AllTheseThings

Revenge is Sweet

I'm honestly not sure what category to select for this post. "Humor" seemed the only appropriate selection, although it's a little twisted. I just read that a number of dead stingrays are washing up on Australias beaches. Authorities are suggesting that the poor unsuspecting creatures are victims of angry Steve Irwin fans, exacting revenge for the killing of their beloved hero. Can this be true??? Is there anyone out there, upset about the death of crazy old Steve, who would actually feel better by lopping the tails off a few his attackers closest relatives? Well, I suppose so, based soley on the fact that "it takes all sorts to make a world". Let's hope it's only one guy, heavily caffeinated at the time and hopefully over it by now. If there's more than one, we're all in trouble!
What's less surprising is that stringray tails are being taken as "souvenirs" of the gruesome event.

Philomena

allthesephilomena@yahoo.com

Tender Is the Night

I’ve been up in the night a lot lately.  My youngest, 1 ½ year old Austin, has some health problems.  For some unexplained reason (possibly teething), he has been up in the night screaming as if in great pain.  This has been going on for sometime, and last night was another night. 

As I rocked and patted and walked around the house trying to soothe him, I found myself quoting Psalm 23 out loud to Austin.  I repeated the first 3 verses over and over:  “The Lord is my Shepherd.  I shall not want.  He makes me to lie down in green pastures.  He leads me beside the still waters.  He restores my soul.”  Meditating on the words was very powerful as I focused on the Lord’s promise to lead me, provide for me, and (stated 3 different ways) restore me. 

I know I’m not the only parent up with a sick child.  I’m also not the only parent up who may be worrying in general and unable to sleep.  There are many people up at night who are hurting, sad, wishing for different circumstances, or regretting past mistakes.  The bottom line is that The Shepherd's promise is for us ALL. 

He will lead us.  He will provide for us.  He will restore us in tender and wonderful and uniquely refreshing ways.  The next time you’re up in the night, meditate on those 3 verses, and you may – like me – find yourself overwhelmed with His comfort and love.

Yours,

Lucy

Alltheselucy@yahoo.com

Surprise!!!

Well, to everyone's complete surprise, Iran has decided to comply with the U.N. resolution regarding it uranium enrichment --read:  nuclear bomb making--program!

Oh wait, that did not really happen as the article titled "Six Powers Say Iran Ignored U.N." points out.  In fact, as the title suggests, Iran does not give a rip about the U.N. or its impotent resolutions.  In fact, now that Iran has ignored the resolution, France--again, surprise!--China, and Russia are not even so sure about sanctions.  Sanctions are so very, very mean you know.

The article is a news piece.  But it is hard to read it without laughing.  The fact that Iran is getting closer and closer to having a nuclear weapon is the only thing that makes it not hysterical in its stereotypical depiction of the U.N., EU, France, Iran, and diplomats in general.  The story is like a news agency's obituary for a famous person.  It is written well in advance and archived.  Then, when the person dies, they plug in the dates and a few quotes and they appear on top of the news.  This could have been written months ago.

Some highlights:

"There was a common analysis on where we were," said a senior European Union diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity. The International Atomic Energy Agency, he said, "made clear that Iran has not met the requirements of the Security Council and the IAEA."

Did the reporter really have to wait for the deadline to pass to type that one up?  Did the EU diplomat have to speak on condition of anonymity?  What's his thinking?  "Oh, no, if I give my name I might lose my job because I admit Iran totally ignored us, yet the big EU bosses still want to push this 'lets just talk with the mullahs strategy.'"

Then there's this gem:

"We had a first discussion of next steps in the Security Council following the lines of resolution 1696," he said.

The resolution said sanctions could follow if Iran failed to meet the deadline, but the diplomat declined to say whether there was any consensus on what steps should be taken and when.

The diplomat said all countries hoped Iran would suspend enrichment and begin negotiations on a package of incentives the six powers offered to Iran in June.

Is that from the "Star light, star bright" theory of international diplomacy developed by German political theorist Ima Wishenanhopen?  Or is it in line with the "Cross your fingers, not your swords" model developed at Harvard?  You keep right on hoping diplomats.  Meanwhile, Iran will keep right on enriching.

The spinelessness of certain nations is evident here.  Their participation in multi-lateral negotiations underscores the problem with such a model, you can only go as far as the weakest link.  And if Iran doesn't want to bomb the weakest link, but does want to bomb you, tough luck.

Despite the presentation of a unified front after the nearly four-hour meeting in Berlin, the United States faces growing opposition to its bid to persuade the other powers to impose sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program, with China urging dialogue and France signaling flexibility on the suspension...

While China and Russia also implicitly backed the idea of sanctions by voting for resolution 1696, they both remain reluctant to penalize the Islamic Republic and question Western accusations that Iran poses a nuclear threat.

Before the meeting China's Foreign Ministry stressed the diplomatic options, calling for the standoff with Iran to "be resolved through negotiation and dialogue in a peaceful way."

France also indicated it was not yet time for sanctions by suggesting world powers may be flexible over a previous demand that Iran suspend its enrichment work before starting talks.

"Flexible" here is Reuters-speak for "surrendering" or "capitulating," or "folding like a cheap chair."  Something historically akin to France's military being "flexible" at the Maginot line.  Meanwhile, China and Russia have nothing to lose by blocking the U.S. drive for sanctions.  They aren't the target of Iran's bombs, and they can diminish U.S. power internationally by blocking every move we try to make--even if such moves are for the good of civilization.

The piece wraps up with a quotation from Iran's Foreign Minister:  "The Americans must realize the language of threats does not work."  Maybe so, but the U.N. and the EU must realize impotence does not work either.

Thomas More

allthesemore@yahoo.com

The First First Day Of School

Off she went.  The eldest daughter is now sitting in her first class on her first day of Kindergarten.  Mom, the siblings, and I all went to send her off.  She was a trooper.  No tears.  Pretty excited really.

In a child's life, that first day of school is both a big deal, and at the same time, no big deal.  As I warned her last week, she's in for 13 or 17 or even 20-something straight years of first days.  But the first first day is powerful.  I guess it is a touch of the baby bird's first flight from the nest.  You know, deep down, that they'll be flying off to build their own nest some day.  Just not today.  Maybe tomorrow.  Today is the first first day, not the last first day.  And for that, I'm thankful.  Thankful for her life, our family, and a country where little girls and boys can have a first day in peace, learn things, and, hopefully, make their little neighbors' first days a little better.

Tom Ross, over at the Flashreport blog nailed this for me yesterday.  He sent his little one off for the first day yesterday, and then posted this piece.  I liked that one and it inspired my post.  Some of the highlights from the "Back-to-School" essay by Rich Galen he linked to:

Every year at this time, I remember a wonderful essay I heard on NPR the summer before The Lad first went to college. A woman talked about the day she sent her daughter to kindergarten for her first day of school. "My husband told me not to cry," she wrote, "because tomorrow she would still be in kindergarten."

"But, he was wrong," the essay continued. "'Tomorrow' she went to college."

and

Driving up the Dallas Tollway, the overnight sports station was conducting yet another arcane discussion on the state of the Dallas Cowboys, so I shut the radio off and started singing "Puff the Magic Dragon," to which I can sing the harmony. In college, when I was a pretty good folk guitar player, it was a staple in my repertoire.

I was singing - in pieno voce - when I got to the line:

A dragon lives forever; but not so little boys.
Painted wings and giant's rings make way for other toys.

I tear up at Christmas coffee commercials. I sniff and wipe my eyes at every happy ending in every movie I've ever seen - including movies seen on airplanes which generally precludes any further conversation between my seatmate and me.

"…but not so little boys," however, caused me to pull over to the side of the road and stop, not just to wipe away a tear, but to actually sob. This, on the Dallas Tollway, even at four in the morning, is no mean feat.

The woman who wrote that NPR essay said that she had divided her friends into two groups: Those who understood, and those who didn't.

I understand.

Around the United States, there are hundreds of thousands of families whose children, are guarding our freedoms in far away places. Yesterday they, too, had left for kindergarten not even knowing the existence of the places in which they awoke this morning.

Good stuff to think about on the First of First Days.  I hope Lucy's first day goes well at home; and I wonder what the difference is sending them off versus sitting them down at the house.  She doesn't have to send anyone anywhere, that seems like a blessing and a curse.  I'm sure the importance of the day won't be lost either way though.

Parents, enjoy your first days--they're limited,

Thomas More

allthesemore@yahoo.com

Don't Marry a Career Woman

Please, no hate-emails - this title comes from an article of the same name written by Michael Noer in the current issue of Forbes.  There has been some fine discussion on family life here at All These Things - just throwing this article out there.
Didymus

What to Make of MySpace?

One of the local radio stations has “Therapy Thursday”, where listeners call in with some pressing problem and receive sage advice from the expert-of-the-week. One of the callers yesterday reported that she had discovered her boyfriends MySpace profile and when she’d checked it, he was using it to talk to an ex-girlfriend. “Dump him!” was the hasty but probably appropriate advice of the expert. “Yeah!”, I yelled at the car radio. That was an easy problem. I could be a therapist. Funnily enough, the answer wasn’t so obvious when my boyfriend at the time was doing exactly the same thing. It’s so much easier to diagnose when it’s happening to someone else.

But I digress….I considered this scenario another nail in the coffin for “MySpace”. Except, for some bizarre reason, MySpace seems to survive no-end of bad press and remain the most popular online social networking site in the world. In case you’re unfamiliar (and I’m envious if you are) MySpace allows people to create a unique online profile with as much personal information as they care to divulge, including pictures of themselves, favorite music, videos and messages from their friends. Anyone can access this profile by searching for a name. Unfortunately for MySpace, it first made headline news as a place where paedophiles can easily stalk their young victims, since the site is most popular among older children and teenagers eager to connect with each other. But, a musician friend recently informed me that the site was established to allow musicians to stay in touch with fans and get information out about their concerts. Well, maybe it’s not so bad after all, I thought. If that was it’s original purpose, it’s just unfortunate that it was overwhelmed by vulnerable teenagers and paedophiles. But, then there’s that poor radio listener and her boyfriend …..I’m sure he would’ve found another way to cheat without MySpace, but it practically rolled out the red carpet for him.

So, what to make of MySpace? It all sounds so innocent on paper. “Come and join us and be our new friend and tell us all about you and what you like and don’t like and meet new people and hear some great music…..” Like any of these sites (including online dating sites) there’s a perception that it’s “personal”, a way of letting the world see the real you, which it will, of course, find fascinating. The problem as usual, is human nature, which has a tendency to take something simple and good and pervert it as fast as possible. There’s really nothing personal about MySpace or any of these online sites. In fact, they’re as impersonal as you can get. How many of the five senses can you engage from behind a computer screen? How can people really get to know each other (warts and all) when all that’s presented in the profile is an ideal; good looking (best photo), well read (lots of large books with small type on the “my favorites” list), popular (lots of messages from friends)?

Knowing and being known is a scary prospect. What if no one likes me (says the teenager out loud and the adult more quietly)? What if I get hurt? It’s so much easier to be “sociable” from the safety of my desk. I can never get hurt from here. The outside world, on the other hand, is an emotionally dangerous place. Witness my ridiculous attempts to protect myself and hide my own inadequacies, from my close friends and even from God who gave them to me in the first place. But none of us really benefit from a platform to so easily misrepresent ourselves (either intentionally or unintentionally). It certainly comes easily enough and it might feel good but there’s no real connection there. If strangers on MySpace ever meet each other in person (which I suspect doesn’t happen very often), then the real relationship begins.

I’m sure MySpace has been successful in many ways. I can look up my favorite band and see where their next concert is. I can see what music my friend recommends this month. But I can also fool myself that I am connecting with groups of total strangers who are now my “friends”. If I’m 14, I can give all my personal information to my new pen pal who is apparently 14 but really 45.

Let’s burst the bubble that these websites are relational. They’re anything but that. Instead I vote for more face-to-face contact with new friends and old, more food, more conversation, more laughter, more acceptance of all our inadequacies and appreciation of God’s grace.

I’ll be going now, to delete my MySpace profile and phone a friend…

Philomena

allthesephilomena@yahoo.com   

A Father's Blessing

In "Fiddler on the Roof,"  Tevye's three elder daughters choose the men they will marry.  They are not rich or well-connected.  The tailor chosen over the butcher is hard enough.  'But I love him, Papa!'  Then the second daughter chooses an atheist and plans to follow him to Siberia where he is in a labor camp.  Lastly, Tevye's favourite, Havilah, 'everybody's favorite child' chooses a bookish man, but from their oppressors.  Will Tevye bless his daughters?  The second and third daughters will follow their chosen husband regardless, but the entire family is almost broken by sorrow because Tevye feels he cannot bless Havilah's choice.  As I remember it, right at the end, as Anatevka is being forcibly evacuated, as his family are being scattered, Tevye ensures that its heart is whole; in not so many words, he gives Havilah his blessing.

Why is this blessing so important?  Without the father's blessing, a daugther feels torn, in doubt, she has not been let go.  I am a favorite child.  So is a young woman in my church; she is engaged to a lovely, kind, intelligent, honest man.  But her father will not give his blessing because the groom is not good enough for his favorite and only child.  I was taught 'You can do anything you want to do.'  I was given wings to fly.  By witholding the blessing it feels like there is a string attached to my leg; I can fly and I will, but I have not been given the freedom to soar as I was supposed to do.

Over and again I hear or simply sense that there are thousands of us:  Daddy's little girl.  We were his delight, he poured his time, resources, and dreams in to us - at least some times to the exclusion of our mothers.  But when it is time for us to marry, who could possibly love us, care for us, provide for us as well as we deserve (Remember, we are practically perfect in every way)?  Will the father admit that he thinks, 'Nobody as well as I'?

So may I register a plea to you fathers?  Be wise, like Tevye.  Don't fool yourself that she will choose you over her husband.  Give your daughter your blessing.  You will keep your daughter, gain a son, and more likely enjoy the blessing of family around you in your old age.

Yours candidly,

Beth

allthesebeth@yahoo.com

Law As Contract and The Contract On California

This is not a phenomenon unique to California.  But it is all too common in California politicians' mindsets.  That is, find an employer-enemy and craft specific legislation to harm them.  In this case, the California Legislature just passed a bill to target Wal-Mart.  Why?  Because:

"Clearly, Wal-Mart in particular has been using its money and influence to try to influence local government decisions," said the bills' author, Sen. Richard Alarcon.

The state has an interest, he said, because "Wal-Mart is the most egregious offender when it comes to having employees use public assistance - in fact, training them to apply."

So, liberals set up a system where government can--and must--be lobbied by special interest groups.  Then they complain that a group uses "its money and influence to try to influence local government decisions." I'm shocked, shocked, to find lobbying going on in government.  So do they write a bill to reform lobbying?  Do they craft a bill targeted at any and all employers that encourage their employees to use public assistance?  No.  This bill does not address the issue Sen. Alarcon raises.  Thus, the author admits he designed the legislation to be punitive.  He never even says Wal-Mart is violating the law in encouraging its employees to use the very assistance he votes for, nor does he say they've lobbied illegally.  This is simply punishment for a group he doesn't like.  Is that the right use of law? 

Lets take a step back and look at how law can, and should, be used.  Keep in mind James Madison's concern about "factions" in Federalist No. 10: 

a number of citizens, whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.

Madison did not think the system should award the favorites and punish others.  Law is supposed to further the "permanent aggregate interests of the community" and not be "adverse to the rights of other citizens."  Well how can that be done?  The same way it is in everyday life, by agreement.

Think of a contract between two parties.  They enter into a deal because it is beneficial for both sides.  I want a new pair of shoes, a shoe seller wants $100.  I decide that $100 is fair, we agree to a trade--the deal is done.  Both sides are satisfied.

Now think of law as a large-scale contract, or deal.  I don't want to be murdered, you don't want to be murdered.  So we sign a contract not to murder each other.  To be effective, we need to make the deal with everyone.  But the transaction costs and enforcement costs of our making that deal with every citizen is outrageously high.  I can't go around and get all 300,000,000 citizens to sign the contract.  Enter the goverment.  The government passes a law that we can't murder each other.  Essentially, what has happened is that the government imposed a deal on us.  But, and this is the critical point, it is a deal that benefits the interests of the community, not one group over another--and we'd all agree to it.

Now, Sen. Alarcon might argue that his "deal" benefits the community.  But it is not a contract that everyone would sign if given the chance.  The way to analyze if a law is fair, and I'd even argue constitutional, is to determine if you would enter into such a deal before you knew which party--which "faction"--you would be.  This is an "ex ante" approach.  In the case above, would you agree to Sen. Alarcon's deal BEFORE you knew if you were to be Wal-Mart or the local government body?

As some of our parenting scholars know, the best way to get your kids to perfectly cut pieces of cake is to do the following:  Give one kid the knife and tell him that he gets to cut the cake into two pieces.  But then tell him that his sister gets to choose the piece she wants to eat first.  The result, perfectly even pieces of cake!!  NASA scientists could not create pieces more evenly cut.

The same can be true for law.  Put yourself on both sides of the deal, the law, before it is done.  Does it seem reasonable?  What if you are Wal-Mart in 2006 in California (Alarcon's law)?  What if you are an African-American in the South in the 1950's (Jim Crow laws)?  What if you are a beer drinker in the 1920's (Prohibition)?  In these examples, one group got a terrible deal under the law and nothing in return.  This is not how deals are done or how contracts are made.  Nor should it be the way law works.

To avoid the factions Madison feared, we must not let the powerful--Senator Alarcon and his anti-Wal-Mart buddies--take out venegence on a disfavored minority under the color of law. 

Thomas More

allthesemore@yahoo.com