In America, the fad hasn't caught on. I don't know what it is like to see young men carrying their Nintendo DS's to the dentist, or the mall so they can be with their virtual girlfriend. But in Japan, the trend seems to be growing.
If you have no clue what I am talking about, let me fill you in. There is a genre of video games popular in Japan that involves men maintaining relationships with female characters as if a real romantic relationship were taking place. Last year, in fact, I remember watching a virtual wedding between a particularly shy lovestruck boy and his virtual girlfriend, Nene Anegasaki.
These games are no joke. The newest version of one game, called "Love Plus" has sold an estimated 430,000 copies in Japan alone. Now, real businesses are catching on. There are resorts in Atami, Japan attracting players of this crazily popular game who just want to see a virtual image of themselves next to a particular girl on their phones. I read all about it in this article: Resort Attracts Men With Virtual Girlfriends. Apparently, by scanning a bar code on a statue at one resort, these mega-fans can see themselves pictured with the virtual women of their dreams.
Another resort offers "traditional rooms to the unusual couples, which feature two sets of futon beds and another bar code panel that allows the men to visualize their girlfriends in a flattering summer kimono." (I would hate to be the maid at that hotel.)
Local shops are catching on too, offering trinkets that depict the scantily clad cartoon women.
Now, you might be ready for me to fly off the handle about how this is stupid, and dreadful, and needs to be stopped. But, I don't think that is the case. These boys aren't hurting anyone. Furthermore they are helping to fuel a slumbering towns economy.
"The popularity of Love Plus has been a welcome shot in the arm for Atami, which has seen visitors decline some 40 percent since its 1970s heyday. More than 200 Love Plus fans have stayed at the Ohnoya hotel alone, while well over 2,000 have visited the resort town for the campaign, which kicked off on July 10 and runs until the end of August."
As long as they lift their noses out of their hand held consoles when they cross the street, I have absolutely no problem with these lovestruck youngsters. In fact, I think the union of tourist cities and video games is genius. Could you imagine a World of Warcraft theme park where players could have their pictures taken with their avatars just by swiping a bar code with their phone? Six Flags should look into this idea, in my humble opinion. Maybe they wouldn't have to declare bankruptcy anymore.
Me
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
The Artificial Ape
Right before bed last night, I came across an interview with the author of a new book titled "The Artificial Ape." His name is Timothy Taylor, and he is an anthropologist and archaeologist with some thought provoking ideas regarding the origin of humans. I will preface this entire post by stating that I have not yet read the book (I ordered it this morning), and am basing the following exposition of ideas solely on the interview I read here:
Artificial ape man: How technology created humans
Furthermore, I am merely an armchair sociologist with a passion for anthropology. I only have a bachelor's degree, and do not claim to have the same expertise or experience as Mr. Taylor.
That said, I think that Mr. Taylor's argument that technology (and not competition, as Darwin postulated) was the impetus that led to the emergence of the Homo genus is very interesting and plausible. However, I do think there are areas that can be scrutinized and questioned.
For example, Mr. Taylor states that the "smoking gun" proving his theory is a gap in the fossil record. To explain more precisely, archaeologist's have discovered many stone tools dating to 2.5 million years ago. However, the oldest known fossil of the Homo genus is 2.2 million years old. This 300,000 year gap, according to Mr. Taylor, suggests "that earlier hominins called australopithecines were responsible for the stone tools."
If these tools were truly the impetus for the conversion of earlier hominins to the Homo genus, then why do apes that use sticks to catch bugs not evolve into a new genus as well? I have seen the videos of gorillas in the wild using one stick to pick the bugs off of another stick. Does that count as entailment? Overall, I think that Mr. Taylor is definitely on the right track as far as seeing the use of stone tools as the spark, but why did the change take hold for us and not them? There has to be more to it. Maybe it has more to do with how we utilized the stones (big game to feed a family vs. bugs to feed oneself), then the fact that we created them in the first place.
I really do like the idea of the sling, and can't wait to read more about how it's creation lends credence to the overall theory Mr. Taylor is expounding. Furthermore, it has me brainstorming about what other useful objects could have been created from skins, and plant fibers that changed the course of our development. (One I thought of already is using a hide to make a rudimentary map, which would have allowed early hominins to keep track of important locations by punching holes of various shapes with the stone tools.)
When Mr. Taylor is asked about his "survival of the weakest" theory, I must admit I get a little confused. "Technology allows us to accumulate biological deficits" is a bold statement. How can our thinner fingernails and skinnier jaw bones be considered "biological deficits" if they serve their proper function at this point in our evolutionary history? Is different necessarily better or worse?
Our eyesight is worse than that of our ancestors, but that may be due to the fact that we don't need to hunt wild game with bows and arrows anymore, not because our new technology like Lasik is changing folks vision. How do our genes know that we have had corrective surgery or wear glasses?
I know that I am playing devil's advocate, but it is very rare that I find an author interview so interesting, and outright provocative. The gears in my head are shifting and making new connections quicker than my swollen fingers can type.
As long as I am in an argumentative mood, let's continue.
"Evidence shows that over the last 30,000 years there has been an overall decrease in brain size and the trend seems to be continuing. That's because we can outsource our intelligence. I don't need to remember as much as a Neanderthal because I have a computer. I don't need such a dangerous and expensive-to-maintain biology any more. I would argue that humans are going to continue to get less biologically intelligent."
Wow. Another bold statement. I would argue that our decrease in brain size is as a result of our genes figuring out that we only use a small percentage of what's in our cranium to begin with. Why would our brain eradicate functioning parts, even if they are only moderately useful to our current evolutionary stage, if there is tons of "dark matter" that is completely useless?
The idea that people don't need to remember as much as Neanderthal's also seems illogical to me. Sure, i can put phone numbers in my HTC Evo (shameless Sprint promotion for my husband), but I still need to remember how to turn the darn thing on to retrieve them. The same can be said for driving a car, riding a bike, surfing on a surfboard, dancing the tango to I Pod music etc. Sure, the technology is there, but we still need the intelligence to know how to use it. I would argue that our brains are much more stimulated and inundated than Neanderthal's with information we should retain.
Overall, I can't wait for my copy of "The Artificial Ape" to arrive. I will definitely come back to this post and revise my opinions once my eyes have devoured its pages.
___
Update: 8/31; 8:25 PM
As I have stated before on this blog, I don't believe in coincidences. I just happened upon an article on Discovery Channel's website from April of this year titled "Ancient Hominids Had Human Like Grip." I stared at the words, feeling the "connection" alarm bells going off in my head, but puzzled as to why.
Within a few moments, it came to me. I had just read about Mr. Taylor's sling theory! Eagerly, I clicked the link. After reading the article, it turns out that it seems to have been written for me to find tonight. If the fossil discussed is legitimate, and the evidence can be replicated, more than just the sling theory will need to be reconsidered. Mr. Taylor may have an answer for Professor Tuttle regarding why a precision grip was needed by early hominins: to cling to mom's back. I would add that our thumbs seem pretty well adapted to holding and gripping each others hands.
But it is late, and my zucchini bread is waiting. And, in fairness to Mr. Taylor, I really should wait to receive, and read his book before passing further judgment.
___
9/4
BBC-Earth News-Wild chimps outwit human hunters
In New Guinea, researchers have discovered that a certain group of chimps has learned how to deactivate traps set by hunters. The implications for this discovery are numerous, but include a need for primatologist to re-evaluate our understanding of how chimps learn, and pass on knowledge from one generation to the next. Chimps cannot learn this skill from basic trial and error, because a misstep results in death. Therefore, another mechanism of awareness is present that we have not yet acknowledged.
10/13
Human Ancestors Hunted by Prehistoric Beasts (Discovery News, Jennifer Viegas, 10/12/2010)
Before commenting on the above linked article, I feel that I need to follow-up on my neglecting the topic of this ongoing post. I am still working my way through "The Artificial Ape." It is a good topic, but I only read books right before bed, and this one tends to help put me to sleep faster than most. Still, I love reading about human evolution, and am committed to completing this post someday, assessing the theory Mr. Taylor puts forth. For now, I will stick to commenting on the above linked article, which indirectly relates to "The Artificial Ape."
I guess that I have always known our early human ancestors were lower on the food chain millions of years ago than we are today. But I never really stopped to consider the implications of this fact. I believe the chimp ancestor being discussed in the article lived so long ago, it is highly unlikely we possess any of the instinctual behaviors or habits they developed in response to being prey to wolfs and birds. However, they may have continued to transmit some of the myths and legends about our time as the main course into early human civilizations, making sure the cultural heritage outlived the actual genetic adaptations.
I actually found the comments section more insightful than the article this time. I have heard the idea that "man as predator" originated with the Judeo-Christian religion before. The omnipresent God giving humans dominion over the world in Genesis seems to confirm this theory. However, man had begun to dominate nature long before any of the early prophets wrote their poetry. So, though the Bible may have confirmed it, the idea of man as the top predator definitely did not originate with any religion. '
___
10/18
Cavemen Ground Flour, Prepped Veggies (Discovery News, by Jennifer Viegas, 10/18/2010)
The instant I spotted this article I whispered one of my mantra's to myself; there are no such things as coincidences. Before my nap today, I reached a section in Mr. Taylor's book about cooking, and how the added energy correlates with the increased brain size, and thus intelligence, of early hominins. So, as I read my favorite Discovery author, Ms. Viegas, article I got that weird tingly feeling you get when things in this vast universe just seem to connect too perfectly to be by pure chance.
The first paragraph alone seemed written for this thread:
"Dirty 'kitchen' tools reveal that cavemen were grinding their own flour and preparing vegetables for meals at least 30,000 years ago, according to new research."
Furthermore, Anna Revedin's insight, that cooking enhances digestibility, may help explain how modern humans are able to function with such short digestive tracts. (I remember Mr. Taylor mentioning something about our decreased gut size).
The following line also seems to correlate well with Mr. Taylor's theory, that it was the technology like cooking that led to the conversion from neanderthals to modern humans.
"Since modern humans as well as Neanderthals inhabited these regions, the researchers think it's possible that either or both groups had cooking know-how."
Finally, for arguments sake, I think it is prudent for me to include the quote Ms. Viegas received from a critic of this new research, Silvana Condemi:
"I cannot help thinking that this capacity of Homo sapiens not only to collect but also to process plant food proved advantageous in competition with Neanderthals - who did not have this behavior - when Homo sapiens arrived in Europe. This was undoubtedly one of the factors that contributed to the demise of Neanderthals."
I will have to continue reading the Artificial Ape before bed tonight. It has gotten far more interesting once I reached about a quarter of the way through.
___
10/26/2010
Asian Neanderthals, Humans Mated (Discovery News, by Jennifer Viegas, 10/25/2010)
Publication of information on the now famous "Zhirendong Mandible," has prompted archaeologists and historians to rewrite ancient history. Previously, modern humans were thought to have arrived in eastern Asia around 40,000 years ago. The mandible has pushed that date back an astounding 60,000 years, to 100,000 years ago. It has also led scientists to ask many new questions. One of the most intriguing puzzles, I think, is the following:
"It's also presently unclear why, despite the likely interbreeding, the various hominid populations in Eurasia, including our own, remained distinct for so long."
*
A quick follow-up on the namesake of this post: I am three-quarters of my way through the Artificial Ape. But the arrival of "The Count of Monte Cristo" has had me splitting my before-bed reading. I am getting there, though!
___
11/5
Greater effort boosts the affective taste properties of foods (by Alexander W. Johnson and Michela Gallagher)
It seems to make sense that if I work hard to obtain something, I will cherish it more than something else that was handed to me. But what if the "something" I am working for is a Diet Coke, and the thing I'm given is a Cherry Coke? According to dissonance theory, I will value whatever I work harder for to avoid the psychological conflict of struggling for something less desirable. Evolutionarily speaking, this makes sense:
"In evolutionary terms, such mechanisms could benefit survival under conditions of scarcity when the chances of acquiring food are probably related to increased foraging effort. An increase in palatability accruing to lower value foods under such conditions would serve a dual purpose, both to boost consumption and to confer greater learning connected to the prevailing cues in the environment."
I guess if I ran five miles, that Diet Coke would look pretty darn good!
Though I still have a chapter to go in "The Artificial Ape," finding the link to this study on Discovery News made me recall the story from the book about the boy eating the travelers soap in the Arctic. I promise to have my first reading of the "The Artificial Ape" complete by the end of the week, so I can begin an in depth discussion of the theory Mr. Taylor puts forth soon thereafter. I will admit the material has become much more interesting the farther I have delved, but the 200 pages remaining in Mr. Dumas' classic are also beckoning my already strained eyes.
___
11/5
Early Humans Skipped Fruit, Went for Nuts (Discovery News, by Jennifer Viegas, 11/9/2009)
What did our early ancestors eat? According to a 2009 study conducted by Gabriele Macho, a professor of paleoanthropology at the University of Bradford, and colleague Daisuke Shimizu, it wasn't much fruit. Based on tooth comparisons of chimpanzees, gorillas, and our ancestors from the same genus as famous skeleton "Lucy," "[t]he researchers...believe...early human[s] ate nuts, root vegetables, insects -- such as termites -- and some meat." I am not sure if this will apply to Mr. Taylor's theory, but it is interesting nonetheless.
___
11/8
Human, Neanderthal Brains the Same Until Birth (Discovery News, AFP, 11/8/2010)
Fist, an announcement: I have finished reading "The Artificial Ape," and am working on my critique. The above linked article actually fits quite well into the topic at hand. According to German researchers, the first year of life is the key time as far as differentiating human and neanderthal early brain development. Until birth, the brains are essentially the same. This makes sense combined with Taylor's theory that technology, namely the sling, exposes the "plastic" brain of the human to "the way," that will stick with him or her throughout life. All of this exposure fires neurons, which would coincide well with the German's research that showed:
"The human brain began much more activity in neural circuitry in the first year of life, which may have helped early Homo sapiens survive in the process of natural selection, the study said."
If one forgets for a moment Taylor's rejection of human's susceptibility to natural selection's forces, the rest of the above quote would fit well into his general theory.
But, coincidentally (or not), the article seems to point out the same major criticism I have after completing my first reading of "The Artificial Ape." Namely, I believe brain size is irrelevant to intelligence, and recent levels of brain shrinkage have other causes. So as to save some surprises for my final critique, I will only quote the Germans for now, and state that I agree with their assessment:
"'The interesting thing is within modern humans, the size of the brain correlates only very weakly with any measure of intelligence . . .It's more the internal structure of the brain that is important.'"
___
11/10
I was planning on waiting until my entire analysis of "The Artificial Ape," was complete before writing anything else about it. However, after delving into Mr. Taylor's extensive, and quite honestly intriguing, notes section, I realized how long this may take. Therefore, so as to both prevent myself from forgetting my ideas, and simultaneously keep my handful of readers updated, I will endeavor to formulate my preliminary theories today.
As I see it, the book attempts to answer the fundamental question of how humans, despite our disadvantages, came out on top. Given our dependence on technology for survival, our useless offspring, and dangerous reproduction, it seems illogical. But, according to Taylor, it is the former of these deficiencies that is the differentiating factor between us and the rest of the primates; technology.
Taylor postulates that there was a distinct moment when humanity emerged, and it came when one of our female ancestors used her motherly instinct to create a sling. From the safety of the sling, infant humans absorb "the way" into their absorbing brains so that before they are even done developing into functional beings, they have internalized their societies norms and values. According to Mr. Taylor, "perhaps because of this profound and primal familiarity, I believe we have continually underestimated the effect of this physical reality in making us human." (Page 2)
Taylor postulates a theory of three systems that reminded me of Ken Wilbur's quadrants, minus the psyche. The first system includes the laws of physics and inorganic chemistry, while the second incorporates all organic biology. The third system, technology, is the arguably the reason we became different from our ancestors. This dependence on entailed creations has allowed us to escape the laws of natural selection that governs the rest of nature. However, there is a hefty price to pay for this dependence. According to Taylor, our technologies have become so complicated that, "there is no soft landing into a quieter and more balanced world. . . the only way out is up." (Page 8, Page 11) In fact, it's "unfolding logic" may ultimately result in technology's comprehension of it's own "personal existence.," just like in the sci-fi movies. (And one of my favorite X-Files, where the killer computer operates the elevators and electricity to murder the corporate executives that were about to sell-out.)
But, unlike Kurzweil's "Singularity," or Keylly's "Technium," Taylor's fusion between man and machine has been present all along. In fact, his entire book is based upon the idea that technology "predates and underwrites," the very fact that we are human. Indeed, we are already hybrid-human robots, belonging to not only system 2 (biology) but also system 3 (technology).
___
11/11
Yesterday, I did a decent job summarizing Timothy Taylor's general theory in "The Artificial Ape." Today, I would like to offer my four biggest criticisms.
First, I would like to discuss this statement from Page 2, regarding the moment the first sling was created:
"In that moment, everything that we were going to become was made not just possible but inevitable."
I don't believe that possibility necessitates inevitability, and I don't think Mr. Taylor truly does either. On page 11, he lists the types of disasters that can cause civilizations to collapse, and societies to breakdown. There was no guarantee humanity would come through these catastrophes. I am certain that our ancient ancestors faced the same potential for complete and utter failure. In fact, the moment after the sling was created, a man could have decided to use it as a noose around the female inventor's neck. I honestly think the quoted statement may have been what I call an "author's slip;" it sounds too good not to use it, even though we know it isn't quite accurate.
The next criticism is completely subjective, but I feel it is important to mention. Taylor states that his "artificial system" is controversial, in the introduction and implies such on many other occasions throughout the book. I don't necessarily agree with this sentiment, and think it does more harm then help to his overall position. I would find "psychic" or "supernatural," controversial, but, as a student of history, technology as a major player in human evolution just doesn't seem that out-there to me.
Now, for the meatier criticisms.
Just because technology provides modern humans with all of our basic needs, does not mean we are less intelligent. As the author states on page 8, necessities "all can be provided to allow specialists in technological research and development to focus full-time on analyzing the microscopic inner-level functioning of materials." It takes a great deal of intelligence to understand nanotechnology, string theory, or piezoelectronics. Just because these concepts are specialized, and not general, in nature, does not mean the they are any less valuable, or require less brain power. In fact, I would argue the opposite; technology has allowed us time to nurture and grow our intelligence, and has benefited reciprocally by being programmed with the hand-me-down intelligence of yesteryear.
Which leads me to the final opinion I possess that is different from Mr. Taylor's. I believe recent brain shrinkage is no more than biology realizing it promoted too much growth during the competitive period 100,000 years ago. When we were battling neanderthals to see which of the great primates would prevail, I believe our brains grew exorbitantly, just like the Starbucks coffee chain while it was facing competition. But, once we won, our brains were no longer genetically stimulated to compete, and, like Starbucks today, started to shrink after the adrenaline spiked. Both humans and Starbucks won their games, but over-expanded in the process.
I will keep these critiques on the top of my priority list as I analyze the book chapter by chapter in the mornings to come.
___
11/14
I am taking the time to delve deeply into the notes section of Timothy Taylor's book, and am surprised by how much new, and quite honestly bizarre things I am encountering. The one I wish to discuss this morning is a prime example: The Berlin Wall - A Love Story
I have heard of women masturbating with various objects, and even came across a video of a woman using a full sized baseball bat once. But I had never considered people may actually believe objects have the same feelings and emotions as humans. Then I read Eija-Riitta-Berliner-Mauer's peculiar tale. She considers herself an Objectum-Sexual, defined as "to be emotionally, and sexually attracted to OBJECTS, things - not human beings..." In fact, she is the widow of the Berlin Wall.
Mrs. Berliner-Mauer's beliefs are not that far off from what anthropologist would term animism, or the belief that all objects are living, and have a soul, just like human beings. Animist also believe that objects are able to communicate telepathically with humans via "thought transference, and, "have the same level of awareness..." It is important to note that she does not think that objects are superior to us, but rather equal, as are plants and animals. She calls this idea "Total Equality," whereas Timothy Taylor would probably refer to it as "Becoming the Machine."
Mrs. Berliner-Mauer has been communicating with objects this way since childhood. She feels strongly that the rest of humanity treats objects terribly, and refers to the mutual respect that was required for her marriage to the Berlin Wall to work. The Berlin Wall did not ask to be 'born' anymore than we did. It is therefore due the same respect, and has the, "same right to exist and have a decent life," that you and I do.
Because of the truly passionate love Mrs. Berliner-Mauer has for objects, her sexual acts with them should not be considered masturbation. Like heterosexuals, she is attracted to objects based on how they look. Specifically, "it must be a construction with parallel lines, usually horizontal."
I find this woman extremely bizarre, but I don't know if she is sick. I asked my girlfriend's daughter who is a psychologist what her impressions were, and she said it truly depended upon how much Mrs. Berliner-Mauer's perceived dysfunction altered her ability to maintain normal relationships. Regardless, this story really made me think about how embedded in our global culture objects have become that I can even be writing about a topic like this.
___
11/18
The Axe Had Never Sounded
A second site Mr. Taylor recommended gave an excellent history of French exploration and aboriginal contact in Tasmania. I ended up printing and highlighting several interesting facts; some of which I have comments to make about, some of which I just want to note somewhere before I recycle my printouts.
Introduction, Chapter 1, and Chapter 2:
I learned that archaeologists believe aborigines settled Tasmania about 30,000 years ago. The first Europeans arrived in 1792.
As a lover of the history surrounding the French Revolution, I found this quote most enlightening, and amusing:
"There is a tradition that, on his way to the guillotine in 1793, Louis asked whether any news had yet been received concerning the fate of La Perouse. The day of his execution was the date when the expedition entered Recherche Bay for its second visit."
The French expedition was a "model of mutual respect and observation," as far as aboriginal contact is concerned. This description is far different from the British encounters.
The title of the piece comes from this quote by botanist Labillardiere:
"We were filled with admiration at the sight of these ancient forests, in which the sound of the axe had never been heard."
I also was thrilled to learn about Louise Geradin, the first European woman, disguised as a man, to visit Tasmania. My middle name is "Mary Louise," and I have always longed to read about a "Louise" as adventurous as Ms. Geradin seems.
Chapter 3:
It doesn't surprise me that the scientists on the voyage clashed with military ranks.
"Although the naturalists made exciting and important discoveries, they encountered indifference or hostility from the naval personnel."
I find it sad, but not surprising, that politics got involved in determining "Who Owns the Past," in the case of Tasmania and the aborigines.
"Unfortunately, these French achievements do not accord with Australian national sentiment, as promulgated by the Howard government, which accords iconic status to British navigators. Tasmanian waters, in particular, were sailed by heroes Cook, Bligh, Flinders, and Bass."
This sentiment is further elaborated upon in the introduction to Chapter 5:
"The dominant British orientation in the teaching of Australian history and science, together with the iconic status of James Cook and Matthew Flinders, has hampered the recognition of foreign contributions, none moreso than that of the d'Entrecasteaux expedition."
Chapter 4:
The plant commonly referred to as eucalyptus was first discovered by Europeans on this trip:
"Labillardiere could hardly have anticipated the great commercial advantages of his discovery: that it was introduced rapidly around the world as a cultivar, becoming the species by which the genus Eucalyptus became internationally known; that by 1905 four million feet of its timber would be supplied to the British Admiralty for wharf piles; that today more than 1.3 million hectares of E. globulus are planted outside Australia and 0.4 million hectares of plantation within Australia; or that Tasmania would adopt it as its State floral emblem."
He also identified the type of eucalyptus favored by koalas, E. viminalis, or ribbon gum.
(I will continue with chapter 4 next time I write on this thread.)
Artificial ape man: How technology created humans
Furthermore, I am merely an armchair sociologist with a passion for anthropology. I only have a bachelor's degree, and do not claim to have the same expertise or experience as Mr. Taylor.
That said, I think that Mr. Taylor's argument that technology (and not competition, as Darwin postulated) was the impetus that led to the emergence of the Homo genus is very interesting and plausible. However, I do think there are areas that can be scrutinized and questioned.
For example, Mr. Taylor states that the "smoking gun" proving his theory is a gap in the fossil record. To explain more precisely, archaeologist's have discovered many stone tools dating to 2.5 million years ago. However, the oldest known fossil of the Homo genus is 2.2 million years old. This 300,000 year gap, according to Mr. Taylor, suggests "that earlier hominins called australopithecines were responsible for the stone tools."
If these tools were truly the impetus for the conversion of earlier hominins to the Homo genus, then why do apes that use sticks to catch bugs not evolve into a new genus as well? I have seen the videos of gorillas in the wild using one stick to pick the bugs off of another stick. Does that count as entailment? Overall, I think that Mr. Taylor is definitely on the right track as far as seeing the use of stone tools as the spark, but why did the change take hold for us and not them? There has to be more to it. Maybe it has more to do with how we utilized the stones (big game to feed a family vs. bugs to feed oneself), then the fact that we created them in the first place.
I really do like the idea of the sling, and can't wait to read more about how it's creation lends credence to the overall theory Mr. Taylor is expounding. Furthermore, it has me brainstorming about what other useful objects could have been created from skins, and plant fibers that changed the course of our development. (One I thought of already is using a hide to make a rudimentary map, which would have allowed early hominins to keep track of important locations by punching holes of various shapes with the stone tools.)
When Mr. Taylor is asked about his "survival of the weakest" theory, I must admit I get a little confused. "Technology allows us to accumulate biological deficits" is a bold statement. How can our thinner fingernails and skinnier jaw bones be considered "biological deficits" if they serve their proper function at this point in our evolutionary history? Is different necessarily better or worse?
Our eyesight is worse than that of our ancestors, but that may be due to the fact that we don't need to hunt wild game with bows and arrows anymore, not because our new technology like Lasik is changing folks vision. How do our genes know that we have had corrective surgery or wear glasses?
I know that I am playing devil's advocate, but it is very rare that I find an author interview so interesting, and outright provocative. The gears in my head are shifting and making new connections quicker than my swollen fingers can type.
As long as I am in an argumentative mood, let's continue.
"Evidence shows that over the last 30,000 years there has been an overall decrease in brain size and the trend seems to be continuing. That's because we can outsource our intelligence. I don't need to remember as much as a Neanderthal because I have a computer. I don't need such a dangerous and expensive-to-maintain biology any more. I would argue that humans are going to continue to get less biologically intelligent."
Wow. Another bold statement. I would argue that our decrease in brain size is as a result of our genes figuring out that we only use a small percentage of what's in our cranium to begin with. Why would our brain eradicate functioning parts, even if they are only moderately useful to our current evolutionary stage, if there is tons of "dark matter" that is completely useless?
The idea that people don't need to remember as much as Neanderthal's also seems illogical to me. Sure, i can put phone numbers in my HTC Evo (shameless Sprint promotion for my husband), but I still need to remember how to turn the darn thing on to retrieve them. The same can be said for driving a car, riding a bike, surfing on a surfboard, dancing the tango to I Pod music etc. Sure, the technology is there, but we still need the intelligence to know how to use it. I would argue that our brains are much more stimulated and inundated than Neanderthal's with information we should retain.
Overall, I can't wait for my copy of "The Artificial Ape" to arrive. I will definitely come back to this post and revise my opinions once my eyes have devoured its pages.
___
Update: 8/31; 8:25 PM
As I have stated before on this blog, I don't believe in coincidences. I just happened upon an article on Discovery Channel's website from April of this year titled "Ancient Hominids Had Human Like Grip." I stared at the words, feeling the "connection" alarm bells going off in my head, but puzzled as to why.
Within a few moments, it came to me. I had just read about Mr. Taylor's sling theory! Eagerly, I clicked the link. After reading the article, it turns out that it seems to have been written for me to find tonight. If the fossil discussed is legitimate, and the evidence can be replicated, more than just the sling theory will need to be reconsidered. Mr. Taylor may have an answer for Professor Tuttle regarding why a precision grip was needed by early hominins: to cling to mom's back. I would add that our thumbs seem pretty well adapted to holding and gripping each others hands.
But it is late, and my zucchini bread is waiting. And, in fairness to Mr. Taylor, I really should wait to receive, and read his book before passing further judgment.
___
9/4
BBC-Earth News-Wild chimps outwit human hunters
In New Guinea, researchers have discovered that a certain group of chimps has learned how to deactivate traps set by hunters. The implications for this discovery are numerous, but include a need for primatologist to re-evaluate our understanding of how chimps learn, and pass on knowledge from one generation to the next. Chimps cannot learn this skill from basic trial and error, because a misstep results in death. Therefore, another mechanism of awareness is present that we have not yet acknowledged.
10/13
Human Ancestors Hunted by Prehistoric Beasts (Discovery News, Jennifer Viegas, 10/12/2010)
Before commenting on the above linked article, I feel that I need to follow-up on my neglecting the topic of this ongoing post. I am still working my way through "The Artificial Ape." It is a good topic, but I only read books right before bed, and this one tends to help put me to sleep faster than most. Still, I love reading about human evolution, and am committed to completing this post someday, assessing the theory Mr. Taylor puts forth. For now, I will stick to commenting on the above linked article, which indirectly relates to "The Artificial Ape."
I guess that I have always known our early human ancestors were lower on the food chain millions of years ago than we are today. But I never really stopped to consider the implications of this fact. I believe the chimp ancestor being discussed in the article lived so long ago, it is highly unlikely we possess any of the instinctual behaviors or habits they developed in response to being prey to wolfs and birds. However, they may have continued to transmit some of the myths and legends about our time as the main course into early human civilizations, making sure the cultural heritage outlived the actual genetic adaptations.
I actually found the comments section more insightful than the article this time. I have heard the idea that "man as predator" originated with the Judeo-Christian religion before. The omnipresent God giving humans dominion over the world in Genesis seems to confirm this theory. However, man had begun to dominate nature long before any of the early prophets wrote their poetry. So, though the Bible may have confirmed it, the idea of man as the top predator definitely did not originate with any religion. '
___
10/18
Cavemen Ground Flour, Prepped Veggies (Discovery News, by Jennifer Viegas, 10/18/2010)
The instant I spotted this article I whispered one of my mantra's to myself; there are no such things as coincidences. Before my nap today, I reached a section in Mr. Taylor's book about cooking, and how the added energy correlates with the increased brain size, and thus intelligence, of early hominins. So, as I read my favorite Discovery author, Ms. Viegas, article I got that weird tingly feeling you get when things in this vast universe just seem to connect too perfectly to be by pure chance.
The first paragraph alone seemed written for this thread:
"Dirty 'kitchen' tools reveal that cavemen were grinding their own flour and preparing vegetables for meals at least 30,000 years ago, according to new research."
Furthermore, Anna Revedin's insight, that cooking enhances digestibility, may help explain how modern humans are able to function with such short digestive tracts. (I remember Mr. Taylor mentioning something about our decreased gut size).
The following line also seems to correlate well with Mr. Taylor's theory, that it was the technology like cooking that led to the conversion from neanderthals to modern humans.
"Since modern humans as well as Neanderthals inhabited these regions, the researchers think it's possible that either or both groups had cooking know-how."
Finally, for arguments sake, I think it is prudent for me to include the quote Ms. Viegas received from a critic of this new research, Silvana Condemi:
"I cannot help thinking that this capacity of Homo sapiens not only to collect but also to process plant food proved advantageous in competition with Neanderthals - who did not have this behavior - when Homo sapiens arrived in Europe. This was undoubtedly one of the factors that contributed to the demise of Neanderthals."
I will have to continue reading the Artificial Ape before bed tonight. It has gotten far more interesting once I reached about a quarter of the way through.
___
10/26/2010
Asian Neanderthals, Humans Mated (Discovery News, by Jennifer Viegas, 10/25/2010)
Publication of information on the now famous "Zhirendong Mandible," has prompted archaeologists and historians to rewrite ancient history. Previously, modern humans were thought to have arrived in eastern Asia around 40,000 years ago. The mandible has pushed that date back an astounding 60,000 years, to 100,000 years ago. It has also led scientists to ask many new questions. One of the most intriguing puzzles, I think, is the following:
"It's also presently unclear why, despite the likely interbreeding, the various hominid populations in Eurasia, including our own, remained distinct for so long."
*
A quick follow-up on the namesake of this post: I am three-quarters of my way through the Artificial Ape. But the arrival of "The Count of Monte Cristo" has had me splitting my before-bed reading. I am getting there, though!
___
11/5
Greater effort boosts the affective taste properties of foods (by Alexander W. Johnson and Michela Gallagher)
It seems to make sense that if I work hard to obtain something, I will cherish it more than something else that was handed to me. But what if the "something" I am working for is a Diet Coke, and the thing I'm given is a Cherry Coke? According to dissonance theory, I will value whatever I work harder for to avoid the psychological conflict of struggling for something less desirable. Evolutionarily speaking, this makes sense:
"In evolutionary terms, such mechanisms could benefit survival under conditions of scarcity when the chances of acquiring food are probably related to increased foraging effort. An increase in palatability accruing to lower value foods under such conditions would serve a dual purpose, both to boost consumption and to confer greater learning connected to the prevailing cues in the environment."
I guess if I ran five miles, that Diet Coke would look pretty darn good!
Though I still have a chapter to go in "The Artificial Ape," finding the link to this study on Discovery News made me recall the story from the book about the boy eating the travelers soap in the Arctic. I promise to have my first reading of the "The Artificial Ape" complete by the end of the week, so I can begin an in depth discussion of the theory Mr. Taylor puts forth soon thereafter. I will admit the material has become much more interesting the farther I have delved, but the 200 pages remaining in Mr. Dumas' classic are also beckoning my already strained eyes.
___
11/5
Early Humans Skipped Fruit, Went for Nuts (Discovery News, by Jennifer Viegas, 11/9/2009)
What did our early ancestors eat? According to a 2009 study conducted by Gabriele Macho, a professor of paleoanthropology at the University of Bradford, and colleague Daisuke Shimizu, it wasn't much fruit. Based on tooth comparisons of chimpanzees, gorillas, and our ancestors from the same genus as famous skeleton "Lucy," "[t]he researchers...believe...early human[s] ate nuts, root vegetables, insects -- such as termites -- and some meat." I am not sure if this will apply to Mr. Taylor's theory, but it is interesting nonetheless.
___
11/8
Human, Neanderthal Brains the Same Until Birth (Discovery News, AFP, 11/8/2010)
Fist, an announcement: I have finished reading "The Artificial Ape," and am working on my critique. The above linked article actually fits quite well into the topic at hand. According to German researchers, the first year of life is the key time as far as differentiating human and neanderthal early brain development. Until birth, the brains are essentially the same. This makes sense combined with Taylor's theory that technology, namely the sling, exposes the "plastic" brain of the human to "the way," that will stick with him or her throughout life. All of this exposure fires neurons, which would coincide well with the German's research that showed:
"The human brain began much more activity in neural circuitry in the first year of life, which may have helped early Homo sapiens survive in the process of natural selection, the study said."
If one forgets for a moment Taylor's rejection of human's susceptibility to natural selection's forces, the rest of the above quote would fit well into his general theory.
But, coincidentally (or not), the article seems to point out the same major criticism I have after completing my first reading of "The Artificial Ape." Namely, I believe brain size is irrelevant to intelligence, and recent levels of brain shrinkage have other causes. So as to save some surprises for my final critique, I will only quote the Germans for now, and state that I agree with their assessment:
"'The interesting thing is within modern humans, the size of the brain correlates only very weakly with any measure of intelligence . . .It's more the internal structure of the brain that is important.'"
___
11/10
I was planning on waiting until my entire analysis of "The Artificial Ape," was complete before writing anything else about it. However, after delving into Mr. Taylor's extensive, and quite honestly intriguing, notes section, I realized how long this may take. Therefore, so as to both prevent myself from forgetting my ideas, and simultaneously keep my handful of readers updated, I will endeavor to formulate my preliminary theories today.
As I see it, the book attempts to answer the fundamental question of how humans, despite our disadvantages, came out on top. Given our dependence on technology for survival, our useless offspring, and dangerous reproduction, it seems illogical. But, according to Taylor, it is the former of these deficiencies that is the differentiating factor between us and the rest of the primates; technology.
Taylor postulates that there was a distinct moment when humanity emerged, and it came when one of our female ancestors used her motherly instinct to create a sling. From the safety of the sling, infant humans absorb "the way" into their absorbing brains so that before they are even done developing into functional beings, they have internalized their societies norms and values. According to Mr. Taylor, "perhaps because of this profound and primal familiarity, I believe we have continually underestimated the effect of this physical reality in making us human." (Page 2)
Taylor postulates a theory of three systems that reminded me of Ken Wilbur's quadrants, minus the psyche. The first system includes the laws of physics and inorganic chemistry, while the second incorporates all organic biology. The third system, technology, is the arguably the reason we became different from our ancestors. This dependence on entailed creations has allowed us to escape the laws of natural selection that governs the rest of nature. However, there is a hefty price to pay for this dependence. According to Taylor, our technologies have become so complicated that, "there is no soft landing into a quieter and more balanced world. . . the only way out is up." (Page 8, Page 11) In fact, it's "unfolding logic" may ultimately result in technology's comprehension of it's own "personal existence.," just like in the sci-fi movies. (And one of my favorite X-Files, where the killer computer operates the elevators and electricity to murder the corporate executives that were about to sell-out.)
But, unlike Kurzweil's "Singularity," or Keylly's "Technium," Taylor's fusion between man and machine has been present all along. In fact, his entire book is based upon the idea that technology "predates and underwrites," the very fact that we are human. Indeed, we are already hybrid-human robots, belonging to not only system 2 (biology) but also system 3 (technology).
___
11/11
Yesterday, I did a decent job summarizing Timothy Taylor's general theory in "The Artificial Ape." Today, I would like to offer my four biggest criticisms.
First, I would like to discuss this statement from Page 2, regarding the moment the first sling was created:
"In that moment, everything that we were going to become was made not just possible but inevitable."
I don't believe that possibility necessitates inevitability, and I don't think Mr. Taylor truly does either. On page 11, he lists the types of disasters that can cause civilizations to collapse, and societies to breakdown. There was no guarantee humanity would come through these catastrophes. I am certain that our ancient ancestors faced the same potential for complete and utter failure. In fact, the moment after the sling was created, a man could have decided to use it as a noose around the female inventor's neck. I honestly think the quoted statement may have been what I call an "author's slip;" it sounds too good not to use it, even though we know it isn't quite accurate.
The next criticism is completely subjective, but I feel it is important to mention. Taylor states that his "artificial system" is controversial, in the introduction and implies such on many other occasions throughout the book. I don't necessarily agree with this sentiment, and think it does more harm then help to his overall position. I would find "psychic" or "supernatural," controversial, but, as a student of history, technology as a major player in human evolution just doesn't seem that out-there to me.
Now, for the meatier criticisms.
Just because technology provides modern humans with all of our basic needs, does not mean we are less intelligent. As the author states on page 8, necessities "all can be provided to allow specialists in technological research and development to focus full-time on analyzing the microscopic inner-level functioning of materials." It takes a great deal of intelligence to understand nanotechnology, string theory, or piezoelectronics. Just because these concepts are specialized, and not general, in nature, does not mean the they are any less valuable, or require less brain power. In fact, I would argue the opposite; technology has allowed us time to nurture and grow our intelligence, and has benefited reciprocally by being programmed with the hand-me-down intelligence of yesteryear.
Which leads me to the final opinion I possess that is different from Mr. Taylor's. I believe recent brain shrinkage is no more than biology realizing it promoted too much growth during the competitive period 100,000 years ago. When we were battling neanderthals to see which of the great primates would prevail, I believe our brains grew exorbitantly, just like the Starbucks coffee chain while it was facing competition. But, once we won, our brains were no longer genetically stimulated to compete, and, like Starbucks today, started to shrink after the adrenaline spiked. Both humans and Starbucks won their games, but over-expanded in the process.
I will keep these critiques on the top of my priority list as I analyze the book chapter by chapter in the mornings to come.
___
11/14
I am taking the time to delve deeply into the notes section of Timothy Taylor's book, and am surprised by how much new, and quite honestly bizarre things I am encountering. The one I wish to discuss this morning is a prime example: The Berlin Wall - A Love Story
I have heard of women masturbating with various objects, and even came across a video of a woman using a full sized baseball bat once. But I had never considered people may actually believe objects have the same feelings and emotions as humans. Then I read Eija-Riitta-Berliner-Mauer's peculiar tale. She considers herself an Objectum-Sexual, defined as "to be emotionally, and sexually attracted to OBJECTS, things - not human beings..." In fact, she is the widow of the Berlin Wall.
Mrs. Berliner-Mauer's beliefs are not that far off from what anthropologist would term animism, or the belief that all objects are living, and have a soul, just like human beings. Animist also believe that objects are able to communicate telepathically with humans via "thought transference, and, "have the same level of awareness..." It is important to note that she does not think that objects are superior to us, but rather equal, as are plants and animals. She calls this idea "Total Equality," whereas Timothy Taylor would probably refer to it as "Becoming the Machine."
Mrs. Berliner-Mauer has been communicating with objects this way since childhood. She feels strongly that the rest of humanity treats objects terribly, and refers to the mutual respect that was required for her marriage to the Berlin Wall to work. The Berlin Wall did not ask to be 'born' anymore than we did. It is therefore due the same respect, and has the, "same right to exist and have a decent life," that you and I do.
Because of the truly passionate love Mrs. Berliner-Mauer has for objects, her sexual acts with them should not be considered masturbation. Like heterosexuals, she is attracted to objects based on how they look. Specifically, "it must be a construction with parallel lines, usually horizontal."
I find this woman extremely bizarre, but I don't know if she is sick. I asked my girlfriend's daughter who is a psychologist what her impressions were, and she said it truly depended upon how much Mrs. Berliner-Mauer's perceived dysfunction altered her ability to maintain normal relationships. Regardless, this story really made me think about how embedded in our global culture objects have become that I can even be writing about a topic like this.
___
11/18
The Axe Had Never Sounded
A second site Mr. Taylor recommended gave an excellent history of French exploration and aboriginal contact in Tasmania. I ended up printing and highlighting several interesting facts; some of which I have comments to make about, some of which I just want to note somewhere before I recycle my printouts.
Introduction, Chapter 1, and Chapter 2:
I learned that archaeologists believe aborigines settled Tasmania about 30,000 years ago. The first Europeans arrived in 1792.
As a lover of the history surrounding the French Revolution, I found this quote most enlightening, and amusing:
"There is a tradition that, on his way to the guillotine in 1793, Louis asked whether any news had yet been received concerning the fate of La Perouse. The day of his execution was the date when the expedition entered Recherche Bay for its second visit."
The French expedition was a "model of mutual respect and observation," as far as aboriginal contact is concerned. This description is far different from the British encounters.
The title of the piece comes from this quote by botanist Labillardiere:
"We were filled with admiration at the sight of these ancient forests, in which the sound of the axe had never been heard."
I also was thrilled to learn about Louise Geradin, the first European woman, disguised as a man, to visit Tasmania. My middle name is "Mary Louise," and I have always longed to read about a "Louise" as adventurous as Ms. Geradin seems.
Chapter 3:
It doesn't surprise me that the scientists on the voyage clashed with military ranks.
"Although the naturalists made exciting and important discoveries, they encountered indifference or hostility from the naval personnel."
I find it sad, but not surprising, that politics got involved in determining "Who Owns the Past," in the case of Tasmania and the aborigines.
"Unfortunately, these French achievements do not accord with Australian national sentiment, as promulgated by the Howard government, which accords iconic status to British navigators. Tasmanian waters, in particular, were sailed by heroes Cook, Bligh, Flinders, and Bass."
This sentiment is further elaborated upon in the introduction to Chapter 5:
"The dominant British orientation in the teaching of Australian history and science, together with the iconic status of James Cook and Matthew Flinders, has hampered the recognition of foreign contributions, none moreso than that of the d'Entrecasteaux expedition."
Chapter 4:
The plant commonly referred to as eucalyptus was first discovered by Europeans on this trip:
"Labillardiere could hardly have anticipated the great commercial advantages of his discovery: that it was introduced rapidly around the world as a cultivar, becoming the species by which the genus Eucalyptus became internationally known; that by 1905 four million feet of its timber would be supplied to the British Admiralty for wharf piles; that today more than 1.3 million hectares of E. globulus are planted outside Australia and 0.4 million hectares of plantation within Australia; or that Tasmania would adopt it as its State floral emblem."
He also identified the type of eucalyptus favored by koalas, E. viminalis, or ribbon gum.
(I will continue with chapter 4 next time I write on this thread.)
The Drug War
Notice that I didn't title the post "The War on Drugs." That is another issue, for another time.
The purpose of this post is to compile information about the "The Drug War." By that, I mean the fighting that goes on among the cartels to our south. I have only read sporadic articles regarding this issue, so will not draw many conclusions. Rather, this will serve as a forum where I can raise questions, and try to seek answers.
The reason that I chose to deal with this topic this morning is due to this article I found on CNN's website: Police: American-born drug kingpin arrested in Mexico.
The title alone got me thinking. How many Mexicans and Mexican-Americans do you hear about going home without ICE agents leading the way? Most that I meet are here for legitimate economic opportunities that don't exist in their home country. I had to click and learn more.
It turns out, the story isn't all that exciting. But, I did come across a line in the article that got the wheels in my head churning.
"Beltran's brother Carlos was arrested, leaving Valdez in a fight to fill a power vacuum in one of Mexico's most powerful drug cartels."
All three of the names mentioned in this sentence have been the "kingpin" of a particular Mexican drug gang, known as the Leyva cartel, within the past year. Basically, the police catch or kill one, and another steps up to take his place. Sure, there may be some in-fighting for a while after the last leader falls: a merge of cartels here, a break-up there. But, in the end, these men are playing a game with authorities that they know they will always win. It is worth the risk to them to face bullets and jail for the money that can be made. There is job security in being in a cartel. There will always be another guy ready and willing to step up and be the boss. Just don't get killed or caught.
Which leads me to my first questions of this post: What counter-tactics could law enforcement agencies employ to effectively eliminate or subvert drug cartels in Mexico? Furthermore, is it even possible to do so, or is a better approach humanitarian? Is legalization of all drugs the only answer? Are these men only doing this because there is no other paying job in Mexico, or is the chance to advance to "kingpin" and make the big bucks that good because the turn-over rate is so insanely high?
Lots of questions...more than I expected when I started brainstorming. I will watch for answers as I continue surfing the web. If any of my faithful readers have any thoughts, feel free to leave comments.
___
9/21
Mexican newspaper to cartels: 'We do not want more deaths'
I feel for the people of Ciudad Juarez. I really do. I can't imagine living in a town so ravaged by constant violence. However, I don't think an editorial in the towns most popular newspaper, El Diario, is going to solve the problem.
Cartel members do not care about editorials. They do not care about the journalist's who pen them. Their only interest in the photographer, the cartel's latest victim, was most likely his profession. Photographs are a direct threat to drug smugglers work. They provide solid proof of illegal activity.
Unfortunately, in this case I think the newspaper should consider protecting it's employees lives, more than continuing to practice good journalism. The conditions in Ciudad Juarez are like a war zone, and normal business practices cannot apply,. El Diario, translated into The Diary, needs to learn to operate more secretively. They should even consider seeking political asylum, and moving their base across the border. Their intentions seems pure, but the enemy they are dealing with could care less.
___
9/23
Mexico plans to protect journalists (MSNBC)
After the death or disappearance of over 25 journalists in the past four years, Mexico is planning to implement a new strategy to protect them.
"The plan includes an early warning system in which reporters would have immediate access to authorities when threatened, the creation of a council to identify the causes behind attacks on reporters, legal reforms, and a package of 'best practices' in journalism, according to a statement from Calderon's office."
I am skeptical. But, considering the success of similar tactics in Columbia, also hopeful.
___
9/24
Mexican mayor slain in drug-plagued state
The mayor of Monterrey was murdered this morning. Sadly, he is not the first to perish in northern Mexico as a result of the drug war.
"Gunmen killed another Monterrey area mayor in August after. In June, gunmen killed the leading gubernatorial candidate in neighboring Tamaulipas state. A mayoral candidate was slain there in May. A mayor in San Luis Potosi state was killed this month."
___
10/16
Italy Arrests Alleged Dangerous 'Ndrangheta Mobsters (Time, by Stephan Faris, 7/13/2010)
Italy Braces for a New Mafia War (Time, by Stephan Faris, 10/14/2010)
While perusing Time's website, I came across the two above linked articles. With so much media focus on the drug war closer to home, I guess I had forgotten that the Mafia is still active in Italy. As I read about the 'Ndrangheta crime family from southern Italy, I was struck by the similarities they have with Mexican and South American cartels .
1. Both have centralized power structures that are nearly impossible to infiltrate.
"'The 'Ndrangheta almost only spreads through the growth of the natural family,' says Francesco Forgione, the former head of Italy's antimafia commission, a fact that he says makes the group's tightly bound members difficult to flip. 'You'd have to turn in your brother-in-law, your son, your nephew,' he says. 'It just wouldn't happen.'"
"Little-known outside of Italy, the ['Ndrangheta} criminal syndicate is considered the most dangerous in the country, teaming up with Colombian cocaine producers to control a large share of the European cocaine trade and its annual turnover of $55 billion, equivalent to roughly 3% of the Italian economy."
In Mexico, domestic dependency on cocaine, as well as export revenues from shipments of crystal meth and marijuana to the U.S makes joining cartels one of the best business decisions available to young men in Mexico.
"Last week, the threats ticked up another notch, when police responded to an anonymous phone call, in which a man's voice promised a 'surprise' for Giuseppe Pignatone, the city's chief prosecutor. Outside the courthouse, under an abandoned mattress, lay an unloaded bazooka."
It seems that the theory expounded by Guy Lawson on Morning Joe regarding Mexican drug cartels, may hold true in for the Italian Mafia as well. When the "top guys" are arrested or killed, the "tough guys" and "punks" take over, and confrontations escalate.
In Italy, prosecutors have had a windfall of success, with the arrest of 300 members of the notorious syndicate known as the 'Ndrangheta this past July. But their cases rely on evidence obtained through wiretaps, and issue as contentious in Italy as it is in the U.S., so further arrests may not be possible.
"Though the controversial law makes exceptions for cases involving terrorism and organized crime, prosecutors worry that its tougher standards of evidence and tight time limits could nonetheless make investigations of the kind that bore fruit on Tuesday harder to carry out."
Which leads me to wonder if similar measures may help us battle the criminal activity plaguing our southern border.
___
The purpose of this post is to compile information about the "The Drug War." By that, I mean the fighting that goes on among the cartels to our south. I have only read sporadic articles regarding this issue, so will not draw many conclusions. Rather, this will serve as a forum where I can raise questions, and try to seek answers.
The reason that I chose to deal with this topic this morning is due to this article I found on CNN's website: Police: American-born drug kingpin arrested in Mexico.
The title alone got me thinking. How many Mexicans and Mexican-Americans do you hear about going home without ICE agents leading the way? Most that I meet are here for legitimate economic opportunities that don't exist in their home country. I had to click and learn more.
It turns out, the story isn't all that exciting. But, I did come across a line in the article that got the wheels in my head churning.
"Beltran's brother Carlos was arrested, leaving Valdez in a fight to fill a power vacuum in one of Mexico's most powerful drug cartels."
All three of the names mentioned in this sentence have been the "kingpin" of a particular Mexican drug gang, known as the Leyva cartel, within the past year. Basically, the police catch or kill one, and another steps up to take his place. Sure, there may be some in-fighting for a while after the last leader falls: a merge of cartels here, a break-up there. But, in the end, these men are playing a game with authorities that they know they will always win. It is worth the risk to them to face bullets and jail for the money that can be made. There is job security in being in a cartel. There will always be another guy ready and willing to step up and be the boss. Just don't get killed or caught.
Which leads me to my first questions of this post: What counter-tactics could law enforcement agencies employ to effectively eliminate or subvert drug cartels in Mexico? Furthermore, is it even possible to do so, or is a better approach humanitarian? Is legalization of all drugs the only answer? Are these men only doing this because there is no other paying job in Mexico, or is the chance to advance to "kingpin" and make the big bucks that good because the turn-over rate is so insanely high?
Lots of questions...more than I expected when I started brainstorming. I will watch for answers as I continue surfing the web. If any of my faithful readers have any thoughts, feel free to leave comments.
___
9/21
Mexican newspaper to cartels: 'We do not want more deaths'
I feel for the people of Ciudad Juarez. I really do. I can't imagine living in a town so ravaged by constant violence. However, I don't think an editorial in the towns most popular newspaper, El Diario, is going to solve the problem.
Cartel members do not care about editorials. They do not care about the journalist's who pen them. Their only interest in the photographer, the cartel's latest victim, was most likely his profession. Photographs are a direct threat to drug smugglers work. They provide solid proof of illegal activity.
Unfortunately, in this case I think the newspaper should consider protecting it's employees lives, more than continuing to practice good journalism. The conditions in Ciudad Juarez are like a war zone, and normal business practices cannot apply,. El Diario, translated into The Diary, needs to learn to operate more secretively. They should even consider seeking political asylum, and moving their base across the border. Their intentions seems pure, but the enemy they are dealing with could care less.
___
9/23
Mexico plans to protect journalists (MSNBC)
After the death or disappearance of over 25 journalists in the past four years, Mexico is planning to implement a new strategy to protect them.
"The plan includes an early warning system in which reporters would have immediate access to authorities when threatened, the creation of a council to identify the causes behind attacks on reporters, legal reforms, and a package of 'best practices' in journalism, according to a statement from Calderon's office."
I am skeptical. But, considering the success of similar tactics in Columbia, also hopeful.
___
9/24
Mexican mayor slain in drug-plagued state
The mayor of Monterrey was murdered this morning. Sadly, he is not the first to perish in northern Mexico as a result of the drug war.
"Gunmen killed another Monterrey area mayor in August after. In June, gunmen killed the leading gubernatorial candidate in neighboring Tamaulipas state. A mayoral candidate was slain there in May. A mayor in San Luis Potosi state was killed this month."
___
10/16
Italy Arrests Alleged Dangerous 'Ndrangheta Mobsters (Time, by Stephan Faris, 7/13/2010)
Italy Braces for a New Mafia War (Time, by Stephan Faris, 10/14/2010)
While perusing Time's website, I came across the two above linked articles. With so much media focus on the drug war closer to home, I guess I had forgotten that the Mafia is still active in Italy. As I read about the 'Ndrangheta crime family from southern Italy, I was struck by the similarities they have with Mexican and South American cartels .
1. Both have centralized power structures that are nearly impossible to infiltrate.
"'The 'Ndrangheta almost only spreads through the growth of the natural family,' says Francesco Forgione, the former head of Italy's antimafia commission, a fact that he says makes the group's tightly bound members difficult to flip. 'You'd have to turn in your brother-in-law, your son, your nephew,' he says. 'It just wouldn't happen.'"
2. Both use drugs to make ridiculous amounts of money.
"Little-known outside of Italy, the ['Ndrangheta} criminal syndicate is considered the most dangerous in the country, teaming up with Colombian cocaine producers to control a large share of the European cocaine trade and its annual turnover of $55 billion, equivalent to roughly 3% of the Italian economy."
In Mexico, domestic dependency on cocaine, as well as export revenues from shipments of crystal meth and marijuana to the U.S makes joining cartels one of the best business decisions available to young men in Mexico.
3. And both are using extreme tactics to try to intimidate law enforcement agencies from attempting to capture them. Take this example from Italy:
"Last week, the threats ticked up another notch, when police responded to an anonymous phone call, in which a man's voice promised a 'surprise' for Giuseppe Pignatone, the city's chief prosecutor. Outside the courthouse, under an abandoned mattress, lay an unloaded bazooka."
It seems that the theory expounded by Guy Lawson on Morning Joe regarding Mexican drug cartels, may hold true in for the Italian Mafia as well. When the "top guys" are arrested or killed, the "tough guys" and "punks" take over, and confrontations escalate.
In Italy, prosecutors have had a windfall of success, with the arrest of 300 members of the notorious syndicate known as the 'Ndrangheta this past July. But their cases rely on evidence obtained through wiretaps, and issue as contentious in Italy as it is in the U.S., so further arrests may not be possible.
"Though the controversial law makes exceptions for cases involving terrorism and organized crime, prosecutors worry that its tougher standards of evidence and tight time limits could nonetheless make investigations of the kind that bore fruit on Tuesday harder to carry out."
Which leads me to wonder if similar measures may help us battle the criminal activity plaguing our southern border.
___
Monday, August 30, 2010
Lesson Learned?
As I read about the resolution recently passed in California apologizing to Italians and Italian Americans for their terrible treatment during WWII, I couldn't help but be reminded of how we are ostracizing Arabs and Arab Americans today. What kind of atrocities are we going to need to apologize for 50 years from now?
We are not relocating Arabs like we did to Japanese and Italians during World War II, but do they feel safe and welcomed in their communities? We are not enforcing 8 pm curfews, or limiting how far Muslims can travel, but do they feel comfortable wearing their burka's around their neighborhoods?
The modern relevance of this resolution cannot be overstated. Take the time to click the link. Hopefully, if enough folks become informed, we can finally learn from our past mistakes, and not have to say "We're sorry" again.
We are not relocating Arabs like we did to Japanese and Italians during World War II, but do they feel safe and welcomed in their communities? We are not enforcing 8 pm curfews, or limiting how far Muslims can travel, but do they feel comfortable wearing their burka's around their neighborhoods?
The modern relevance of this resolution cannot be overstated. Take the time to click the link. Hopefully, if enough folks become informed, we can finally learn from our past mistakes, and not have to say "We're sorry" again.
1421 and the Kenya Connection
One of the best books that I have read in the past decade is "1421 The Year China Discovered the World." It theorizes that a fleet of Chinese vessels, led by the explorer and admiral Zheng He, beat Columbus to the new world.
Until doing my research today, I didn't realize that Gavin Menzies had not written any previous books. "1421" left me so captivated that I read it in a single weekend. I still remember much of the controversial evidence Mr. Menzies presented, and, though seemingly far-fetched at times, it had that tantalizing hint of believability folks like me live for.
In the days afterward, I spent several hours checking out web sites created by both supporters and de-bunkers of Mr. Menzies work. By the end of an obsessive two week period, I was convinced that at least some of what I had read about in 1421 would someday be proven true.
Fast-forward to this morning. As usual, I woke up around 4 am, made my cup of coffee, and headed into the den to start my daily search for inspiration. After sifting through a few articles about the origin of arrows, and the International Space Station, I happen upon this:
Ancient Chinese coins found in Kenya
Instantly, my mind flashes back to Zheng He. My heart rushing, I clicked to read the entire article. Sure enough, a joint team of Kenyan and Chinese archaeologist are examining the recent discovery of ancient Chinese coins and pottery in Africa. These are not just any samples, but indeed the very type of high-quality porcelain and "Yongle Tongbao" coins that the royal diplomat Zheng He would have carried on his voyage.
I read on, furiously scratching my fat cat's belly as my excitement grew.
"The China-Kenyan Lamu Islands Archaeological Project, launched by the National Museum of China, the School of Archaeology and Museology of the Peking University and the Kenya National Museum, was officially launched in July 2010. The project's main purpose is to confirm the authenticity of some local villagers' claims that they are "descendants of the ancient Chinese people" and to salvage the ships in Zheng He's fleet, which were sunk 600 years ago."
You are probably thinking, "What does this have to do with me? Why are you writing about some Chinese diplomat in Kenya 600 years ago?"
Well, I will hold you in suspense no longer. If the physical relics, hereditary claims, and future underwater exploration prove Zheng He was in Kenya 600 years ago, it adds credence to Gavin Menzies claim that the same Zheng He was in America in 1421.
Still not clicking?
I will spell it out very clearly for those who fell asleep in history class in grade school.
IT IS LOOKING INCREASINGLY LIKELY THAT THE CHINESE EXPLORER ZHENG HE, NOT CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS, WAS THE FIRST TO DISCOVER THE AMERICAS.
I hope that the capitalized type didn't offend anyone. (If you read the intro paragraph, you knew this already.) It was meant to incite you to yearn to learn more. Order a copy of 1421 at Amazon (I saw some for around $7), or head to your local library. That way, when it is announced that Mr. Menzies had it right all along, you will be able to say "I told you so," just like me.
Until doing my research today, I didn't realize that Gavin Menzies had not written any previous books. "1421" left me so captivated that I read it in a single weekend. I still remember much of the controversial evidence Mr. Menzies presented, and, though seemingly far-fetched at times, it had that tantalizing hint of believability folks like me live for.
In the days afterward, I spent several hours checking out web sites created by both supporters and de-bunkers of Mr. Menzies work. By the end of an obsessive two week period, I was convinced that at least some of what I had read about in 1421 would someday be proven true.
Fast-forward to this morning. As usual, I woke up around 4 am, made my cup of coffee, and headed into the den to start my daily search for inspiration. After sifting through a few articles about the origin of arrows, and the International Space Station, I happen upon this:
Ancient Chinese coins found in Kenya
Instantly, my mind flashes back to Zheng He. My heart rushing, I clicked to read the entire article. Sure enough, a joint team of Kenyan and Chinese archaeologist are examining the recent discovery of ancient Chinese coins and pottery in Africa. These are not just any samples, but indeed the very type of high-quality porcelain and "Yongle Tongbao" coins that the royal diplomat Zheng He would have carried on his voyage.
I read on, furiously scratching my fat cat's belly as my excitement grew.
"The China-Kenyan Lamu Islands Archaeological Project, launched by the National Museum of China, the School of Archaeology and Museology of the Peking University and the Kenya National Museum, was officially launched in July 2010. The project's main purpose is to confirm the authenticity of some local villagers' claims that they are "descendants of the ancient Chinese people" and to salvage the ships in Zheng He's fleet, which were sunk 600 years ago."
You are probably thinking, "What does this have to do with me? Why are you writing about some Chinese diplomat in Kenya 600 years ago?"
Well, I will hold you in suspense no longer. If the physical relics, hereditary claims, and future underwater exploration prove Zheng He was in Kenya 600 years ago, it adds credence to Gavin Menzies claim that the same Zheng He was in America in 1421.
Still not clicking?
I will spell it out very clearly for those who fell asleep in history class in grade school.
IT IS LOOKING INCREASINGLY LIKELY THAT THE CHINESE EXPLORER ZHENG HE, NOT CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS, WAS THE FIRST TO DISCOVER THE AMERICAS.
I hope that the capitalized type didn't offend anyone. (If you read the intro paragraph, you knew this already.) It was meant to incite you to yearn to learn more. Order a copy of 1421 at Amazon (I saw some for around $7), or head to your local library. That way, when it is announced that Mr. Menzies had it right all along, you will be able to say "I told you so," just like me.
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Gun Control
It was a cool autumn Sunday, just after school had re-started for the year. I had just come home from a three hour birthday party where I had been forced to watch Reading Rainbow, and eat stale cheese balls next to a boy picking his nose and sticking the buggers in the carpet. All I wanted to do was look in my grab bag, and see what kind of prize I would find.
On the drive home, my mom was intently focused on the road. Sitting beside her in the front seat, I silently stuck my hand into the small plastic hole. Rummaging casually through a layer of candy, I felt it and knew instantly what I had found. But I had needed to make sure. Sliding it along the slick side of the bag, I nonchalantly pulled the tip of it over the lip near the handle holes, to take a peek.
Big mistake. Out of the corner of her all-seeing mother-eyes, she spotted it. Before I had time to even grasp it between my hands and feel its wobbly white trigger, she had snatched it away.
Instantly, I flew into a rage. "But mom, it's a WATER GUN! It's green plastic! It doesn't even LOOK real!" I can remember screaming these words with such heated passion, that I felt like my face was going to blow up.
It didn't matter. My house had a strict no gun policy. It included everything from mock pistols from cops and robbers sets, to squirt guns meant for the pool. I was SOL.
__
My parents stuck to their no-guns on this rule, until I was about 12, and my little brother, 9. Then, finally, one warm summer Saturday at K-Mart, my brothers begging and pleading paid off. To the utter disgust of my mother, my father purchased my brother a cap gun.
I'm sure they fought about it for hours later that night. But, to my brother, myself, and my little sister, that brown and black plastic gun with a shiny orange tip was the coolest thing in the world. Finally, we had a gun of our own to run around and play army with. We wouldn't have to borrow the forsaken left-overs from the neighbors garage anymore.
You see, that was the irony of the whole situation. The rule was "No guns allowed at our house." There was no way my over-protective mother could stop us from using them while playing with our friends. In a neighborhood of 9 boys and 3 girls in Wisconsin, where hunting is king, the only thing the no-gun policy did was make my siblings and I feel like constant leeches.
The other irony of this situation is that the children I babysit for have a 7-year old boy who is not allowed to have guns either. He is clever, however, and has crafted his own pistol out of Legos. . .
So, although I don't have any children of my own, and am a woman not a man, I can use some of my personal experiences to comment on the following article: Bring it: Boys may benefit from aggressive play.
First and foremost, I agree with Jane Katch. Trying to oppress aggressive play is not the solution. Making sure the aggression is properly directed is the key. A boy should not be aiming his aggression at his little sister, but rather at other boys, or invisible enemies.
The one argument I always think aboutagainst this theory is that these boys are too young to truly understand the consequences of violence. However, there is no proof that children who are not allowed to play with guns learn about the permanence of death, or the seriousness of injury, etc. any early, or better than children who are allowed to play with guns.
When I watch the little 7 year old I babysit for play Jedi swords with his buddies, (he is allowed to have light sabers), he is giggling as plastic whacks plastic. He is not exhibiting any anger or hatred, just exuberant joy at being able to let off some steam.
I truly feel for teachers. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place. To appease the over-protective moms, they need to curb the natural play patterns of all of the children in their classroom.
The one component of this that I feel is often overlooked is how smart, and judgmental children are. By the time I was in 2nd grade, my classmates knew my mother was strict, and I knew whose parents were lax. I didn't know those terms, strict and lax, but I knew whose house to ride my bike to so that I could have a Popsicle and some Doritos, and play some He-Man vs. Shera if I wanted to.
It's important for young child's social standing to be seen as having cool parents, and a cool house to hang out at. (It's almost as important as having cool clothes and shoes in high school, but not quite.) So when parents are making decisions about guns, video games, and other controversial toys and activities, keep your child's self esteem in mind. Say no when it really matters, like when they ask you to buy beer, or to have their girlfriend sleep over. Remember, it can really hurt a kid to have their peers never want to come over.
This doesn't mean I think that kids should rule the roost. Children should never threaten adults with violence, even during temper tantrums. Furhtemore, it is paramount that youngsters are taught that roughhousing is meant for the playground, not the dinner table or before bedtime. Set boundaries, but not barriers.
As a tom-boy who played with her fair share of the neighbors guns, I think that I turned out just fine. My brother's cap gun was long-forgotten by the time he started junior high. And I'm not aware of any of the 9 boys from my neighborhood turning into serial killers. So, mothers, take all of these things into consideration when making your decision regarding toy guns, and boys aggression in general. After all, if its just a water gun, it is just a water gun.
On the drive home, my mom was intently focused on the road. Sitting beside her in the front seat, I silently stuck my hand into the small plastic hole. Rummaging casually through a layer of candy, I felt it and knew instantly what I had found. But I had needed to make sure. Sliding it along the slick side of the bag, I nonchalantly pulled the tip of it over the lip near the handle holes, to take a peek.
Big mistake. Out of the corner of her all-seeing mother-eyes, she spotted it. Before I had time to even grasp it between my hands and feel its wobbly white trigger, she had snatched it away.
Instantly, I flew into a rage. "But mom, it's a WATER GUN! It's green plastic! It doesn't even LOOK real!" I can remember screaming these words with such heated passion, that I felt like my face was going to blow up.
It didn't matter. My house had a strict no gun policy. It included everything from mock pistols from cops and robbers sets, to squirt guns meant for the pool. I was SOL.
__
My parents stuck to their no-guns on this rule, until I was about 12, and my little brother, 9. Then, finally, one warm summer Saturday at K-Mart, my brothers begging and pleading paid off. To the utter disgust of my mother, my father purchased my brother a cap gun.
I'm sure they fought about it for hours later that night. But, to my brother, myself, and my little sister, that brown and black plastic gun with a shiny orange tip was the coolest thing in the world. Finally, we had a gun of our own to run around and play army with. We wouldn't have to borrow the forsaken left-overs from the neighbors garage anymore.
You see, that was the irony of the whole situation. The rule was "No guns allowed at our house." There was no way my over-protective mother could stop us from using them while playing with our friends. In a neighborhood of 9 boys and 3 girls in Wisconsin, where hunting is king, the only thing the no-gun policy did was make my siblings and I feel like constant leeches.
The other irony of this situation is that the children I babysit for have a 7-year old boy who is not allowed to have guns either. He is clever, however, and has crafted his own pistol out of Legos. . .
So, although I don't have any children of my own, and am a woman not a man, I can use some of my personal experiences to comment on the following article: Bring it: Boys may benefit from aggressive play.
First and foremost, I agree with Jane Katch. Trying to oppress aggressive play is not the solution. Making sure the aggression is properly directed is the key. A boy should not be aiming his aggression at his little sister, but rather at other boys, or invisible enemies.
The one argument I always think aboutagainst this theory is that these boys are too young to truly understand the consequences of violence. However, there is no proof that children who are not allowed to play with guns learn about the permanence of death, or the seriousness of injury, etc. any early, or better than children who are allowed to play with guns.
When I watch the little 7 year old I babysit for play Jedi swords with his buddies, (he is allowed to have light sabers), he is giggling as plastic whacks plastic. He is not exhibiting any anger or hatred, just exuberant joy at being able to let off some steam.
I truly feel for teachers. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place. To appease the over-protective moms, they need to curb the natural play patterns of all of the children in their classroom.
The one component of this that I feel is often overlooked is how smart, and judgmental children are. By the time I was in 2nd grade, my classmates knew my mother was strict, and I knew whose parents were lax. I didn't know those terms, strict and lax, but I knew whose house to ride my bike to so that I could have a Popsicle and some Doritos, and play some He-Man vs. Shera if I wanted to.
It's important for young child's social standing to be seen as having cool parents, and a cool house to hang out at. (It's almost as important as having cool clothes and shoes in high school, but not quite.) So when parents are making decisions about guns, video games, and other controversial toys and activities, keep your child's self esteem in mind. Say no when it really matters, like when they ask you to buy beer, or to have their girlfriend sleep over. Remember, it can really hurt a kid to have their peers never want to come over.
This doesn't mean I think that kids should rule the roost. Children should never threaten adults with violence, even during temper tantrums. Furhtemore, it is paramount that youngsters are taught that roughhousing is meant for the playground, not the dinner table or before bedtime. Set boundaries, but not barriers.
As a tom-boy who played with her fair share of the neighbors guns, I think that I turned out just fine. My brother's cap gun was long-forgotten by the time he started junior high. And I'm not aware of any of the 9 boys from my neighborhood turning into serial killers. So, mothers, take all of these things into consideration when making your decision regarding toy guns, and boys aggression in general. After all, if its just a water gun, it is just a water gun.
Cool Quotes
"There is nothing more powerful than a made up mind."
(Lewis Pugh before he dove into the freezing water at the North Pole. Here is the video I heard him say it in that prompted me to make this post: Lewis Pugh )
I gave up religion because I didn't believe in them vs. us, only to find myself still torn between them and us. It's just different. (Me 9/2/2010).
"There is a realization that what has worked in the past may not necessarily work in the future."
(Prime Minister of Malaysia, Najib Razak, discussing the need to change the affirmative action system of his country in order to stay competitive in the global economy.) Malaysia's New Journey - TIME
(Lewis Pugh before he dove into the freezing water at the North Pole. Here is the video I heard him say it in that prompted me to make this post: Lewis Pugh )
I gave up religion because I didn't believe in them vs. us, only to find myself still torn between them and us. It's just different. (Me 9/2/2010).
"There is a realization that what has worked in the past may not necessarily work in the future."
(Prime Minister of Malaysia, Najib Razak, discussing the need to change the affirmative action system of his country in order to stay competitive in the global economy.) Malaysia's New Journey - TIME
Political Corruption
I'm not naive enough to think that there aren't other corrupt politicians. In fact, I would bet that a vast majority of our lawmakers have committed some ethical, possibly criminal, offense at some point in their career. But it seems to me that very few get caught, and those that do get prosecuted, still tend to get away with it.
For the past 2 years, my local news channels have felt obliged to discuss a certain individual far beyond what his accomplishments deserve. Sure, he gave commuters the I-Pass, but beyond that, I can't think of a single good thing that he has done. The bad things that he is accused of doing, however, have placed him front and center on just about every prime time broadcast I can recall for months. If you live in anywhere near Chicago, like me, you know who I am talking about: Rod Blagojevich.
For a long time, I have been embarrassed to tell folks that I am from Chicago if there is even the slightest chance that politics will come in our conversation. But, the more I read about politics, the more I have found that Chicago is not alone.
So, to track this trend, I have decided to start a post on Political Corruption.
The first lucky entry: S. Korean PM-to-be resigns amid pressure
The entire time I was reading the article, I felt as though I had just picked up a Chicago Tribune.
I bet I can find a dozen articles like this within a year about other politicians from all over the world. I will be curious to see how many of them actually do time, or pay a fine.
___
Update: 8/29 6:24 PM
French prosecutor seeks Woerth case evidence
Well, well, well. What have we here. Another politician facing allegations of corruption? This times, it's the Labor Minister of France. When prosecutors are done reviewing the records, he may face charges ranging from receiving illegal donations, to showing favoritism on a national real estate deal. Oh, and a billionaire heiress is involved. I'll be very interested to see how this turns out.
___
9/27
Official: Chavez allies win congressional majority
"Before the vote, the opposition had criticized an election law passed by Chavez's allies that redrew some legislative districts and gave greater weight to votes in rural areas, where the president remains more popular."
I wonder if Chavez would have known about gerrymandering if he hadn't seen the corrupt tactic employed by some of his American enemies.
"Chavez also pitched his allies like a salesman, offering Venezuelans new, low-interest credit cards and discounted appliances from washing machines to TV sets. The government's "Good Life Card," which has yet to be widely distributed, is to be good for purchases at state-run stores and for travel, and the government has started a program offering cheap appliances imported from China."
He better watch out when all the crappy appliances start breaking, and his countrymen still owe on their shiny new credit cards. Teaching his people how to spend on credit is one of the stupidest economic policies I have ever read about.
___
12/30
Former Israeli president guilty of rape, sexual harassment (CNN, 12/30/2010)
As I read the story linked above, the only thing that kept going through my mind was that in the US, we have never seen an ex-President stand trial for anything. And I can think of plenty of examples from my lifetime alone where a guilty verdict would have been a distinct possibility.
For the past 2 years, my local news channels have felt obliged to discuss a certain individual far beyond what his accomplishments deserve. Sure, he gave commuters the I-Pass, but beyond that, I can't think of a single good thing that he has done. The bad things that he is accused of doing, however, have placed him front and center on just about every prime time broadcast I can recall for months. If you live in anywhere near Chicago, like me, you know who I am talking about: Rod Blagojevich.
For a long time, I have been embarrassed to tell folks that I am from Chicago if there is even the slightest chance that politics will come in our conversation. But, the more I read about politics, the more I have found that Chicago is not alone.
So, to track this trend, I have decided to start a post on Political Corruption.
The first lucky entry: S. Korean PM-to-be resigns amid pressure
The entire time I was reading the article, I felt as though I had just picked up a Chicago Tribune.
I bet I can find a dozen articles like this within a year about other politicians from all over the world. I will be curious to see how many of them actually do time, or pay a fine.
___
Update: 8/29 6:24 PM
French prosecutor seeks Woerth case evidence
Well, well, well. What have we here. Another politician facing allegations of corruption? This times, it's the Labor Minister of France. When prosecutors are done reviewing the records, he may face charges ranging from receiving illegal donations, to showing favoritism on a national real estate deal. Oh, and a billionaire heiress is involved. I'll be very interested to see how this turns out.
___
9/27
Official: Chavez allies win congressional majority
"Before the vote, the opposition had criticized an election law passed by Chavez's allies that redrew some legislative districts and gave greater weight to votes in rural areas, where the president remains more popular."
I wonder if Chavez would have known about gerrymandering if he hadn't seen the corrupt tactic employed by some of his American enemies.
"Chavez also pitched his allies like a salesman, offering Venezuelans new, low-interest credit cards and discounted appliances from washing machines to TV sets. The government's "Good Life Card," which has yet to be widely distributed, is to be good for purchases at state-run stores and for travel, and the government has started a program offering cheap appliances imported from China."
He better watch out when all the crappy appliances start breaking, and his countrymen still owe on their shiny new credit cards. Teaching his people how to spend on credit is one of the stupidest economic policies I have ever read about.
___
12/30
Former Israeli president guilty of rape, sexual harassment (CNN, 12/30/2010)
As I read the story linked above, the only thing that kept going through my mind was that in the US, we have never seen an ex-President stand trial for anything. And I can think of plenty of examples from my lifetime alone where a guilty verdict would have been a distinct possibility.
Witchcraft, Poverty, and Orphans
Mother accuses children of witchcraft
There are times during my web surfing that I come across stories seemingly too horrible for words. It is at those times, that I step back, take a deep breath, and force myself to find the strength to tell them.
__
Imagine being eight or nine years old, and being abandoned by your mother. Your father is dead, and she is too poor to feed and cloth you any longer. Even worse, she is claiming that you have caused the death of your siblings through the use of black magic.
Even though you are young, you know how devastating this accusation can be. You have seen other "witch" children disappear, drowned or burned in the night, their parents never punished.
Now, you are one of those vilified children. Your mother scowls at you in front of the entire village, and all you can do is cry. You are petrified.
An NGO representative tries to talk sense into your mother, while you stand watching, but she refuses to budge. With tears in her own starving eyes, she sticks to her convoluted story about witchcraft.
The NGO representative has no other choice. You are escorted to a car, and taken from your village forever. Eventually, you arrive at your new home; an orphanage.
Your leaders in the Nigerian government are doing nothing to help your plight. They think your story is being blown out of proportion. The NGO's they claim, are out to extort money from wealthy donors. This scares charitable folks from helping, creating a viscous circle in which you are trapped. The NGO run orphanage feeds and shelters you, but provides only rudimentary education, and no hope for a future any brighter than your dead father or poverty stricken mother.
__
9/12
The rescued, accused witches of Nigeria
The hopeless look in the little boy's eyes on the first picture is almost too much to bear viewing. To think that men claiming to be pastor's of god are responsible for most of the abuse and neglect in Nigeria is reprehensible. But it is not surprising. I have read about religion being used as an instrument of greed so many times. What is truly sad is the victims are children, who have no choice but to submit to their elders.
Some quotes from this story bear repeating:
"Those denounced as witches must be cleansed through deliverance or cast out, say the pastors -- many of whom charge between $300 and $2,000 for their services."
"[W]hen a relative asked Godwin if he was a witch, he said no, so he was beaten and made to confess that he did kill her. He was locked up with his mother's corpse every night for three weeks with little food or water before a neighbor contacted Sam who could rescue him."
___
There are times during my web surfing that I come across stories seemingly too horrible for words. It is at those times, that I step back, take a deep breath, and force myself to find the strength to tell them.
__
Imagine being eight or nine years old, and being abandoned by your mother. Your father is dead, and she is too poor to feed and cloth you any longer. Even worse, she is claiming that you have caused the death of your siblings through the use of black magic.
Even though you are young, you know how devastating this accusation can be. You have seen other "witch" children disappear, drowned or burned in the night, their parents never punished.
Now, you are one of those vilified children. Your mother scowls at you in front of the entire village, and all you can do is cry. You are petrified.
An NGO representative tries to talk sense into your mother, while you stand watching, but she refuses to budge. With tears in her own starving eyes, she sticks to her convoluted story about witchcraft.
The NGO representative has no other choice. You are escorted to a car, and taken from your village forever. Eventually, you arrive at your new home; an orphanage.
Your leaders in the Nigerian government are doing nothing to help your plight. They think your story is being blown out of proportion. The NGO's they claim, are out to extort money from wealthy donors. This scares charitable folks from helping, creating a viscous circle in which you are trapped. The NGO run orphanage feeds and shelters you, but provides only rudimentary education, and no hope for a future any brighter than your dead father or poverty stricken mother.
__
9/12
The rescued, accused witches of Nigeria
The hopeless look in the little boy's eyes on the first picture is almost too much to bear viewing. To think that men claiming to be pastor's of god are responsible for most of the abuse and neglect in Nigeria is reprehensible. But it is not surprising. I have read about religion being used as an instrument of greed so many times. What is truly sad is the victims are children, who have no choice but to submit to their elders.
Some quotes from this story bear repeating:
"Those denounced as witches must be cleansed through deliverance or cast out, say the pastors -- many of whom charge between $300 and $2,000 for their services."
"[W]hen a relative asked Godwin if he was a witch, he said no, so he was beaten and made to confess that he did kill her. He was locked up with his mother's corpse every night for three weeks with little food or water before a neighbor contacted Sam who could rescue him."
___
Ramblings
From time to time, I get an image in my head that may eventually lead to a story. This seemed like as good of a place as any to jot them down.
___
Two men in black suits and sunglasses meet in an empty parking garage. They stand beside the tinted windows of their black SUV's. Their cronies line the concrete surrounding the vehicles, guns poised and trigger fingers ready.
With no more than the slightest of nods, one of the men alerts the other to open the trunk. The quacking sound of an electronic key breaks the stagnant silence. Almost, three of the greener thugs are jolted into firing. Almost, but not quite.
As the trunk slowly swings open, no one blinks or breaths.
___
The Rabbit
Dining on daisies,
Scampering through weeds.
Hopping past tree trunks,
Concealed by the reeds.
At first glance,
You might believe
That the life of a rabbit
Is based completely on habit.
Then, out of the sky
A black spot does appear.
Before the bunny can move,
A claw is gouged into its rear.
The Hawk
Feasting on fricassee,
Soaring before the storm,
Diving deep into the meadow,
Always in perfect form.
At first glance,
You might believe
That the life of a hawk
Is only kill and stalk.
You're probably right!
___
The Lily
Lily, oh lily, so vibrantly bright,
Just like a spaceship,
About to take flight.
The carnations get lost
In your hot pink glitter.
The roses, high cost,
Seem boring and bitter.
___
The Rain
The rain makes me remember,
A long ago September.
We met in the back row,
So nobody would know.
A murmur, a kiss,
A proposal, a hiss.
What would have happened if I'd said yes?
If I met you today,
All I would say,
Is, "I wonder with the rain."
___
The Test
In twenty words or less,
I will pass the test.
The question: Why?
The answer: Because.
See, told you so!
___
10/20
This is how much we love our cats. I feed them "feasts" of beef, turkey, and chicken everyday, four, five, and even six times some days. I clean their litter boxes everyday, sometimes twice a day. I hairball the fat one like she is getting "the full package" at a day spa twice a week, and my husband makes room for the little one on his lap, even if it means gimping his arms while he types on the laptop. In comparison, we eat cereal for most meals because it is cheap and, well, cheap. I clean our toilet twice a month. I go to the salon twice a year, and only for basic dyes and cuts. And I have never had my husband make room for me on his lap while he is trying to type an e-mail!
___
1/10
I always wanted a fat cat. When I was a little girl, I pictured holding a fluffy white ball of fur on my lap, with a wispy tail and a little pink nose. I never imagined owning a massive mound of matted black fur with a constantly whacking tail, and a milk-splashed mark on her face. In fact, my cat Kia is so far from ordinary, that I felt the urge to share a couple of her unique characteristics with you.
For example, she has perfected the art of the flop. I am sure many cats perform this feat, but few with the same non-grace as my Kia. Forget sticking your butt in the air and falling to the side. Kia simply takes a few steps away from you, and falls over like a dead dog. However, that evil tail never stops whacking, ruining the ruse. The reason she flops is also quite unique: she wants her belly scratched. I'm not talking softly massaged, or gently rubbed; I mean scratched like the stomach of full-grown golden retriever. She also likes her nose, chin, and butt scratched. I have autoimmune problems that affect my joints, and am told to 'move it, or lose it,' so often scratch Kia's fat head to help all of my fingers stretch out each morning.
It is also important to note that Kia's belly and butt are far beyond anything most cats could ever dream of attaining in both girth, and tangles. Saying that she is a big girl would be the understatement of the year. However, she is comfortable with her heaviness, and waddles her way around the condo, ready to jump at every shadow. She also enjoys being groomed. She actually waits on the bar table in the kitchen each morning for me to come and pick, or cut the knots out of her fur. Most cats would run when you pull out the scissors, but not my Kia! She starts purring like I just pulled out a lobster dinner!
But when it comes to everyday life, Kia is the quintessential scaredy-cat. While her sister attacks bugs, Kia paws them once, then runs away when her love tap fails to kill them. If she is sleeping by your feet, and your, or anything else in the room, moves, she is gone like Jumping Jack Flash. I have even seen her jump three feet in the air from something as simple as a watch's glare on the wall.
All of these traits may seem unappealing, or downright negative to most people. But to me, they are all part of the Kia I have grown to love. As I write this now, her snoring is keeping me company. I still have a couple hairs irritating my eyes from when I buried my face in her fur this morning. All these things are just reminders of the cat who has my heart, Kia.
___
4/16
Everything King Midas touched turned to gold. But have you ever heard the tale of King Minus? Everything that he touched turned to shit.
It all started on the morning of the Bicentennial Banquet. King Minus was in the royal garden inspecting the perfectly pruned royal rose bushes. "They look like shit," he mused, just loud enough for the workers, who were sweating profusely, to hear.
When he got to the central fountain, its just-polished marble glinting in the sunlight, the hard-to-please King had the same response. "It looks like shit!" he hollered to the exhausted polishers.
The King then moved on to the Royal Banquet Hall, where servants were busy polishing forks and spoons. The King picked up a utensil from the completed pile, held it up to the candlelight, then tossed it back down. "It looks like shit!" he mused nonchalantly, turning towards the kitchen.
Every spit on every fireplace had a different meat spinning, while cooks frantically basted, and kept the coals at the perfect height. After walking through the hectic room, the King stopped before the doorway, to declare loudly, "It all looks, and smells like shit!"
Tired from all of his criticizing, the king headed to the royal boudoir to take a nap before the party.
Meanwhile, the servants of the castle finished their chores, all the while reeling from the kings constant complaints. All of them secretly wished for a way to make the King stop being so critical.
A fairy-witch just happened to be passing my the royal gardens when she heard the head groundskeeper fretting with his workers. "I will help you," she said as she flew off to the tower, and into the kings bedroom window. With the wave of her wand, and a sprinkling of glitter, the spell was cast. Now the king would learn what shit really was!
When he woke up, the sun had already set and guests were beginning to pour into the castle. The king got out of bed, and was dressed in his best regalia by a dozen servants, all the while never touching anything. . . until one of them handed him his royal scepter. The instant the solid gold staff skimmed his fingertips, it turned into a stinky pile of shit. The king turned bright red, as the servants stared in disbelief.
"Shit!" the King yelled, sending a wave of servants from the hallway rushing into the room. One of them accidentally stepped on the pile of poo that had been the scepter, sending the King into a fury. "Get off of my scepter!" he raged charging at the unsuspecting man. As his hands came in contact with the man's chest, he too turned into shit. "Shit!" Everyone yelled together, trying to get as far away from the king as possible.
Left alone in his room, the king stared down at his poop-stained hands, and then at the stinky pile on the floor. What in the world could be going on? he wondered.
Just then, his royal adviser shuffled in. "Your guests are waiting, your Highness," he intoned, looking quizzically at the pile of poo on the floor. "Did the maids forget to change your bed pan, sire?"
"Everything I touch is turning to shit!" King Minus cried, rushing towards his long-time friend with his hands outstretched.
"Well, don't touch me!" the adviser advised, ducking under the kings arm just in time to avoid catastrophe. "You must have been dreaming, sire. I will send to have this mess taken care off. Lets get your hands washed so you don't keep the nobles waiting."
The adviser realized the King was not lying the instant he dropped the bar of soap into his hands. It turned from an ivory rectangle, to a squishy mound of shit. Afraid for his life, the adviser took off as fast as his ancient legs would take him. Enraged, the King chased after, his years of sitting on the throne making a speedy pursuit impossible.
Through the hall they raced at a turtle's pace, the adviser limping his way along while the King stumbled after.
Down the stairs, and through the hall, right into the banquet room the duo ran. Silence overtook the party as the King, with shit stained hands, chased the elderly man right past the line of guests, and out into the garden.
Out of breath and near collapsing, the King fell onto a bench. Tears stained his cheeks, but he was too afraid of turning to shit to wipe them away. Suddenly, a flurry of sparkles appeared beside him. It was the fairy-witch!
"You look like shit!" she yelled, waving her wand to remove the spell.
Never again did King Minus tell his servants their work looked like shit. Instead, he started telling them all how bad they sucked!
The End
___
5/19
I hate pensions. They are the thing that my generation is footing the entire bill for, but will never have the benefits from when we retire.
___
Two men in black suits and sunglasses meet in an empty parking garage. They stand beside the tinted windows of their black SUV's. Their cronies line the concrete surrounding the vehicles, guns poised and trigger fingers ready.
With no more than the slightest of nods, one of the men alerts the other to open the trunk. The quacking sound of an electronic key breaks the stagnant silence. Almost, three of the greener thugs are jolted into firing. Almost, but not quite.
As the trunk slowly swings open, no one blinks or breaths.
___
The Rabbit
Dining on daisies,
Scampering through weeds.
Hopping past tree trunks,
Concealed by the reeds.
At first glance,
You might believe
That the life of a rabbit
Is based completely on habit.
Then, out of the sky
A black spot does appear.
Before the bunny can move,
A claw is gouged into its rear.
The Hawk
Feasting on fricassee,
Soaring before the storm,
Diving deep into the meadow,
Always in perfect form.
At first glance,
You might believe
That the life of a hawk
Is only kill and stalk.
You're probably right!
___
The Lily
Lily, oh lily, so vibrantly bright,
Just like a spaceship,
About to take flight.
The carnations get lost
In your hot pink glitter.
The roses, high cost,
Seem boring and bitter.
___
The Rain
The rain makes me remember,
A long ago September.
We met in the back row,
So nobody would know.
A murmur, a kiss,
A proposal, a hiss.
What would have happened if I'd said yes?
If I met you today,
All I would say,
Is, "I wonder with the rain."
___
The Test
In twenty words or less,
I will pass the test.
The question: Why?
The answer: Because.
See, told you so!
___
10/20
This is how much we love our cats. I feed them "feasts" of beef, turkey, and chicken everyday, four, five, and even six times some days. I clean their litter boxes everyday, sometimes twice a day. I hairball the fat one like she is getting "the full package" at a day spa twice a week, and my husband makes room for the little one on his lap, even if it means gimping his arms while he types on the laptop. In comparison, we eat cereal for most meals because it is cheap and, well, cheap. I clean our toilet twice a month. I go to the salon twice a year, and only for basic dyes and cuts. And I have never had my husband make room for me on his lap while he is trying to type an e-mail!
___
1/10
I always wanted a fat cat. When I was a little girl, I pictured holding a fluffy white ball of fur on my lap, with a wispy tail and a little pink nose. I never imagined owning a massive mound of matted black fur with a constantly whacking tail, and a milk-splashed mark on her face. In fact, my cat Kia is so far from ordinary, that I felt the urge to share a couple of her unique characteristics with you.
For example, she has perfected the art of the flop. I am sure many cats perform this feat, but few with the same non-grace as my Kia. Forget sticking your butt in the air and falling to the side. Kia simply takes a few steps away from you, and falls over like a dead dog. However, that evil tail never stops whacking, ruining the ruse. The reason she flops is also quite unique: she wants her belly scratched. I'm not talking softly massaged, or gently rubbed; I mean scratched like the stomach of full-grown golden retriever. She also likes her nose, chin, and butt scratched. I have autoimmune problems that affect my joints, and am told to 'move it, or lose it,' so often scratch Kia's fat head to help all of my fingers stretch out each morning.
It is also important to note that Kia's belly and butt are far beyond anything most cats could ever dream of attaining in both girth, and tangles. Saying that she is a big girl would be the understatement of the year. However, she is comfortable with her heaviness, and waddles her way around the condo, ready to jump at every shadow. She also enjoys being groomed. She actually waits on the bar table in the kitchen each morning for me to come and pick, or cut the knots out of her fur. Most cats would run when you pull out the scissors, but not my Kia! She starts purring like I just pulled out a lobster dinner!
But when it comes to everyday life, Kia is the quintessential scaredy-cat. While her sister attacks bugs, Kia paws them once, then runs away when her love tap fails to kill them. If she is sleeping by your feet, and your, or anything else in the room, moves, she is gone like Jumping Jack Flash. I have even seen her jump three feet in the air from something as simple as a watch's glare on the wall.
All of these traits may seem unappealing, or downright negative to most people. But to me, they are all part of the Kia I have grown to love. As I write this now, her snoring is keeping me company. I still have a couple hairs irritating my eyes from when I buried my face in her fur this morning. All these things are just reminders of the cat who has my heart, Kia.
___
4/16
Everything King Midas touched turned to gold. But have you ever heard the tale of King Minus? Everything that he touched turned to shit.
It all started on the morning of the Bicentennial Banquet. King Minus was in the royal garden inspecting the perfectly pruned royal rose bushes. "They look like shit," he mused, just loud enough for the workers, who were sweating profusely, to hear.
When he got to the central fountain, its just-polished marble glinting in the sunlight, the hard-to-please King had the same response. "It looks like shit!" he hollered to the exhausted polishers.
The King then moved on to the Royal Banquet Hall, where servants were busy polishing forks and spoons. The King picked up a utensil from the completed pile, held it up to the candlelight, then tossed it back down. "It looks like shit!" he mused nonchalantly, turning towards the kitchen.
Every spit on every fireplace had a different meat spinning, while cooks frantically basted, and kept the coals at the perfect height. After walking through the hectic room, the King stopped before the doorway, to declare loudly, "It all looks, and smells like shit!"
Tired from all of his criticizing, the king headed to the royal boudoir to take a nap before the party.
Meanwhile, the servants of the castle finished their chores, all the while reeling from the kings constant complaints. All of them secretly wished for a way to make the King stop being so critical.
A fairy-witch just happened to be passing my the royal gardens when she heard the head groundskeeper fretting with his workers. "I will help you," she said as she flew off to the tower, and into the kings bedroom window. With the wave of her wand, and a sprinkling of glitter, the spell was cast. Now the king would learn what shit really was!
When he woke up, the sun had already set and guests were beginning to pour into the castle. The king got out of bed, and was dressed in his best regalia by a dozen servants, all the while never touching anything. . . until one of them handed him his royal scepter. The instant the solid gold staff skimmed his fingertips, it turned into a stinky pile of shit. The king turned bright red, as the servants stared in disbelief.
"Shit!" the King yelled, sending a wave of servants from the hallway rushing into the room. One of them accidentally stepped on the pile of poo that had been the scepter, sending the King into a fury. "Get off of my scepter!" he raged charging at the unsuspecting man. As his hands came in contact with the man's chest, he too turned into shit. "Shit!" Everyone yelled together, trying to get as far away from the king as possible.
Left alone in his room, the king stared down at his poop-stained hands, and then at the stinky pile on the floor. What in the world could be going on? he wondered.
Just then, his royal adviser shuffled in. "Your guests are waiting, your Highness," he intoned, looking quizzically at the pile of poo on the floor. "Did the maids forget to change your bed pan, sire?"
"Everything I touch is turning to shit!" King Minus cried, rushing towards his long-time friend with his hands outstretched.
"Well, don't touch me!" the adviser advised, ducking under the kings arm just in time to avoid catastrophe. "You must have been dreaming, sire. I will send to have this mess taken care off. Lets get your hands washed so you don't keep the nobles waiting."
The adviser realized the King was not lying the instant he dropped the bar of soap into his hands. It turned from an ivory rectangle, to a squishy mound of shit. Afraid for his life, the adviser took off as fast as his ancient legs would take him. Enraged, the King chased after, his years of sitting on the throne making a speedy pursuit impossible.
Through the hall they raced at a turtle's pace, the adviser limping his way along while the King stumbled after.
Down the stairs, and through the hall, right into the banquet room the duo ran. Silence overtook the party as the King, with shit stained hands, chased the elderly man right past the line of guests, and out into the garden.
Out of breath and near collapsing, the King fell onto a bench. Tears stained his cheeks, but he was too afraid of turning to shit to wipe them away. Suddenly, a flurry of sparkles appeared beside him. It was the fairy-witch!
"You look like shit!" she yelled, waving her wand to remove the spell.
Never again did King Minus tell his servants their work looked like shit. Instead, he started telling them all how bad they sucked!
The End
___
5/19
I hate pensions. They are the thing that my generation is footing the entire bill for, but will never have the benefits from when we retire.
My Religion
I was raised Catholic. I studied Buddhism, Taoism, Shinto, and other Eastern faiths in college. I have read the bible, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, parts of the Koran and various exotic Jewish texts. What I learned is that all religions are essentially the same in both their affirmative teachings about how to live life, as well as their exclusive tendencies, which often lead to conflicts and wars.
Today, I am proud to say I live my life by following the morals I hold in my heart as a human being. I don't need any one book, preacher, or symbols to reaffirm these norms. My "church" is the entire world, and my "parish," the community I come in contact with every day.
I will never outright persecute those who gain fulfillment from adhering to a particular creed. However, I will, from time to time, update this post with the ways religion, and those who rally in its name, exasperate the divisions that keep us from becoming a unified, peaceful society.
___
The Westboro Baptist Church
Man fires pepper spray on protesters outside Marine's funeral
The above linked article is only the latest episode in a drama that has been unfolding for over two decades. I did some research, and learned that before the Westboro Baptist Church started protesting at military funerals, they were picketing homosexuals funerals. (ADL)
"In 1998, WBC members set off an angry reaction nationwide when they showed up at the funeral of gay murder victim Matthew Shepard and held up signs saying “No Fags in Heaven” and “God Hates Fags.'” (ADL) I guess I had heard about this incident, but never really tied it to what is happening today, at the funeral's of fallen service men and women.
I do know that pastor Phelps believes that God is punishing America for homosexuality by allowing soldiers to be killed. Over the past couple years, I have been brought to tears on several occasions as I watched interviews of families just trying to put their loved ones to rest being devastated by this hate group, disguised as a Church.
Thankfully, a sectarian group has formed to combat these religious extremists. The Patriot Guard Riders attend funerals to shield families and friends from the protesting Westboro congregation. (Patriot Guard Riders)
I hope folks realize two things about the Westboro Baptist Church. First, though they may be the most vocal, they are far from alone. In my religious studies, I have come across dozens of groups who use God and Jesus to rationalize their hatred.
Second, and more importantly, the Westboro church is an example of extreme Christianity. It is far from the norm. Remember this next time you are considering other faiths, and their extreme vs. moderate adherents, as well.
___
9/4
The release of Stephen Hawking's newest book has once again raised the "God" debate on all of the major news web sites. Though the world seems to be making a huge deal out of his "discovery" that God isn't needed to explain the creation of the universe, I feel like many folks with a lot less prestige than Mr. Hawking have been yelling the exact same thing for along time. Only no one listened to us.
I can live with that. I don't want to be famous. Mr. Hawking is doing a fine job of handling the media from his wheel chair. I give him due props.
What I can't stand about his latest discovery, and how he is handling the questions it raises, is that he doesn't take its implications to the next level. Leaving too much room for interpretation will only lead to folks worshiping almighty "gravity" soon.
So I will come out and say it. There isn't a god. There never was a god. The universe just is. It is full of mysteries that we don't understand, but those mysteries were not designed, or created by an intelligent being. Therefore, we do not contain a divine spark. We are merely human. All that we are comes from the universe. When we no longer live, all that we are returns to it.
I have much more to say on this topic, but my coffee is gone. This indicates that exercise time has unfortunately arrived. Til next time, peace out!
___
9/5
How Pakistan's Floods Have Made Women Dangerously Visible
Imagine risking your very life if a member of the opposite sex viewed your face, or your elbow. Women living in conservative Muslim areas of the world are facing this dilemma everyday. So much so that many of them find it easier to just stay in their homes. But hiding inside is not always an option for women fleeing the devastating floods in Pakistan. You would think that their greatest fear is from disease, and homelessness. But, for some, due to their strict religious honor code, staying covered takes precedence to even these seemingly life-threatening issues.
__
9/6
Planned Quran-burning could endanger troops, Petreaus warns
A church in Florida is going to burn copies of the Quran on 9/11. Why? As "a warning against what it calls the threats posed by Islam."
I believe this Church's actions are evidence of the threat posed by crazy, uneducated Christians. If a Methodist did something terrible, would they blame the Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc too?
Now, it is there right, as Americans, to burn whatever they wish (accept marijuana, which is another issue for another post). But it is my right to call them horrible bigots, and to chastise them, and their outdated, hate-mongering religion. I am an atheist, and would never burn the holy book of another person because I have enough decency as a human being to respect folk's right to practice whatever faith, or lack of faith, they want.
The threat posed by these radicalized Christian groups is real. The planned event has sparked so much controversy that Muslims in Indonesia are protesting at the US embassy in Jakarta. People throughout Afghanistan are discussing it. Even General Petreaus is weighing in, warning about consequences to American forces on the ground there.
Yet another example of why I detest organized religion.
___
9/7
Pastor: Church 'praying" about plan to burn Quran
Wow. Add that to the reasons to argue against the power the prayer.
__
9/28
Don't know much about religion? You're not alone, study finds
Actually, it turns out that I do know a lot about religion. I scored a 9/10 on the quiz included in the above linked article. I am not bragging. I went to school to study religion. As you shall see as I analyze the findings offered by the article, my education plays a critical role in my knowledge of world religions, as well as my choice to be an atheist.
The first statistic I found interesting, but not surprising, was that a majority of Americans scored a 50% or less on a similar, 32 question phone quiz about world religions. Which leads me to ask the obvious: Why is America's religious knowledge so lacking?
I think that there are two reasons. Some people just don't care about religion, period. Primarily, however, I think people are ignorant about religion because they are content within their current belief system. They know a lot about their own faith, but not much about any others. It takes a very open-minded person to look outside of the worldview you were raised in, and actually learn about other religions. I believe this is because people are afraid of what they might find if they do step outside the boundaries of their own faith. Namely, they fear finding truths, similarities, and inspiration that may lead them to challenge the uniqueness of their own belief system.
I went through this experience when I first started looking outside Catholicism. I was still a teenager at the time, working on completing the requirements for my confirmation classes. There was a huge ecumenical push going on in the Catholic Church at the time, so one of them was to participate in another religion's festival. I remember participating in a Jewish Seder meal, which included preparing the food in a kosher kitchen, reading the passover story, and eating the meal. The Jewish family hosting the event did an incredible job. On several occasions, I experienced the same sense of being "chosen" as I did during certain Catholic rituals. I remember thinking to myself, "If other religions offer morality tales with solid messages, and rules that seem appropriate for leading a healthy and happy life, maybe my faith isn't so special after all."
In the group of about 10 of us, however, I felt alone. Half of them were sleeping or twisting their bubble gum. The other half couldn't wipe the looks of distaste off their faces as we passed the unleavened bread around the table. I could tell they thought the Seder was weird ritual that they needed to participate in to be confirmed as a Catholic. For me, it was much more. It was part of a larger learning process I was subjecting myself too, that eventually led me to major in world religions in college. At the Seder, another pillar supporting my Catholicism had fallen. And, just like in any house, once there is structural damage, more is sure to come.
Which leads me back to the next finding I wish to discuss from the above linked article: The fact that a vast majority of agnostics and atheists were raised within the structure of a particular faith, and made a conscious choice to move away from that faith at some point in their lives. In other words, they were raised with a belief in some form of God, but chose to identify themselves as nonbelievers later.
Why would people choose to forgo their ancestors' religions to become part of the "fairly unpopular" agnostics or atheists? The same reason people tend to do well on the world religions quiz: education. It's hard to deny the validity of a Theravada Buddhist monks approach to submission and discipline when you already know that the famous Catholic monk Benedictine's similar tactics. Harder still to recite the first lines of the Apostle's Creed with a straight face, after learning about Darwin. If religion's didn't claim exclusivity, and immutability, there wouldn't be a problem. Christian Buddhists could rewrite the Bible to incorporate evolution. But that is not the case. And, as people learn about other religions, science, and the world in general, the pillars supporting the faiths of our fathers fall.
As a recently acknowledged atheist, I can tell you this decision does not come lightly. In fact, it is one of the hardest aspects of my identity I deal with; not because I doubt my decision. I don't. I am certain of my disbelief in God. It is impossible, however, for me to even speak about this topic with my devoutly Catholic parents. They blame themselves for my straying from their faith. My grandmother, who is over 90, cries because I will not accept communion anymore. I have never come out and said the words "I am an atheist," or "I don't believe in God," to anyone in my family. In fact, this post is the first place I typed them.
It breaks my heart to see my grandmother cry. It would be so much easier just to fib, to say that I still go to church, and believe in God. But I played that game for almost a decade. At 32, I have finally grown up enough to know who, and what I am. When my grandmother cries, I hold her hand and cry too. I hope she finds her heaven. She, of all people, deserves it.
I've strayed, but only slightly. Because, if you asked me what the key determining factor in my decision was, I would undoubtedly say my education. According to the Pew poll, the more years of education a person completed directly impacted how well they performed on the quiz. In the same vane, youths who participated in church groups generally did better.
So who did best on the quiz?
"Jews and Mormons were close behind atheists and agnostics as the group who did best overall on the religion questions, and white evangelical Protestants also tended to get more than half right.
White Catholics averaged exactly half right, followed by mainline Protestants and people who said they were "nothing in particular," both of whom got just under half right."
I will let these results speak for themselves.
___
9/29
Survey: Americans don't know much about religion
I wrote most of what I want to say about this topic yesterday. However, this article does offer some new information, worth noting.
"Forty-five percent of Roman Catholics who participated in the study didn't know that, according to church teaching, the bread and wine used in Holy Communion is not just a symbol, but becomes the body and blood of Christ." (This atheist knows all about transubstantiation).
"More than half of Protestants could not identify Martin Luther as the person who inspired the Protestant Reformation. And about four in 10 Jews did not know that Maimonides, one of the greatest rabbis and intellectuals in history, was Jewish." (I knew the first, did not know the second).
"Atheists and agnostics scored highest, with an average of 21 correct answers, while Jews and Mormons followed with about 20 accurate responses. Protestants overall averaged 16 correct answers, while Catholics followed with a score of about 15." (Just thought having the actual numbers would be nice).
"On questions about Christianity, Mormons scored the highest, with an average of about eight correct answers out of 12, followed by white evangelicals, with an average of just over seven correct answers. Jews, along with atheists and agnostics, knew the most about other faiths, such as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism. Less than half of Americans know that the Dalai Lama is Buddhist, and less than four in 10 know that Vishnu and Shiva are part of Hinduism." (I think that atheists know about other religions more than people of other faiths because they searched for answers elsewhere before coming to their decision to become a nonbeliever.)
___
9/29
Beyond God and Atheism: Why I am a "possibilian"
By David Eagleman, New Scientist issue 2779, Sept. 27, 2010
The following comments regarding the above linked article from New Scientist online are going to be critical, but hopefully not disrespectful. My intentions in writing this post is not to berate or bully the author, but rather to show him the errors in his logic as concisely and kindly as possible.
I do this out of empathy and compassion. I sincerely belief that the author is in the same psycho-religious state that I was about two years ago. I was raised by devoutly Catholic, miracle-believing, daily-Church- attending parents. I went to Catholic grade school, and was instructed by Franciscan Sisters, participated in hundreds of masses as a reader, and truly believed in the faith with all of my heart.
That is precisely why breaking away from Catholicism, and religion in general, was at first extremely difficult for me. I went through a long phase where I called my belief system "Erinism." Erinism was much like the authors possibilianism; not subscribing to any religion, but still not ruling out the possibility that one of them, (or, in the case of my Erinism, a combination of them), may hold the key to the ultimate question.
I can't tell you the exact moment I broke away from this ridiculously termed, egotistical faith, that was really no more than a fancy agnosticism. But, I can tell you since making the leap, I have become much more aware of the heat atheism takes from all sides of the religious spectrum. The author puts us non-believers somewhere far to one end, but I often feel like atheism is hitched to the bottom, and batted around like a punching bag by everyone on top.
In this article, atheism is criticized for not being open to the vast possibilities the universe contains, including those offered by religions. Basically, the author claims there is no data disproving the notion of God. Based on every concept of a God I have ever encountered, I wholeheartedly disagree. There is no being hovering above the earth, responsible for its creation, and interacting with its inhabitants. There are no spirits residing in rivers, or dead ancestors wandering around cave complexes eating food offerings. These things HAVE been proven. To say otherwise, and site the possibility of the earth being populated by aliens, or the existence of mediators from other dimensions, is not fair. If either of these extreme possibilities were true, there still would be no proof for the existence of a God. In fact, discovering either of these things would topple most religions on their heads.
Let's take a look at a couple of the author's knocks on atheism:
"This situation calls for an openness in approaching the big questions of our existence. When there is a lack of meaningful data to weigh in on a problem, good scientists are comfortable holding many possibilities at once, rather than committing to a particular story over others. In light of this, I have found myself surprised by the amount of certainty out there."
I don't understand this comment. How are atheists committing to anything other than a disbelief in a higher power? As an atheist, I am certain that the Judeo-Christian-Islamic-Hindu-Animist versions of Gods do not exist. I am open to the possibility of aliens planting us here. Though I doubt it is true, I do not ignore the possibility just because I don't believe in God.
Furthermore, the follow quotes would serve as an example of agnosticism in any other article:
I take personal exception to the following lines:
"I know a lot of atheists who seethe at the idea of religion, and religious followers who seethe at the idea of atheism - but neither group is bothering with more interesting ideas."
First off, the reason I "seethe" at the idea of religion is the very reason the author is arguing for his unique position: possibilities. Religions prevent people from being open to new ideas, especially scientific ones. In the U.S., this skepticism leads to political donations to right wing candidates who oppose new technologies, medicines, and energy sources. The author should seethe at the idea of religions along with me, and also learn to follow in my foot-steps of not allowing that anger to care over to the actual believers.
Secondly, there are people on both ends attempting to build bridges, and come up with new ideas. Saying otherwise reflects how ignorant the author is on the topic of which he has chosen to write. My taking the time to comment is an example of an attempt at bridge building, as are the countless comments on posts just like this that I read every day. (I wish I could comment, but unfortunately I do not subscribe to New Scientist, so this well-intentioned critique will most likely rot here on my blog.)
___
Oct. 1
Child bride horrors last a lifetime
What shocked me most about the above article was not the fact that 9 and 10 year old girls are being forced to have sex with middle-aged men, but that religion is used to validate these horrific rapes. When Yemen attempted to pass legislation making the legal marriage age 17, it was Islamic fundamentalist who protested the loudest.
"More than 100 leading religious clerics called the attempt to restrict the age of marriage 'un-Islamic'".
I guess I shouldn't be that surprised, considering Warren Jeffs and other leaders of the FLDS used their power to force young girls into illegal marriages in our own country.
The biggest problem with fighting against people who argue with religion as their trump card is that you can never beat someone's God. Even with four aces, they will win. The only way to win is to stop playing the game altogether. Hopefully the younger generation in Yemen realizes this, and stops the insanity.
___
Oct. 2
Druids recognized as religion for first time in UK (Fox News)
As the above headline attests, druidry is now considered to be an official religion in the UK. I was interested in this article because, for a brief period over a decade ago, I spent a lot of time reading about the real druids of old. I was enthralled by tales of Vercingetorix, the Gaulish general who unsuccessfully revolted against the Romans. Many authors give credit to the ancient druids for helping sustain order amongst the general populace, and even guiding the great leaders hand at times. Though his attempt was ultimately a failure, his story is more memorable than most victories.
I also am interested in druids because of their knack for healing. I acquired a textbook about ancient healing practices several years ago, and remember many parts devoted to their tactics.
But, in all of my reading about druids, I never once encountered tales of them worshiping at stone circles. They preferred the forests, and the groves hidden amongst the trees. That is why I was someone irritated by the article's seeming ignorance of this fact.
I also have a slight problem with modern druids wanting to dance and sing at stone circles. I believe if their ancient namesakes could have any say in the matter, modern druids should be much more concerned with preserving the earth's dwindling forests. It's great to want to uplift your own spirit by partying at Stonehenge, but at least try to make a little effort to honor the heritage which you have chosen to steal, and then mutilate.
(I apologize if druids are doing more than nodding their heads at the obvious environmental connection associated with their name. I will watch for more on this topic.)
___
Oct. 3
Britain recognizes Druidry as religion for first time, gives it charitable status (CNN)
The above linked article offers the following quote, which I feel the article from Fox News failed to touch on:
"Druids were members of the learned class among ancient Celts, acting as priests, judges and teachers. They performed human and animal sacrifices and worshiped in forests in western Europe, Britain and Ireland."
It also discusses druidry in relation to the American Wicca movement. I criticize Wicca for the same reason I criticize modern druidry, however. Worshiping a dieing God instead of trying to save it seems a tad bit ridiculous to me.
___
Oct. 3
Washington's 'Red Mass' attracts top government leaders, controversy (CNN)
Before reading the above linked article, I had heard of the Red Mass, but never taken the time to find out what it was. Now that I know, I must say that I am not surprised by the manipulative way the Catholic Church attempts to infiltrate the minds of our government officials. As a former Catholic, I was a party to this sneakiness on many occasions. I must say that I am sickened to think of our Supreme Court Justices either voluntarily, or because of social pressures, falling victim to this kind of brainwashing. If they truly believe in the separation of church and state, all of the justices, even the six justices that are Catholic, should not participate in an event like the Red Mass.
Enough commentary from me. Let's look at the facts. The Red Mass started in 1952, in response to Supreme Court verdicts the Catholic Church did not approve of. Since that time, the pulpit has been repeatedly used to inform our lawmakers and judges about Gods will on controversial issues, like abortion. Yet, the Church denies any attempt at persuading the judges on social issues. Instead, they claim these annual Red Masses are ecumenical experiences, meant to probe the larger issues plaguing the world. Sometimes this may be true, but the fact that there is no way to predict what kind of messages the homily will contain should prevent our government officials from participating.
I think I will watch which elected officials from my state are seen at this years event, and make sure NOT to ever give them my vote in future elections.
___
10/16/2010
In a recent poll, 60% of Germans interviewed thought that Muslims should have their religious practices "significantly curbed." Apparently, the leader of Germany, Angela Merkel agrees. Recent comments she made, quoted in this Yahoo News article, are disturbing, but unfortunately not that surprising.
Like the United States, Germany is facing immigration issues. But instead of Catholic Mexicans invading from their southern border, they have Islamic Turks infiltrating from the East. At least the Spanish speaking Mexican's Catholic values align with the Christian framework inherent in American society. For Germans, trying to reconcile Arabic speaking Muslims must be doubly difficult.
I am not making excuses for the Germans. I am sickened by their bigotry. But unless we attempt to understand where it originates, we will never be able to eradicate it.
___
10/24
Iran restricts social sciences seen as 'Western' (Yahoo News, by Nasser Karimi, 10/24/2010)
After reading the above linked article, I debated with myself for over three hours whether to start a new post, and focus on the politics behind Ahmadinejad's decision to restrict what universities can teach, or confront the culprit head on. I decided to take the controversial, but correct, approach of putting this topic under 'My Religion,' because, as an atheist, no topic is beyond academic inquiry in my mind. It is the Iranian president's extremists Islamic views, and his desire to implement Sharia law, that is behind this harmful censorship.
"'The content of the current courses in the 12 subjects is not in harmony with religious fundamentals and they are based on Western schools of thought,' senior education official Abolfazl Hassani told state radio.'"
The twelve subjects in question include general education courses like philosophy and management, but also important social courses, like women's studies and human rights. These changes are expected to affect two million of the 3.5 million university students in Iran.
"Hassani said the restrictions prevent universities from opening new departments in these subjects. The government will also revise the content of current programs by up to 70 percent over the next few years, he said."
Many believe this outrageous move is in retaliation for the huge number of students that participated in last year's election protests. This is not the first time the Iranian government has used cuts to education as a punishment for political dissent.
"In 2006, dozens of liberal university professors and teachers were sent into retirement, drawing strong protests from students. Liberal and secular professors teach at universities around the country, but they are a minority. Most are politically passive and do not identify with either the hard-liners or the liberal camp."
And in 1980, a previous administration closed the universities altogether for two straight years!
Education is the key to outgrowing fundamentalist religion, and eventually the chains of religion altogether. That is why Ahmadinejad and his government are so fearful of the power universities wield over young minds. I feel a deep agony for all people in Iran. I couldn't imagine living under such a horrible dictator. I think it is sad that they live in such controlled shells that their spiritual life is confined to a God that only condemns things, leaving little for the society to cherish outside of prayer.
At first you might think that we live far from this type of censorship in America. But a quick glance at recent battles in Texas over the inclusion of intelligent design alongside evolution in biology textbooks shows that we still have a ways to go ourselves.
___
11/5
Here is a perfect example of how religion can be used for evil:
"Homosexuality is outlawed in Uganda. Some U.S. Evangelical groups are backing a bill, currently under review in parliament, that would make homosexuality punishable by death."
Source: Time Magazine, November 15, 2010
I was having a hard time deciding if this quote is more appropriate for my thread titled "American Bigotry," but eventually decided to put it here. This is because my lack of religion, but possession of morals would prevent me from ever advocating such an terrible law.
___
11/14
Pastor says student's suicide was tipping point for his coming out (CNN Belief Blog, 11/13)
I can't imagine living with the burden of ignoring my inner sexual cravings for over twenty years. I also can't imagine authenticating myself by coming out in front of a mega-church congregation. Everyone that reads my blog regularly knows how anti-organized-religion I am, but this man's acknowledgment gives me hope in the future. According to the doctrine followed by a majority of Americans, churches should be shelters for the downtrodden, the destitute, the persecuted, and the humble. But in practice, the doors are too often shut to these most hated and misunderstood members of society. To finally have leaders from shunned groups take control of the pulpit is a huge step in the right direction. However, it is also telling how evangelical fundamentalists respond with misconstrued ideas about such preacher's creating an army of gays.
___
11/30
I saw an I-report on CNN yesterday that I still have stuck in my head this morning. So I searched for it, but found this amazing video clip depicting what I wish to discuss instead. It is a billboard, paid for my American Atheists, that implores people to face the fact the Christmas is a myth, and to celebrate reason this year instead. I think it is hilarious that we atheists have to stare at billboards begging us to attend mega-churches, listen to Christian radio stations, or ask "WWJD" all of the time. But the minute someone that isn't a believer invokes their right to advertise their beliefs, it makes national news! I love this billboard so much, that I decided to check out the funding organization's website. I will come back to this thread later, and post my impressions.
___
12/1
I am still in the midst of reading all of the informative stories and enlightening interviews on American Atheist's official website. The one thing that struck me the most so far, and that I had never considered before, is why atheists have such a hard time organizing. It is because of the displeasure many of them have had with other forms of organized religion. Trying to find a structure that doesn't undermine the cohesion of the group, and keeping any person or persons from becoming too powerful, is much more difficult than I could have imagined.
____
2/27/2011
John Dominic Crossan's 'blasphemous' portrait of Jesus (CNN, by John Blake, 2/27/2011)
Many years ago as a junior in college, I took a class called "The Sociology of Religion." The entire semester was devoted to understanding the dualistic relationship between religion and society, both on a micro and macro level. I loved the class so much, that I went on to take the other courses the professor offered, even though they never would have appealed to me before. I ended up with a second major, in religion, which I managed to pull off in just four semesters of study.
What made this teacher different, and his courses so refreshing? The same thing that makes Mr. Crossan's studies so intriguing to me; the scholarly takes precedence over the spiritual. Mr. Mueller would force us to look at the Bible like a book written by a human author, instead of a divinely inspired sacred text. Likewise, Mr. Crossan was willing to recognize, and then publicly acknowledge, instances of scripture, and church doctrine, that weren't the kind of lessons modern folks should be living by.
"'It's like you're a scientist in research and development, and you say that this drug is lethal, and they say, 'Find something good in it,' Crossan says.'"
That sentiment describes exactly how I felt as a teenager when I would point out questionable premises from the Bible to my elders. Instead of acknowledging the insanity of such things as a child being born stained with something called "original sin," or the inferiority of women, I would get answers like, "Well, you don't have to believe everything." As I have written elsewhere in this blog, I truly believe that when it comes to something with as many real life implications as religion, you do have to choose; you are either part of the solution, or a perpetual enabler of the problem.
That is why those courses with Mr. Mueller were so refreshing years ago, and why coming across the above linked article describing the work of John Dominic Crossan brought back some sentimental feelings about my days at North Central. Thanks, Mr. Mueller and Mr. Crossan.
___
3/1
In this article from CNN's belief blog, the recent controversial declaration by author and preacher Rob Bell that there may be no such place as hell is discussed. I guess the book Mr. Bell has been promoting isn't even out yet, and the really orthodox Christians are already getting their suspenders twisted. Imagine the insanity of declaring that there is no hell! I mean, where would good people who aren't necessarily Christian end up?
I find it really sad that most religions rely so much on exclusivity in both life and death. It's like the social collective somehow knows how susceptible human beings are to feeling special, and thus weaved the fulfillment to that desire into all the worlds sacred texts. And anytime anyone like Mr. Bell tries to break the tradition by appealing to, what in any other instance, would be the moral's religions are founded upon, he is called a hypocrite. You gotta love organized religion!
___
11/2/2011
"In God We Trust" was just reaffirmed as our national motto by an overwhelming majority vote in the house. I would be much happier if these representatives started learning to trust in themselves to start fixing our broken world, because there is no God that is going to swoop down and save us. Indeed, it is the belief system behind a motto like this that is at the root of all of our problems, if you ask me.
Today, I am proud to say I live my life by following the morals I hold in my heart as a human being. I don't need any one book, preacher, or symbols to reaffirm these norms. My "church" is the entire world, and my "parish," the community I come in contact with every day.
I will never outright persecute those who gain fulfillment from adhering to a particular creed. However, I will, from time to time, update this post with the ways religion, and those who rally in its name, exasperate the divisions that keep us from becoming a unified, peaceful society.
___
The Westboro Baptist Church
Man fires pepper spray on protesters outside Marine's funeral
The above linked article is only the latest episode in a drama that has been unfolding for over two decades. I did some research, and learned that before the Westboro Baptist Church started protesting at military funerals, they were picketing homosexuals funerals. (ADL)
"In 1998, WBC members set off an angry reaction nationwide when they showed up at the funeral of gay murder victim Matthew Shepard and held up signs saying “No Fags in Heaven” and “God Hates Fags.'” (ADL) I guess I had heard about this incident, but never really tied it to what is happening today, at the funeral's of fallen service men and women.
I do know that pastor Phelps believes that God is punishing America for homosexuality by allowing soldiers to be killed. Over the past couple years, I have been brought to tears on several occasions as I watched interviews of families just trying to put their loved ones to rest being devastated by this hate group, disguised as a Church.
Thankfully, a sectarian group has formed to combat these religious extremists. The Patriot Guard Riders attend funerals to shield families and friends from the protesting Westboro congregation. (Patriot Guard Riders)
I hope folks realize two things about the Westboro Baptist Church. First, though they may be the most vocal, they are far from alone. In my religious studies, I have come across dozens of groups who use God and Jesus to rationalize their hatred.
Second, and more importantly, the Westboro church is an example of extreme Christianity. It is far from the norm. Remember this next time you are considering other faiths, and their extreme vs. moderate adherents, as well.
___
9/4
The release of Stephen Hawking's newest book has once again raised the "God" debate on all of the major news web sites. Though the world seems to be making a huge deal out of his "discovery" that God isn't needed to explain the creation of the universe, I feel like many folks with a lot less prestige than Mr. Hawking have been yelling the exact same thing for along time. Only no one listened to us.
I can live with that. I don't want to be famous. Mr. Hawking is doing a fine job of handling the media from his wheel chair. I give him due props.
What I can't stand about his latest discovery, and how he is handling the questions it raises, is that he doesn't take its implications to the next level. Leaving too much room for interpretation will only lead to folks worshiping almighty "gravity" soon.
So I will come out and say it. There isn't a god. There never was a god. The universe just is. It is full of mysteries that we don't understand, but those mysteries were not designed, or created by an intelligent being. Therefore, we do not contain a divine spark. We are merely human. All that we are comes from the universe. When we no longer live, all that we are returns to it.
I have much more to say on this topic, but my coffee is gone. This indicates that exercise time has unfortunately arrived. Til next time, peace out!
___
9/5
How Pakistan's Floods Have Made Women Dangerously Visible
Imagine risking your very life if a member of the opposite sex viewed your face, or your elbow. Women living in conservative Muslim areas of the world are facing this dilemma everyday. So much so that many of them find it easier to just stay in their homes. But hiding inside is not always an option for women fleeing the devastating floods in Pakistan. You would think that their greatest fear is from disease, and homelessness. But, for some, due to their strict religious honor code, staying covered takes precedence to even these seemingly life-threatening issues.
__
9/6
Planned Quran-burning could endanger troops, Petreaus warns
A church in Florida is going to burn copies of the Quran on 9/11. Why? As "a warning against what it calls the threats posed by Islam."
I believe this Church's actions are evidence of the threat posed by crazy, uneducated Christians. If a Methodist did something terrible, would they blame the Catholics, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc too?
Now, it is there right, as Americans, to burn whatever they wish (accept marijuana, which is another issue for another post). But it is my right to call them horrible bigots, and to chastise them, and their outdated, hate-mongering religion. I am an atheist, and would never burn the holy book of another person because I have enough decency as a human being to respect folk's right to practice whatever faith, or lack of faith, they want.
The threat posed by these radicalized Christian groups is real. The planned event has sparked so much controversy that Muslims in Indonesia are protesting at the US embassy in Jakarta. People throughout Afghanistan are discussing it. Even General Petreaus is weighing in, warning about consequences to American forces on the ground there.
Yet another example of why I detest organized religion.
___
9/7
Pastor: Church 'praying" about plan to burn Quran
Wow. Add that to the reasons to argue against the power the prayer.
__
9/28
Don't know much about religion? You're not alone, study finds
Actually, it turns out that I do know a lot about religion. I scored a 9/10 on the quiz included in the above linked article. I am not bragging. I went to school to study religion. As you shall see as I analyze the findings offered by the article, my education plays a critical role in my knowledge of world religions, as well as my choice to be an atheist.
The first statistic I found interesting, but not surprising, was that a majority of Americans scored a 50% or less on a similar, 32 question phone quiz about world religions. Which leads me to ask the obvious: Why is America's religious knowledge so lacking?
I think that there are two reasons. Some people just don't care about religion, period. Primarily, however, I think people are ignorant about religion because they are content within their current belief system. They know a lot about their own faith, but not much about any others. It takes a very open-minded person to look outside of the worldview you were raised in, and actually learn about other religions. I believe this is because people are afraid of what they might find if they do step outside the boundaries of their own faith. Namely, they fear finding truths, similarities, and inspiration that may lead them to challenge the uniqueness of their own belief system.
I went through this experience when I first started looking outside Catholicism. I was still a teenager at the time, working on completing the requirements for my confirmation classes. There was a huge ecumenical push going on in the Catholic Church at the time, so one of them was to participate in another religion's festival. I remember participating in a Jewish Seder meal, which included preparing the food in a kosher kitchen, reading the passover story, and eating the meal. The Jewish family hosting the event did an incredible job. On several occasions, I experienced the same sense of being "chosen" as I did during certain Catholic rituals. I remember thinking to myself, "If other religions offer morality tales with solid messages, and rules that seem appropriate for leading a healthy and happy life, maybe my faith isn't so special after all."
In the group of about 10 of us, however, I felt alone. Half of them were sleeping or twisting their bubble gum. The other half couldn't wipe the looks of distaste off their faces as we passed the unleavened bread around the table. I could tell they thought the Seder was weird ritual that they needed to participate in to be confirmed as a Catholic. For me, it was much more. It was part of a larger learning process I was subjecting myself too, that eventually led me to major in world religions in college. At the Seder, another pillar supporting my Catholicism had fallen. And, just like in any house, once there is structural damage, more is sure to come.
Which leads me back to the next finding I wish to discuss from the above linked article: The fact that a vast majority of agnostics and atheists were raised within the structure of a particular faith, and made a conscious choice to move away from that faith at some point in their lives. In other words, they were raised with a belief in some form of God, but chose to identify themselves as nonbelievers later.
Why would people choose to forgo their ancestors' religions to become part of the "fairly unpopular" agnostics or atheists? The same reason people tend to do well on the world religions quiz: education. It's hard to deny the validity of a Theravada Buddhist monks approach to submission and discipline when you already know that the famous Catholic monk Benedictine's similar tactics. Harder still to recite the first lines of the Apostle's Creed with a straight face, after learning about Darwin. If religion's didn't claim exclusivity, and immutability, there wouldn't be a problem. Christian Buddhists could rewrite the Bible to incorporate evolution. But that is not the case. And, as people learn about other religions, science, and the world in general, the pillars supporting the faiths of our fathers fall.
As a recently acknowledged atheist, I can tell you this decision does not come lightly. In fact, it is one of the hardest aspects of my identity I deal with; not because I doubt my decision. I don't. I am certain of my disbelief in God. It is impossible, however, for me to even speak about this topic with my devoutly Catholic parents. They blame themselves for my straying from their faith. My grandmother, who is over 90, cries because I will not accept communion anymore. I have never come out and said the words "I am an atheist," or "I don't believe in God," to anyone in my family. In fact, this post is the first place I typed them.
It breaks my heart to see my grandmother cry. It would be so much easier just to fib, to say that I still go to church, and believe in God. But I played that game for almost a decade. At 32, I have finally grown up enough to know who, and what I am. When my grandmother cries, I hold her hand and cry too. I hope she finds her heaven. She, of all people, deserves it.
I've strayed, but only slightly. Because, if you asked me what the key determining factor in my decision was, I would undoubtedly say my education. According to the Pew poll, the more years of education a person completed directly impacted how well they performed on the quiz. In the same vane, youths who participated in church groups generally did better.
So who did best on the quiz?
"Jews and Mormons were close behind atheists and agnostics as the group who did best overall on the religion questions, and white evangelical Protestants also tended to get more than half right.
White Catholics averaged exactly half right, followed by mainline Protestants and people who said they were "nothing in particular," both of whom got just under half right."
I will let these results speak for themselves.
___
9/29
Survey: Americans don't know much about religion
I wrote most of what I want to say about this topic yesterday. However, this article does offer some new information, worth noting.
"Forty-five percent of Roman Catholics who participated in the study didn't know that, according to church teaching, the bread and wine used in Holy Communion is not just a symbol, but becomes the body and blood of Christ." (This atheist knows all about transubstantiation).
"More than half of Protestants could not identify Martin Luther as the person who inspired the Protestant Reformation. And about four in 10 Jews did not know that Maimonides, one of the greatest rabbis and intellectuals in history, was Jewish." (I knew the first, did not know the second).
"Atheists and agnostics scored highest, with an average of 21 correct answers, while Jews and Mormons followed with about 20 accurate responses. Protestants overall averaged 16 correct answers, while Catholics followed with a score of about 15." (Just thought having the actual numbers would be nice).
"On questions about Christianity, Mormons scored the highest, with an average of about eight correct answers out of 12, followed by white evangelicals, with an average of just over seven correct answers. Jews, along with atheists and agnostics, knew the most about other faiths, such as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism. Less than half of Americans know that the Dalai Lama is Buddhist, and less than four in 10 know that Vishnu and Shiva are part of Hinduism." (I think that atheists know about other religions more than people of other faiths because they searched for answers elsewhere before coming to their decision to become a nonbeliever.)
___
9/29
Beyond God and Atheism: Why I am a "possibilian"
By David Eagleman, New Scientist issue 2779, Sept. 27, 2010
The following comments regarding the above linked article from New Scientist online are going to be critical, but hopefully not disrespectful. My intentions in writing this post is not to berate or bully the author, but rather to show him the errors in his logic as concisely and kindly as possible.
I do this out of empathy and compassion. I sincerely belief that the author is in the same psycho-religious state that I was about two years ago. I was raised by devoutly Catholic, miracle-believing, daily-Church- attending parents. I went to Catholic grade school, and was instructed by Franciscan Sisters, participated in hundreds of masses as a reader, and truly believed in the faith with all of my heart.
That is precisely why breaking away from Catholicism, and religion in general, was at first extremely difficult for me. I went through a long phase where I called my belief system "Erinism." Erinism was much like the authors possibilianism; not subscribing to any religion, but still not ruling out the possibility that one of them, (or, in the case of my Erinism, a combination of them), may hold the key to the ultimate question.
I can't tell you the exact moment I broke away from this ridiculously termed, egotistical faith, that was really no more than a fancy agnosticism. But, I can tell you since making the leap, I have become much more aware of the heat atheism takes from all sides of the religious spectrum. The author puts us non-believers somewhere far to one end, but I often feel like atheism is hitched to the bottom, and batted around like a punching bag by everyone on top.
In this article, atheism is criticized for not being open to the vast possibilities the universe contains, including those offered by religions. Basically, the author claims there is no data disproving the notion of God. Based on every concept of a God I have ever encountered, I wholeheartedly disagree. There is no being hovering above the earth, responsible for its creation, and interacting with its inhabitants. There are no spirits residing in rivers, or dead ancestors wandering around cave complexes eating food offerings. These things HAVE been proven. To say otherwise, and site the possibility of the earth being populated by aliens, or the existence of mediators from other dimensions, is not fair. If either of these extreme possibilities were true, there still would be no proof for the existence of a God. In fact, discovering either of these things would topple most religions on their heads.
Let's take a look at a couple of the author's knocks on atheism:
"This situation calls for an openness in approaching the big questions of our existence. When there is a lack of meaningful data to weigh in on a problem, good scientists are comfortable holding many possibilities at once, rather than committing to a particular story over others. In light of this, I have found myself surprised by the amount of certainty out there."
I don't understand this comment. How are atheists committing to anything other than a disbelief in a higher power? As an atheist, I am certain that the Judeo-Christian-Islamic-Hindu-Animist versions of Gods do not exist. I am open to the possibility of aliens planting us here. Though I doubt it is true, I do not ignore the possibility just because I don't believe in God.
Furthermore, the follow quotes would serve as an example of agnosticism in any other article:
- "Given these considerations, I do not call myself an atheist. I don't feel that I have enough data to firmly rule out other interesting possibilities. On the other hand, I do not subscribe to any religion.
- "So it seems we know too little to commit to strict atheism, and too much to commit to any religion."
I take personal exception to the following lines:
"I know a lot of atheists who seethe at the idea of religion, and religious followers who seethe at the idea of atheism - but neither group is bothering with more interesting ideas."
First off, the reason I "seethe" at the idea of religion is the very reason the author is arguing for his unique position: possibilities. Religions prevent people from being open to new ideas, especially scientific ones. In the U.S., this skepticism leads to political donations to right wing candidates who oppose new technologies, medicines, and energy sources. The author should seethe at the idea of religions along with me, and also learn to follow in my foot-steps of not allowing that anger to care over to the actual believers.
Secondly, there are people on both ends attempting to build bridges, and come up with new ideas. Saying otherwise reflects how ignorant the author is on the topic of which he has chosen to write. My taking the time to comment is an example of an attempt at bridge building, as are the countless comments on posts just like this that I read every day. (I wish I could comment, but unfortunately I do not subscribe to New Scientist, so this well-intentioned critique will most likely rot here on my blog.)
___
Oct. 1
Child bride horrors last a lifetime
What shocked me most about the above article was not the fact that 9 and 10 year old girls are being forced to have sex with middle-aged men, but that religion is used to validate these horrific rapes. When Yemen attempted to pass legislation making the legal marriage age 17, it was Islamic fundamentalist who protested the loudest.
"More than 100 leading religious clerics called the attempt to restrict the age of marriage 'un-Islamic'".
I guess I shouldn't be that surprised, considering Warren Jeffs and other leaders of the FLDS used their power to force young girls into illegal marriages in our own country.
The biggest problem with fighting against people who argue with religion as their trump card is that you can never beat someone's God. Even with four aces, they will win. The only way to win is to stop playing the game altogether. Hopefully the younger generation in Yemen realizes this, and stops the insanity.
___
Oct. 2
Druids recognized as religion for first time in UK (Fox News)
As the above headline attests, druidry is now considered to be an official religion in the UK. I was interested in this article because, for a brief period over a decade ago, I spent a lot of time reading about the real druids of old. I was enthralled by tales of Vercingetorix, the Gaulish general who unsuccessfully revolted against the Romans. Many authors give credit to the ancient druids for helping sustain order amongst the general populace, and even guiding the great leaders hand at times. Though his attempt was ultimately a failure, his story is more memorable than most victories.
I also am interested in druids because of their knack for healing. I acquired a textbook about ancient healing practices several years ago, and remember many parts devoted to their tactics.
But, in all of my reading about druids, I never once encountered tales of them worshiping at stone circles. They preferred the forests, and the groves hidden amongst the trees. That is why I was someone irritated by the article's seeming ignorance of this fact.
I also have a slight problem with modern druids wanting to dance and sing at stone circles. I believe if their ancient namesakes could have any say in the matter, modern druids should be much more concerned with preserving the earth's dwindling forests. It's great to want to uplift your own spirit by partying at Stonehenge, but at least try to make a little effort to honor the heritage which you have chosen to steal, and then mutilate.
(I apologize if druids are doing more than nodding their heads at the obvious environmental connection associated with their name. I will watch for more on this topic.)
___
Oct. 3
Britain recognizes Druidry as religion for first time, gives it charitable status (CNN)
The above linked article offers the following quote, which I feel the article from Fox News failed to touch on:
"Druids were members of the learned class among ancient Celts, acting as priests, judges and teachers. They performed human and animal sacrifices and worshiped in forests in western Europe, Britain and Ireland."
It also discusses druidry in relation to the American Wicca movement. I criticize Wicca for the same reason I criticize modern druidry, however. Worshiping a dieing God instead of trying to save it seems a tad bit ridiculous to me.
___
Oct. 3
Washington's 'Red Mass' attracts top government leaders, controversy (CNN)
Before reading the above linked article, I had heard of the Red Mass, but never taken the time to find out what it was. Now that I know, I must say that I am not surprised by the manipulative way the Catholic Church attempts to infiltrate the minds of our government officials. As a former Catholic, I was a party to this sneakiness on many occasions. I must say that I am sickened to think of our Supreme Court Justices either voluntarily, or because of social pressures, falling victim to this kind of brainwashing. If they truly believe in the separation of church and state, all of the justices, even the six justices that are Catholic, should not participate in an event like the Red Mass.
Enough commentary from me. Let's look at the facts. The Red Mass started in 1952, in response to Supreme Court verdicts the Catholic Church did not approve of. Since that time, the pulpit has been repeatedly used to inform our lawmakers and judges about Gods will on controversial issues, like abortion. Yet, the Church denies any attempt at persuading the judges on social issues. Instead, they claim these annual Red Masses are ecumenical experiences, meant to probe the larger issues plaguing the world. Sometimes this may be true, but the fact that there is no way to predict what kind of messages the homily will contain should prevent our government officials from participating.
I think I will watch which elected officials from my state are seen at this years event, and make sure NOT to ever give them my vote in future elections.
___
10/16/2010
In a recent poll, 60% of Germans interviewed thought that Muslims should have their religious practices "significantly curbed." Apparently, the leader of Germany, Angela Merkel agrees. Recent comments she made, quoted in this Yahoo News article, are disturbing, but unfortunately not that surprising.
Like the United States, Germany is facing immigration issues. But instead of Catholic Mexicans invading from their southern border, they have Islamic Turks infiltrating from the East. At least the Spanish speaking Mexican's Catholic values align with the Christian framework inherent in American society. For Germans, trying to reconcile Arabic speaking Muslims must be doubly difficult.
I am not making excuses for the Germans. I am sickened by their bigotry. But unless we attempt to understand where it originates, we will never be able to eradicate it.
___
10/24
Iran restricts social sciences seen as 'Western' (Yahoo News, by Nasser Karimi, 10/24/2010)
After reading the above linked article, I debated with myself for over three hours whether to start a new post, and focus on the politics behind Ahmadinejad's decision to restrict what universities can teach, or confront the culprit head on. I decided to take the controversial, but correct, approach of putting this topic under 'My Religion,' because, as an atheist, no topic is beyond academic inquiry in my mind. It is the Iranian president's extremists Islamic views, and his desire to implement Sharia law, that is behind this harmful censorship.
"'The content of the current courses in the 12 subjects is not in harmony with religious fundamentals and they are based on Western schools of thought,' senior education official Abolfazl Hassani told state radio.'"
The twelve subjects in question include general education courses like philosophy and management, but also important social courses, like women's studies and human rights. These changes are expected to affect two million of the 3.5 million university students in Iran.
"Hassani said the restrictions prevent universities from opening new departments in these subjects. The government will also revise the content of current programs by up to 70 percent over the next few years, he said."
Many believe this outrageous move is in retaliation for the huge number of students that participated in last year's election protests. This is not the first time the Iranian government has used cuts to education as a punishment for political dissent.
"In 2006, dozens of liberal university professors and teachers were sent into retirement, drawing strong protests from students. Liberal and secular professors teach at universities around the country, but they are a minority. Most are politically passive and do not identify with either the hard-liners or the liberal camp."
And in 1980, a previous administration closed the universities altogether for two straight years!
Education is the key to outgrowing fundamentalist religion, and eventually the chains of religion altogether. That is why Ahmadinejad and his government are so fearful of the power universities wield over young minds. I feel a deep agony for all people in Iran. I couldn't imagine living under such a horrible dictator. I think it is sad that they live in such controlled shells that their spiritual life is confined to a God that only condemns things, leaving little for the society to cherish outside of prayer.
At first you might think that we live far from this type of censorship in America. But a quick glance at recent battles in Texas over the inclusion of intelligent design alongside evolution in biology textbooks shows that we still have a ways to go ourselves.
___
11/5
Here is a perfect example of how religion can be used for evil:
"Homosexuality is outlawed in Uganda. Some U.S. Evangelical groups are backing a bill, currently under review in parliament, that would make homosexuality punishable by death."
Source: Time Magazine, November 15, 2010
I was having a hard time deciding if this quote is more appropriate for my thread titled "American Bigotry," but eventually decided to put it here. This is because my lack of religion, but possession of morals would prevent me from ever advocating such an terrible law.
___
11/14
Pastor says student's suicide was tipping point for his coming out (CNN Belief Blog, 11/13)
I can't imagine living with the burden of ignoring my inner sexual cravings for over twenty years. I also can't imagine authenticating myself by coming out in front of a mega-church congregation. Everyone that reads my blog regularly knows how anti-organized-religion I am, but this man's acknowledgment gives me hope in the future. According to the doctrine followed by a majority of Americans, churches should be shelters for the downtrodden, the destitute, the persecuted, and the humble. But in practice, the doors are too often shut to these most hated and misunderstood members of society. To finally have leaders from shunned groups take control of the pulpit is a huge step in the right direction. However, it is also telling how evangelical fundamentalists respond with misconstrued ideas about such preacher's creating an army of gays.
___
11/30
I saw an I-report on CNN yesterday that I still have stuck in my head this morning. So I searched for it, but found this amazing video clip depicting what I wish to discuss instead. It is a billboard, paid for my American Atheists, that implores people to face the fact the Christmas is a myth, and to celebrate reason this year instead. I think it is hilarious that we atheists have to stare at billboards begging us to attend mega-churches, listen to Christian radio stations, or ask "WWJD" all of the time. But the minute someone that isn't a believer invokes their right to advertise their beliefs, it makes national news! I love this billboard so much, that I decided to check out the funding organization's website. I will come back to this thread later, and post my impressions.
___
12/1
I am still in the midst of reading all of the informative stories and enlightening interviews on American Atheist's official website. The one thing that struck me the most so far, and that I had never considered before, is why atheists have such a hard time organizing. It is because of the displeasure many of them have had with other forms of organized religion. Trying to find a structure that doesn't undermine the cohesion of the group, and keeping any person or persons from becoming too powerful, is much more difficult than I could have imagined.
____
2/27/2011
John Dominic Crossan's 'blasphemous' portrait of Jesus (CNN, by John Blake, 2/27/2011)
Many years ago as a junior in college, I took a class called "The Sociology of Religion." The entire semester was devoted to understanding the dualistic relationship between religion and society, both on a micro and macro level. I loved the class so much, that I went on to take the other courses the professor offered, even though they never would have appealed to me before. I ended up with a second major, in religion, which I managed to pull off in just four semesters of study.
What made this teacher different, and his courses so refreshing? The same thing that makes Mr. Crossan's studies so intriguing to me; the scholarly takes precedence over the spiritual. Mr. Mueller would force us to look at the Bible like a book written by a human author, instead of a divinely inspired sacred text. Likewise, Mr. Crossan was willing to recognize, and then publicly acknowledge, instances of scripture, and church doctrine, that weren't the kind of lessons modern folks should be living by.
"'It's like you're a scientist in research and development, and you say that this drug is lethal, and they say, 'Find something good in it,' Crossan says.'"
That sentiment describes exactly how I felt as a teenager when I would point out questionable premises from the Bible to my elders. Instead of acknowledging the insanity of such things as a child being born stained with something called "original sin," or the inferiority of women, I would get answers like, "Well, you don't have to believe everything." As I have written elsewhere in this blog, I truly believe that when it comes to something with as many real life implications as religion, you do have to choose; you are either part of the solution, or a perpetual enabler of the problem.
That is why those courses with Mr. Mueller were so refreshing years ago, and why coming across the above linked article describing the work of John Dominic Crossan brought back some sentimental feelings about my days at North Central. Thanks, Mr. Mueller and Mr. Crossan.
___
3/1
In this article from CNN's belief blog, the recent controversial declaration by author and preacher Rob Bell that there may be no such place as hell is discussed. I guess the book Mr. Bell has been promoting isn't even out yet, and the really orthodox Christians are already getting their suspenders twisted. Imagine the insanity of declaring that there is no hell! I mean, where would good people who aren't necessarily Christian end up?
I find it really sad that most religions rely so much on exclusivity in both life and death. It's like the social collective somehow knows how susceptible human beings are to feeling special, and thus weaved the fulfillment to that desire into all the worlds sacred texts. And anytime anyone like Mr. Bell tries to break the tradition by appealing to, what in any other instance, would be the moral's religions are founded upon, he is called a hypocrite. You gotta love organized religion!
___
11/2/2011
"In God We Trust" was just reaffirmed as our national motto by an overwhelming majority vote in the house. I would be much happier if these representatives started learning to trust in themselves to start fixing our broken world, because there is no God that is going to swoop down and save us. Indeed, it is the belief system behind a motto like this that is at the root of all of our problems, if you ask me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)