Wednesday, October 29, 2003
I just tried something called "Gender Genie", which, according to Andrew Sullivan, is a program that is supposed to be able to tell whether you're male or female by the content of your prose. Glenn Reynolds score was surprisingly almost even, and Andrew's score was approximately 2:1 male. My score was male-725 and female-233, which is a more than 3:1 male ratio. Hmmm... if you'd like to try it yourself, here's the link.
|
|
My mom called and asked me what kind of cake I'd like for my birthday. You know what? I don't really know... if it were my stepmom, I wouldn't hesitate to ask for her carrot cake (in my opinion, the best in the world), but otherwise I'm just not sure. I like all kinds of cake... white cake and yellow cake (not the uranium kind), chocolate cake, spice cake... you name it, I like it. She offered to get a decorated cake from the bakery, but if there's one thing I don't want more of, it's a manufactured cake with manufactured icing. I've had enough of that this week. Droy's birthday was Friday, and he had a leftover sheetcake from his co-workers, plus the cake I made him. He forced me to take the sheet cake home, since he wasn't going to eat it. So, of course, every time I'm a tad hungry, I slice off a slab of cake. Not good for the waistline or the arteries, I can assure you. I can only hope it's gone soon. You know, it's really too bad that I can't bring myself to just throw it away...
|
|
Wow!! I pointed something out to Andrew Sullivan, and he linked to it!! I feel so... so... important! My life as a blogger is complete! Now I just need a link from Glenn Reynolds, and I can die happy.
|
|
Tuesday, October 28, 2003
Monday, October 27, 2003
Well, I had a pretty busy weekend in Chicago, but it was a lot of fun. Ended up walking around downtown on Friday night, just exploring, and walking by the Sears Tower. It's pretty impressive. On Saturday, we went to the Field Museum of Natural History, then to the Chicago Art Institute (where we saw many famous paintings, including "American Gothic" and the Seurat painting featured in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off"). Then we went up to the Skydeck in the Sears Tower, and then to Giordano's for dinner. I tell you what, there's nothing like Chicago-style stuffed-crust pizza! We were planning on going out on Saturday night, but by the time we got back to the hotel, it was after 10pm, and we had had a very long day.
We got back to Iowa around 3pm on Sunday, and decided to carve pumpkins. It was the first time Droy had ever done it, and it was a lot of fun. If I could post pictures, I would, but I haven't figured out how to do that yet. But regardless, it was a great weekend, and it's just what I needed.
|
We got back to Iowa around 3pm on Sunday, and decided to carve pumpkins. It was the first time Droy had ever done it, and it was a lot of fun. If I could post pictures, I would, but I haven't figured out how to do that yet. But regardless, it was a great weekend, and it's just what I needed.
|
You probably thought, as I did, that the Sears Tower lost its title as "Tallest Building in the World" in 1996, with the completion of the Petronas Towers in Kuala Lumpur. Well, think again! Take a look at this and this.
|
|
The irony of this cartoon is almost too heavy to bear. Yet, the people at whom it's directed will almost certainly miss it completely.
|
|
Friday, October 24, 2003
The culture that allows this must be utterly destroyed.
UPDATE: I may have stated that too strongly. Perhaps not utterly destroyed... but something big has to happen to STOP this!! Something has GOT to change!!
|
UPDATE: I may have stated that too strongly. Perhaps not utterly destroyed... but something big has to happen to STOP this!! Something has GOT to change!!
|
Thursday, October 23, 2003
Here's a funny story for you...
Last night, I was doing all my laundry so that I would have clean clothes for my trip to Chicago this weekend. I ended up finishing pretty late, and so I decided that the next morning I would wait until after Italian Diction class to take a shower. That meant that I could sleep about 45 minutes later, then throw on some clothes and head to class. Well, I set my alarm for 7:30, and went to bed.
The next morning I got up, put on my clothes and a baseball cap, and pulled my car out of the garage. I looked at my watch, and realized something. It was ten minutes to 8am... but class didn't start until 9!! I had set my alarm an entire hour early. I couldn't believe it. I ended up just turning off my car and leaving it out of the garage, and I went inside and took a shower and got ready. I ended up having MORE time than I usually do to get ready, so I did a little ironing as well.
I don't know how I made the mistake of setting my alarm for the wrong time, but I think I just wasn't thinking about it too hard. I normally get up at 8am for a 9am class, but for some reason I thought I needed to get up at 7:30. Perhaps it's because I got up at 6:15 the day before.
I did something similar once before, when I was in high school. My room was in the basement of our house, and so it had no windows or sources of outside light. One night, I was hanging out in my room, and I ended up falling asleep on my bed some time after 7pm. When I awoke, I had no idea how much time had passed, but I felt pretty good. Then I looked at the clock-- it said 11:00! I had forgotten to set my alarm! I was going to be SO late for school! I raced around my room gathering clothes, and then ran upstairs to take a shower. At the top of the stairs, I stopped. The kitchen was dark. The windows were dark. I was momentarily confused.
And then my dad emerged from his bedroom, on his way to the bathroom, and stopped and looked at me funny. "John, what are you doing?" he said. I realized at once what had happened. I had awakened not 16 hours later, but only 4. Sheesh. "Nothing" I replied, and then slunk back downstairs to go to bed for real. At least I had a good night's rest that night!
|
Last night, I was doing all my laundry so that I would have clean clothes for my trip to Chicago this weekend. I ended up finishing pretty late, and so I decided that the next morning I would wait until after Italian Diction class to take a shower. That meant that I could sleep about 45 minutes later, then throw on some clothes and head to class. Well, I set my alarm for 7:30, and went to bed.
The next morning I got up, put on my clothes and a baseball cap, and pulled my car out of the garage. I looked at my watch, and realized something. It was ten minutes to 8am... but class didn't start until 9!! I had set my alarm an entire hour early. I couldn't believe it. I ended up just turning off my car and leaving it out of the garage, and I went inside and took a shower and got ready. I ended up having MORE time than I usually do to get ready, so I did a little ironing as well.
I don't know how I made the mistake of setting my alarm for the wrong time, but I think I just wasn't thinking about it too hard. I normally get up at 8am for a 9am class, but for some reason I thought I needed to get up at 7:30. Perhaps it's because I got up at 6:15 the day before.
I did something similar once before, when I was in high school. My room was in the basement of our house, and so it had no windows or sources of outside light. One night, I was hanging out in my room, and I ended up falling asleep on my bed some time after 7pm. When I awoke, I had no idea how much time had passed, but I felt pretty good. Then I looked at the clock-- it said 11:00! I had forgotten to set my alarm! I was going to be SO late for school! I raced around my room gathering clothes, and then ran upstairs to take a shower. At the top of the stairs, I stopped. The kitchen was dark. The windows were dark. I was momentarily confused.
And then my dad emerged from his bedroom, on his way to the bathroom, and stopped and looked at me funny. "John, what are you doing?" he said. I realized at once what had happened. I had awakened not 16 hours later, but only 4. Sheesh. "Nothing" I replied, and then slunk back downstairs to go to bed for real. At least I had a good night's rest that night!
|
Wednesday, October 22, 2003
Today, I was made aware again of an issue I really hadn't paid attention to for a long time, that of the Darwin fish. I read this post and this one, both on the Volokh Conspiracy weblog, that took sides on how to interpret the Darwin fish with legs in regard to the traditional Christian ICHTHUS. I tend to agree with Juan Non-Volokh about the intent of the Darwin fish-- the intent to profane a traditional Christian symbol of faith. I disagree with David Bernstein that people are only making a "funny riff on the traditional fish", and are not sending any particular message. I think that making a funny riff on the fish itself IS a particular message. The Icthus symbol has very basic and specific meaning, and I doubt you could find anybody who is ignorant of that most basic meaning. Thus, people who use the Darwin fish symbol, even for the sake of humor, have a certain intent to contravene the Christian fish, and that itself is a message, no matter how slight it might be.
Having said that, I now devolve into pure screed. The Darwin fish really pisses me off. It takes one of the most historical and eloquent symbols of my faith, and twists it to mock that very same faith. You could liken it somewhat to taking the Muslim crescent and conflating it with a pig or dog, or taking the Star of David and doing something similarly contrary with it. The thing is, symbols are very important to Christians, so I doubt you could find a true equivalent in another religion. And since you probably could not, people will feel free to continue to display the Darwin fish, since it's only mocking Christianity, and EVERYBODY does that, right? Mock Islam, and you're automatically intolerant. Mock Christians, and you're only doing what educated and astute people do.
It may not be fair, but I instantly form an assessment of the people who put such things on their cars, and that assessment is almost universally that the person in question is some kind of liberal commie environmentalist wacko who is not worth a teaspoon of my piss or a second of my time. Like I said, that's probably not fair. And you know what? I don't care.
|
Having said that, I now devolve into pure screed. The Darwin fish really pisses me off. It takes one of the most historical and eloquent symbols of my faith, and twists it to mock that very same faith. You could liken it somewhat to taking the Muslim crescent and conflating it with a pig or dog, or taking the Star of David and doing something similarly contrary with it. The thing is, symbols are very important to Christians, so I doubt you could find a true equivalent in another religion. And since you probably could not, people will feel free to continue to display the Darwin fish, since it's only mocking Christianity, and EVERYBODY does that, right? Mock Islam, and you're automatically intolerant. Mock Christians, and you're only doing what educated and astute people do.
It may not be fair, but I instantly form an assessment of the people who put such things on their cars, and that assessment is almost universally that the person in question is some kind of liberal commie environmentalist wacko who is not worth a teaspoon of my piss or a second of my time. Like I said, that's probably not fair. And you know what? I don't care.
|
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
Sorry I didn't blog yesterday... had too many things going on. School all day, a music faculty meeting in the afternoon, then off to Iowa City for Musick's Feast rehearsal. I took Droy to get his hair cut before rehearsal, but not before managing to get lost in the boondocks of eastern Iowa City. Apparently, streets are forbidden to cross train tracks, because I could find no connecting road to get me to the other side. I had to spend 10 minutes driving around with the tracks over my right shoulder, taunting me. Oh, well.
After rehearsal, Droy and I went to my friend Samuel's house. Samuel and his wife are from Hong Kong, and they have two little boys. Until recently, they lived in on-campus housing at the University of Iowa (which was comprised of a small, 2-bedroom cinder-block apartment), but since Samuel is no longer a student, they have bought a condo in Coralville and have moved up there. Their new home is beautiful, and quite spacious. There are two bedrooms on the main floor, and an additional bedroom in the basement (finished, of course). Samuel has an office in the basement as well, and they have acquired a grand piano and a nice bedroom set. It makes me very glad to see them living so well. I'm sure they're enjoying it as well.
On Sunday, I had a choir concert to conduct. The Mount Pleasant High School choirs also participated, so we didn't have to come up with an entire program (which would have been difficult at this point in the year, to say the least). Unfortunately, there were several other activities going on that day, such as soccer games and Southeast Iowa Band concerts. I lost three members to soccer games, and one to the concert. And this is after losing three music majors in one week!! Things were not looking good. In our rehearsal before the concert, almost 10 people were missing, and the choir sang quite poorly. I had to sing along on the tenor parts in several places (and believe me, I am NO tenor). I was really quite worried... but the high school director suggested I ask his tenor soloist (choir director at a local community college) to sing with us. I did, and he agreed. What a difference it made! The tenors were once again rock-solid, despite the fact that he had never sung the music before. Also, most of the other people showed up, including one of the soccer women (the women's game was before the men's, so she was able to get here in time for the concert). All in all, the performance went much better than I had expected, so I was pretty happy. One piece, "Annie Laurie", was still not very good, but it didn't crash and burn like I thought it would. We can always work on it more for our fall concert.
At least I have over three weeks to worry about that.
|
After rehearsal, Droy and I went to my friend Samuel's house. Samuel and his wife are from Hong Kong, and they have two little boys. Until recently, they lived in on-campus housing at the University of Iowa (which was comprised of a small, 2-bedroom cinder-block apartment), but since Samuel is no longer a student, they have bought a condo in Coralville and have moved up there. Their new home is beautiful, and quite spacious. There are two bedrooms on the main floor, and an additional bedroom in the basement (finished, of course). Samuel has an office in the basement as well, and they have acquired a grand piano and a nice bedroom set. It makes me very glad to see them living so well. I'm sure they're enjoying it as well.
On Sunday, I had a choir concert to conduct. The Mount Pleasant High School choirs also participated, so we didn't have to come up with an entire program (which would have been difficult at this point in the year, to say the least). Unfortunately, there were several other activities going on that day, such as soccer games and Southeast Iowa Band concerts. I lost three members to soccer games, and one to the concert. And this is after losing three music majors in one week!! Things were not looking good. In our rehearsal before the concert, almost 10 people were missing, and the choir sang quite poorly. I had to sing along on the tenor parts in several places (and believe me, I am NO tenor). I was really quite worried... but the high school director suggested I ask his tenor soloist (choir director at a local community college) to sing with us. I did, and he agreed. What a difference it made! The tenors were once again rock-solid, despite the fact that he had never sung the music before. Also, most of the other people showed up, including one of the soccer women (the women's game was before the men's, so she was able to get here in time for the concert). All in all, the performance went much better than I had expected, so I was pretty happy. One piece, "Annie Laurie", was still not very good, but it didn't crash and burn like I thought it would. We can always work on it more for our fall concert.
At least I have over three weeks to worry about that.
|
Saturday, October 18, 2003
Can I just tell you how disappointed I am in the results of the Major League Baseball playoffs? Both of the wrong teams won. I usually like to root for the underdog, and underdogs like the Red Sox and the Cubs are some of the most compelling. Contrast that with the Yankees, who seem to go to the World Series every year. And the Marlins... well, I just don't feel anything about them. They're just there... almost a non-entity for me. I was so much hoping for an underdog vs. underdog series, so no matter who won, it would be a worthwhile victory. But that's not going to happen. Once again, we have a series with the ubiquitous Yankees and some boring, generic team. I've heard many people say that the series itself will be anticlimactic, and I agree. The only reasons for me to watch it have now been eliminated.
|
|
Friday, October 17, 2003
We lost three music majors this week. THREE. That may not seem like much to you, but in a department the size of ours, that's almost a fatal wound. One of them got pregnant and quit school, another was pregnant but lost her baby, and the third... well, I just don't know what went wrong with her. She seemed to be doing quite well. I guess maybe it was just too stressful for her... I can almost understand that, because our music program is so jam-packed with classes and requirements that it can seem pretty overwhelming.
Still... only one of them made any attempt to contact me and explain what was happening. I guess maybe they felt bad about leaving... I dunno. I would have liked the courtesy of at least an explanation. I hope that they decide to continue on in the next semester.
On another depressing note, my choir retains what they've learned like a sieve retains water. We've had to go over the same piece so many times, it's insane. And we have a concert this weekend. AND two of my personnel can't make it because they have a soccer game. I've had this concert on the syllabus since the beginning of the semester, but obviously nobody pays any attention to that. I should start writing nonsense limericks in the lines about attendance requirements and see if anyone notices. I'm trying to get an extra tenor from the folks at the U. of Iowa, but I'm having no luck thus far.
At least the Musick's Feast performance went well last night. Although I really couldn't sing higher than a B or C, we managed to fit in some of the lower pieces for me, in combination with some 2- and 3-voice stuff for the women. All in all, we had the right amount of music, and I didn't have to try to sing too high. My voice was already sounding better, but it was still best not to push it. But hey--we're going to be on TV! UITV, that is, which actually sucks. They don't program anything interesting. But if you watch it, you can see the entire conference on... wait for it... EMPATHY. Yes, they had an entire 3-day conference devoted to empathy. The whole stage, including the podium, was draped with multi-colored scarves, and lit by candles. Puh-LEEZE. Of all the ridiculous things I've seen in the academic world, this had to take the cake. I was glad that we sang first and were able to leave before they started talking-- I have a feeling it would have made me physically ill.
But hey-- at least I got to be amused by watching the crowd trickle in, and picking out the gay and lesbian attendees. (It wasn't too difficult-- there were more gay people there than there are at Studio 13 on Saturdays.)
|
Still... only one of them made any attempt to contact me and explain what was happening. I guess maybe they felt bad about leaving... I dunno. I would have liked the courtesy of at least an explanation. I hope that they decide to continue on in the next semester.
On another depressing note, my choir retains what they've learned like a sieve retains water. We've had to go over the same piece so many times, it's insane. And we have a concert this weekend. AND two of my personnel can't make it because they have a soccer game. I've had this concert on the syllabus since the beginning of the semester, but obviously nobody pays any attention to that. I should start writing nonsense limericks in the lines about attendance requirements and see if anyone notices. I'm trying to get an extra tenor from the folks at the U. of Iowa, but I'm having no luck thus far.
At least the Musick's Feast performance went well last night. Although I really couldn't sing higher than a B or C, we managed to fit in some of the lower pieces for me, in combination with some 2- and 3-voice stuff for the women. All in all, we had the right amount of music, and I didn't have to try to sing too high. My voice was already sounding better, but it was still best not to push it. But hey--we're going to be on TV! UITV, that is, which actually sucks. They don't program anything interesting. But if you watch it, you can see the entire conference on... wait for it... EMPATHY. Yes, they had an entire 3-day conference devoted to empathy. The whole stage, including the podium, was draped with multi-colored scarves, and lit by candles. Puh-LEEZE. Of all the ridiculous things I've seen in the academic world, this had to take the cake. I was glad that we sang first and were able to leave before they started talking-- I have a feeling it would have made me physically ill.
But hey-- at least I got to be amused by watching the crowd trickle in, and picking out the gay and lesbian attendees. (It wasn't too difficult-- there were more gay people there than there are at Studio 13 on Saturdays.)
|
Thursday, October 16, 2003
I just read some reviews of "Kill Bill", the new film by Quentin Tarantino, and it sounds like an absolute bloodbath. Unlike many other people (who must have had their souls surgically removed at some point), I don't care for violence in movies, and especially bloody violence. There's plenty of that in the world without having to create more of it onscreen. I whole-heartedly agree with James Lileks' assessment, especially about the scene with the little girl coming home from school. I don't plan on seeing this film, and I'm hoping against hope that my brothers won't see it either, and like it. (Of course, I KNOW that Dan will go see it, and will absolutely eat it up... but maybe Steph can influence Matt not to go.)
I also watched part of "Scooby Doo" last night... Matt Lillard is truly the physical incarnation of Shaggy. That, by itself, is enough to encourage me to watch the rest of the movie. Stay tuned, and I'll let you know what I think when I finish it.
|
I also watched part of "Scooby Doo" last night... Matt Lillard is truly the physical incarnation of Shaggy. That, by itself, is enough to encourage me to watch the rest of the movie. Stay tuned, and I'll let you know what I think when I finish it.
|
Wednesday, October 15, 2003
By the way, sorry for not blogging for almost a week. I spent four days in Wichita, Kansas, for my nephew's baptism, and I haven't really had a chance to sit down and write anything since. Let's sum up everything that's happened, shall we?
Chicken pot pie: Got it right on the third try. Then promptly forgot it at school. Have to make another one.
Wichita: Had a great time. Saw my whole family, took family pictures, which lasted 3 hours, primarily because my 2-year-old nieces couldn't follow the photographer's instructions: "Julia, stand up straight. Elise, put your arms down. Julia, look over here! Look over here! Who wants some candy? Elise, put your arms down. Julia, stand up straight. Elise, put your arms down." And so on. FOR. THREE. HOURS.
Chuckwagon: After the photos, we all went to the Prairie Rose Chuckwagon Supper, which is a barbecue dinner and Western (NOT country, mind you) music show located on a ranch just outside Wichita. Barbecue=great. Best brisket ever. Show=really good. I was surprised, since I'm not a fan of the genre.
Baptism: Went off without a hitch. My Dad did it instead of the regular pastor.
Lebanese dinner: Outstanding. I LOVE mediterranean food. Took a tour of the Orthodox Church (at which it was located) after dinner. Interesting, although I wonder if the guide would have mentioned several assertions of his if he had known he was talking to a Lutheran Pastor and his family.
Trip back: Uneventful. Made good time-- I drove 500 miles in 7 hours and 1 minute, with only one ten-minute stop. Got 32 mpg. Woo-hoo!
And now I'm sick. Yecch. Well, that's been my week so far. Hope you didn't miss me too much.
|
Chicken pot pie: Got it right on the third try. Then promptly forgot it at school. Have to make another one.
Wichita: Had a great time. Saw my whole family, took family pictures, which lasted 3 hours, primarily because my 2-year-old nieces couldn't follow the photographer's instructions: "Julia, stand up straight. Elise, put your arms down. Julia, look over here! Look over here! Who wants some candy? Elise, put your arms down. Julia, stand up straight. Elise, put your arms down." And so on. FOR. THREE. HOURS.
Chuckwagon: After the photos, we all went to the Prairie Rose Chuckwagon Supper, which is a barbecue dinner and Western (NOT country, mind you) music show located on a ranch just outside Wichita. Barbecue=great. Best brisket ever. Show=really good. I was surprised, since I'm not a fan of the genre.
Baptism: Went off without a hitch. My Dad did it instead of the regular pastor.
Lebanese dinner: Outstanding. I LOVE mediterranean food. Took a tour of the Orthodox Church (at which it was located) after dinner. Interesting, although I wonder if the guide would have mentioned several assertions of his if he had known he was talking to a Lutheran Pastor and his family.
Trip back: Uneventful. Made good time-- I drove 500 miles in 7 hours and 1 minute, with only one ten-minute stop. Got 32 mpg. Woo-hoo!
And now I'm sick. Yecch. Well, that's been my week so far. Hope you didn't miss me too much.
|
I'm sick. I thought I was getting better, but I'm not. And I have to sing tomorrow night. Hoo, boy.
|
|
Thursday, October 09, 2003
I am NOT having a pleasant evening. I've been trying to make a chicken pot pie, but I have never had so much trouble in my life! Usually, I can cook anything I want to, but I'm having the worst time making the crust for the pie. Usually, my crust turns out fine, but not this time--I've had to start over twice. This is the last time-- if it doesn't work this time, I'm going to Hy-Vee and buying a frozen crust. Wish me luck.
|
|
I'm used to getting "date-related" spam in my e-mail inbox. You know-- e-mails that are purporting to be from someone who is interested in dating you, or saw you and thought you were hot, etc. etc. Well, a new breed of spam has been born, and I'm somehow on the receiving end of it. It's the "I saw you in church" spam, and it goes something like this:
"I saw you in church the other day, and I really liked what I saw. Your face, your body... I fell in love immediately. Click here if you want more information about me."
I didn't click on the link, but I'm pretty sure that it would lead to some kind of adult website. I tell you... Of all the crazy things in the world, I NEVER thought I would see adult-site spam with a church-related hook!
|
"I saw you in church the other day, and I really liked what I saw. Your face, your body... I fell in love immediately. Click here if you want more information about me."
I didn't click on the link, but I'm pretty sure that it would lead to some kind of adult website. I tell you... Of all the crazy things in the world, I NEVER thought I would see adult-site spam with a church-related hook!
|
Wednesday, October 08, 2003
Andrew Sullivan had a great article in the Wall Street Journal the other day, about gay marriage. Quite a few people posted responses, but sorry to say, I was not terribly surprised by them. Rather, it was about as I expected. Go read the article, then read the responses, and then read my response to them below.
OK, done reading? Now dig in.
Most of the responses to this essay seem to be in opposition, and most of those opposed base their position on religious grounds. Sorry, folks, but that dog just won’t hunt. You have to understand that your religion, even though you absolutely KNOW it to be true, carries the exact same weight as other religions in regard to civil law. That’s part of the whole U.S. system. That’s the exact idea behind the separation of church and state.
Civil law, ideally, is not based on whether or not acts are sinful. Civil law is based, in large part, on protecting the rights of individuals from government and from each other. There are many things which are sinful which are not illegal, and many things which are illegal which are not sinful. Conflating sin with legality, or any part of the civil code, blurs the dividing line between church and state more than, say, school prayer ever could. Sin is simply not relevant in civil law.
I certainly recognize that many people have religious beliefs that prevent them from supporting gay marriage. I understand, and even sympathize with many of them. However, is it really their place to try to enforce those beliefs on people who don’t believe the same way? Just because you believe that gay people should not marry each other, does that mean that you should actively try to prevent it, whether by constitutional amendment or protests or violence or whatever? Think of it this way: According to Muslim beliefs, women must wear head coverings in public. They believe that this is Allah’s will, and to see most Western women walking around with bare heads, to say nothing of bare midriffs, probably seriously offends their sensibilities. What would you say if they tried to introduce civil legislation requiring all women to wear head coverings? You would object, because 1) it’s based on a religious belief, which the government has no business enforcing, and 2) it might directly conflict with your own religious belief. Just as God is no respecter of persons, the U.S. government is no respecter of religions. It is (or should be) blind to their differences, and in its eyes, each religion should carry equal weight (that is to say, none). There is no legitimate civil reason for denying marriage benefits to someone just because your spouse is a man instead of a woman, or vice versa.
Let’s address some of the more insistent arguments, then, shall we?
Tradition/history is against it:
This is a non-argument. Just because something is traditional, doesn’t mean it’s not traditionally wrong. Slavery, for example, has an incredibly long and distinguished history. The treatment of women as inferiors is also very traditional (it’s only in the last 100 years or so that things have changed significantly). Besides, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that same-sex unions were performed in Europe in the Middle Ages and before.
The Bible says that marriage is between one man and one woman:
Well, this is obviously not true. Many of the great heroes in the Bible were polygamists. Moses, King David, King Solomon, to name but a few. And to go into the realm of the truly bizarre, Lot’s daughters got themselves pregnant by their own father! The Bible doesn’t really say too much about this state of affairs (no pun intended), although I have to say I’m pretty sure God wasn’t terribly pleased with it.
Marriage is holy:
Religious marriage may be holy, but civil marriage certainly isn’t. I don’t call a drive-up ceremony performed upon drunk patrons in a Las Vegas “chapel” to be anything remotely resembling holy. Besides, if marriage is so holy, why do heteros make such an infernal mess of it all the time? Spouse beatings, divorce, serial marriage, child abuse… gay marriage can’t possibly make the situation worse than it is now.
God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve:
This, again, is not an argument, but rather a cute phrase. Besides, if God HAD created Adam and Steve, there wouldn’t have been any more people. Perhaps we might examine the possibility that God was merely being practical with his choice of gender for the first two humans?
It’s a sin:
I’m sorry, but as I said previously, sin is simply not relevant in civil law. ‘Nuff said.
No possibility of children:
True, gay couples cannot, outside of a miracle, have children naturally. But then again, many hetero couples are not capable of having children, either. Whether because of sterility, or age, or surgery, or injury, or some other factor, some straight couples simply cannot have children of their own. Does this mean we should deny them marriage, since they can’t naturally procreate? I think you know the answer to that.
It’s “special rights”:
Someone said that it is a case of “special rights” granted to a minority. They’re absolutely right—I mean, how can we ask for a right that nobody else has? Er, wait, I mean, that black people don’t have. No, wait, that’s not right—I mean that Jews don’t have. Wait a minute… I think they only people that DON’T have the right to marry the person they love are gay people. Doesn’t seem like a special right to me, sounds more like a situation in need of remedy. Besides, if gay people were allowed to marry someone of the same sex, it wouldn’t really be a case of special rights, because straight people would then be allowed to marry someone of the same sex, too (if they really wanted to). That sounds a bit silly, doesn’t it? But it’s exactly the same as saying that gay people already have the right to marry, they just have to marry someone of the opposite sex. It’s not a true option.
We must perpetuate our traditions and values:
I really don’t understand this argument. It seems to suggest that, if we allow gay people to marry, then everyone will forget that they can marry someone of the opposite sex if they want to, and the whole concept of hetero marriage will disappear. That’s laughable. They must really be talking about perpetuating the value that gay people are sinful and bad, and that we must prevent them from achieving legitimacy so that they will ALWAYS be considered sinful and bad. If our children no longer think that being homosexual is a terrible thing, why, they might teach their children the same thing, and then who KNOWS what will happen! Dogs and cats, living together… MASS HYSTERIA!!!!
The U.S. was founded on Judeo-Christian principles:
Which principles were those? Circumcision? Salvation by Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ? If so, where are these beliefs and values set forth in our Constitution? Or were those principles things like religious freedom, equality of all people, and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? It seems to me that these are the very things people are trying to defeat in this case. If these are the Judeo-Christian values that our nation is based on, shouldn’t we try to uphold them for all people?
What about my rights?:
What right is that? The right not to see things in society that you would not see? Nobody has that right. I see lots of things in society that personally offend me a great deal, but I must allow them because those people are as free to do what they want as I am. Or do you mean that you are afraid that the government will eventually tell you that your religion can no longer say or believe certain things about gay people? I seriously doubt it will ever come to that. But if it does (and it shouldn’t: religious people should be allowed to hold and speak about their convictions with no threat of reprisal), then you have millions of people in this country who will be willing to join you, myself included, to ensure that the freedoms of religion and speech are not curtailed in any way. After all, for Catholics, divorce is forbidden, but allowed in civil society. Likewise, for Muslims and Mormons, alcohol is forbidden but allowed in civil society. These people are free to say what they wish about divorce or alcohol, and free to abstain from those things themselves. However, they (hopefully) would not presume to try to enforce this on other people.
America is a land of many and varied religious beliefs. Some of them might seem strange to many of us, and some might seem downright wrong. But in order for us to be allowed freedom our own particular beliefs, we have to allow that same freedom to others who don’t think the same way. America, like it or not, is and always will be a secular society. It is not specially “God’s Country”, any more than France or Germany or Iran or China is. If you’re looking to establish a theocracy in this world, then I’m afraid you’ll have to go found one someplace else.
|
OK, done reading? Now dig in.
Most of the responses to this essay seem to be in opposition, and most of those opposed base their position on religious grounds. Sorry, folks, but that dog just won’t hunt. You have to understand that your religion, even though you absolutely KNOW it to be true, carries the exact same weight as other religions in regard to civil law. That’s part of the whole U.S. system. That’s the exact idea behind the separation of church and state.
Civil law, ideally, is not based on whether or not acts are sinful. Civil law is based, in large part, on protecting the rights of individuals from government and from each other. There are many things which are sinful which are not illegal, and many things which are illegal which are not sinful. Conflating sin with legality, or any part of the civil code, blurs the dividing line between church and state more than, say, school prayer ever could. Sin is simply not relevant in civil law.
I certainly recognize that many people have religious beliefs that prevent them from supporting gay marriage. I understand, and even sympathize with many of them. However, is it really their place to try to enforce those beliefs on people who don’t believe the same way? Just because you believe that gay people should not marry each other, does that mean that you should actively try to prevent it, whether by constitutional amendment or protests or violence or whatever? Think of it this way: According to Muslim beliefs, women must wear head coverings in public. They believe that this is Allah’s will, and to see most Western women walking around with bare heads, to say nothing of bare midriffs, probably seriously offends their sensibilities. What would you say if they tried to introduce civil legislation requiring all women to wear head coverings? You would object, because 1) it’s based on a religious belief, which the government has no business enforcing, and 2) it might directly conflict with your own religious belief. Just as God is no respecter of persons, the U.S. government is no respecter of religions. It is (or should be) blind to their differences, and in its eyes, each religion should carry equal weight (that is to say, none). There is no legitimate civil reason for denying marriage benefits to someone just because your spouse is a man instead of a woman, or vice versa.
Let’s address some of the more insistent arguments, then, shall we?
Tradition/history is against it:
This is a non-argument. Just because something is traditional, doesn’t mean it’s not traditionally wrong. Slavery, for example, has an incredibly long and distinguished history. The treatment of women as inferiors is also very traditional (it’s only in the last 100 years or so that things have changed significantly). Besides, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that same-sex unions were performed in Europe in the Middle Ages and before.
The Bible says that marriage is between one man and one woman:
Well, this is obviously not true. Many of the great heroes in the Bible were polygamists. Moses, King David, King Solomon, to name but a few. And to go into the realm of the truly bizarre, Lot’s daughters got themselves pregnant by their own father! The Bible doesn’t really say too much about this state of affairs (no pun intended), although I have to say I’m pretty sure God wasn’t terribly pleased with it.
Marriage is holy:
Religious marriage may be holy, but civil marriage certainly isn’t. I don’t call a drive-up ceremony performed upon drunk patrons in a Las Vegas “chapel” to be anything remotely resembling holy. Besides, if marriage is so holy, why do heteros make such an infernal mess of it all the time? Spouse beatings, divorce, serial marriage, child abuse… gay marriage can’t possibly make the situation worse than it is now.
God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve:
This, again, is not an argument, but rather a cute phrase. Besides, if God HAD created Adam and Steve, there wouldn’t have been any more people. Perhaps we might examine the possibility that God was merely being practical with his choice of gender for the first two humans?
It’s a sin:
I’m sorry, but as I said previously, sin is simply not relevant in civil law. ‘Nuff said.
No possibility of children:
True, gay couples cannot, outside of a miracle, have children naturally. But then again, many hetero couples are not capable of having children, either. Whether because of sterility, or age, or surgery, or injury, or some other factor, some straight couples simply cannot have children of their own. Does this mean we should deny them marriage, since they can’t naturally procreate? I think you know the answer to that.
It’s “special rights”:
Someone said that it is a case of “special rights” granted to a minority. They’re absolutely right—I mean, how can we ask for a right that nobody else has? Er, wait, I mean, that black people don’t have. No, wait, that’s not right—I mean that Jews don’t have. Wait a minute… I think they only people that DON’T have the right to marry the person they love are gay people. Doesn’t seem like a special right to me, sounds more like a situation in need of remedy. Besides, if gay people were allowed to marry someone of the same sex, it wouldn’t really be a case of special rights, because straight people would then be allowed to marry someone of the same sex, too (if they really wanted to). That sounds a bit silly, doesn’t it? But it’s exactly the same as saying that gay people already have the right to marry, they just have to marry someone of the opposite sex. It’s not a true option.
We must perpetuate our traditions and values:
I really don’t understand this argument. It seems to suggest that, if we allow gay people to marry, then everyone will forget that they can marry someone of the opposite sex if they want to, and the whole concept of hetero marriage will disappear. That’s laughable. They must really be talking about perpetuating the value that gay people are sinful and bad, and that we must prevent them from achieving legitimacy so that they will ALWAYS be considered sinful and bad. If our children no longer think that being homosexual is a terrible thing, why, they might teach their children the same thing, and then who KNOWS what will happen! Dogs and cats, living together… MASS HYSTERIA!!!!
The U.S. was founded on Judeo-Christian principles:
Which principles were those? Circumcision? Salvation by Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ? If so, where are these beliefs and values set forth in our Constitution? Or were those principles things like religious freedom, equality of all people, and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? It seems to me that these are the very things people are trying to defeat in this case. If these are the Judeo-Christian values that our nation is based on, shouldn’t we try to uphold them for all people?
What about my rights?:
What right is that? The right not to see things in society that you would not see? Nobody has that right. I see lots of things in society that personally offend me a great deal, but I must allow them because those people are as free to do what they want as I am. Or do you mean that you are afraid that the government will eventually tell you that your religion can no longer say or believe certain things about gay people? I seriously doubt it will ever come to that. But if it does (and it shouldn’t: religious people should be allowed to hold and speak about their convictions with no threat of reprisal), then you have millions of people in this country who will be willing to join you, myself included, to ensure that the freedoms of religion and speech are not curtailed in any way. After all, for Catholics, divorce is forbidden, but allowed in civil society. Likewise, for Muslims and Mormons, alcohol is forbidden but allowed in civil society. These people are free to say what they wish about divorce or alcohol, and free to abstain from those things themselves. However, they (hopefully) would not presume to try to enforce this on other people.
America is a land of many and varied religious beliefs. Some of them might seem strange to many of us, and some might seem downright wrong. But in order for us to be allowed freedom our own particular beliefs, we have to allow that same freedom to others who don’t think the same way. America, like it or not, is and always will be a secular society. It is not specially “God’s Country”, any more than France or Germany or Iran or China is. If you’re looking to establish a theocracy in this world, then I’m afraid you’ll have to go found one someplace else.
|
Well, well. So Arnold Schwarzenegger will be the new governor of California.
A lot of people are absolutely scandalized by this. An actor, the leader of a state? Why, this is as bad as Ronald Reagan as president, or that Ventura fellow running Minnesota! It's outrageous! He's not qualified! He's not smart enough! He's a womanizer! He's a REPUBLICAN!!
All the screeching that's going on, including some priceless assessments by people in other countries, completely ignores the greatness of the events of last night.
Great, you say? Why great?
Well, precisely because a career politician was DEMOCRATICALLY ousted from office, and replaced with someone with no prior career in politics. I like that. I like that a lot.
I have a deep and abiding mistrust of life-long politicians. It seems to me that their entire adult lives seem dedicated to getting in, and staying in, power. There's always another election-- can't say or do anything that might upset anyone, unless it's such a small minority of people that we can safely ignore them. Instead of doing what's right, or even what they think is right, all of their decisions are based on power, and keeping that power. Is their action/inaction on a particular issue going to cost them popularity or votes? Better avoid it, then!
That's why I like to see an outsider, especially an outsider like Schwarzenegger, bust into the inner circle and start mixing things up. He has a career outside of politics. If he's defeated in an election, so what? He's got plenty of money and other things to do, it won't bother him much. In fact, special interest groups will have difficulty buying him off, precisely because he has so much money. He has actual ideas about how to do things, and whether or not they work well, they are based more on convictions than on maintaining personal power.
Now, I don't think Schwarzenegger is some kind of saint. I've read about the allegations of the women who say he harassed them in various ways, and although it doesn't even come close to matching the behavior of Bill Clinton while in office, it also doesn't seem like the kind of behavior to which most decent people would stoop. But Arnold isn't "most decent people". He's a Hollywood star. Such people are a breed apart, and I'm heartily surprised that weirder or worse things about him haven't surfaced. If I could have my way, I would have run someone a little more principled, without the connection to Hollywood. But I don't get to choose-- Californians do. And they had to choose between career politician who was running their state into the ground, and someone who might just be able to stop it. I think they made the right choice.
SIGH... I've run off my original point again. Back we go. To sum up, it's a decided STRENGTH in our system that an outsider, someone who is NOT a politician, can run for public office and be elected. It means that positions of power and influence are not just available to the ones who work within the political machine, but are open to everyone (in theory). If it's an actor, so be it-- that actor is still a citizen, and has as much say in his or her government as anyone else, and also as much right to run for office. Maybe Arnold doesn't know all the intricacies of working within a state government, but he knows quite a bit about business, and anyway, that's why governors have a staff. You certainly don't think that they do all that work themselves, do you?
|
A lot of people are absolutely scandalized by this. An actor, the leader of a state? Why, this is as bad as Ronald Reagan as president, or that Ventura fellow running Minnesota! It's outrageous! He's not qualified! He's not smart enough! He's a womanizer! He's a REPUBLICAN!!
All the screeching that's going on, including some priceless assessments by people in other countries, completely ignores the greatness of the events of last night.
Great, you say? Why great?
Well, precisely because a career politician was DEMOCRATICALLY ousted from office, and replaced with someone with no prior career in politics. I like that. I like that a lot.
I have a deep and abiding mistrust of life-long politicians. It seems to me that their entire adult lives seem dedicated to getting in, and staying in, power. There's always another election-- can't say or do anything that might upset anyone, unless it's such a small minority of people that we can safely ignore them. Instead of doing what's right, or even what they think is right, all of their decisions are based on power, and keeping that power. Is their action/inaction on a particular issue going to cost them popularity or votes? Better avoid it, then!
That's why I like to see an outsider, especially an outsider like Schwarzenegger, bust into the inner circle and start mixing things up. He has a career outside of politics. If he's defeated in an election, so what? He's got plenty of money and other things to do, it won't bother him much. In fact, special interest groups will have difficulty buying him off, precisely because he has so much money. He has actual ideas about how to do things, and whether or not they work well, they are based more on convictions than on maintaining personal power.
Now, I don't think Schwarzenegger is some kind of saint. I've read about the allegations of the women who say he harassed them in various ways, and although it doesn't even come close to matching the behavior of Bill Clinton while in office, it also doesn't seem like the kind of behavior to which most decent people would stoop. But Arnold isn't "most decent people". He's a Hollywood star. Such people are a breed apart, and I'm heartily surprised that weirder or worse things about him haven't surfaced. If I could have my way, I would have run someone a little more principled, without the connection to Hollywood. But I don't get to choose-- Californians do. And they had to choose between career politician who was running their state into the ground, and someone who might just be able to stop it. I think they made the right choice.
SIGH... I've run off my original point again. Back we go. To sum up, it's a decided STRENGTH in our system that an outsider, someone who is NOT a politician, can run for public office and be elected. It means that positions of power and influence are not just available to the ones who work within the political machine, but are open to everyone (in theory). If it's an actor, so be it-- that actor is still a citizen, and has as much say in his or her government as anyone else, and also as much right to run for office. Maybe Arnold doesn't know all the intricacies of working within a state government, but he knows quite a bit about business, and anyway, that's why governors have a staff. You certainly don't think that they do all that work themselves, do you?
|
Tuesday, October 07, 2003
Here's another post by Steven Den Beste, which details what the treacherous snakes in the rest of the world (and even in our own country) are up to.
|
|
Monday, October 06, 2003
This makes me sick. And the kicker is that the people who trash Christianity for relegating women to a lesser status will not say a WORD about this kind of thing.
|
|
I just read an incredible essay on Power (specifically, American Power) that I was directed to by LGF. If you love America, you should go read it NOW.
|
|
Saturday, October 04, 2003
By the way, I HATE electric can openers. Of all the unnecessary kitchen gadgets ever invented, this one takes the cake. It only takes a couple of seconds to open a can by hand. That's shorter than it takes me to open it with the machine. Plus, it's a lot easier to do, and it doesn't use electricity. I can think of absolutely no good reason to use an electric can opener. There, I said it. I feel much better now.
|
|
Homecoming at Iowa Wesleyan! I got up at 8 this morning to go help put together the music department float. The Homecoming theme this year was "Nightmare on Main Street". See, 'cause the main address of the college is on Main St., and it's October, and there's the movie called "Nightmare on Elm Street" although it isn't Elm here in Mt. Pleasant, and... uh... well, you get it. My opinion: Blechh.
Still, the music students did an awesome job with their float. They made a graveyard out of a trailer, and put cardboard tombstones on it that said things like "R.I.P. W. A. Mozart" and other music in-jokes. They had cobwebs all over everything, and flying bats (suspended by fishing poles, one of which I operated), and they were all dressed in black with ghoulish makeup and cobwebs and "dust" sprinkled liberally all over them. They even had a cauldron with dry ice, making a mist. They stood among the gravestones and played "The Munsters", "The Addams Family", and "Ghostbusters". Some of the others threw candy to the kids. It was pretty cool. Unfortunately, they didn't win the float prize. Well, better luck next year.
I went home before the football game and did the dishes, then went to the field to get the choir ready for the Star-Spangled Banner. Most of the choir members were also in the Pep Band, which was playing before the game, so it was a little difficult to get some time to warm up. We did a few quick scales, and then we were off to the track to sing. I crowded them together as closely as possible, so they could hear without walls around them to reflect the sound. We had to wait for the coin toss, but then we sang, and to my delight, they sang really well-- we didn't even need the microphones! I was quite proud.
I spent the next few quarters of the game watching Wesleyan get pounded by William Penn University 38-0, but I sort of expected that. I saw the new computer science professor, Vinu George, and decided to say hi. I ended up talking to him for over half an hour. He's new to Iowa, coming from grad school in Mississippi, and he doesn't know very many people, especially around his age. Come to think of it, neither do I. Well, I talked to him about being in rural Iowa, his upcoming marriage, the Indian restaurants in Iowa City, computers, and a bunch of other stuff. We seem to have several interests in common, so perhaps we'll hang out a bit this semester.
I had to leave in the third quarter to get ready to go to Iowa City for the Musick's Feast concert. Musick's Feast is an early music ensemble in which I sing, which donates all ticket proceeds to hunger relief agencies. Tonight, we did a concert of pieces to and about the Virgin Mary. One of those pieces was Josquin's stunning 5-voice "Salve Regina", which I am doing with my choir as well. Overall, the concert went pretty well, although we had to re-start two pieces. That may have ruined it somewhat for the others, but I did pretty well-- I only made two very minor mistakes.
Now I'm cooking chili for Droy (yes, at 11:30 at night). I've only made chili three times so far, but I really like this recipe that I'm using. I sort of made it up myself:
Chili
1-1/2 T. olive oil
1 medium onion, chopped
2 cloves garlic, minced
1 lb. ground round (85% lean)
1 tsp. salt
1 tsp. pepper
1 tsp. cumin
1-1/2 T. chili powder
1 can (15 oz) tomato sauce
1 can diced tomatos (opt. with chilis)
2 cans (15 oz. each) beans (kidney, chili, black... whatever)
1-1/2 T. brown sugar
Heat the oil in the bottom of a dutch oven on medium heat. Cook the onions in the oil until translucent, then add the minced garlic. Do not allow the garlic to brown. Add the ground beef, and brown. Add the cumin, salt, and pepper, and then add the chili powder. Cook for another minute. Next add the tomatos, tomato sauce, and beans. Add brown sugar. Reduce heat to low and cook for 30 minutes. Chili can be served hot off the stove, but for best results, allow to cool, then refrigerate overnight. Reheat before serving.
|
Still, the music students did an awesome job with their float. They made a graveyard out of a trailer, and put cardboard tombstones on it that said things like "R.I.P. W. A. Mozart" and other music in-jokes. They had cobwebs all over everything, and flying bats (suspended by fishing poles, one of which I operated), and they were all dressed in black with ghoulish makeup and cobwebs and "dust" sprinkled liberally all over them. They even had a cauldron with dry ice, making a mist. They stood among the gravestones and played "The Munsters", "The Addams Family", and "Ghostbusters". Some of the others threw candy to the kids. It was pretty cool. Unfortunately, they didn't win the float prize. Well, better luck next year.
I went home before the football game and did the dishes, then went to the field to get the choir ready for the Star-Spangled Banner. Most of the choir members were also in the Pep Band, which was playing before the game, so it was a little difficult to get some time to warm up. We did a few quick scales, and then we were off to the track to sing. I crowded them together as closely as possible, so they could hear without walls around them to reflect the sound. We had to wait for the coin toss, but then we sang, and to my delight, they sang really well-- we didn't even need the microphones! I was quite proud.
I spent the next few quarters of the game watching Wesleyan get pounded by William Penn University 38-0, but I sort of expected that. I saw the new computer science professor, Vinu George, and decided to say hi. I ended up talking to him for over half an hour. He's new to Iowa, coming from grad school in Mississippi, and he doesn't know very many people, especially around his age. Come to think of it, neither do I. Well, I talked to him about being in rural Iowa, his upcoming marriage, the Indian restaurants in Iowa City, computers, and a bunch of other stuff. We seem to have several interests in common, so perhaps we'll hang out a bit this semester.
I had to leave in the third quarter to get ready to go to Iowa City for the Musick's Feast concert. Musick's Feast is an early music ensemble in which I sing, which donates all ticket proceeds to hunger relief agencies. Tonight, we did a concert of pieces to and about the Virgin Mary. One of those pieces was Josquin's stunning 5-voice "Salve Regina", which I am doing with my choir as well. Overall, the concert went pretty well, although we had to re-start two pieces. That may have ruined it somewhat for the others, but I did pretty well-- I only made two very minor mistakes.
Now I'm cooking chili for Droy (yes, at 11:30 at night). I've only made chili three times so far, but I really like this recipe that I'm using. I sort of made it up myself:
Chili
1-1/2 T. olive oil
1 medium onion, chopped
2 cloves garlic, minced
1 lb. ground round (85% lean)
1 tsp. salt
1 tsp. pepper
1 tsp. cumin
1-1/2 T. chili powder
1 can (15 oz) tomato sauce
1 can diced tomatos (opt. with chilis)
2 cans (15 oz. each) beans (kidney, chili, black... whatever)
1-1/2 T. brown sugar
Heat the oil in the bottom of a dutch oven on medium heat. Cook the onions in the oil until translucent, then add the minced garlic. Do not allow the garlic to brown. Add the ground beef, and brown. Add the cumin, salt, and pepper, and then add the chili powder. Cook for another minute. Next add the tomatos, tomato sauce, and beans. Add brown sugar. Reduce heat to low and cook for 30 minutes. Chili can be served hot off the stove, but for best results, allow to cool, then refrigerate overnight. Reheat before serving.
|
Friday, October 03, 2003
This morning, I saw a newspaper headline the blared loudly "NO WEAPONS IN IRAQ!" Then I proceeded to Andrew Sullivan's weblog, where he reads the actual report and says that the headlines have it exactly backwards. Guess which one I believe?
|
|
Thursday, October 02, 2003
Well, they got me. They got me good. You see, this week is Spirit Week at my college, and my students have been threatening to "get" me somehow. Well, I got up this morning to find my house, trees, and yard covered with toilet paper. It was a good job, too. Very thorough. I must say that I'm rather proud. Of course, slightly annoyed, too, but it didn't take too long to clean up, considering. Although toilet paper becomes a mess when wet, if it's frozen, it becomes stiff and is easier to take out of trees and off of roofs.
I woke up early this morning for some reason, and decided to get up rather than try to sleep for an extra 20 minutes. I looked out my window, and at first I thought it had snowed. But that's highly unusual for this part of the country at the beginning of October, so I looked again, and realized it was toilet paper. I decided to forego my shower so that I could start cleaning up at once. The front yard was pretty easy, being smaller and having only one tree. However, it also had about a hundred plastic forks stuck in the ground, and they tend to be brittle when frozen (which they were). Nevertheless, I got them out and put them in a pile on the driveway with the toilet paper. Then I tackled the back. My backyard is much bigger, and it has six pine trees instead of one. They really got those toilet paper rolls stuck in the trees good. Fortunately, the trees aren't too tall, and I got almost all of the paper off by just pulling it (it was still frozen and stiff). I had to reach up into the trees to get some of the rolls out, but I managed to get them all. The hardest part, though, was the roof. My students threw three big wads of TP up onto my roof, leaving only a trail of paper behind. But I was lucky once again-- the paper was still frozen, and with some gentle tugging, the entire wad came off of the roof. The same with the next one. However, the third was out of my reach, so I'm going to have to get a ladder and climb up on the roof to get it down. Still, it was not a bad job for only an hour's work. I taught my first class in jeans and a sweater, wearing my glasses, but I don't think anybody noticed or cared. After class, I ran home and got a shower, and then started my day.
When it came time for choir, I started things as per usual. But then I stopped, and said, "I'd like to thank you all. You see, I was planning on going to the store to buy some toilet paper, but now I don't have to." They gave me a blank look for a second, but then the people in the know started giggling, and then the whole class figured out what was going on and joined in.
Not a bad day, overall.
|
I woke up early this morning for some reason, and decided to get up rather than try to sleep for an extra 20 minutes. I looked out my window, and at first I thought it had snowed. But that's highly unusual for this part of the country at the beginning of October, so I looked again, and realized it was toilet paper. I decided to forego my shower so that I could start cleaning up at once. The front yard was pretty easy, being smaller and having only one tree. However, it also had about a hundred plastic forks stuck in the ground, and they tend to be brittle when frozen (which they were). Nevertheless, I got them out and put them in a pile on the driveway with the toilet paper. Then I tackled the back. My backyard is much bigger, and it has six pine trees instead of one. They really got those toilet paper rolls stuck in the trees good. Fortunately, the trees aren't too tall, and I got almost all of the paper off by just pulling it (it was still frozen and stiff). I had to reach up into the trees to get some of the rolls out, but I managed to get them all. The hardest part, though, was the roof. My students threw three big wads of TP up onto my roof, leaving only a trail of paper behind. But I was lucky once again-- the paper was still frozen, and with some gentle tugging, the entire wad came off of the roof. The same with the next one. However, the third was out of my reach, so I'm going to have to get a ladder and climb up on the roof to get it down. Still, it was not a bad job for only an hour's work. I taught my first class in jeans and a sweater, wearing my glasses, but I don't think anybody noticed or cared. After class, I ran home and got a shower, and then started my day.
When it came time for choir, I started things as per usual. But then I stopped, and said, "I'd like to thank you all. You see, I was planning on going to the store to buy some toilet paper, but now I don't have to." They gave me a blank look for a second, but then the people in the know started giggling, and then the whole class figured out what was going on and joined in.
Not a bad day, overall.
|
Wednesday, October 01, 2003
I'm so excited! I just got an e-mail from a colleague in Nebraska, telling me that his ancestors came to America with a group of Spomers who settled in Nebraska. (My great-grandparents were also Germans who lived in Russia, and they came to America in 1904, shortly before my grandfather was born.) He gave me URL of a website, The American Historical Society of Germans from Russia (AHSGR) , which keeps track of surnames and original villages and genealogies and such. I'm going to send them all the family information I know, and hope that I can make some connections. Wish me luck!
|
|
