A young boy taken to Church by his loving parents, sits in the pews and listens to the minister preach the Gospel of the Lord Jesus. And the minister embellishes the story a bit by describing a scene of a beautiful garden where the Lord will walk with the true believers for eternity. "Imagine walking hand in hand with our Lord Jesus in paradise forever" intoned the minister. As the young boy grew into manhood he never forgot the image of walking hand in hand with the Lord in that incredibly beautiful garden. He lived his life, took a wife and fathered a son which he later took to the same church so his son could hear the "good news". Being a father he liked to imagine his son also walking hand in hand with the Lord Jesus in the paradise garden. In the autumn of his life the man, now a grandfather, began to unceasingly ponder the image of walking in the garden with Jesus. The image became so real that he came to accept it as his fate and as his reward. Years later as he lay dying in his hospital bed all he could think about was walking in the garden with his beloved Lord. And then he died.
"Lord."
"Yes my child?"
"We have been walking in this wonderful garden for 10,000 years."
"Yes my child, 10,000 wonderful years."
"I need to know something Lord."
"What is it my child?"
"Is this all there is?"
"No my child, there is much, much more. This is all you wanted."
Friday, November 13, 2009
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Global Warming - Part 1
My friend Julie asked me what I thought about Global Warming. Her new boyfriend is very conservative and thinks the global warming debate is a scare by the Obama administration to shut down business. (Yes I realize the global warming controversy is much older than the Obama administration.) My Friend Mark, an attorney in the greater Los Angeles metroplex told me once that "the time for debate is over, we must take drastic action to avoid the coming ecological catastrophe." Most of us fall somewhere in between these 2 extremes.
My answer to Julie was basically in 2 parts. First I like to ask if global warming is man caused, what is causing global warming on Mars? Mark's answer to this was "oh, you found a red herring" and dismissed my question. Julie seemed to accept that the cause of global warming is not so clear. Second I told Julie whereas I am not a stupid person I just can't seem to get my head wrapped around the problem. There are too many variables. The famous Hockey Stick chart of warming trends doesn't seem to stand up to rigorous statistical analysis. The claim that Ice is thinner today than any other time in history lacks credibility because of how the data is collected. It is easy to take temperatures readings globally today using satellites but satellites have only be around since the late 1960's. Does ice core samples give an accurate temperature reading for a specific date? I don't know. Do you? Yet ice thickness and global temperatures are based on these measurements.
Global Warming studies use a lot of disciplines. Statistics, Meteorology, Climatology, Geography, Computer Science, Physics, Economics, Astronomy, not to mention Political Science and Psychology. I have training in Economics and Computer Science and understand enough of the Global Warming arguments in those areas to form an opinion. As to the other areas, I'm pretty clueless. Are you up to speed on these disciplines?
My friend Robert said the other day "it's a 50-50 proposition. Either there is a coming global catastrophe or there isn't so we better act as if there is and start trying to reverse it. This is kind of a variation on Pascal's argument for the existence of God. It is specious and doesn't prove anything but rather is designed to appeal to the emotions. (Both Robert's 50-50 argument and Pascal's wager.) But that seems to be the central theme of the Global Warming debate. Get as many people on you side as you can and build your power base. And once you have the power you can make changes to US policy to mitigate the effects of dumping so much "green house gases" into the atmosphere. Physicist and Meteorologist Craig Bohren, distinguished professor emeritus at the Pennsylvania State University, said "Whatever the US and Europe do to mitigate consumption is likely to be negated by increased consumption in countries such as China, India, and Brazil." http://www.usatodayom/tech/colum.cnist/aprilholladay/2006-08-07-global-warming-truth_x.htm
My point is this. I don't get it. And I don't see a clear path to determining the truth about Global Warming. But I can see a huge potential for abuse here. Hidden agendas being served, political power being fueled, and the usual blatant manipulation of the public.
My answer to Julie was basically in 2 parts. First I like to ask if global warming is man caused, what is causing global warming on Mars? Mark's answer to this was "oh, you found a red herring" and dismissed my question. Julie seemed to accept that the cause of global warming is not so clear. Second I told Julie whereas I am not a stupid person I just can't seem to get my head wrapped around the problem. There are too many variables. The famous Hockey Stick chart of warming trends doesn't seem to stand up to rigorous statistical analysis. The claim that Ice is thinner today than any other time in history lacks credibility because of how the data is collected. It is easy to take temperatures readings globally today using satellites but satellites have only be around since the late 1960's. Does ice core samples give an accurate temperature reading for a specific date? I don't know. Do you? Yet ice thickness and global temperatures are based on these measurements.
Global Warming studies use a lot of disciplines. Statistics, Meteorology, Climatology, Geography, Computer Science, Physics, Economics, Astronomy, not to mention Political Science and Psychology. I have training in Economics and Computer Science and understand enough of the Global Warming arguments in those areas to form an opinion. As to the other areas, I'm pretty clueless. Are you up to speed on these disciplines?
My friend Robert said the other day "it's a 50-50 proposition. Either there is a coming global catastrophe or there isn't so we better act as if there is and start trying to reverse it. This is kind of a variation on Pascal's argument for the existence of God. It is specious and doesn't prove anything but rather is designed to appeal to the emotions. (Both Robert's 50-50 argument and Pascal's wager.) But that seems to be the central theme of the Global Warming debate. Get as many people on you side as you can and build your power base. And once you have the power you can make changes to US policy to mitigate the effects of dumping so much "green house gases" into the atmosphere. Physicist and Meteorologist Craig Bohren, distinguished professor emeritus at the Pennsylvania State University, said "Whatever the US and Europe do to mitigate consumption is likely to be negated by increased consumption in countries such as China, India, and Brazil." http://www.usatodayom/tech/colum.cnist/aprilholladay/2006-08-07-global-warming-truth_x.htm
My point is this. I don't get it. And I don't see a clear path to determining the truth about Global Warming. But I can see a huge potential for abuse here. Hidden agendas being served, political power being fueled, and the usual blatant manipulation of the public.
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Forgiveness
Let's talk about forgiveness.
I remember a few years ago when somebody in Georgia was murdering children was finally apprehended by the authorities. A Christian minister went on television proclaiming that "we must forgive this murderer". He went on to explain that it was our Christian duty to forgive. (And people wonder why I am not a Christian.) Well the whole incident really stuck in my craw. I, for the life of me, could not come up with a reason to forgive the killer. And more importantly the killer did not ask for forgiveness. So the incident was a catalyst for me to investigate forgiveness.
Most reasons given for forgiveness are selfish. That is to say we forgive so we may continue to grow and prosper in this life. i.e.. I forgive you so I don't get stuck in a negative mindset of hatred and/or bitterness. But what do you get out of this forgiveness? Especially if forgiveness is given freely and without conditions. How do you benefit? The answer is you don't. At least as far as I can tell.
My understanding of forgiveness in Judaism is there are 4 elements that must be met to grant forgiveness. I call them the 4 Rs and they go something like this: Remorse, Repent, Repay, Repair. A few years ago Doug Rand of the Santa Cruz Center for Nonviolence got into a heated argument with his neighbor and threw a stone through the guys window. (Delicious irony.) According to the 4 Rs Doug first needed to show that he was sorry (remorse), then ask forgiveness (repent), then fix the window (repay), then take an anger management class (repair). The last is to show true remorse and taking steps to avoid those kinds of incidents in the future.
Now compare and contrast Christian doctrine of forgiveness from God and Jewish doctrine. Christians maintain that if a person asks for forgiveness then forgiveness must be given. Unconditionally. No so in Judaism. Which method do you think a god would prefer? And this touches on one of the reasons I think Christianity is a scam. Free forgiveness... you get what you pay for.
Finally I'd like to add that, although I am not a Jew, I practice the 4 Rs method in my life. If you commit some offense against me don't expect forgiveness from me to be de rigeuer. You need to go through the steps, and conversely I will go through them if I commit an offense against you and want forgiveness. (Read those last 3 words again.)
I remember a few years ago when somebody in Georgia was murdering children was finally apprehended by the authorities. A Christian minister went on television proclaiming that "we must forgive this murderer". He went on to explain that it was our Christian duty to forgive. (And people wonder why I am not a Christian.) Well the whole incident really stuck in my craw. I, for the life of me, could not come up with a reason to forgive the killer. And more importantly the killer did not ask for forgiveness. So the incident was a catalyst for me to investigate forgiveness.
Most reasons given for forgiveness are selfish. That is to say we forgive so we may continue to grow and prosper in this life. i.e.. I forgive you so I don't get stuck in a negative mindset of hatred and/or bitterness. But what do you get out of this forgiveness? Especially if forgiveness is given freely and without conditions. How do you benefit? The answer is you don't. At least as far as I can tell.
My understanding of forgiveness in Judaism is there are 4 elements that must be met to grant forgiveness. I call them the 4 Rs and they go something like this: Remorse, Repent, Repay, Repair. A few years ago Doug Rand of the Santa Cruz Center for Nonviolence got into a heated argument with his neighbor and threw a stone through the guys window. (Delicious irony.) According to the 4 Rs Doug first needed to show that he was sorry (remorse), then ask forgiveness (repent), then fix the window (repay), then take an anger management class (repair). The last is to show true remorse and taking steps to avoid those kinds of incidents in the future.
Now compare and contrast Christian doctrine of forgiveness from God and Jewish doctrine. Christians maintain that if a person asks for forgiveness then forgiveness must be given. Unconditionally. No so in Judaism. Which method do you think a god would prefer? And this touches on one of the reasons I think Christianity is a scam. Free forgiveness... you get what you pay for.
Finally I'd like to add that, although I am not a Jew, I practice the 4 Rs method in my life. If you commit some offense against me don't expect forgiveness from me to be de rigeuer. You need to go through the steps, and conversely I will go through them if I commit an offense against you and want forgiveness. (Read those last 3 words again.)
Thursday, October 22, 2009
God's love
As you probably figured out by now I feel the same way about the Christian Church as I feel about water-boarding. Not a warm and fuzzy kind of feeling, more like a scream in the dark kind of feeling. My wife has a work friend who expressed wonderment that she (my wife) has no membership in a formal religion and yet is involved in the community to the extent that she volunteered at the Community of Christ thrift store. "Well I like what they are doing for the community and I can get past their theology." explained my wife. Now this friend of hers is going through a minor crisis of faith. Her church (and I don't know which particular Christian sect) is in the process of hiring a new pastor and most people agreed that a certain woman was the perfect candidate... until they found that person had a female partner... or as I would say 'her boat sailed a little too close to the Isle of Lesbos.' So they dumped the candidate, presumably in the name of God's love. Hurray for tolerance and love!
So I have 2 points to make here. First, you don't need to call yourself a Christian to help people. In fact I find that most Christians are self-centered in that they are interested in going to heaven and having everyone else go to hell. And that taints their service to their fellow human beings. It has been my experience that there are a lot of opportunities to help people. And sacrifice without the expectation of return is part of my definition of loving thy neighbor. Second, if you are claiming that your church is representational of God here on earth you had best be sure that your house is clean before you start condemning other people's houses. As an aside, most Christians will tell you that saying 'God damn' is taking the Lord's name in vain, a violation of the third commandment. My understanding of Judaism is that taking the Lord's name in vain is not cursing using the word God, rather it is saying things like 'God is on our side' as a justification of actions. I think the aforementioned Church is guilty of taking the Lord's name in vain when they rejected the lesbian pastor. I think that God would rather his/her/its church be inclusive rather than exclusive.
So I have 2 points to make here. First, you don't need to call yourself a Christian to help people. In fact I find that most Christians are self-centered in that they are interested in going to heaven and having everyone else go to hell. And that taints their service to their fellow human beings. It has been my experience that there are a lot of opportunities to help people. And sacrifice without the expectation of return is part of my definition of loving thy neighbor. Second, if you are claiming that your church is representational of God here on earth you had best be sure that your house is clean before you start condemning other people's houses. As an aside, most Christians will tell you that saying 'God damn' is taking the Lord's name in vain, a violation of the third commandment. My understanding of Judaism is that taking the Lord's name in vain is not cursing using the word God, rather it is saying things like 'God is on our side' as a justification of actions. I think the aforementioned Church is guilty of taking the Lord's name in vain when they rejected the lesbian pastor. I think that God would rather his/her/its church be inclusive rather than exclusive.
Friday, September 11, 2009
9-11
Today is 9-11. September 11th 2009, 8 years after the attack. Pat Tillman called 9-11 the Pearl Harbor of his generation and immediately signed up, walking away from a lucrative football career. Thank you Pat. Thank you for taking this cowardly attack on the USA so seriously. You gave all so that we may be free.
Not everyone has the courage, or the ability to join the Army and become a Ranger to defend this country. But we can do things to help defend this country. The Bush administration tried to tell us that illegal drug sales were funding terrorism. And to some small case that may in fact be true. But the real cash pipeline to terrorism is Oil. Bin Laden's father made billions running a construction company that built oil infrastructure in Saudi Arabia. Osama took his share of the company profits and funded Al Caida. And he proceeded to export terrorism all over the world. He was in the Sudan, in Afghanistan, in Somalia setting up training camps. All because we have pumped mega-bucks into Saudi Arabia.
Remember during the Carter administration when OPEC placed an oil embargo upon us and we were waiting in line for hours to get gas... when we could find it? Don't you think that was the perfect time to come up with a national energy policy what would have weaned us from Arab crude oil? And when Congress started to talk about alternate forms of energy and the people started having 1 day boycotts of gas OPEC lowered the price of oil. And then we continued to make huge, inefficient vehicles. Shortly after that the SUV was invented and later the Hummer came on the scene. (In my opinion the Hummer is such an affront that the drivers should be pulled from behind the wheel and shot in the street.)
Today do we see a national energy policy? When we bailed out GM and Chrysler did we force them to start producing more efficient vehicles? This is not the Army, for Christ sakes, where they have CRS syndrome. (Can't Remember Shit.) We have to learn from our mistakes and formulate an energy policy. We don't need a green revolution, we need efficient vehicles and alternate forms of energy. Simple technological solutions to our current problems and not some green dream that will generate millions of jobs some time in the hazy future. He have the skills and abilities today to stop buying oil from OPEC. We owe that effort to the brave soldiers like Pat Tillman who put their lives on the line for this county.
And if we don't do it, the terrorists win.
Not everyone has the courage, or the ability to join the Army and become a Ranger to defend this country. But we can do things to help defend this country. The Bush administration tried to tell us that illegal drug sales were funding terrorism. And to some small case that may in fact be true. But the real cash pipeline to terrorism is Oil. Bin Laden's father made billions running a construction company that built oil infrastructure in Saudi Arabia. Osama took his share of the company profits and funded Al Caida. And he proceeded to export terrorism all over the world. He was in the Sudan, in Afghanistan, in Somalia setting up training camps. All because we have pumped mega-bucks into Saudi Arabia.
Remember during the Carter administration when OPEC placed an oil embargo upon us and we were waiting in line for hours to get gas... when we could find it? Don't you think that was the perfect time to come up with a national energy policy what would have weaned us from Arab crude oil? And when Congress started to talk about alternate forms of energy and the people started having 1 day boycotts of gas OPEC lowered the price of oil. And then we continued to make huge, inefficient vehicles. Shortly after that the SUV was invented and later the Hummer came on the scene. (In my opinion the Hummer is such an affront that the drivers should be pulled from behind the wheel and shot in the street.)
Today do we see a national energy policy? When we bailed out GM and Chrysler did we force them to start producing more efficient vehicles? This is not the Army, for Christ sakes, where they have CRS syndrome. (Can't Remember Shit.) We have to learn from our mistakes and formulate an energy policy. We don't need a green revolution, we need efficient vehicles and alternate forms of energy. Simple technological solutions to our current problems and not some green dream that will generate millions of jobs some time in the hazy future. He have the skills and abilities today to stop buying oil from OPEC. We owe that effort to the brave soldiers like Pat Tillman who put their lives on the line for this county.
And if we don't do it, the terrorists win.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Yeah-Yeah-Yeah
9/9/9 The Beatles (inc. Pat. Pend. all rights reserved, don't fuck with us boy) released their recordings, yet again. Summer reruns take on a new meaning. Apparently we have gone from the Summer of Love to the Summer of Ennui.
Hooo boy! How do they have the nerve to pull this off? A digital re-mastering of all their work, plus recording studio comments and a video game. Isn't Sir Paul already worth over a billion dollars?
If they really wanted to do something new (hey, wasn't that the name of a Beatles album in the 60's?) they would go on a reunion tour. I know what you're thinking, the Grantman finally ate the brown acid and has flipped out. No, this will work and I'll tell you how.
A couple years ago my friend Mark and I were walking on Decatur Street in the French Quarter of New Orleans when we were ambushed by an undercover Hari Krishna dude. And this guy was fairly entertaining in his stick so we bought (via donation to the cause) a couple of souvenir hats of Jazzfest 2007 from him. So now that we were properly softened up and in a buying mood he played his ace.
Hari Krishna Dude: So who was your favorite Beatle?
Grantman: I liked John as a kid but now find that Paul is my favorite.
Hari Krishna Dude: Don't you think that George was the best of the group?
Grantman: George? What, are you new? I always thought of George as the most replaceable Beatle. Imagine how cool that group would have been with Eric Clapton instead of George.
At this point the Hari Krishna Dude's plan of steering us towards his brand of Hinduism via the beliefs of George Harrison are toast. Dejectedly, he turns on his heels, steps off the curb and is hit by a bus. (I made up the bus part).
But it got me to thinking. Why not a reunion of the Beatles with Clapton sitting in for Harrison and Julian Lennon sitting in for John? Julian looks like John and has similar vocal qualities. His album Volatte was as good as anything John did. So there it is. A reunion tour with Julian, Paul, Eric and Ringo. Hmmm. Ringo. You know he wasn't the original drummer, Pete Best was. And let's just be honest here. Ringo is a prick. You don't believe it? Take a look at this You-Tube clip of him telling his fans to stop sending fan mail because he is too busy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpd24yVy5C4
OK, new plan. A Beatles reunion tour with Julian, Paul, Eric and Pete. This would totally work.
And Paul had better stay on his best behavior. Nobody is irreplaceable. As Charles de Gaulle once said, "the cemeteries are full of indispensible men."
Yeah-Yeah-Yeah.
Hooo boy! How do they have the nerve to pull this off? A digital re-mastering of all their work, plus recording studio comments and a video game. Isn't Sir Paul already worth over a billion dollars?
If they really wanted to do something new (hey, wasn't that the name of a Beatles album in the 60's?) they would go on a reunion tour. I know what you're thinking, the Grantman finally ate the brown acid and has flipped out. No, this will work and I'll tell you how.
A couple years ago my friend Mark and I were walking on Decatur Street in the French Quarter of New Orleans when we were ambushed by an undercover Hari Krishna dude. And this guy was fairly entertaining in his stick so we bought (via donation to the cause) a couple of souvenir hats of Jazzfest 2007 from him. So now that we were properly softened up and in a buying mood he played his ace.
Hari Krishna Dude: So who was your favorite Beatle?
Grantman: I liked John as a kid but now find that Paul is my favorite.
Hari Krishna Dude: Don't you think that George was the best of the group?
Grantman: George? What, are you new? I always thought of George as the most replaceable Beatle. Imagine how cool that group would have been with Eric Clapton instead of George.
At this point the Hari Krishna Dude's plan of steering us towards his brand of Hinduism via the beliefs of George Harrison are toast. Dejectedly, he turns on his heels, steps off the curb and is hit by a bus. (I made up the bus part).
But it got me to thinking. Why not a reunion of the Beatles with Clapton sitting in for Harrison and Julian Lennon sitting in for John? Julian looks like John and has similar vocal qualities. His album Volatte was as good as anything John did. So there it is. A reunion tour with Julian, Paul, Eric and Ringo. Hmmm. Ringo. You know he wasn't the original drummer, Pete Best was. And let's just be honest here. Ringo is a prick. You don't believe it? Take a look at this You-Tube clip of him telling his fans to stop sending fan mail because he is too busy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpd24yVy5C4
OK, new plan. A Beatles reunion tour with Julian, Paul, Eric and Pete. This would totally work.
And Paul had better stay on his best behavior. Nobody is irreplaceable. As Charles de Gaulle once said, "the cemeteries are full of indispensible men."
Yeah-Yeah-Yeah.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Go Niners!
When I was leaving
It was a quintessential guy moment in a bar. And I really didn't watch football out in the tall corn for a couple of seasons. I was busy exploring the beautiful fall forests with a recurve bow in my hand looking for the elusive wild turkey.
Lately I've considered taking up football watching again. And as I thought about it I figured I had better pick a local team so I had a chance of seeing them on TV without buying one of those $10,000 sports packages from the cable company. The closest areas with an NFL franchise are
WTF?
"What's wrong with Farve?" I asked. "Oh my sister thinks he is dreamy", (they still say dreamy in the heartland) "and I can't root for a team with Farve because she adores him."
Now I'm liking the Vikes. The purple jerseys, the horns, they have a great up-and-coming RB out of
Now a bit of historical confession is in order here. I used to be a Raiders fan. Remember when they won the Superbowl from a wildcard slot and President Reagan called to congratulate them for being the first team to do so? The very next year the Raiders showed their true colors and moved to LA, turning their backs on the Bay Area. After that the Niners caught fire and started to win Superbowls. The words "
The jury is still out. Perhaps I'll try to follow both the Niners and the Vikes. The turkey's will certainly appreciate that.
After note: There is a guy running around
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
