Sack Not The Lord

I truly wish this were a gag. Safe bet that the defensive player in the football figurine won't be finding a lot in his stocking this year.

It's hard not to stay cynical. I could really use an uplifting speech from Mr. Van Pelt

WWJD

It's that time of year. When I start feeling awkward. To say that I am not a religous person is to grossly understate my condition. However, that has little to do with why "the" holiday season makes me squirm.

Yesterday, at my weekly weigh-in, I inflicted 7 lbs more damage on the unsuspecting springs of my bathroom scale than in the previous week's session. I think that my diet of the few days, which has been dominated by fried bluegill, chicken wings, pies, peanut butter and cookies, might have made it so that water is reluctant to leave my body. Seven lbs...in the week before Thanksgiving. Who the hell am I to eat this much?

Strangely, every time my pants get more difficult to button, I start thinking about John Locke's theory on property. What I remember from my political theory class you can probably fit in a Dixie Cup, but I was taken with Locke's point about the a person's rights to property:

As much as any one can make use of to any advantage of life before it spoils, so much he may by his labour fix a property in. Whatever is beyond this is more than his share, and belongs to others. Nothing was made by God for man to spoil or destroy. And thus considering the plenty of natural provisions there was a long time in the world, and the few spenders, and to how small a part of that provision the industry of one man could extend itself and engross it to the prejudice of others, especially keeping within the bounds set by reason of what might serve for his use, there could be then little room for quarrels or contentions about property so established.

Tomorrow is Thanksgiving. This holiday bothers more than any other righ now. I am grateful many things in my life, but it strikes me as peculiar that we celebrate by engaging in gluttony. "If you don't eat it. I'm just going to throw it away." Waste. Waist.

What Would John (Locke) Do?

See here for information on Locke's theories.

Blogs of Note

In you case you missed the premiere of this blog , you'd better go there now if expect a holiday gift from Lori .

And thanks to Tim in Chicago for this

free to a good home

You may have already read about Pete. If you have fenced back yard, a comfy couch and access to peanut butter, he'd like to hear from you.

From The Golden Text

About 1/5 of the states voted for laws that would curtail the rights of gay couples. I think the Michigan's Proposal 2 was among the most restrictive.

I haven't been to a church sevice in over 30 years, so I'm not the most literate person on what the bible says/doesn't say. That said, here are some points (from MSNBC's David Shuster ) that I wish I could make:

"A loss for true conservatism (David Shuster November 8, 2004)

On Tuesday, eleven different states outlawed gay marriage. 

The basic argument I heard was not about marriage (more on that below) but about being gay. And a majority of voters seem to believe that homosexuality is an "immoral lifestyle choice." 

Hmmmm.  The problem is that anybody who has a relative or friend who is gay also knows it is not a "choice."  It is something wired into the genes of approximately 3 or 4 percent of the human population in every single culture on the planet.  Secondly, when it comes to morality, consider this: While the Bible does suggest homosexuality is an abomination (Leviticus 18:22), The Bible also says in Leviticus 25:44 that we may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations; Exodus 35:2 says that my neighbor who works on the Sabbath should be put to death; Lev. 19:27 expressly forbids men from getting their hair trimmed; Lev. 11:6-9 states that touching a dead pig makes us unclean (Are you ready for some football?) and Lev. 19:19 forbids us from planting two different crops in the same field or wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread.  The penalty?  Lev. 24:10-16 suggests we stone people to death.

Maybe some Americans want to return to the days of slavery, devout observance to the Sabbath, long hair, all cotton clothes,  and stoning people... I would prefer that our society move forward.

And the best way to move any society forward is to strengthen the family. I adore my family and consider them to be the best part of my entire life. And I'm absolutely convinced that "marriage" fosters social cohesion, emotional security, and economic prudence.  That's why I'm baffled as to why we would keep such an institution away from anybody. (I'm not talking about "religion-sanctioned marriage," I'm referring to the civil institution of marriage—the kind that involves a "state-sponsored" license.) 

The fact is, the couple down the street... whether they are straight or gay, has no bearing whatsoever on my marriage or yours.  Gay marriage could only undermine or delegitimize straight marriage if it were a real alternative.  But, do you know any heterosexuals who could be persuaded by law (or anything else for that matter) to have sex with or marry someone of their own sex?  I don't.

Any intelligent and logical thinking person must know that gays are not going away.  So why not coax these human beings into traditional values? Marriage reinforces a healthy social trend... and it provides stability. Isn't that what conservatism stands for?

If we really want to improve and strengthen the institution of marriage, instead of passing laws that exclude couples, shouldn't we be focused on why 50% of all marriages end in divorce?  Why not pass a law that requires all couples (as some churches do) to meet with a pastor and talk about hundreds of issues before the marriage. Or how about a law that says you can't marry anybody you met in the last 24 hours?

Unfortunately, logic and common sense to be in short supply these days. Instead, we have an endless supply of hatred and fear. Why is that?"

W 2.0

This Iraq war has its roots in a strategy document that was drafted by an Undersecretary of Defense--Paul Wolfowitz-- in the first Bush administration. now has a prominent place in Bush 43's administration, as Donald Rumsfeld's deputy secretary.

Sure, Iraq , the sequel, is about oil, and to some extent probably some unfinished business in the Bush family. And of course, they lost Bin Laden, so the administration felt it had to look busy. But this war in Iraq is the realization of Paul Wolfowitz' dirty little dream of US hegemony.

The Iraq war is just spring training. Essentially, the foreign policy of this administration's second term might kickoff with "heads, Syria; tails, Iran."

Here's something you might want to bookmark, and read before the next election.

A Promise Kept

Why Ohio shouldn't surprise you.

No turning back now

I'm pretty sure that Devin is the first person whom I've honored by storing his stool sample in my refrigerator for 24 hours.