Uncouth PerspectivesNot on the rug, man.

I wanted to talk a little about what I am reading.

I saw this idea over at Mind on Fire. Basically it’s about taking an excerpt out of a near book and sharing it.

For the record, I do not know what a meme is, I do not care what a meme is, and, in fact, I dislike the word on principle alone. That being said, let us continue.

1. Pick up the nearest book of 123 pages or more. No cheating!
2. Find page 123
3. Find the first 5 sentences
4. Post the next 3 sentences
5. Tag 5 people

I am not going to do #5, because I refuse to send unsolicited message, chain-style letters to -anyone-. I thought this was interesting enough to do myself, but do not even think that I am going to attempt to perpetuate it to other people who are not interested.

I had two books on top of each other so I shall share both:

The first is The Electric Church, a book which I am borrowing and combines many favorites: a dystopian and sci-fi future, religion, and hired killers. Not a very interesting blurb.

[asa book]0316021725[/asa]

“Hover displacement!” I shouted over my shoulder. “Distant, but coming.”

She didn’t say anything.

The second is The Godless Constitution: A Moral Defense of the Secular State, one of my many books dealing with the intersection of politics and religion. Much more interesting excerpt.

[asa book]0393328376[/asa]

The battle over Sunday mail began in the small market town of Washing, Pennsylvania, in 1809, the year Jefferson’s presidency ended. Its postmaster, Hugh Wyle, followed the widespread, though unofficial, practice of sorting the mail as well as keeping his post office open on Sundays to allow churchgoers from neighboring villages to pick up mail after church. The problem was that Wylie was also an elder in Washington’s Presbyterian church, and in 1809 the Pittsburgh synod of the church ruled that for such as egregious violation of the Sabbath Wylie was to be excluded from communion.

And because I know you are dying to see what my bedside pile of books looks like, here you are:

Let me tell you a little story.

So to Pope decides to visit an Italian University and give a speech.  This is not a churchy event, but is  the opening of the academic year and, in my opinion, a pretty big win for the University.  Say what you will about the Pope, it is a big deal for him to come give a speech, whether you agree or not, which, really, is what this story is about.

What is the response from the school, do you think?  Why for the students and faculty members to protest so loud that the Pope cancels the visit.

Here’s the story: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pope16jan16,0,296931.story?coll=la-home-center

And some choice quotes:

More than 60 professors signed a letter to the public school’s rector saying the pope’s appearance, which had been scheduled for the opening of the academic year Thursday, was an affront to people of science and to the “secular” nature of the institution.

…

The students who led the protests celebrated their “victory for laicism,” whereas the rector of La Sapienza, Renato Guarini, said he was dismayed that a “small publicity-seeking minority” had managed to derail a papal visit to an institution founded, as it happens, by one of Benedict’s predecessors, Pope Boniface VIII — 700 years ago.

Let me start by getting my feelings out in the open:  screw you.

One of the challenges the students and faculty put forward is legitimate:  the Pope was going to give a speech but was not open to a question and answer session.  Although, if I were the Pope (Oh, how I dream about it!  Where’s my hat?!), I think I would be disinclined to play hardball with people so determined to hate me on principle that they’ll cancel my appearance anyways.

But, seriously, I believe strongly in the Academic mission and, question and answer session or not, I think that having the Pope come speak is valuable and useful part of that mission.  When people are critical of Universities as “liberal brain washing” institutes, it’s this kind of asshat actions that they are talking about.  I am not saying that people should not be vocal against the Pope, or whoever, if they feel like it–I am certainly do not support the Catholic church–but let the man talk!  And use it as an opportunity to hold more sessions about the Science vs. Religion debate, or on the issue of morality in atheism, or whatever you want!  But do not silence a voice because they say things you do not like.  That, to me, goes against the entire idea of Academia.  Especially when that voice is the selected leader of a major world religion.

I just get so angry when I read or see this kind of hypocricy.   This is one of those ultimate opportunities for education, learning, and growth.  I mean, if the Dali Lama came, would these same people have protested… or is he western and modern enough?  What if the next one isn’t so interested in constitutions and has takes a hard line.  Well, too bad, same guy, just reincarnated.  Haha!  You fail!

Seriously, though, I expected in Academia, of all places, for any civilized voice to have a platform and opportunity to speak.  It’s not a victory to celebrate–you did not win a skirmish in the great war against religion;  you did not even fight.  Walk around with all the pride and prejudice you want.  It is not for me.

When Scott announced he was coming back, I looked around and said “Beauchemin or McDonald are the most at risk.”

Sadly, how true I was.

Andy McDonald was traded to the Blues today for Doug Weight (not a bad pick up), a minor leaguer, and a 7th round pick. In addition, Doug Weight is a UFA at the end of the year, so the stupid salary cap stuff is not an issue.

Read more: http://ducks.nhl.com/team/app/?service=page&page=NewsPage&articleid=346678

I have been very lax in my study of religion of late. It turns out that when you have assignments and constant pressure that comes with grad school, it’s much easier for it to be hobby. I’m going to file that under ironic and move on. My focus when I was actively working on my Master’s Degree was apocalyptic cults. This is a subject I am very interested in and the recent news of a Russian doomsday cult has really sparked my interest again. Hopefully I can fan that into a real flame of interest.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/11/16/doomsday.cult/index.html

What I find most interesting about this incident is that the leader is no longer with the group. He’s been arrestd and undergoing “psychiatric evaluation.” He told the group to hole up in their self built cave and they are doing it. One of the reasons I find this interest has to do what what a “cult” is and how it is formed. Or, rather, how hard it is to define those things. Like many things with religion, defining what makes something a cult is generally a subjective affair. Most often, a descriptive definition is used. I.e. a cult is something that has x, y, and z characteristics. For example, one might say that a cult does not have mainstream acceptance. However, there are people who call Mormonism a cult, yet it clearly has mass appeal. Even better, others, such as myself, would not agree that mainstream acceptance is a characteristic at all.

However, one that is widely adopted in this method of defining a cult is charismatic leadership. The Branch Dividians had David Koresh, Christianity had Paul, and the Insane Clown Posse have Violent J. One theory about containing/controlling cult behavior (if you would choose to do so) is that if you take out the leader, you take out the cult. I do not believe things are that black and white, but the theory is probably a good rule of thumb.

So, then, what kind of control did Kuznetsov have that his followers continue their practices and follow his commandments even after he is gone? They apparently communicating with him via letters but are mistrustful that he may be under the control of the authorities. It makes me think that a new leader has emerged with the remaining members that allows them to hold strong to their beliefs. If this is true, it poses an interesting twist to the idea of a charismatic leader’s role within a cult. It also shows one of the things at the root of cult behavior: a cult is sociological based “thing” which is guided by principles of the relationships between members more than the philosophical doctrine they supposedly cling to.

Very interesting case in the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals…don’t be surprised is this one go to the U.S. Supreme Court.

From the decision:

“In considering the factors for a preliminary injunction, the district court reasoned that e-mails held by an ISP were roughly analogous to sealed letters, in which the sender maintains an expectation of privacy. This privacy interest requires that law enforcement officials warrant, based on a showing of probable cause, as a prerequisite to a search of the e-mails.”

From an article:

A federal appeals court on Monday issued a landmark decision (.pdf) that holds that e-mail has similar constitutional privacy protections as telephone communications, meaning that federal investigators who search and seize emails without obtaining probable cause warrants will now have to do so.

“This decision is of inestimable importance in a world where most of us have webmail accounts,” said Kevin Bankston, a staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

The ruling by the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Ohio upheld a lower court ruling that placed a temporary injunction on e-mail searches in a fraud investigation against Steven Warshak, who runs a supplements company best known for a male enhancement product called Enzyte. Warshak hawks Enzyte using “Smiling Bob” ads that have gained some notoriety.

[More]

The Anaheim Ducks beat the Ottawa Senators 4-1 to win the greatest prize in sports… the Stanley Cup!

We are in the so-called era of the “new NHL.” The new rules are in place to make the game faster, more exciting, and to see more goals scored. And it has worked (whether or not that will get the sport more viewers is another story). But even more interesting is that Brian Burke, Randy Carlyle, and the others decided to play the new rules from another angle. They developed a game that used strong physical and gritty play to shut down a team designed to be exemplary of the new rules–fast, lean, and highly technically skilled.

I do not think that this strategy will always work, but it will be worth watching the two types of play compete for success. The Ducks have obvious echoes of the Devils and I can’t wait to see what others team try this strategy out for success.

GO DUCKS!

Two girls were arrested in McHenry County, Illinois last week for distributing flyers at their school that depicted a male classmate kissing another classmate and had the words “God Hates Fags” on the flyers. One of the girls at her arraignment was denied bail for her actions, and the other was effectively placed on house arrest.

read more | digg story

Anaheim prevailed 4-2 in the best-of-seven NHL Western Conference final. The Ducks will meet the Ottawa Senators in the Cup final, with Game 1 set for May 28 (CBC, 7:30 p.m. ET).

read more | digg story

I’m reading this article in my school’s newspaper (Orange Coast College’s Coast Report) on safety and lighting concerns. The article tells that the school has received a lot of complaints about the lighting and, now, the campus is deciding to do something about it. They have a brilliant plan. They are going to conduct a study. Everyone look out!

My assumption about this sudden concern for the lighting (and safety) is the recent re-hashing of school killings and shootings (at least, one’s that we hear about). So, some kids get shot in San Diego and the lights get turned up at my school. Now we are using our heads! While we are at it, maybe we can even fill in some pot holes! The whole school might even be safe!

Okay, let’s get down to the point. The school has been doing remodeling and they neglected to re-do the night time lighting as part of the plan, not including, of course, the regular maintenance they have not been doing. Now everyone is in an uproar because “school’s aren’t safe.” People getting shot/killed/hurt/robbed/etc at school is not the problem. It is a symptom.

It’s not the school that is not safe, it’s the people that are not safe. The killings are a symptom of the lack of self worth that our society breeds. We do not allow people to love themselves, we abuse each other (whether physical, verbal, emotional, monetary, etc), there are very few healthy outlets and people to turn to (Don’t cry religion at me, they’ll just tell you that you are the problem and you need to find an external source to help you out)… and then we wonder why a 15 year old kid will shoot people. Because we bred him to do it. We allowed him to get picked on in school. We allowed him to be misparented and abused. We allowed him to not have healthy outlets for his aggression. And we allowed him to externalize his blame.

Of course, it was the music! No, it was the movies! No, it was the books! No, it was the media! No, it was this damn philosophy stuff!

…No, it was people.

The situation needs to be called it’s real name–a symptom. Not a problem. The music is not the problem. Lighting is not the problem. The systems that allows for an externalized system of self worth and accountability… one that says the person is important, BUT DO NOT LOVE YOURSELF. One that says you are born an evil person and there is nothing -you- can do about it, but if you go to someone else you can be freed.

It’s time we stop and live in the real world and focus on the real problems. And let’s not jump and react only when there are problems. Use reason and have the problems solved by not letting them become problems.

Fixing the broken lights would help, too.