tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-374918652024-03-07T13:11:06.223-05:00Thou and Thou OnlyRiches we heed not, nor man's empty praise.<br><br>
This blog belongs to the family of JunkMale, a Christian and Georgia Tech alumnus. Target demographics might include conservative Christian, healthy-eating, homeschooling, interracial families, and others who do not call this world "home." Where homemade is usually better than store-bought. For more info, click the "About" link below.Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-28208237670401442342011-06-09T11:32:00.003-04:002011-06-09T11:59:41.587-04:00Holier-Than-Thou Badges<img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5616236198008102594" style="FLOAT: right; MARGIN: 0px 0px 10px 10px; WIDTH: 151px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 300px" alt="" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BivWnwP0isc/TfDhEOT2nsI/AAAAAAAADyk/E1KnClYhiqs/s400/472253_champ.jpg" border="0" />Perhaps you have a few. Such badges are common where one's interest-at-hand is different from the general population. Here are some examples of Holier-Than-Thou badges, plus an entirely-too-sarcastic-and-exaggerated-and-thus-purely-hypothetical blurb from a hypothetical holder of such a badge. The <b>bolded</b> indicates the Holier-Than-Thou badge.<br /><br /><ul><li>Point-and-shoot cameras vs. <b>SLRs</b> (single lens reflex)<br />"<em>Ha, good luck taking any sort of professional grade pictures with that little thing. Do you even know how to change your aperture settings? I would choke if I had to use a point-and-shoot</em>" And further within the photography realm...</li><br /><br /><ul><li><b>Manual focusing</b> vs. auto focusing lenses<br />"<em>Have fun with your precious auto focus in low light conditions, while my $500,000 focusing screen and vintage f/0.4 lens gets it perfect every time. I could never go back to auto focus.</em>"</li></ul><br /><br /><li><b>Making your own computers</b> vs. buying pre-assembled computers from Dell, HP, etc.<br />"<em>My computer is so much more powerful per dollar because I didn't have to pay myself $90/hr for labor. I would choke if I had to buy an assembled computer</em>."</li><br /><br /><li>Linux vs. Windows<br />"<em>Bow before me, mortals, I am <b>so</b> cool because I use Linux, death to everything Windows. BTW I am non-conformist for the sake of non-conformity.</em></li>"<br /><br /><li>Traditional board games vs. <b>Euro/German style board games</b><br />"<em>I'd much rather push wooden cubes around in a non-confrontational manner than bleed you dry in Monopoly."</em></li><br /><br /><li>Store-bought vs. <b>home-grown</b> vegetables<br />"<em>The vegetables from <b>our</b> yard are so much higher in vitamin, mineral, and antioxidant content than <b>your</b> store-bought vegetables. Have fun dying of cancer</em>."</li></ul><br /><br />The next few get a bit more relateable to any readers we still have left, mostly because I have/had personal experience with computers, cameras, and gardening and can't think of any others. And BTW, there is a point to this post besides being a vent or a rant; I shall put it after the list which follows.<br /><ul><li><b>Homeschooling</b> vs. institutional schooling<br />"<em>My homeschooler read Cicero's Greatest Hits in its original Greek, translated Swaziland's constitution into Latin for fun during his free time, and built a particle accelerator in his closet and has collected 153g of antimatter so far. What does your public schooler do with his time?"</em></li><br /><br /><li><b>Cloth diapers</b> vs. disposable<br />"<em>Cloth diapers are better for you, better for baby, better for life, and a prerequisite to enter Heaven</em>."</li><br /><br /><li><b>Avoiding trans-fats</b> vs. Not<br />"<em>Avoiding trans-fats is better for you, better for the world, and a prerequisite to enter Heaven</em>."</li><br /><br /><li><b>Having many children</b> vs. Not<br />"<em>I guess those people just don't view children as God's blessings</em>."</li><br /><br /><li><b>Grinding your own grain</b> vs. white flour or store-bought whole wheat flour<br />"<em>You don't grind your own wheat? No wonder you're fat and diabetic.</em>"</li><br /><br /><li><b>Backyard eggs</b> vs. store bought<br />"<em>I guess those people just don't view fresh eggs as God's blessings</em>. <em>Oh, and backyard eggs are a prerequisite for entering Heaven</em>."</li><br /><br /><li><b>Natural childbirth</b> vs. Not<br />"<em>BLARGH epidural anesthesia now, methamphetamine I.V. later</em>."</li></ul><br /><br />In recent years, I have become much more sensitive to exhuding a Holier-Than-Thou attitude in my writing, speech, and actions. In discussing the topic with Harmony, both of us agree that our miscarriages and fertility woes were a big catalyst in changing the way we presented ourselves. For the duration of this blog post, I will refer to the period before miscarriages and fertility as BM&I, for "Before Miscarriages and Infertility."<br /><br />BM&I, it was always my (our?) intention to have more children at this point in our marriage. After all, having lots of children is an indicator of God's blessing on a married couple living in holy matrimony, and we were pretty good people, right? Well. Then June 19, 2007 happened and our lives were never the same again. October 15, 2007 happened and set in stone that our thinking would never go back to BM&I mentality.<br /><br />Miscarriages and infertility dampened our self-righteous tendencies quite a bit. Pregnancies and children were no longer Holier-Than-Thou badges to be smuggly flaunted, they were more like "oh-my-goodness-what-you-have-is-SUCH-a-blessing,if-you-had-any-idea-what-it's-like-to-not-be-able-to-have-that-you-would-spend-the-rest-of-your-life-cherishing-it/her/him." Viable pregnancies were something to be maddeningly but cautiously nervously grateful for, not casually addressed as "oh another blessing here and on the way, sweet, let's see how many tons of tomatoes we got today."<br /><br />We discovered that, hey, you know, it doesn't quite feel great to hear people on blogs or blog comments boasting of God's blessings and their family size and implying that smaller families were that way because they actively rejected the blessings, in light of what had just happened. And I'm sure these people (I honestly do not remember any specific instances anymore) did not intend to come off that way, but that's the way I read things during that time. Losing hope for our "Has Many Children" badge humbled us in that area, as well as all the others. If it was that unpleasant to hear self-righteousness in one area, then it must be unpleasant in others as well. After all, who wants to feel like they are being condescended and condemned because of their choice of gardening philosophy or where they get their eggs?<br /><br /><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5616236989776295250" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 300px; HEIGHT: 243px" alt="This image meant to convey family size; my proofreader did not understand though, thus the explanation" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-9a1yd5qB72s/TfDhyT4GdVI/AAAAAAAADys/GYczh8cRc6w/s400/1339722_bunny_figurine.jpg" border="0" />I wish we had not had to endure the post-BM&I period, but good came of it. This is how life is, though - God gives us trials to help refine our character. I cringe to think what my thoughts might be if we'd had a honeymoon baby and easy children born at 1 year intervals after that. "<em>Well anyone who rejects God's blessings shouldn't cry about it when they have difficult children. Well those people</em> [who might have untold fertility issues or whatever, none of your business] <em>obviously are rejecting God's blessings...I mean their first daughter is 2 and the mom isn't pregnant yet..??"</em> You get the idea. Post BM&I, there's a greatly reduced (but still non-zero, as we are sinners) probability that such presumptuous thoughts will cross our minds.<br /><br />In the end, all of these Holier-Than-Thou badges might come to us. I would, of course, welcome having many children, which is the Holier-Than-Thou badge which has proven most elusive to us. But perhaps God thought that it would be better for us to take the long route there, so that we could be fully grateful for what God has given us, with much less self-righteousness than if He'd given the blessings to us right away. But even if He chooses not to give us any more children, at least we'll be much less likely to be self-righteous, Holier-Than-Thou bags of hot air.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-17254417532438120542010-07-09T07:31:00.002-04:002010-07-09T07:48:55.652-04:00Answering the CriticsA friend of mine has a two-year-old daughter that she really wants to homeschool. Unfortunately, her family and friends are far less than supportive. She recently emailed me this question that I am (with her permission) posting here slightly edited for our readership to help answer.<br /><blockquote><span style="font-style: italic;">What are some of your rebuttals to homeschool critics? When people say: "The children will not be socially acclimated." or "Can it be a little unhealthy for children to be around their parents so much?"</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">What are some other ones you've heard and please give me a tactful way to respond to these... </span></blockquote><br />Here is the response I sent her:<br /><blockquote><br />For all of civilization, up until the late 1800s, children grew up at home with their families. Take for example the pioneers, who crossed the US in covered wagons. How much time did *they* spend with their parents every day? If you read the Little House on the Prairie series, you'll find out that Laura and her sisters were hardly ever in school until they were much older. They spent all day at home with their family. It was, in fact, a rare thing before the 1800s for a child to spend long periods of time away from their families.<br /><br />That ought to cover the second question. Unless they think that all of humanity had unhealthy childhoods for thousands of years....<br /><br />For the first question, I might then ask if they think that these famous people who were home educated were not "socially acclimated": Laura Ingalls Wilder, Abraham Lincoln, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, Franklin Roosevelt, George Washington Carver, Thomas Edison, etc. Just google for "famous homeschoolers for a MUCH longer list - public schooling is so very new that most of the famous people of history were home educated.<br /><br />If they reply that yes, that was fine *then*, but public school is necessary to be "socially acclimated" now, then I would ask which parts of school are important. Then answer the specific areas that they are concerned about. For example:<br /><br />Spending time with other children? They can do that at church or at homeschool group activities or at scouts or any other activities they're involved in.<br /><br />Prom? There are homeschool proms.<br /><br />The experience of being bullied (yes, I know people who think it's important to go to public school so that you know what it's like to be bullied)? 1) Not every child is bullied in school. 2) That's what family is for. Sibling rivalry, anyone?? 3) Are the bullies missing out in public school because *they* are never bullied?<br /><br />Etc. I would also mention famous modern homeschoolers, such as the Jonas Brothers, Joshua Harris (author of I Kissed Dating Goodbye), and Tim Tebow (UF football player). Also, Will Smith and John Travolta homeschool their children. <br /><br />Then I would be sure to tell them that scientists have studied the social health and success of homeschooled adults and compared them to public schooled adults. In most areas there is NO difference, and in the areas where there is a difference the homeschooled adults always scored higher.</blockquote>But the truth is that I haven't really had to deal with critics much, and so I was hoping our readers could help me out. What response would you have given my friend? And what other questions do the critics ask that she should be prepared to answer?Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-47661611919993023352009-10-26T07:42:00.005-04:002009-10-26T08:48:04.848-04:00For Christians - Halloween or Not?(otherwise known as "let's have some controversy on the old blog.")<br /><br />As the title states, the question is for the Christian readers of this blog. I am particularly interested in the opinions of the church of Christ readers, especially since it seems like we are the only family in our church who does not celebrate Halloween. But I will gladly accept opinion of those in other denominations ;)<br /><br />Do you or don't you? Why? Have you ever considered doing the opposite? At any point, did you do differently than what you do now? What convinced you to do differently?<br /><br />It is a conscience issue for me, per Romans 14. It bothers my conscience to take part in such activities, so I do not do it. I will leave it at that, unless you want to take it to the comments. As I mentioned before, it seems like it's us and a smattering of Baptists who do not take part. This means we miss out on a big Halloween party every year. In a few years we will no doubt have to explain to Pearl why everyone else gets to do it, but she (we) does not. Believe me, sometimes I wish my conscience were fine with it; life would be a bit easier. <br /><br />I also feel similarly about Christians' propensity for the traditional Easter things like egg hunts and Easter bunnies and whatnot. <br /><br />Let's hear your opinions.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com28tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-58397140892580391792009-07-15T08:03:00.000-04:002009-07-15T08:03:44.966-04:00We Prefer The Boring Life<a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/Sl3EpybPVJI/AAAAAAAABcc/YQMfGmQRUAg/s1600-h/20090711_sleep.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/Sl3EpybPVJI/AAAAAAAABcc/YQMfGmQRUAg/s400/20090711_sleep.jpg" border="0" alt="...so does she."id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5358655353830462610" /></a><br />Recently, the JunkFamily was out attending an old college friend's birthday lunch. The age range of the group was from about our age to people in their 30's, I think. All of them were legally single, although I do believe three people were engaged (two to each other, one to someone who wasn't there). We were the only people with offspring of any sort.<br /><br />Sometime during the event, a betrothed maiden asked us what we do in the evenings. Harmony and I thought for a bit...and couldn't really give her a good answer to that. It turns out that we are very boring people. We gave an account of a typical evening these days, after I get home - put my lunch stuff away, do dishes, help out with chores around the house, take care of Pearl while Pearly Ma does housework, putting out Pearly Ma's emotional fires, going out in the garden, eat dinner, talk, check e-mail, shower, get in bed by 9 PM. Sometimes we take walks, although to Luna's dismay, this happens much less frequently than the years/months Before Pearl (BP).<br /><br />Perhaps innerly perplexed, she asked what we did in the years/months BP. Pretty much the same, except without the taking-care-of-Pearl parts.<br /><br />I see that many people on Facebook oftentimes list multiple current TV shows as their favorites and I wonder when they have time to do anything else. Even with DVRs and whatnot, an hour long show still takes about 45 minutes to watch. How do they have time to clean the dwelling, clean themselves, etc.? My guess is that sleeping time is where the extra time gets pulled from.<br /><br />But if you know me well, you probably know that I am <i>very</i> stingy about things that can cut into my sleep time. I don't like walking around all day feeling bleary eyed and almost falling asleep on the way home, or falling asleep during meetings. Basically I do not like feeling sleepy in situations where I ought not. These days, there are three factors that are warring against the sleep situation: early rising sun (I do not sleep well in the mornings when it's light out), hungrily persistent dog who wants breakfast, and baby. Since I do not sleep well into bright morning, my best solution is to go to sleep early.<br /><br />I do not have much desire (if any) to hang out with friends if I cannot have my family with me. I feel that many of our church friends would feel the same, seeing as all of our church friends are families. If we do spend time with one another, it is usually as families (unless it's Harmony and church friend during the day time). On occasion, sometimes aforementioned birthday boy college friend requested me to leave the family at home. Back in the days BP, this meant leaving Harmony at home. Now it means leaving Harmony and Pearl home. One of these days I will bust out the simple truth that spending time with me is a package deal; you want me, you're going to have to get all of us, because spending time with my own family is much more important than spending time with single college friend.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:75%;"><i>This single college friend will undoubtedly bring up the question "So why don't we talk anymore?" For background, we were best friends in college and went to the same church (I actually had a part in helping him become a Christian), and he brings this up almost every time we talk. I don't have a great answer other than just...life is busy. It is starting to become a real drag, having that conversation every time.</i></span><br /><br />Wanting to spend as much time as I can with my ladies and wanting to get the sleep that I need are reasons why I prefer the boring life.<br /><br />(I also don't like being busy and running around all day doing all this junk, but that's getting beyond the scope of this post)JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-13917770255834415552008-12-08T10:15:00.002-05:002008-12-08T10:27:47.806-05:00What My Parents Did RightIn my family, we had a rule that the only TV that was allowed was 'educational'. So we watched lots of nature documentaries, history shows, and (my personal favorite as a young child - which perhaps explains my affinity for geography) Where in the World is Carmen San Diego? PBS was the majority of our TV watching back in those days. I'm also pretty sure we had a limit to how much we could watch, especially in the summer, and we had to finish our homework before we were allowed to watch anything.<br /><br />Those rules sort of fell by the wayside by the time I was in high school, but by that time I preferred those sorts of shows, for the most part. I think I picked up one or two junk shows, and all the rest of my TV watching continued to be semi-educational.<br /><br />The same applied to computer games. I don't think my sister or I ever owned a computer game that didn't teach math or geography, or some other skill, until perhaps high school. I still remember my sister and I sitting at the computer playing Outnumbered together. I did all the quick mental math, because I was older, and she helped with the word problems. I also played Carmen San Diego and Mickey's Space Adventure (I can still tell you random facts about the planets thanks to this game).<br /><br />We spent a lot of time in imaginative play, because our mom wouldn't spend the money on all the toys my friends had. Mom would give us book reports to complete over the summer months, and she took us to science museums and historical sites. It wasn't uncommon to play Bible memory games when we were on long trips, or to be given challenging math problems to solve over dinner. We practically lived at the library.<br /><br />I used to resent all these things when I was little, because I never was up on the shows or games that all my friends watched, and we never got to anywhere or do anything 'fun'. Now, however, I think my parents probably did the right thing. My sister and I are thinkers - perhaps not deep thinkers, but more so than many kids our age. We have an appreciation for science and history that many of my friends never got.<br /><br />My parents weren't perfect, but they did a lot of things right. This is just one example, but it's a good one. Thanks Mom and Dad. :-)Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-8097044626564530442008-05-12T07:17:00.002-04:002008-12-09T17:09:47.508-05:00God and Gardening: Lessons in Submission<span style="font-size: 180%; font-style: italic;">We are becoming more</span> and more serious about gardening as each day passes. A month or two ago, we decided that one of our eventual goals was for our garden to completely sustain our vegetable needs. If all goes well, perhaps trips to the grocery store will be for meats and other animal products only (we would still have to buy grains, oils, etc. in bulk though).<br /><br /><img style="float:left; margin:0 10px 10px 0;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/SCXbBv5JRHI/AAAAAAAAAmM/VFqTS0WNcEo/s320/veggies_cuttingboard_small.jpg" border="0" alt="Stock image - Veggies on Cutting Board" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5198802167951606898" />This would mean that we'd have to submit our eating habits and desires to the seasons. We live in <a href="http://www.garden.org/zipzone/index.php?img=seusa" target="new" title="USDA - Southeast US Hardiness Zones">USDA hardiness zone 7B</a>, which means we will not be able to have typical summer produce year-round. That would be foodstuffs like tomatoes, peppers, watermelon, and cucumbers, which are some of the things that are growing in our garden right now. Just my luck that those are some of my favorite fruits and vegetables. I've never had a great liking for most of the typical winter veggies like cabbage, turnips, and broccoli. But if we want to be self-sufficient in our produce needs, I am going to have to learn to like these things. Likewise, we are going to have to learn to go without our favorite fresh summer produce in the colder months. <br /><br />We are going to voluntarily refrain from the urge to get tomatoes in the dead of Georgia winter. We have given much thought and consideration to long term produce storage, and have been buying seeds of varieties that keep well. We are also planning on buying a pressure canner, and we have a chest freezer and dehydrator as well. We are planning on setting up a root "cellar" in the garage or somewhere in the house. The fact is, though, that we are just going to have to accept that we won't be able to have fresh, straight-from-the-backyard tomato basil soup all year round.<br /><div align = 'center'><img src='http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee166/junkm4le/blog_images/stevia_cartoon_wide.jpg' alt='Filler image - stevia'/></div><br />Last week, Harmony and I recognized that God might be using our desire for a sustaining garden to teach us a lesson in submission. There are seasons in life where we want this... or we want that... or feel like we really need this. I <i>want</i> red juicy tomatoes and sweet red bell peppers all year round, but cannot have them. We hope that our garden will produce enough so that we will have plenty of vegetables to can and freeze. But we can't be certain. We hope the Lord will bless our harvest abundantly, but He might not. Perhaps God wants us to eat lots of cabbage, turnips, and winter squash this year. <br /><br />Before we got married, we had our own plans for what life would be like right now. In some variety of our plans, I wouldn't have time to be writing this blog post because I'd be chasing a toddler around, with possibly another baby on the way. In another variety, I might be catching up on sleep lost from midnight care of a few-month-old infant (<a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/06/sad-news.html" title="Thou and Thou Only - Sad News" target="new">read about what could have been</a>). This is not the way life has gone for us though; in fact, sometimes it seems like the children are being given to everyone except us. Countless times have we prayed for God to give us the blessing of children, but almost always accompanying those prayers are prayers for God to help us be willing to submit to His (possibly contrary) will.<br /><br /><div class="pullquote"><span class="curly">“</span>We will submit to His will, so cabbage, turnips, and winter squash will comprise a large part of our spiritual diet.<span class="curly">”</span></div>And so figuratively, our life harvest has not gone according to our desires. We wanted a proverbial bumper crop of juicy tomatoes, sugary sweet peppers, and light butter beans. The Lord gave us none, or perhaps what we received were vegetables that looked good initially, but spoiled very quickly (i.e. the joy of the positive pregnancy test, the crushing blow of miscarriage). We will submit to His will, so cabbage, turnips, and winter squash will comprise a large part of our spiritual diet. We will work to get the most enjoyment out of what are not our first choices when it comes to produce. We'll work to submit to His perfect will and find peace in those times when God just says "No," for His own perfect reasons.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-41456677572375595962008-04-17T08:06:00.001-04:002008-04-17T08:08:21.915-04:00Striving Not To Be BusyRod Dreher over at Crunchy Con writes about <a href="http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2008/04/hitting-the-wall.html" title="Crunchy Con - Hitting the Wall" target="newwindow">how stress is taking its toll</a> on his family. He talks about how even though their economic situation is sound and their lives relatively uncomplicated, his 33 year old wife has developed shingles. Shingles usually strikes older people, although in younger people, a prime culprit can be stress.<br /><br />In particular, here's a portion that I found interesting. He speaks of a friend's friend's friend's friend (or something like that) who had won an incentive trip to the Caribbean, with other hard working people in her division:<br /><blockquote>The friend came back startled and even shaken by her encounter with workers in their 20s and 30s. All they could talk about was work. All they wanted to do was work. <u>Their whole lives were built around the office, and career achievement, and working more hours to achieve more success at the office.</u> And my friend's friend, who was in her late 40s, thought these young people were crazy.</blockquote> (The emphasis is mine)<br /><br />To me, that is a most unfortunate state of affairs. Perhaps if these people did not have families, this might be acceptable, somewhere in the universe. But if these people have families, their priorities are messed up. I am largely preaching to the choir here, I believe.<br /><br />I despise being busy. It stresses me out, and I don't like stress (who does?). I make a concerted effort <i>not</i> to be busy. Others might be in a different season of life than us, but I love that we are in a situation where Harmony can be a housewife. It's less stress for both of us. On a typical afternoon/evening after work, I get home, we eat dinner, then we usually go outside together and talk about the garden, talk about her day (not much interesting stuff in my days, usually), talk about the dog, talk about life, etc. We'll end up back inside, where we don't do much. Sometimes we'll take a walk, go to the park, or take Luna to the dog park, but for the most part, we stay home. And we like it that way.<br /><br /><aside><br />I have noticed the trend in commercials to appeal to busy people. More and more, I hear commercials on the radio saying "If you're as busy as I am, you don't have time to X and Y, that's why Z is <i>quick and easy!</i>"<br /></aside><br /><br />I always found it a bit backward that while the most important earthly relationship is between husband and wife, typically the husband, wife, or both see their co-workers for longer periods of time each day. Don't you think that's backward too? Something's a bit inside-out about that, and unfortunately, my job is not one where I can telecommute. So this un-busy life we try to lead is one that, in a way, tries to compensate for the inside-outness. I imagine this feeling will only be strengthened when we have children.<br /><br />I don't participate in any extracurricular activities at work. I'm not saying that it's wrong to be involved, but for myself and my family, it's not what we want right now. There are more important things and people in life than the leadership association or the quilting club. I don't really hang out with "the guys" or "the buddies" much, because 1) I have not really kept up with college friends, and 2) it's just more time away from my wife, unless she can come too. In the very early days of this blog, I wrote a post about <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/01/for-lack-of-ambition.html" title="Thou and Thou Only - For Lack of Ambition" target="newwindow2">lacking worldly ambition</a>.<br /><br />Of course, we make exceptions for church. We try to be at most church events, and we have somewhat made it a rule that if someone invites us out to lunch, we'll go. But I have been in a church which seemed to imply that idle time was SATAN's time. We had activities almost every day of the week. Many of these were officially voluntary, but if your attendance was inconsistent, someone would eventually question your commitment to God. The high level of stuff-to-do was fine for a single college student, but times have changed. I would have none of that now.<br /><br />Does all this make us seem homebody-ish? Good, it should. I don't see what's wrong with being a homebody, if you define it as "a person who prefers pleasures and activities that center around the home." That's what we are striving for.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-21440963955053711072007-12-05T08:19:00.000-05:002007-12-05T08:20:04.037-05:00Providing Semi-Neutral Raw Diet UpdatesAs subtly indicated in the <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/12/beginning-of-lunas-raw-diet.html" target="enwwinwdow">previous post</a>, we are starting Luna on a raw diet. In doing our research, we found that many raw feeding websites tended to be slightly cultic in their support for raw diets.<br /><br />We wanted to examine personal testimonials of people who had had good and bad experiences with raw feeding. There was an overwhelming amount of good personal testimonials, compared to very few bad testimonials. This means one of the following:<br /><ol><br /><li>Raw feeding is really really really good for dogs.</li><br /><li>Raw feeding brainwashes people; they praise it no matter how bad it is.</li><br /><li>The economy will thrash about in death throes (<span style="font-size:85%;">think Jabba meets Leia's chain, or a fish out of water</span>) if Hillary is elected.</li><br /><li>Raw feeders with bad experiences don't often post their experiences on the internet.</li></ol><br />Or maybe none of those. Perhaps in their fervent support for raw feeding, raw feeders are willing to overlook a few negative effects here and there (if any). Similarly, if you really really really like Giuliani for 2008, you are willing to overlook his somewhat abysmal marital record.<br /><br />At the moment, I tentatively plan to provide both positive and/or negative changes to Luna's health when we make the complete switch to raw feeding (currently we still have a dry/wet mix of Merrick brand that we're feeding her for dinner). The fact that we are feeding her raw meat twice a day indicates that we are already pro-raw, and thus, not completely neutral (hence the "semi-" in the title). However, in the interest of being as truthful as possible, we will post any negative changes as well.<br /><br />It seems to me that raw diets are safe, but of course, not <i>totally</i> safe. <b>No</b> diet is totally safe. Are you vegetarian because you fear meat-based food poisoning? You are, in fact, not totally safe, because bacteria can still accumulate on vegetables (remember the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_North_American_E._coli_outbreak" target="newinwodw1">spinach recalls in 2006?</a>). Or for any kibble junkies, remember the massive <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_pet_food_recalls" target="newinwdow2">pet food recalls of 2007</a>? You are not totally safe with big brand name kibble either. It's not a salvation issue, so do what you think is right for your family/dog. But don't violate your conscience and feed raw when you "know" you should feed kibble, or feed kibble when you "know" you should feed raw.<br /><br />"So how is Luna doing so far?" you ask. Well, it might just be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_bias">cognitive bias</a> on our part, and it might be <i>way</i> too soon to see results, but Harmony and I think that her coat feels a bit softer. She definitely has smaller and less frequent poop, although she seems like she's straining a lot to get it out. According to websites, the "smaller and less frequent" means that more stuff is being absorbed, but what about the straining? She sort of seems constipated. If any fellow raw feeders have any input, please provide.<br /><br />As for negatives: the only thing I have noticed is that she seems to be much more hungry, or is just more vocal about it. I believe the current schedule for Luna is 0.25 pounds of raw meat a day, although I sort of forgot how we arrived at that figure. Judging by feeling her ribs, she seems to be at about the right weight.<br /><br />Here are some other things that we will be looking for in the future:<br /><ul><li>Continued good breath and teeth (Luna hadn't developed problems with these yet, so hopefully they will stay away).</li><br /><li>Poop that breaks down (biodegrades) quickly and has less odor. So far, we've observed neither.</li><br /><li>Less ear itching</li></ul>JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-20983555200792670662007-11-06T10:09:00.000-05:002007-11-06T10:10:02.860-05:00Version 5.0I've been wanting to write <i>something</i> about my feelings about recent events. So far I've gone through about three or four different posts, none of which I ended up publishing, because they sounded too whiny, too bitter, or too both.<br /><br />For those with children, please do me a favor and thank God that you have them.<br /><br />Among the conservative homeschooling Christian blogosphere, there's lots of talk about "letting God control family size." Usually this applies to the upper limit, but I hardly hear about the lower limit: letting God control family size, even if it means none. This is something that we are praying that God will prepare us for (that's probably a horrible sentence, grammatically).<br /><br />It might seem to you as if we are jumping the gun; after all, we've "only" had two consecutive miscarriages, and the obstetricians seem to be nonplussed about our situation. We have heard of women who had 2+ miscarriages at first, then went on to have children. But there's no guarantee that that will happen to us. God has His ways, and they are quite above our ways. Perhaps He has a reason why we're going through this; perhaps not. It's pointless to ponder, impossible to know for sure, and not our place to question it.<br /><br />So if you would, please pray for us, that we would have ourselves decrease, and have Christ increase. That we would surrender ourselves to God's will, and be content with whatever family God will give us, whether it's a happy home full of 10 biological children, or a happy home full of adopted children (human or furry variety). Or whatever other variations there are.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-73164367588708018782007-06-28T17:33:00.002-04:002008-05-14T15:31:53.265-04:00On HeadcoveringI was reading the comment section to an article my dad <a href="http://preachermike.com/2007/06/26/stackhouses-paradigm">linked</a>. I was struck by one of the comments, and would have responded there except that I doubt the original commenter would ever read my response (the comments on that blog have since moved to another post) -- and my response would have been entirely too long. It simply reminded me of an attitude I see in church these days that bothers me. Her comment was as follows:<br /><blockquote>The command for silence for all time is problematic, but maybe not as much as the command for women to wear head coverings for all time when the church is gathered.</blockquote> It is my opinion that the prejudice women today have against wearing a head covering is entirely unfounded. And, yes, I am well aware that I am about to open a can of worms... but I really do believe that most of society (and especially Christians) today are making a big fuss over nothing. Let me explain.<br /><br /><span style="width: 200px; float: right; text-align: center; border-top: 1px solid #000066; border-bottom: 1px solid #000066; background: #DEDED9; padding: 10px; margin: 5px 0 5px 5px;">The cultural argument has been way overdone.</span>The passage referred to above is from <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20cor%2011:3-16;&version=31;">1 Corinthians 11:3-16</a>. Verse 5 is the first one that mentions women and head coverings, and it reads as follows: "And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved."<br /><br />The 'head' spoken of in that verse is explained in verse 3: "<span class="sup" id="en-NIV-28588"></span>Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God." So the 'head' is man. Perhaps this refers to her husband, or men in general. I do not know. But the gist of verse 5 is that if a woman prays or prophesies with her head uncovered, she dishonors men.<br /><br />(It should be well noted that women these days spend prodigious amounts of time dishonoring men. Therefore, deciding not to keep this passage amounts to just another drop in the bucket. If women will not honor their husbands in general, they are only hypocrites if they choose to keep this passage.)<br /><br />The cultural argument has been way overdone. I'm not going to go into it here (although I personally do not believe Paul was motivated by culture when he wrote this) because I think the vast majority of women only <span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">use</span> the cultural argument to get out of obeying a scripture they find overwhelming or offensive. I know that's what I did for a long time, until I actually decided to check out the cultural argument myself. But did you catch what the passage actually says? This is not an Islam-esque command to wear a burkha around all the time. Paul says that women should wear a head covering when they <span style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-STYLE: italic">pray or prophesy</span>. Now for all the Christian women out there, when was the last time you prophesied? Some Christians do believe that prophesy is still alive and well in the Church, so perhaps there are some. But the majority of us have never prophesied. So that just leaves one instance where Paul says to wear a covering: when you pray. You see, this isn't even a command that extends through the entire worship service. In fact, some might even contend that it doesn't even <span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">apply</span> to the worship service.<br /><br />Why might someone say that, you ask? Let me explain further. Paul begins 1 Corinthians by addressing problems in the church. And up through the beginning of chapter 11, he is speaking of issues not specifically related to worship. First he spoke of divisions (perhaps relating to worship, but more just dealing with squabbling brethren), then about sin in the church with the immoral brother, then about lawsuits and sexual immorality, marriage and divorce, eating food sacrificed to idols, and then finally we hit chapter 11 and the discussion of head coverings. Then, in the middle of chapter 11, Paul turns towards the assembly when he says, "<span class="sup" id="en-NIV-28602"></span>In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your meetings do more harm than good." (ch. 11 v. 17) He then proceeds to speak about the Lord's Supper, spiritual gifts, and orderly worship.<br /><br />Another argument might be that in chapter 14, Paul gives instruction for women to remain silent in the churches (ch. 14 v. 34). Some would say that this instruction includes prayer and prophesy. Others would contend that there was an exception given for women who wore head coverings. Personally, I do not think there were exceptions given, based on the instruction Paul gave to certain Christians who had the gift of prophesy: <blockquote>Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. <span class="sup" id="en-NIV-28693"></span>And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the<span style="FONT-STYLE: italic"> first speaker should stop</span>. <span class="sup" id="en-NIV-28694"></span>For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged. <span class="sup" id="en-NIV-28695"></span><span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">The spirits of prophets are subject to the control of prophets</span>. (ch. 14 v. 29-32, emphasis mine - obviously)</blockquote>It seems to me that just because God reveals a prophesy to you does not mean that you had to share that prophesy in the assembly. Therefore, it could be consistent to have a woman with the gift of prophesy (which we know to be true, since <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=51&chapter=21&verse=7&end_verse=9&version=31&context=context">Philip's daughters were prophetesses</a>) who never prophesied during the assembly. This, to me, is the most consistent reading of the passages. Now, that is not to say that the directives in the beginning of chapter 11 do not apply to the worship setting -- just that the context does not <span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">force</span> that meaning.<br /><br />Regardless, in most conservative Christian churches today, women neither pray nor prophesy out loud. So the question remains, does the passage in chapter 11 refer to listening to a prayer or prophesy, or does it mean when a woman prays or prophesies herself?<br /><br />This is much more difficult to discern, IMO. I do not profess (haha) to have the answer to this, but it is my opinion that Paul was speaking of when a woman prays or prophesies herself, not when she is listening to someone else pray or prophesy. I think that at the very least, the passage surely includes when a woman is praying or prophesying herself -- meaning when she is at home -- but it could very well include listening to prayers as well. Feel free to study this for yourself and draw your own conclusions. Then tell them to me, please. My mind is far from made up on that point.<br /><br />So maybe some of you are saying at this point, "Wow, I never thought of it that way. It's not so bad as I thought!" That was my reaction to my study of the subject, so maybe there will be some of you who think like I do. :) My instinct, though, is that many of you will still think that the passage is 'unfair' to women. And for those who feel this way, let me analyze another portion of that same passage for you.<br /><br />Did you know that 1 Corinthians 11 is even stricter with men than with women? I know, the ONLY time you ever hear this verse read, it is talking about women -- 95% of the time used to refute 1 Corinthians 14, an argument which has always annoyed me -- but the truth is that Paul gives just as strict a command to men as he does to women. In fact, he tells men that if they do not remove any covering from their heads when they pray and prophesy, they dishonor <span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">Christ</span> (ch. 11 v.3-4). Now, I know it is a bad thing to dishonor my husband, but think of just how much more severe it is to dishonor Christ.<br /><br />Some Christians believe that hair is sufficient covering for a woman. If a woman can call hair a covering, why can't a man? And Paul clearly states that "Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head." So if this is true, every Christian man must shave his head before praying or prophesying -- and personally, I would consider that to be a <span style="FONT-STYLE: italic">much</span> harsher teaching than simply saying that women must wear something on their heads when they pray. I think as women we have it pretty easy. We run the risk of dishonoring men -- men run the risk of dishonoring Christ.<br /><br />I know I wouldn't say anything about culture, but I just can't help it. Did you know that in the time of the NT writings, Jewish men wore head coverings when they worshiped? Why do you think Jewish men today wear a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kippah">yarmulka</a>? It seems obvious to me that Paul was giving a new, Christian, instruction rather than forcing Jewish custom down the Gentile's throats (Besides, where else in the NT do you see Paul making Gentiles become more Jewish? Wasn't his entire ministry focused on refuting the Judaizers?). Here's a quote for you: <blockquote>As to the obligation of wearing a yarmulke, halakhic experts agree that it is a custom. The prevailing view among Rabbinical authorities is that this custom has taken on a kind of force of law (Shulkhan Arukh, Orach Chayim 2:6), because it is an act of <i>Kiddush Ha-Shem</i>, "Sanctifying the Holy Name". From a strictly talmudic point of view, however, the only moment when a Jewish man is required to cover his head is during prayer (Mishne Torah, Ahavah, Hilkhot Tefilah 5:5)</blockquote><br />The Mishne part of the Talmud was written in about 200 AD, and I think it well reflects the customs of the time of Christ and the early church.Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-5706351214884476502007-06-26T08:26:00.000-04:002007-06-26T08:26:07.419-04:00Oaths and VowsOaths are not a rare thing in this day and age. Government officials take oaths of office, and many times among children, you will hear phrases like "I swear to God it's true!" <br /><br />However, it is my personal conviction that oaths are not something that Christians should consider lightly, if even at all. The only reason I give ground regarding oaths is because Paul possibly swears an oath in <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Corinthians%2011:31;&version=9;49;47;" target="newwindow">2 Corinthians 11:31</a> and <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=galatians;&version=9;49;47;" target="newwindow">Galatians 1:20</a>. I do not believe that Paul's two instances of swearing give Christians the freedom to go around swearing oaths freely, given other instances where the Bible says not to swear oaths (<a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%205:33-37;&version=9;49;47;" target="newwindow">Matthew 5:33-37</a> and <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=james%205:12;&version=9;49;47;" target="newwindow">James 5:12</a>)<br /><br />I've been thinking about the practice of renewing marriage/wedding vows. If I'm not mistaken, I have known people who renewed their vows after less than 4 years of marriage. I do not claim to know what was going on in their life, but things seemed fine on the outside. <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/05/standard-disclaimer.html" target="newindow2">Standard Disclaimer</a> applies. As I stated before, I do not believe oaths and vows are something Christians should take lightly. I personally believe it is a frivolous, unnecessary, and possibly unGodly gesture to renew vows when things are going perfectly fine in a marriage. Would we ever renew vows? At this instant in our lives, we are leaning towards "no." I know that we've only been married for a grand total of about two seconds compared to some readers, but we do not take oaths or vows lightly. We meant what we said. This is not to condemn any who have renewed vows; who knows, we might change <i>our</i> minds after 30 years. <br /><br />All that said, when we have children, we will <u>strongly</u> instruct them that they are <u>never</u> to say things like "I swear to God this/that!" 1) The child is likely swearing a needless oath, and 2) Swearing in God's name is not something to be taken lightly. I also have some problems with corrupt or non-religious government officials swearing on the Bible when taking an oath of office. (Do they have any idea of the gravity of what they are really doing??) If they are not going to uphold Christian virtues and not going to conform to Christ's image while in office, they should not swear on the Word of God. That, too, is what I believe to be a frivolous swearing of oath.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-10046742212914798632007-06-24T16:39:00.000-04:002007-06-24T16:39:20.881-04:00Sad NewsRecent lack of posts can be attributed to sad news and busy circumstances. Tuesday, June 19<sup>th</sup>, Harmony had a miscarriage. She had been 6 weeks pregnant with our baby at that point. There were lots of tears, and frustration on my part, due to my lack of ability to "do" something to "fix" this problem (since, you know, that's how we men deal with things). We had a slew of pregnancy posts queued up, but those will have to wait. Thankfully, the miscarriage went as "well" as possible, with no surgery necessary (so far). We also learned that she is Rh negative, and she has since received the proper <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhogam" target="newwindw">Rhogam</a> shot within 72 hours of the miscarriage. Please pray for us; for recovery of all kinds, and that miscarriages would not be a frequent visitor, as they have been in other females from Harmony's father's side (they very well could be due to the Rh factor, but no definitive tests were ever done on those women).<br /><br />We had told much of our family about the pregnancy, and various people from our church and certain parents' churches had also known. Due to various circumstances, we have not had a chance to attend our church for a few consecutive services now, so no one there knows. We'll have to explain to them, which I'm not looking forward to.<br /><br />When it rains it certainly does pour. Tuesday was also the day that my family was coming to stay with us until Saturday. The occasion was for Harmony's little sister's wedding, which took place Saturday (and now she is merrily married yay happy). <br /><br />We attended church with Harmony's parents today. Harmony and I somehow ended up talking to some random married man. Through whatever conversational means, we somehow let out that we wanted to start a family whenever God would give us one (a.k.a. no contraception). The guy, a regular expert on life in general, said "oh okay" and then started to nicely explain to us how THE best way is to wait two years or so, because (of course) we need to get to know each other, and because once the pesky kids come along, it's all over from there (keep in mind our recent situation). It's not verbatim, but that's what we took away from the exchange. Neither of us said anything back to this fella, Harmony because she was afraid she'd start crying again, and me because part of Psalm 4 instructs us, "In your anger, do not sin." Allowing my mouth open after what this man said would've been sin on my part. He was not privy to our recent situation.<br /><br />Why must people be so presumptuous when they find out that some people just want to start families right away? Harmony and I want to start a family because we want to start a family. It is our personal conviction that we are not going to use contraceptives. We are not starting a family because the Bible says we must start a family ASAP. I am aware that the Bible says children are a blessing; I am not aware of any command, example, or necessary inference where people are given commands to have children right away. Absent any Biblical command in either direction, we do not try to force our no-contraception views on others who do not illicit our opinions on the matter.<br /><br />We are aware of several other recent incidents of people sticking their noses into other people's family decisions: OB/GYN offices giving unsolicited commentary on why hormonal birth control is the only acceptable form of birth control; strangers suggesting that the government forcefully sterilize a couple who has more than three children; someone (not a doctor) suggesting that a lady who had a recent miscarriage should wait X number of months/years before having another pregnancy, etc.<br /><br />If there's one thing Harmony and I have learned from this and other <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2006/11/our-turbulent-engagement-part-1.html">life experiences</a>, it is that people should be careful when they give advice on personal matters. More often than not, you offend instead of encourage. One size almost never fits all.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-87229905262272250732007-06-04T08:18:00.000-04:002007-06-04T08:25:03.028-04:00There's Always Someone More ConservativeRecently, we were actually able to eat something from the small container garden that Harmony has been cultivating over the past number of months. It got me thinking more about this <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/03/upward-spiral.html" target="newwindow">upward spiral</a> that perhaps we are on. I got to thinking that no matter how conservative/traditional we eventually get, there will probably always be someone who's more conservative/traditional. BTW, I wield the word "conservative" in the pure dictionary sense of the word, not the political one.<br /><br />Food-wise, we're nowhere close to being extreme, in our eyes. We still eat stuff that has preservatives in it, although we try to avoid it if at all possible. Although we are rather gung-ho about avoiding <a href="http://thou-and-thou-only.blogspot.com/2007/02/we-care-about-trans-fats.html" target="newwindow">trans fats</a>, every now and then we will cheat a bit and eat little bits of our wedding-cake-which-we-were-not-supposed-to-eat-yet. Also, sometimes we are presented with little choice but to eat shortening-laden food at either grandmother's house. As long as there are (crazy?) organic eating vegans out there, we will be nowhere near extreme. We do not grow all our own food either, although we hope to have sustainable crops of tomatoes, red bell peppers, and other vegetables which are relatively expensive but oh-so-good.<br /><br />Church-wise, we attend a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_christ" target="newwindow">church of Christ</a>, so some would probably consider us extreme. Especially liberal Protestants or other churches which (to me) hardly even resemble Christian churches. <br /><br /><blockquote>At this time I'd like to take a little detour into the subcategory of music in church. Churches of Christ are sometimes known for adhering to a cappella worship. Conservative as this may be, there are some who go as far as saying that <i>unison</i> (as opposed to harmony) a cappella singing is the only way to go. Admittedly, I don't know of many churches that do this these days, except for the Amish. Somewhat of a side note: Did you know that 20th century martyr and Lutheran theologian <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietrich_Bonhoeffer" target="newwindow2">Dietrich Bonhoeffer</a> advocated <a href="http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=2737&C=2488" target="newwindow3">unison singing</a>? (that page is not just about his opinion on unison singing...search for "unison" for the relevant part) While my preference is for harmony (Harmony, haha), I can understand how someone would feel negatively about harmony in worship. If someone in my congregation were to raise this issue, I would have little problem with accommodating my brother/sister in Christ, in the manner of <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2014&version=47;9;49" target="newwindow4">Romans 14:13-19</a>.</blockquote><br />As long as there are Amish communities, and as long as there are monasteries, there will always be people more conservative than us. Although we hold to the mindset that this world is not our home, the aforementioned groups seem to take that a step further and withdraw from the world as much as possible. <br /><!--Now for church things other than music, specifically soteriology, or the study of salvation. I do not believe that all will go to heaven, and I suppose that would get me labeled "conservative" or "fundamentalist." I also do not believe that one will go to heaven if he lives his life in whatever way he chooses. Would that not be a dishonor to the example that Jesus set? I suppose the past couple of sentences would have me labeled "Arminian." I believe that the right place between predestination and free will is somewhere in the middle. The Bible mentions predestination and "God's elect," but it also mentions how people can fall away from grace. -->JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-20893308034361367672007-05-09T08:31:00.002-04:002008-04-14T13:11:43.968-04:00Christian Duty to Vote?I've been thinking about the title phrase lately. Is it a Christian's duty to vote?<br /><br />One might think that no candidate best embodies whole Christian virtues. The Christian who is convinced of his mandatory suffrage would vote for the lesser of two evils. However, I am not convinced of mandatory suffrage lest-ye-be-cast-into-the-eternal-flame. I do not believe the Constitution says that U.S. citizens MUST vote; they have the <i>right</i> to vote. A right does not necessarily have to be exercised.<br /><br /><span style="width: 200px; float: right; text-align: center; border-top: 1px solid #000066; border-bottom: 1px solid #000066; background: #DEDED9; padding: 10px; margin: 5px 0 5px 5px;">I do not condemn other Christians for voting for who they believe is best.</span>When you vote for a political candidate, you vote for his platform. There are some things on his platform with which you might not agree. If you vote for him in spite of these things, is this not compromising your beliefs? In some areas, a compromise might be fine. But there are other clear cut areas where I will not compromise my Bible-derived beliefs.<br /><br />Googling for the phrases "<a href="http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&q=christian+vote+lesser+evil" target="newwindow">Christian vote lesser evil</a>" and "<a href="http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&q=christian+duty+to+vote" target="newwindow2">Christian duty to vote</a>" return lots of results. You will find writers on both sides of the issue. Some go as far as saying it is <a href="http://www.floridabaptistwitness.com/6304.article" target="newwindow3">sinful for a Christian not to vote</a>. If you're going to make a strong statement like that, you need to have a very strong scriptural case, which I believe this guy does NOT have.<br /><br />I found what I perceive to be a good argument in favor of abstaining suffrage <a href="http://www.giveshare.org/BibleStudy/081.voting.html" target="newwindow4">here</a>. I'll quote the section here, because I think the author states it well. I have added emphasis myself, as well as links (because I'm nice).<br /><blockquote><i>Those that are in Christ are supposed to be a new creation, not part of this world’s system. "Now then we are ambassadors for Christ," <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20corinthians%205;&version=49;" target="newwindow5">II Corinthians 5:17-20</a>. The analogy is given that we are just like a nation’s ambassador. How valid is this analogy?<br /><br />The United States ambassador to Moscow is not a communist. He does not regard the U.S.S.R. as his government, because it is mortally opposed to his government. The Ambassador does not enter Soviet politics nor attempt to mitigate the evils in its system. He doesn’t vote in Soviet elections nor join its army to fight for its cause. Nor is he allowed to do these things. Yet the American ambassador is subject to, and must abide by, Russian laws and rules.<br /><br />This analogy is almost, but not entirely, the same as a true believer in his native country. Wherever you live, your government is basically against the Bible and those who follow it. You are to be an ambassador, a government representative, of the Messianic Kingdom. No man can serve two masters, two opposing government systems, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%206;&version=49;" target="newwindow7">Matthew 6:33, 24</a>. The Messianic Kingdom is diametrically opposed to the Babylonish governments of this world. </i><b><u>Our spiritual citizenship is reserved in Heaven</u></b><i>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20peter%201;&version=49;" target="newwindow8">I Peter 1:4</a>, <a href="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%202;&version=49;" target="newwindow9">Ephesians 2:19</a>.<br /><br />BUT, we are, in effect, also physical citizens of our respective countries as well. And, under the laws of Western democracies, we have the right to vote. The American ambassador to Moscow doesn’t have the right to vote in Soviet elections.<br /><br />We have other rights, such as the right to appeal to the courts for redress of wrongs. As followers of the Messiah, we may carefully and under the right circumstances, exercise these rights. As we have seen, Paul exercised his rights as a Roman citizen when he was personally affected in an important matter.</i></blockquote><br />I have not yet exercised my right to vote. I don't know if I ever will. Perhaps I will exercise it in referendums where there is a clear right and wrong. When you vote for a political candidate, you vote for his package of political beliefs; in a referendum, it's sort of a la carte. So what am I to do in the mean time? Pray. I pray and I try to increase my faith that God hears my prayers for this world and considers them.<br /><br />I leave with this; I do <b><u>not</u></b> believe the Bible says "Thou shalt vote," nor do I believe there are enough smatterings of "Thou shalt vote"-like teachings in the Bible for me to conclude that, in fact, "Thou shalt vote." In other words, I believe it to be a Biblically disputable matter. Thus, although my presence at the voting booth will be rare, I do <b><u>not</u></b> condemn other Christians for voting for who they believe is best. I'm not totally convinced on the matter, although I lean very heavily towards not voting...if a fellow Christian has a good case for why I should vote, let's retire to the comment page and discuss it over tea. I like green tea with brown rice, with nothing else added, thank you.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">P.S. - Call me a shallow voter, fundamentalist, or woman hater, but abortion is the make-or-break issue for me. I never intend to vote for anyone who is pro-abortion, no matter how good their platform is.</span>JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-42639867531447179542007-05-01T07:44:00.001-04:002007-05-01T07:44:43.221-04:00Normal To ThemYesterday, Harmony made popcorn. By this, I (of course!) do <i>not</i> mean microwave variety. We're talking canola oil in the pot, pure kernels, pure adrenaline. After the kernels finished popping, we drizzled some melted Smart Balance butter over it. I made a comment that this popcorn tasted just as good as the "normal" kind. As the words came out, I got to thinking that this <i>was</i> normal popcorn, and that the other stuff was unnatural. <br /><br /><aside><br /><i>Microwave popcorn is EXTREMELY horrible for you. If you value your arteries, you should really re-consider buying that box of microwave popcorn. Look at the trans fat count, and also consider that the inside of the bags are lined with Teflon, to prevent sticking (I forward your questions to my wife, who is a Bachelorette of Science in polymer engineering).</i><br /></aside><br /><br />Anyways, this all got me thinking about what I want my kids to consider "normal" while they're growing up. The only place I ever saw stovetop popcorn was in one old Calvin and Hobbes comic (something about making it with no cover on the pot). I want my kids to consider the following things "normal," and in most cases, their corresponding counterparts "abnormal."<br /><br /><ul><li>Stovetop popcorn</li><br /><li>Homemade cookies, from scratch and not from-a-tube (= trans fats)</li><br /><li>Unsocialized (unsocialistic) homeschooling</li><br /><li>A teacher to student ratio of 1 to (however many kids we have)</li><br /><li>Principal kissing the teacher? What's scandalous about that?</li><br /><li>Never using chemical pesticides in the vegetable garden</li><br /><li>Using biological or otherwise natural pest control in the vegetable garden</li><br /><li>Having a mom and dad who don't look like each other, aside from dad being vaguely Homo sapien (this counterpart is not necessarily abnormal)</li><br /><li>Having a mom and dad who actually seem to enjoy each other's company (this is somewhat uncommon among the previous generation of Korean parents)</li><br /><li>Hymns in a cappella 4 part harmony</li><br /><li>Staying in church service with your parents, as far back as you can remember being in church</li></ul>JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-33264256433833724252007-04-22T20:10:00.000-04:002007-04-22T20:51:06.469-04:00ChoicesToday on the way home from church, JM and I were listening to some talk radio show. This is unusual for us. On Sundays we typically listen to a CD of a cappella hymns, partly because there are no radio shows we're particularly interested in, and partly because we just like listening to the hymns. But today we were taking my car to church, and my car is a DX model -- crank windows, power nothing, and no tape or CD player. Ergo, we listened to the radio. I have no idea what show we were listening to; I was only listening with half an ear. But right before the end of the program a caller called in and said something very memorable:<br /><br />"To the lady who says that in today's society women *have* to work: There's only one thing in this life that we *have* to do, and that's die. Everything else is a choice."<br /><br />The host made some comment about how you have to pay taxes, too, and the caller replied, "No, you can *choose* not to pay taxes, and then face the consequence of your *choice* by spending a few years in prison."<br /><br />And, you know, I think that for the most part that's a good summary of our lives. Some things, such as a freak accident or a chronic illness, are not the result of our choices. Other life events are inherited from our parents. But I think that for the most part our circumstances are the product of our choices. For example: your house is destroyed in a terrible hurricane and you lose everything you own. But you *chose* to live on the coast of Florida. You suffer from diabetes, but you did not watch what you ate and you refused to exercise like you should have. You are retired and alone, struggling to make ends meet on social security and medicare, but you never took the time to foster a real relationship with your children who could have taken care of you in your old age. You and your spouse combined barely make enough money to get by -- but you pay $100 a month for cable, eat convenience foods constantly, pay through the nose for the best daycare for your children, and are deep in debt from your student loans, expensive cars, and house with rooms no one ever goes in. Your car broke down, but you made the choice not to get the scheduled maintenance -- or: your car runs fine, but you have no money left in your checking account after paying for the 120,000 mile maintenance. What happens then if you get into a wreck and have to make repairs on the car?<br /><br />We have some friends who are in pretty big trouble financially. They were way behind in their bills, which were legion, and they ate out almost daily. BUT two or three weeks ago they made the choice to stop eating out, and to get back on track with their bills, and to stop spending money on video games and other unnecessary purchases. I talked with the wife the other day, and she was shocked at how much extra money they had in their checking account this month.<br /><br />JM and I made the choice to eat more organic and healthy foods, even though we're on a tight budget already. This means that we will not have as much extra money at the end of the month for paying down the principle on the student loan. We could pay off the loan right now, but it would completely wipe out all our savings. So we are making the choice to keep the debt and leave our emergency fund in tact. We'll see in about 5 years what the consequences of that choice were.<br /><br />My sister is getting married to a man who is currently getting his PhD in Mathematics. They won't get as much time together as they might have liked because they have decided that she will work to make ends meet -- but the end result will be (God-willing) a better future for them after he graduates. They could have taken out student loans and she could have gotten a part-time job, or not worked at all. Then they could have had more together time in the early months of their marriage, but more stress after his graduation.<br /><br />The point I'm trying to make is that our choices matter. No one *has* to do anything. So to the lady who says that in today's society women have to work to make ends meet: you work because you choose to, through one choice or another, and I know from personal experience and through the experiences of women across the country in situations much less "comfortable" than my own that it is all TOO possible for a woman to stay at home -- but only if she is willing to make the choices to *make* it possible.Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-70985845197500066392007-04-21T16:51:00.000-04:002008-12-09T17:10:19.428-05:00Fitting InEDIT: see bottom of post.<br /><br />We are very much looking forward to being weird homeschoolers who do not "socialize" our children. We are very much looking forward to having our children at home, sheltered from government intrusion and other people's "socialized" kids. Hahahaha!<br /><br />How many pointless fads and trends did I put my parents' money through when I was out being "socialized" in public and private schools? Looking back, none of the dumb trends amongst the children had any long term benefits. Now, I know that kids, being kids, will want many of these things, but how many of them could've been completely bypassed if I hadn't been surrounded with other conformlings?<br /><br />- In elementary school, I wanted to have cool shoes, because all the cool kids had cool shoes. Reebok pumps come to mind.<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/RiqG4Sk2RKI/AAAAAAAAAAw/NSRE6tFpQMk/s1600-h/pumps99.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/RiqG4Sk2RKI/AAAAAAAAAAw/NSRE6tFpQMk/s200/pumps99.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5056001833293989026" border="0" /></a><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/RiqIqyk2RMI/AAAAAAAAABA/ACj5HUujz0I/s1600-h/mypumps.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/RiqIqyk2RMI/AAAAAAAAABA/ACj5HUujz0I/s200/mypumps.jpg" target="newwindow" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5056003800389010626" /></a><br />- About 3rd or 4th grade, it was no longer cool to have a hard plastic lunch box. The cool thing was the have one of those soft foam zippered lunch boxes, with ice pack inside. Admittedly, they probably do insulate better.<br />- Around that same time, I had to have a Body Glove shirt, because those were cool. I'm sure someone else has got to remember the Body Glove trend. In the picture below, I was wearing my one article of Body Glove clothing.<br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/RiqCbyk2RJI/AAAAAAAAAAo/TUdjGMDEvho/s1600-h/body-glove-large.jpg"><img style="cursor: pointer;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/RiqCbyk2RJI/AAAAAAAAAAo/TUdjGMDEvho/s320/body-glove-large.jpg" alt="" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5055996945621206162" border="0" /></a><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/RiqH6yk2RLI/AAAAAAAAAA4/BS-0UjUZrNc/s1600-h/Clipboard02.jpg"><img style="cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;" src="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_avUUQxpy30o/RiqH6yk2RLI/AAAAAAAAAA4/BS-0UjUZrNc/s200/Clipboard02.jpg" border="0" alt=""id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5056002975755289778" /></a><br />- This didn't cost any money, but wearing your backpack over only one shoulder was cool. By college, most people figured out that it makes loads more sense to actually use both straps.<br /><br />Harmony's entries:<br />- I remember just HAVING to have a 'cool' TrapperKeeper in elementary school. It's what all the cool kids had!<br />- In high school, it was the 'thing' to bring your lunch in a brown paper bag. I remember my mom being very distressed about this: "But it's not reusable! If you just used your lunchbox, we wouldn't have to keep spending money on your lunchbag..."<br />- In middle school, I decided that to be cool I needed a cool backpack.<br />- And don't even get me started about the super-expensive back-to-school wardrobe that was a must every year. With $50 tennis shoes being essential.<br /><br />It would've been so much less stressful for both of us if we hadn't had to feel like we had to fit in with the cool kids. I suppose our detractors might blame our own insecurity for feeling like we had to fit in, and that they, being headstrong and individualistic, didn't care about what others thought. Well that's okay. But for the rest of us then-fragile people, it would've been a load off our collective back. If only I could go back in time and convince myself that it really, really, really doesn't matter.<br /><br />Of course homeschooling doesn't mean the end to all of children's problems. But from what I read, it is quite a way to avoid a lot of them.<br /><br />EDIT: I will add that these fads were made even sillier for me because I did not play basketball (Reebok pumps), nor was I a surfer (Body Glove).<br /><br />Anyone else have any fitting-in items to add?JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-62849137352099390332007-04-19T07:34:00.001-04:002007-04-19T07:51:23.142-04:00The Inevitable Religious FadIn the immediate days following disasters or tragedies, there is the inevitable religious fad. All of a sudden, it is okay for people to say the word "prayer" in public. All of a sudden, people are much more willing to hold hands or candles and sing religious songs. They're suddenly more willing to participate in a public prayer.<br /><br />Godless people or people who are otherwise areligious seem to be quite eager to do the churchy thing whenever tragedy strikes. Well, who can blame them? We are all created in the image of God and inside, we long for God. Unfortunately, there are probably many people who go to God only in times of despair. God brings both times of happiness and despair. It is not you, O pagan, who has masterfully crafted your own life which is now experiencing this thing called "happiness." It is not you, O pagan, who lavishly bestows blessings upon thine own life.<br /><br />Ecclesiastes 7:14<br /><blockquote><sup>14</sup>When times are good, be happy; but when times are bad, consider: God has made the one as well as the other. Therefore, a man cannot discover anything about his future.</blockquote><br /><br />Rather than making flower and teddy bear memorials, why not turn to God, go to church, and make a serious commitment? It's for life, and much less wasteful than leaving perfectly good teddy bears to get stinky and moldy from exposure to the elements. Spare the bears, please. I suppose if you want to do both, I can't stop you. If you must, you must.<br /><br />True Christianity should deliver a rude awakening to the fad follower; that is, there's a lot more expected of you than just paying your homage to "the Man upstairs" (BTW, I use that phrase only to let you know that I <i>can't stand</i> it). I believe it is disrespectful to treat God as if He only exists in times of sorrow, while otherwise living your life as you please. He is not solely a grief counselor for you to utilize at <i>your</i> pleasure in tough times. He's the Creator of this universe and the one who put that longing inside you in the first place.<br /><br />EDIT: I admit religious fads can have a good effect. Someone who would not have usually gone to church might start attending regularly and turn to God. This would be a Good Thing<sup>TM</sup>.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-80934997096212147652007-04-16T11:57:00.000-04:002007-04-16T12:17:39.126-04:00"We have no time to stand and stare"<center><p><i></i></p><p><i>What is this life if, full of care,</i></p><p><i>We have no time to stand and stare.</i></p><p>-- from "Leisure," by W.H. Davies</p><p style="text-align: left;">This was quoted in an article my sister recently sent me, entitled "<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040401721.html?hpid=topnews">Pearls Before Breakfast</a>," which was of course a reference to the Biblical phrase "pearls before swine." The article was about an experiment. People at the Washington Post set up the famous violinist Joshua Bell in a DC subway station and had him perform as a street musician. Almost no one paid any attention. When interviewed later, many of the people didn't even remember hearing a violinist, or if they did they didn't think it was anything special. What they didn't know is that they would typically have to pay $100+ for a seat at one of his concerts. Joshua Bell earns $1000 a minute, and he plays on one of the best Stradivarius violins in the world, made during the golden age of Antonio Stradivari (the 1710's). <br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">(as an aside: my sister got his autograph at a concert five years ago, and insists that SHE would have stopped to listen)<br /></p><p style="text-align: left;">But here is what I consider to be the most interesting part of the entire article: <blockquote>"There was no ethnic or demographic pattern to distinguish the people who stayed to watch Bell, or the ones who gave money, from that vast majority who hurried on past, unheeding. Whites, blacks and Asians, young and old, men and women, were represented in all three groups. But the behavior of one demographic remained absolutely consistent. Every single time a child walked past, he or she tried to stop and watch. And every single time, a parent scooted the kid away."<br /></blockquote>And again, on a similar note: <blockquote>"We're busy. Americans have been busy, as a people, since at least 1831, when a young French sociologist named Alexis de Tocqueville visited the States and found himself impressed, bemused and slightly dismayed at the degree to which people were driven, to the exclusion of everything else, by hard work and the accumulation of wealth."</blockquote></p><div style="text-align: left;">There are other questions posed in the article, such as "what is art" and "is True Art dependent on the setting," but I think the point is made clear with the little children -- they recognized the music as art, and they wanted to listen. The adults were too busy to care.<br /></div><p></p></center>Harmonyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15105846442509828835noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-6671060773242811652007-04-03T07:16:00.000-04:002007-04-03T10:16:05.949-04:00"Weird" With MoneyAnother way we are weird is with money issues. Apparently many couples groan whenever they think of the dreaded budget. But we are quite strange. Before we were married, before anyone ever told us to, we got on the computer and made out a rough budget. We both thought it was kind of <i>fun</i> to get all the spending organized and see how much we'd have to put in savings and pay off my student loan. We find it <i>fun</i> to tweak our budget and see how much more money we can squeeze out of somewhere and put it towards retirement savings or loans. We find it <i>fun</i> to shop around on the internet for the best value car insurance. Are we weird or what? I guess we'll have to get used to being called weird, considering future plans of breastfeeding, cloth diapering, co-sleeping, and homeschooling.<br /><br />Neither of us have any credit card debt. I remember my mom signed me up for a credit card (or maybe I told her that I needed to start building up credit) in 2003, while I was in my junior year of college. It was a no-frills Visa with a pretty low limit. The strange thing is that I don't ever remember either of my parents telling me not to spend more than I actually had. I don't remember them telling me to pay the balance off every month, although I'm sort of sure they did. Whatever the case, it didn't take much for that fact to stick in my head, and I've always paid down my credit card balance multiple times a month since then. I am extremely grateful that I have only ever had $0.10 of credit card debt (the charge was waived); if we had tons of debt, we would be very hard pressed to live like we do now (one income, wife staying at home).<br /><br /><aside><br />Some say that NO credit card usage is responsible, but I disagree. We use our Citi Dividend Platinum Select Mastercard for much of our everyday expenses. I believe our cashback rate for gas/groceries/drugstore purchases is still 5% (they haven't sent us notification saying it was going to go down yet). This builds up our credit score, gives us a small amount of cash back, and takes liability off of us in the event that someone sifts a card number (better to be a credit card number than a debit card number). Some say credit scores are unimportant, but many necessities involve looking at credit scores, such as job applications or car insurance. All that aside, if you have problems with overspending, then you should avoid credit cards.<br /></aside><br /><br />I am extremely grateful to my dad for getting me to start saving for my retirement this young. Back in 2004 he got on my case about starting a Roth IRA. I hear on the radio that many young people are not taking advantage of 401(k) plans and company matches! This does not make sense to me either. While I'm talking about parents, let me say that I am very grateful that they were constantly paying down my student loans while I was in school. In retrospect, going to a Florida school would've saved a lot of money. But I would never have met my wife, and no one would be able to stop me from choosing Georgia Tech again (and again and again), knowing what I know. <br /><br />Neither of us would've <i>dreamed</i> of going into debt over wedding expenses. But apparently it is not an uncommon thing. This totally makes no sense to me. If neither of our families were willing to help with wedding expenses, then we would've been completely happy just bringing the immediate families into town for a <20 people, <$500 wedding. Paying extravagant interest on an unnecessary 5 figure sum? If it wasn't going to happen without cash, it would not have happened.<br /><br />I suppose that if we were in dire straits, updating our budget wouldn't be the light-hearted experience that it currently is. Harmony and I are currently offering small amounts of assistance to some friends of our's who are in it way deeper than we are. They are 4 months pregnant with an unplanned "surprise" baby, and have gobs of debt. Comparing the take home pay to what's left after the bills...it doesn't look good right now, but Harmony and I are doing what we can to help. It feels nice to be helping someone, and we do hope that we can help turn their situation around. Perhaps God has blessed us with relatively sound financial minds so that we can help others.<br /><br />I really hope I haven't sounded too high and lofty in all this. But consumer debt just does not make a flicker of sense to us though.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-38828026068768550472007-03-10T15:25:00.000-05:002007-03-10T16:02:35.019-05:00Grocery Store Field TripsIt is a bit rare for me to have to go to the grocery store and not have to get home right away. So today, Saturday, when we wanted to buy a Sunday paper and some Swiss cheese, I decided to make a field trip of it. It's like going to the zoo. More on that in a minute.<br /><br />Before we get into any of that, let me say a few things. We generally try to avoid driving on Saturdays, due to what I refer to as "working mom" traffic. Although we live in the suburbs, we live in developing and expanding suburbs, and our subdivision is located near some busy roads. I posit that if there weren't so many working moms out there, there wouldn't be such immense traffic volume. Exceptions made for traditionally man-places like Home Depot and the like. Not that I blame them...if we were a two income couple, I'd never want to do errands on weekdays if I had to go home and cook dinner and then clean up. Hat's off to the two income couples. We don't know how you do it. Additional hat off (and gawking wide eyes) if you enjoy being busy so much.<br /><br />Luckily, we have a Publix within walking distance of our house. So in addition to avoiding working mom traffic, we got some exercise and Vitamin D from being out in sunlight. I wanted to see some of the convenience food items that Publix sold. I'd heard some rumors among the blogs, and I wanted to see with my own eyes. I also wanted to check out the health contents of these things.<br /><br />We did see some of the pre-packaged hot dogs in buns. They were part of one of those Lunchable-like packages. When you combined all the "food" items, the list of ingredients spanned the height of the package. The worst place was the baked goods aisle. Did you know they actually sell pre-shaped cookie dough now? As in, open the package and put them on the pan, no shaping necessary. This makes no sense to me. If you are busy busy busy and don't have time to make your own cookies, why not just buy Chips Ahoy? If you don't care at all about unhealthy food and don't have time, it really doesn't make sense for you to waste more time baking the pre-shaped cookies in the oven. You'd save that much time (and space in the dishwasher) if you just bought the ready-to-eat kind. The wife says it's because people want to pretend like they really are baking. And I suppose there is some sort of taste value to cookies fresh out of the oven. They do taste different, even if the dough is pre-made. Oh, they also had pre-stacked microwaveable pancakes. That's a new one.<br /><br />It was a bit embarrassing to pick up the convenience items. I thought people might think that we actually buy those sorts of things. I made sure to very conspicuously gawk at the ingredient list, lest people be fooled.<br /><br />When you go to the zoo, do you go in order to see the local wildlife? Do you go to the zoo to look at fire ants and common household spiders? You must admit that you do not go to the zoo really REALLY looking forward to the raccoons and rabbits. No, of course not...you go to the zoo because you want to see animals that you don't normally see. Things like lions, tigers, polar bears, and cassowaries and whatnot. So in a way, my going to the grocery store is like going to the zoo, because we have none of the extreme-convenience items. I'm not used to seeing such items around my house. Seeing those things and reading the ingredient list is my food equivalent of seeing exotic animals at the zoo. And when we have kids, we'll make sure they don't get too close to neither the lions nor the convenience foods, probably enforcing the latter the strongest. After all, if you're an average person living in the U.S., you are much higher risk to suffer an early death from trans-fats than from a random chimpanzee attack (<a href="http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_001b.html">chimps can be <span style="font-style: italic;">absolutely</span> vicious</a>, BTW).JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-40690300107707777772007-02-20T14:47:00.000-05:002007-02-20T15:15:35.932-05:00Would I Have Been a Liberal Back Then?As times change, so does what is considered "conservative" or "liberal." I hope that if I had lived 200-300 years ago, that I would've had a number of liberal traits.<br /><br />Back in times of slavery, it was the conservative position that there was nothing wrong with slavery (if I'm not mistaken). It was the progressive, or liberal, position that slavery was wrong. Now, I haven't exactly done my research, but I believe that until the Revolutionary period, almost no whites spoke out against slavery. If I had been living back then, would I have had any twinge of guilt if I had been a slave owner? I suppose that since the Bible does mention that slaves should obey their masters, maybe I would've used this as justification, since it does not necessarily condemn slave ownership. And if I did own slaves, I sure hope that I would've treated them in a manner according to Ephesians 6.<br /><br />During the American Civil Rights era, would I have held a progressive position towards civil rights reform? I hope that I would've been clear-minded enough to realize that there was no Biblical justification for mistreating people solely based on skin color. I hope that I would've sided with the peaceful protesters, perhaps even enduring ridicule even though I'm not black. Then again, as a Korean, I probably would've advocated civil rights reform anyways, since they probably benefited Asians as well.<br /><br />Would I have disapproved of interracial marriage, during times when it was looked down upon, and even illegal in many US states? I hope that I would've had the mind to think that there was no New Testament justification for condemning interracial marriage. Harmony and I have currently not experienced any indemnity for our interracial marriage, aside from all the stuff that happened during our engagement. To my knowledge, we've not gotten any disapproving sneers when people see us together.<br /><br />Then again, being liberal in your beliefs should only extend so far. The liberality of my beliefs only extends as far as the Bible allows it. To take two hot-button issues of the day...the Bible does not condone murder of innocent children (among murder of other demographics), nor does it condone homos*xual relations. Therefore I do not condone them either, however much contemporary society tries to tell me that these are normal and acceptable behaviors. Speaking of other commonly accepted behaviors, the Bible does not condone divorce and remarriage to another spouse, if the first spouse is living; therefore, I do not condone divorce and remarriage, unless the original couple is being reunited. "This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?" I'm just very glad that I'm not in a situation like that, nor will I ever be.<br /><br />What exactly is my political label? I don't really know. There's "liberal," there's "conservative," but I hope that I could label myself as "Biblical."JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-88626948317768723782007-02-14T17:11:00.000-05:002007-02-19T12:06:43.508-05:00We Care About Trans-FatsIt seems surprising to me how many people don't seem to care much about <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans_fat">trans-fats</a>. Even reading on some crunchy blogs, even some of those people don't seem to be rabidly avoiding them like they should. In fact, it seems like the only people who avoid trans-fats like the plague are us and each of our sisters.<br /><br />FYI: the process of hydrogenation leads to trans-fats, so hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated oils ARE trans-fats.<br /><br />The dangers of trans-fats are <a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=dangers+of+trans+fats&start=0&amp;amp;ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official">well-documented</a> (yeah I know, giving Google search results is sorta wishy-washy...but just take your pick). If you look at a food label, you will see lots of percentages, which are recommended daily values or allowances (RDV). However, if you look next to the entry for trans-fat, you will see no number. This is because no amount of trans-fat is necessary or healthy. Even a lot of the oft-decried substances like saturated fats and cholesterol have RDVs, because those things are necessary. For instance, cholesterol is necessary in order to build up cell membranes. Most trans-fats these days are artificial, so any more references to trans-fats heretofor refer to the artificial variant.<br /><br />There is absolutely nothing good that comes from eating trans-fat, aside from the fact that you've probably just eaten a whole box of Cheez-its and are now pleasantly satisfied. Trans-fats lower the good cholesterol (HDL) and increase the bad cholesterol (LDL). Any intake of trans-fat increases risk of coronary heart disease. Trans-fats are commonly present in many snack foods (most kinds of Doritos or cookies) and lots of instant/ready-to-eat foods, possibly because they have a long shelf life.<br /><br />It was slightly excruciating at first, but Harmony and I have weened ourselves completely off trans-fats. It was a sad time at first, no longer being able to eat store-bought Chex mix, most Girl Scout cookies, french fries ("French Fries, oh, French Fries" - Harmony) or Krispy Kreme donuts (It still is tempting to pick up a box of Krispy Kremes). We quickly discovered that there were no-trans-fat variants of most of the foods we enjoyed in our prior lifetimes. For example, you can always substitute butter for shortening, if you are making your own cookies. (EDIT: some sources say you cannot, but as long as they still taste like cookies to us, we don't care) Make your own fries and deep fry them in canola oil. If you can afford it, organic varieties of cheese crackers are available in the health food section (funny that grocery stores have health food sections...implying that all other sections are "unhealthy"). Recently, we have seen natural variants of Doritos, made without partially hydrogenated oils.<br /><br />Which brings me to another small point. Sometimes, you will see 0 trans fats under the nutrition info, but will still see "partially hydrogenated x" among the ingredients. The observant among you will notice that apparently the only way to measure fats is in increments of 0.5g. If there is an ingredient that is present in less than 0.5g per serving, it doesn't have to be listed. So if there happens to be 0.48g of cyanide in your Campbell's soup, it's probably not listed. Yes, I know, cyanide's not a fat, but I was just illustrating a point.<br /><br />Because trans-fats increase your risk of coronary heart disease, which is a silent killer, trans-fats are also silent killers. So if you eat Krispy Kremes every day and feel fine, you might be paying for it later. Of course, this is a free country and you can eat what you want (except maybe other living people and endangered species).<br /><br />Out of all artificial additives, we are most Nazi about trans-fats. There are many other bad things out there, such as MSG, high fructose corn syrup, or hydrolyzed this and that. We try to avoid those too, but must admit that we have all of those things in our pantry right now. However, we have come to the conclusion that no amount of trans-fat is okay for us. EDIT: The safest way to go is always make your own food, and if buying anything pre-packaged, go for the shortest ingredient list.<br /><br />If anyone has strong opinions on why we should avoid another food additive more aggressively than trans-fats, please let us know. We're always on the lookout to become healthier people.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37491865.post-59204705816637980112007-02-07T09:39:00.000-05:002007-03-15T09:15:51.582-04:00Picking and Choosing Political IdeologiesSome people might look at my position that abortion should be outlawed by the federal government and speaketh ill of me, considering that people like me are usually not for government control over people's lives. However, in being a Christian, this world is not my home, and I am not bound to conform 100% to these earthly ideologies of government control or freedom from government or whatever. I do not pick and choose from the Bible (or try not to, anyways). I DO pick and choose from political ideologies, as I see appropriate from what the Bible says.<br /><br />The following passage is Acts 4:32 - 35<br /><blockquote><p>32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that<br />any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33With<br />great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord<br />Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There were no needy persons among<br />them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought<br />the money from the sales 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was<br />distributed to anyone as he had need.<br /></p></blockquote><br />Now, you read this and you will likely think socialism or communism. However, I don't believe the text indicates any sort of authoritarian coercion. This is what I believe could be called ideal conservatism; no coercion, but people are taken care of because of the generosity of the population. However, I will conceded that money from real estate *was* put at the apostles' feet in order to be distributed. So maybe socialism isn't to be 100% condemned. After all, Christianity cannot be contained in one political ideology. Anyways, some random paragraphs follow:<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_democracy">Christian Democracy</a><br />I agree with a lot of the points here. However, I don't know how far the average Christian Democrat advocates the social solidarity bit (i.e. welfare, high tax on the rich, etc). I'm all for reducing poverty and getting people off the streets. Regarding welfare: the government should not give free hand-outs to any low-income person who asks. After all, "If a man will not work, he will not eat." That's a Bible quote, for those who don't know. Regarding high taxes on the rich: again, ideally the rich will be generous with their money, thus alleviating the necessity of taxes. <br /><br />Crunchy conservatism<br />For anyone that does not know, crunchy conservatism puts family, social conservatism, and environmental-friendliness into one lifestyle. Overall, these would probably be the people more likely to attend church regularly, have large families, buy organic groceries, vote Republican, and homeschool. If I'm wrong, someone please correct me. The person to first put the ideology in one manifesto was <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Dreher">Rod Dreher</a>, although the lifestyle has been around for longer than his book. Speaking of which, I enjoyed his book; I did not, however, like the part of his book where he said that a crunchy conservative would naturally gravitate towards "classic" religion like Catholicism and Orthodoxy. I am Church of Christ and have never felt any pull to go towards "classic" religion (no offense intended to Catholics/Orthodox). And I might not agree with crunchy conservatives on death penalty and war (no I would never spit on soldiers/marines/airmen/sailors or do anything like that), where they (on average) traditionally side with the Republicans. <br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistent_life_ethic">Consistent Life Ethic</a><br />This says that all human life is sacred. I haven't read too much on this one. Anyways, I haven't totally been able to reconcile some of my views and choices on the consistent life ethic subject. For example, I work for a company that makes high-tech gadgets that could be responsible for lots of loss of life, but I am opposed to taking human life. I work in somewhat of a supporting role and am not directly involved in the things that could take human life. Just because I work to support some high-tech projects doesn't mean I can't have a consistent pro-life ethic. If you think about it, all of us who pay taxes to the government have funded wars in one way or another. So the only way to avoid such a thing would be to not pay taxes, which is against the law of the land, which the Bible says we should obey. I haven't totally figured it out myself, folks. Convictions on complicated issues like this aren't built in a day. <br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism">Libertarianism</a><br />This, I believe, is "liberalism" in the true dictionary sense of the word, not the current political definition. If I wanted to hold to a consistent political ideology, I'd choose this one. However, I tend to disagree with libertarianism on social issues like legalizations of abortion, prostitution, gay marriage, and the like, since the Bible does not look favorably on these sorts of things. Given a choice between leftist and libertarian, I'd vote libertarian. At least they'd keep their hands off of me, my family, and my family's sustenance (a.k.a. the money I earn).<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mennonite#Theology">Mennonites</a><br />I don't swear oaths, because my yes is yes and my no is no. Um....there's not really anything political about this, nor do I know of any political ideology that shuns oaths. Which is why I've linked to a religious group instead of a political one. I've only had to invoke this conviction once, and that was when we were getting our marriage certificate. Harmony and I "affirmed" that all of the information on the application was correct.<br /><br />Where the Bible is clear on things, you bet I am completely close-minded! No viewpoint but the Bible on those sorts of things. However, where it unclear or silent, there's room for open-mindedness. If you think I'm crazy on any of these points, please feel free to let me know.JunkMalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02619673168896233941noreply@blogger.com1