Credit Card Fraud and German Risk

Two topics here.

First, if anyone is interested in playing a Game of German Risk online, let me know. It's pretty relaxed--you have a full 24 hours to take a turn. No 3 or 4 hour block of time required, just a couple minutes here and there (and you don't have to sit around waiting while others take their turns). The map only allows for 4 players.

Second, our credit card info got swiped somehow. I looked at our account info yesterday and saw a $200 charge for "XBOX Live." I called Discover, and apparently some other unauthorized charges had been made at the same time (one $1 charge for Yahoo and one larger charge to Blizzard for World of Warcraft). These additional charges didn't show up on the online account--apparently Discover was double-checking to make sure they were valid charges. Of course, once their suspicions were confirmed, they canceled the account. The question remains--if Discover had suspicions, why didn't they contact me?

I'm not sure how our credit card information got stolen--I suspect a nearby gas station got hit by a "Skimmer" which transmits credit card information to thieves, but I really don't know. Hopefully everything will resolve and they'll catch the bad guy--and hopefully I won't end up paying $200 for the thief's use of XBox Live.

Mosque

The proposed mosque near what used to be World Trade Center has many names: the Cordoba House, Park 51, the Ground Zero mosque. Unfortunately, it has become embroiled in controversy because it lies two blocks from Ground Zero. First, some facts.

1. Islam is composed of many different groups that believe many different things, much like Christianity is composed of many different groups that believe many different things. Equating those planning the mosque to those who caused 9/11 would be like equating a group of violent fundamental Christians who want to kill everyone who doesn't agree with them with the Catholic church. Sure, they share some religious beliefs. But enormous differences set them apart. Same with the group that wants to build the mosque. They're not connected to the 9/11 terrorists. In fact, they're sworn enemies.

2. Two blocks is a large distance in the area around Ground Zero. A Greek Orthodox church, a synagogue, and two Catholic churches sit just one block from Ground Zero, along with literally hundreds of businesses. (Google Maps is a great resource to look at the area). It's a crowded, diverse place. A mosque would fit right in, and would be a great asset to the many Muslims in the area. Another mosque already sits four blocks from the site. Again, very crowded, very diverse.

3. Make no mistake--the controversy about this mosque is spawned by conservative news organizations and conservative politicians in order to gain votes for the upcoming election. It's fearmongering at it's most base. It's bullying of the worst kind. It's the same kind of scapegoating that led the Nazis to kill the Jews and gypsies and led the U.S. to throw thousands of Japanese into what were basically prison camps. It should have no place in the civilized world.

4. Most of the people in Manhattan want this mosque built. The majority of it will serve as a recreational area, open to all people.

5. Originally, opponents of the mosque tried to stop it with lawsuits (alleging that the building should be designated a historic building, etc.) Now that those lawsuits failed, those same people say "of course those people can build there, because of the freedoms of the First Amendment, but building there would be insensitive." So apparently they're acknowledging those original lawsuits were an attempt to subvert the First Amendment...

I understand that ignorant, racist, or xenophobic people could view the move as insensitive. I have yet to hear an argument against the mosque that isn't based in ignorance, racism, or xenophobia. If you can find one, please point it out to me.

Did I mention that I despise bullies? Most grownups outgrow the bullying phase in high school. Or so I thought. Sigh.

Current mood: sad.

Neil Peart's Impression of Logan and the Bluebird Restaurant

Those of you who like Logan and/or Rush should enjoy this. Especially those of you with fond memories of this restaurant.

http://www.neilpeart.net/news/august_09.html

Scapegoating

It seems like recent months have brought an increase of negative public opinion towards certain minority groups. Hispanics and Muslims seem to be getting the majority of the negative attention at this point. Some politicians are more than willing to jump into the fray (attempting to pass laws that encourage racial profiling, using racist terms usually reserved for animals when referring to these people giving birth (i.e. "dropping babies"), and telling people where they should and shouldn't build their places of worship). Some of these politicians even changed their previous moderate sensibilities and became a part of that fray (I'm looking at you, McCain). Unfortunately for the LDS church, some of these politicians are LDS. Politicians, of course, are often more than happy to give up their personal convictions in order to increase their chances of winning an election.

So why this increase in negative public opinion? The U.S. is, after all, deporting many more illegal immigrants this year than it has in years past. Crime is down. The economy--

The economy is down. And because it's down, many people require a scapegoat. Apparently blaming Bush for starting it and Obama for continuing it/exacerbating it/starting it (depending on a person's political inclinations and/or levels of intelligence) isn't enough. And, of course, because the state of the economy is always someone else's fault, taking personal responsibility is out of the question.

I understand people are out of work and worried about their finances. I have close family members that have been out of work since the recession started. I'm praying that I'll be able to find work in a year, after I take the bar. But hard times are what led the Germans to begin scapegoating Jews and Gypsies after World War I. It's a dangerous path, one that history rightfully condemns. It leads to dark, dangerous places, and it should have no place among us.

May we have the strength to condemn it when it raises its ugly head.

Renting

I got home from work yesterday to find a For Sale sign in our front yard.
The house we've lived in for over two years is up for sale, and the landlord didn't even give us a heads up.

I looked up the listing online. It exaggerates (lies) about how much each of the two units in the house are renting for, claiming that we pay $45 more per month than we actually do, and listing the other unit as being $100 more per month than what it was advertised for a month ago, before new renters moved in. The selling price is probably fairly reasonable ($180K for a two-unit house in a fairly nice neighborhood, just a couple of miles from downtown). But I'm worried that someone's going to buy the house and either kick us out so they can live in our apartment, or (more likely) start charging us what the listing claims we're paying.

Any suggestions? Should I call the realtors and tell them the listing is wrong? Should I call the landlord out on the lie? Obviously, I may need to do some digging on landlord/tenant law.

Oh, and the listing also says this house is 97 years old. Wow.

No Royal Road to Geometry

Or biology. Or religion.

An LDS scientist discusses how silly it is to argue against certain disciplines without knowing anything about them. If you want to understand something, you have to put in the effort.

I've been guilty of the same thing (anytime I say anything about economics, for example). But we should learn to ignore those who make a habit of it.

Unfortunately, he doesn't allow comments, or you would see the principle in action. (The biggest anti-evolution LDS bloggers/commenters, for example, have absolutely no background in biology--not a terrible surprise; the biggest pro-evolution LDS bloggers do have biology degrees. Hmmm).

Some other LDS science blogs written by biologists:
http://ldsscience.blogspot.com/ (life science researcher)
http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com/ (Professor of Biology/Evolution--only some of the posts are science)
http://sciencebysteve.net/ (Biology/Evolution Professor at BYU)

The "science" blogs written by people with no background in the science they discuss aren't worth mentioning, for the reasons stated in the "Royal Road" article above.

Numbers

Active members of the EQ: 11.
Active members of the EQ a month from now: 9.
Number of active members of the EQ we lost in the past three months: 5. A similar number moved out the previous summer.
Ouch.
The ward has always depended on students and student's spouses who were just here for a short time (under a year to four years). Especially since part of our ward is downtown Cincinnati, and so we get everything that comes with that (lots of members living in poverty, lots of members without cars, etc.) For example, the last and the current EQ presidents, the last two executive secretaries (currently we just go without), and the current and last YW presidents all fit into the student/student spouse category. Now just two couples in the ward fit that definition. Tough times ahead.

If you're thinking of moving (going to grad school, finding work, etc.) I know just the place...
Please. Before they demote us to a branch, or force us to combine with some other ward. Small is great, but there is such a thing as too small.

And no, we don't have an EQ secretary, or an EQ teacher, or any of those others EQ callings I hear rumors about. Heck, we're lucky to have a president and two counselors right now...

Doctrine and Covenants, Government, and Religion

I gave a lesson to the youth in my ward on July 4th; they asked me to talk about the gospel and its connection to the government. I meant to post about it earlier, but a kidney stone (which made itself known literally five minutes before the lesson, calmed down for the lesson, and then came back with a vengeance to ruin most of the rest of the week) derailed me. (My strength is finally back to almost-normal, I think.)

I don't think they knew what they were getting themselves into by asking me to teach. I didn't. Teaching adults is easy--create good questions and have them discuss the questions until time runs out. The teenagers here had a harder time speaking up, meaning I had to teach more.

Anyway, I made some interesting discoveries in researching the lesson. The first thing that came to mind was the 12th Article of Faith. While important, alone it's way too simplistic for any decent discussion of the topic. Plus, it seems like many people focus on that one scripture and ignore all other scriptures. Fortunately, an entire section in D&C provides some real meat.

I highly recommend a thorough reading of Section 134. Here's what I found most interesting.
First, separation of church and state. Verse 4 reads in part, "We do not believe that human law has a right to interfere in prescribing rules of worship to bind the consciences of men, nor dictate forms for public or private devotion." In other words, the government has no right to tell us when to pray or how to worship. To me, this sounds like an argument against things such as mandatory prayers in school (although I realize this scripture can be interpreted in different ways). Certainly, minority religions (such as the LDS church) depend on the separation of church and state to keep majority religions from telling us how to worship. It's unfortunate, in this respect, that the Supreme Court, the body that interprets the First Amendment which gives us our religious liberties, is so void of religious diversity.

Verse 5 is also interesting. It begins, "We believe that all men are bound to sustain and uphold the respective governments in which they reside, while protected in their inherent and inalienable rights by the laws of such government." Notice the exception? We're not bound to sustain or uphold governments when our inherent and inalienable rights are not protected. What rights are those? Verse 2 gives us some hints: "The free exercise of conscience, the right and control of property, and the protection of life." In other words, if your free exercise of conscience is not protected, you have no obligation to uphold the government. My interpretation is that the free exercise of conscience includes the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion. LDS teenager Helmut Huebener, then, committed no sin when he and his friends spoke out against the Nazis in Nazi Germany, even though they broke the law by doing so. Those who engage in religious ceremonies that harm no one are also, in my opinion, not committing sin, even though the U.S. government may view such acts as illegal.

Any thoughts on this subject? It's much more nuanced than those who frequently quote the 12th Article of Faith realize. In any case, I'm grateful for the freedom of religion in the U.S. It may not be the optimum level of freedom, but it's better than most other countries (even most other civilized countries). I'm a big fan of Europe, but when it comes to religious freedoms, the U.S. is superior.

Hulu update

Warehouse 13: horrific. It's got to be pretty bad if I can't manage to finish the first episode. Take Adam Sandler's worst movie and turn it into sci-fi. Yech.
Grade: F.

Persons Unknown: OK. People who like dark might like it--it feels more horror than sci-fi. I don't really recommend it, but I won't discourage anyone from watching it either.
Grade: C.

Day Break: awesome. Just 13 episodes (like Firefly, it was canceled mid-season). Pretty much a cop/mystery show with a sci-fi twist. Very intense (definitely a PG-13), with some great characters and some great actors. It ties up fairly well at the end (in other words, it does in 13 episodes what Lost couldn't do in 121). And yes, Adam Baldwin plays himself, as he does in every TV show he's in. Grade: A-.

What the Republican Party would need to do to win me back

“As I look out at the political landscape now, I find plenty of slogans on the Republican side, but not very many ideas."
Bob Bennett, Republican Senator from Utah

A little known fact--not too many years ago, I considered myself a Republican. Not that I ever really thought much about politics back then, but...
More recently, I registered as Republican--but that had more to do with being able to vote in the primaries in Utah (the winner of the Republican primaries in Utah almost always wins office) than actually agreeing with the Republican platform.
I'm also a big fan of moderate Republicans (Jon Huntsman's my hero, and I used to like McCain before he conformed).

But I'm not a Republican. And, at least most of the time, I won't vote for Republicans. If Republicans want to win me back, here's what they need to do.

1. Focus on cost effectiveness. Eliminating a huge money-saving provision in the healthcare bill by falsely labeling it a "death panel" is not the way to go about this. Nor is giving huge amounts of money to defense contractors. Republicans complain about high taxes and about how much the government is spending; if they truly believe this, they need to focus on cost effectiveness. Instead of attacking programs that help people, they need to focus on how to provide the same benefits at a lower cost. It's not hard. For example, changing food stamps so that they can only be used for specific healthy foods (fruits, vegetables, whole grains, dairy, etc.) instead of on candy, potato chips, and soft drinks. How would this save money? By driving Medicaid costs way down. Simple solution. Still taking care of the poor, but saving big money doing it.

2. Be pro-science. Obviously, the Republican party has significant links to Big Oil and the religious right, two organizations that have some definite anti-science leanings, at least in regards to specific areas. (They also have big links to tobacco, which also used to have anti-science leanings, but got overwhelmed by an enormous amount of scientific information regarding the dangers of tobacco). Granted, some Democrats are anti-science when it comes to vaccines and such, and both McCain and Romney believe evolution occurs (as opposed to Palin and Hucklebee, who don't), but overall, Democrats are more scientifically literate.

3. Be pro-education. Education is an investment. Smart Republicans would negotiate with teacher unions, and offer decent money (ie--a living wage) to teachers (especially young teachers) in return for less job security (meaning ineffective teachers would be able to get booted more easily).

Also, they would implement summer programs that would allow high school students the chance to graduate a year early. Schools would save money by using resources (school buildings and teacher benefits) more effectively, and more teachers would have the opportunity to work--and get paid--for work done in the summer. There's the cost-effectiveness idea again.

4. Charge people for driving on roads. Roads should be paid for by those who use them. I'm not suggesting we toll every road; I'm suggesting we pay for roads, road repairs, and road maintenance solely through gasoline taxes, and decrease all other taxes that currently pay for roads. Benefits? People actually pay for what they use. Plus, less air pollution, reduced medical costs because of reduced air pollution, and a greater incentive to move away from our addiction to oil.

5. Be willing to negotiate and compromise on immigration. Focusing solely on "strengthen the border" while ignoring everything else is stupid. We need comprehensive reform, and it won't happen as long as Republican politicians continue to make foreigners scapegoats. Half the children being born in the US are minorities, and unless the Republican party starts recognizing this, and starts showing these minorities more respect, the Republican party will die with the baby boomers.

Any other ideas for Republicans? I think Republicans have a lot of good ideals (limited government, an emphasis on high moral standards, etc.) But I have to agree with Bob Bennett. Republicans currently have plenty of slogans, but not enough real ideas.

America and the LDS Church

The LDS church started out as an American church, but, as missionaries were sent out to Europe, the Pacific Islands, and elsewhere, it quickly became an international church. Originally, European saints immigrated to Utah. But most of the members in Tonga and Samoa did not. Now, the majority of members of the church are not Americans. The church seems to make an effort to call itself an international church. A member of the First Presidency is not American and does not speak English as a first language. Many other General Authorities come from a variety of foreign countries.

Why then, do pictures like this exist? This is unfortunately displayed at the BYU Bookstore. This picture, in my view, falsely raises the US Constitution (an inspired yet deeply flawed document--it allowed for slavery, after all) into holy scripture. We are not an American church. Yet some members don't seem to get it.

A few years ago I showed up to church for the first time in my Idaho Falls ward. An enormous American flag plastered the front of the chapel. I can't imagine any other ward in any other country desecrating their chapel with a flag of their country during the sacrament, but somehow, in the US, it wasn't a big deal.

Anytime politics is brought up in a gospel context, I think to myself--do these people realize that members in other countries think entirely different about politics? I think President Uchtdorf, for example, doesn't think universal healthcare is of the devil. I'm pretty sure fast offerings in Germany go a lot further because they're not used to pay for the healthcare of church members.

I like America. I like the Constitution. It is an important document--and, most importantly for the LDS church, it allows for the freedom of religion. The First Amendment allowed the church to grow in the US (although eventually even the Constitution wasn't enough to keep bigots from driving us out). Many countries adopted aspects of the Constitution, and now our religion can be practiced in many countries.

However, if we start putting our good but flawed Constitution on a pedestal, or if we do the same with our founding fathers (good men, but not the angels some make them out to be), our flag, or our American customs, we run the danger of turning patriotism into a false idol. And that's not behavior that God's church, an international church, should engage in.

This is a billboard seen going south from our place towards downtown Cincinnati. Apparently, the good folks at the Creation Museum in Kentucky believe that dinosaurs breathed fire, despite a total lack of evidence for that belief. I know that the Creation Museum lacks evidence for many (most, all?) of its claims (people riding on dinosaurs Flintstone-style, etc.) but claims of a fire-breathing dragon surprise even me.

Or it might not even be a belief--it could just be that dragons (as well as dinosaurs) sell. And at $22 admission, and over a million visitors since it opened three years ago, it's apparently working.

Working the Connection Angle

I always envied those who used connections to get jobs. During and after high school, some of my best friends got jobs with their dad's companies. I had mixed feelings about my not having connections. On the one hand, I hated that I had to work so much harder to find work. On the other hand, I was proud of every job I found because I found it without help.

I worked six jobs before my mission, all ones I found myself. My first job after the mission was working at a car rental place; I found it through the friend of a friend, so I had a bit of a connection there. The next job was definitely a connection-type job. Two uncles worked at a sleep clinic. The only catch was I had to volunteer full-time for a couple of months, but I soon got a job offer that ended up paying for most of college (plus a car and my Europe trip). One very sweet connection.

I'm still more proud of the jobs I get myself, without help--but I'm smart enough to use the connection angle to my advantage. As fate would have it, I'm headed into the field of pharmaceutical law. I'm taking the classes for it, and I (through lots of interviews with no connections) found a job in it. But my uncle--one of the uncles who was instrumental in helping me get a job in the sleep field--now works for a drug company. And he knows attorneys there. Am I working the connection angle? Oh yeah. I'm crossing my fingers and hoping something will come of it.

And I remain impressed with those few individuals who, like my uncle, go high places without the connections. That's an incredibly difficult feat. As for me--it's a harsh world out there, especially in this job market; I'm taking all the help I can get.

Best books series

So a friend just posted a long list of his favorite books on facebook. I don't have the patience or memory for that--but I do want to do a few posts about the best books out there, categorized by genre.

The first genre, my favorite, is fantasy. Fantasy authors seem to like to write in series, so here are the best series in fantasy that I'm aware of.

1. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings"
2. George R.R. Martin's "A Game of Thrones"
3. Robin Hobb's "Assassin's Apprentice" (a follow-up series, also excellent and what I'm currently re-reading, is "Fool's Errand")

A warning on Martin--he's pretty graphic.

All three series have great plot, characters, and writing style.

Some LDS writers on Hobb and Martin (Tolkien needs no recommendation):

Orson Scott Card:
"Robin Hobb...arguably set the standard for the modern serious fantasy novel."
"the...excellent heroic fiction of...Robin Hobb and George R. R. Martin..."
Plus two more detailed (and raving) reviews of Hobb's work here and here. Yeah. OSC's a huge Robin Hobb fan.

Brandon Sanderson:
"Robin Hobb...in my opinion writes far better than I do myself."
"George R. R. Martin (is) probably the most skilled epic fantasy writer on the market right now."

This stuff (unlike most the fantasy I read as a teenager) will stand the test of time. It's not just good fantasy. It's good literature.

Any other recommendations?

TV shows to watch this summer

Two recommendations.

The first reminds me in some ways of Firefly--great dialogue, cool characters, Western (although based in today's Kentucky, and not tomorrow's space). I hesitated to watch it at first, because it's based in the South--but it's good. Really good. Justified is definitely a PG-13, though, so don't come blaming me if you don't like the show because of that aspect--but it's the best show on TV right now that I know of. Try it out. Just one episode.

The second one I've mentioned before, but I have to mention again, if only because I don't know anyone else who's seen it, and it deserves to be watched. That show is Journeyman. I little bit of science fiction, but it's more of just a good drama with the sci-fi element creating the drama. It only lasted one season, but you can find it (for absolutely free, and no waiting for the next episode) on Hulu. Next to Firefly, it's the greatest short-lived show I know of.

Two LDS members, two leaders in immigration reform--on different sides

The man behind Arizona's new immigration law is LDS.
Fortunately, he's not the first member of the church to make a difference in immigration. Rex Lee, president of BYU and US Solicitor General, played a big role in immigration and state's rights.
In 1975, Texas passed a law similar in idiocy to the one in Arizona. Illegal immigrants in Texas could not attend public schools.
Carter's administration supported a lawsuit against Texas. Reagan became president, Rex Lee was his Solicitor General, and the Texas case reached the Supreme Court.
The Reagan administration debated which side to support. Rex Lee refused to change sides. Rex Lee, and therefore Reagan, fought against Texas.
Unfortunately, our current Supreme Court Chief Justice disagreed with Rex Lee. That doesn't give me much faith in our current Supreme Court.
However, knowing that Rex Lee, a Mormon, had compassion for the underclass gives me hope. I have a fairly good idea of where LDS leaders stand on this issue (they have considerably more compassion than most politicians in Arizona do). I hope LDS politicians will repent (if need be) and have that same compassion. I hope they will become more like Rex Lee.

Rock Band

I played Rock Band for the first time a couple of months ago, and decided I wanted it. I made a deal that if I didn't buy any junk food for a year, I would get myself the game. Well...I caved in. Not to the junk food deal (we haven't bought junk food for months), but to the "wait for a year" part. I saw a deal for Beatles Rock Band with Rock Band II "instruments" and both the Beatles and the Rock Band II software, for about $80. So I bought it.
The package arrived, and not only were the instruments Rock Band I instead of Rock Band II (in other words, not wireless), but the Rock Band II software was nowhere to be found. I emailed the company a complaint, and they gave me a $20 coupon to make up for it. $20 doesn't buy me the software, let alone pay for the difference between the instruments, so I complained again. All I wanted was the Rock Band II software (and that's all I asked for). But instead--they gave me a full refund.
So I got the Rock Band instruments and the Beatles software for free. Plus the $20 gift certificate (which I'll use to pay for most of Rock Band I software and a Classic Rock expansion).
As I've said before, it always pays to complain after you've been ripped off...
In this case it pays so much that I almost feel like I'm taking advantage of them.
Meanwhile, we're enjoying rocking out to the Beatles. Great music that I really should know better than I do.
And "I am the Walrus" is so cool and crazy that I'm beginning to think that the Beatles are the first progressive rock band (and not King Crimson, like I've always believed).
Interesting side note--if you go to buy single tracks for Rock Band off the internet, you'll find they have a separate category for "prog." Looks like my obscure tastes are going a bit more mainstream.

Goodbye Arizona

We've been making a list of possible places to move to after law school. If I stay with my current job, which is a real possibility, we are limited to Cincinnati, Cody Wyoming, and maybe Denver. Another possibility is a judicial clerkship for one year. I'd work for a judge for one year for not much more than what I was making as a teacher, but it would look real nice on a resume. So we've been thinking about places where I could apply for a clerkship. Pretty much just places out west. Once I clerk for a judge in any given state, my resume looks extra nice in that state; for example, if I clerk for the Supreme Court of Idaho, I'd probably be able to get a job with the best firms in Idaho.
Now, though, I've decided to take Arizona off that list of potential places.
Why?
Ever since my mission, I've looked at the pros and cons to living in the US versus western Europe. Europeans focus more on education, have more culture, cheaper (yet just as good) healthcare, better public transportation, more livable cities, less violence.
The US has less of an obsession with sex (although that is changing), stronger freedoms of speech and religion (both exist in Europe too, but they're slightly more protected here), and, at least until now, you weren't required to carry around identification with you so you could prove to the cops that you were in the country legally.

A Russian friend of mine in Germany assisted Eastern Europeans coming (illegally) into Germany. He'd tell them to not speak when they went out in public, for fear of the police hearing their foreign language and asking for their papers. Those unfortunate to have black or brown skin (mostly people from Africa and the Middle East) could be stopped by police just because their skin was a different color. If they didn't have identification on them, the police assumed they were in the country illegally.
Now, Arizona has created a law that I pray will be found unconstitutional. Police in Arizona are now obligated to stop everyone they suspect might be an illegal immigrant (ie--looks Mexican) and ask for their papers. If they don't have papers on them, they can be arrested (regardless of whether or not they are American citizens). If you're brown and you want to go on a bike ride, better take your driver's license. And forget about going for that swim.

And let's not even think about how crime will soar when criminals realize they can victimize illegal immigrants without fear of the police being called. If your house is robbed or your daughter raped, and you're an illegal immigrant and you call the cops, you can kiss the USA goodbye. If you call the cops, you'll be deported. Crime will go up, while the reporting of crime will go down.

An article about it (and about the sad fall of what used to be one of America's great politicians) is here. Another article here. Sad times indeed. America just got a little less great.

The Church speaks up on the whole Glenn Beck/Social Justice thing

Okay, so it's just the church newsroom, not an official proclamation. Still, worth a read. I'm also interested in hearing what you think about it.
Here it is. Click on the link at the church website for the actual article.

Criticism at Church Part II

Funny incident yesterday; I'm sitting in Priesthood opening exercises, and a friend is struggling with his 14-month-old daughter. She and Peter are the only two pre-nursery, post-newborns in the ward. Peter is not in the room.
The kid is being a bit fussy, and her dad is trying to settle her down. I remember a previous encounter with a certain ward member who criticized me in private after Peter acted up a bit (detailed here), so I looked over to the other side of the room to see how this same man was reacting to this new disturbance.
He erupted. Loudly, and in public. Said something about how he couldn't hear and how my friend needed to take his daughter out. The whole room heard him.
There were two people acting like children in that room. One of them had an excuse.
His behavior still makes me angry. On the upside, a large portion of the ward saw that behavior yesterday. He publicly embarrassed himself.
It was then that I realized that, given what I know of this man's very structured concepts of gender roles (to put it nicely), and his church callings when his kids were small, that it's unlikely he ever dealt directly with his own pre-nursery children in church. That, and possibly some hearing loss that he's sensitive about, may contribute to his poor behavior. Given what others might think of him now, following this latest incident, I might even have a little pity for him.

Blog help?

We're planning a church site/Montreal (and maybe Quebec) trip for May--we're both very excited about it.
Meanwhile, I keep on getting spam comments on this blog. They usually pop up at just one or two posts I've made. Any ideas on how to get rid of those comments? I know I can delete them, but that's getting old--there needs to be an easier way. I don't want to restrict access or make it a bigger pain to comment. I wish I could restrict comments on just those posts (other blogs have the ability to halt comments on one post at a time, but I don't think blogger is quite that advanced). The only thing I can figure out is to delete the posts that get the spam, and then repost them.
Any better ideas?
If you see any posts here in the next few days that seem familiar, it's just because I deleted the original and then re-posted it. I hope that works...

Review of the very first live performance of Trans-Siberian Orchestra's "Beethoven's Last Night"

For my 30th birthday, April and I went to Taft Theatre in downtown Cincinnati to see Trans-Siberian Orchestra kick off their first non-Christmas tour. We sat fairly close--some of the best balcony seats--close enough to clearly see the performer's faces, even with my poor eyesight. Our small crowd of about 2000 people was the first to hear TSO perform the entire "Beethoven's Last Night" album live. It's one of my favorite albums (in my top 20).

Their Christmas tours are played at much bigger venues, attract much larger crowds, and have more performers. The Christmas tours also dilute some of the TSO greatness, as they hire extra musicians so they can run an East tour and a West tour simultaneously.

Not so here. This was TSO at its finest. I've seen ex-Savatage members Al Pitrelli (guitar) and Johnny Lee Middleton (drums) perform several times during TSO's Christmas West tours, but this was the first time I'd seen ex-Savatage members Chris Caffery (guitar) and Jeff Plate (drums). Ex-Savatage producer/writer Paul O'Neill also made a brief appearance. I say ex-Savatage because, because although Savatage might not technically be dead, they haven't performed live or put out an album for ten years. TSO has largely replaced Savatage.

The band played the entire rock opera "Beethoven's Last Night," with a narrator explaining a bit of the story in-between songs. The narrator was good, but I knew the story well enough that I wish they would have left him out and stuck to the music. The music itself was incredible. Six talented vocalists, two piano/keyboard players, and an electric violinist added some additional flair to the traditional guitar/bass/drums. Jon Oliva, the heart and soul of Savatage, was missing in action--the songs he sang on this album were performed quite well by another vocalist. The other vocalists were also excellent, although I wish the song "Who is this Child" had been sung with less theatrics and more melody (and more like the version on the album).

I'm not sure how to explain how it is being in a concert like this. It's intense. I was grinning like a madman through half the songs. And when they finished the album, and after Al Pitrelli introduced the band members, they played a couple of Savatage songs.

The first, "Believe," is one of my top-ten songs. The only downside was that Jon Oliva wasn't singing it (although his replacement did a very good job). It's an intense gorgeous song. Originally released on Savatage's album "Streets: A Rock Opera," it was recently re-done for TSO's latest album, "Night Castle."
The other was an instrumental pulled mainly from Savatage's "Dead Winter Dead," the greatest album of all time.

And of course, lasers, projected pictures in the background, and stage fog all contributed to the atmosphere (although I personally think that lasers are overrated and should've been left out).

The concert lasted about 3 hours (although I did the math, and the actual time the band played music was only about 1.5 hours--the album, which is 1.25 hours, plus a couple of additional songs).

Overall, though, seeing the first live performance of this album (and hearing "Believe,") made this the best concert I've ever been to, and contributed to making this landmark birthday the best birthday I've ever had.

One of the reasons I'm happy the healthcare bill passed

A professional writer writes about writers and health insurance--and about the struggles writers and every other tiny business has had with the way America has done healthcare.
The last part of the article turns into a little bit of a rant against the Republicans, which a few of you might be offended about (personally, I'm not--the Republicans haven't put forth any serious attempts to solve healthcare since Richard Nixon, who would be denounced as a socialist/commie on talk radio today for his attempts at healthcare reform).
Anyway, read it, and skip the last few paragraphs if you're sensitive that way. This is something all aspiring writers and small business owners should be happy about.
The link.
And yes, he does look like a Tolkien dwarf.

Cincinnati First, Salt Lake City Last

On the craziness scale, anyway.
I'm a bit surprised Cincy beat out cities on the coasts, though (especially after having lived in the Bay area).

Local Politics in Utah: Hall of Shame

For those who don't already know, both the Utah senate majority leader and the Utah house majority leader in Utah have had a spectacularly bad year.

The senate majority leader was given a DUI.

And the house majority leader admitted that in 1985, at the age of 30, he was in a hot tub with a 15-year-old. Both were naked. He claims there was no contact; she says differently. (Sounds a bit like Clinton's "I smoked marijuana but I never inhaled" line, except far, far worse). He paid her $150,000 for her silence as recently as 2002.

What's perhaps even more troublesome is that both major newspapers in Utah knew some details about the story since 2002--and kept quite about it. The Deseret News basically got a confession from him (it's unsure exactly how much the Trib knew, but they certainly new enough to investigate it further). The press is supposed to be a check on the government, but they dropped the ball here. And the other incredibly troublesome part--instead of calling him out for being a child predator, his colleagues in politics have shown him a great deal of support since the news broke out.

I'll let you find your own links--there may be new details about the story by the time you read this.

He should be on the national sex offender registry, not in a leadership position in Utah politics. The newspapers should have reported the story years ago, and his colleagues in Utah should do whatever they can to distance themselves from him.

How to Fix Health Care

Health care in the US faces two major problems. It's expensive, and because it's expensive, for some it's out of reach.
The employer-based system we have right now doesn't work. It may have worked when it originated--when people stayed with the same job their entire lives. But times have changed, and our health care system needs to change with it in order to meet society's needs.

Here are the changes I'd like to see.

First, basic cost-effective health care for everyone. Essentially, Medicare for all, but (unlike Medicare), a system that actually cares about costs. Is medicine "A" 99.99% effective and costs $1000/day, and is medicine B 99.98% effective and costs $10/day? Currently, (as far as I understand) cost is not a consideration in determining care (at least for Medicare), and the (slightly) more effective yet (absurdly) more expensive product would be used. Obviously, if we are concerned about costs (and as health care rates continue to rise, we need to be), we need to make some adjustments.

Also needed is a clear, reasonable voice in every non-emergency test/surgery/procedure to say, "is this really necessary? Is there a cheaper way to do this that's just as good?" A huge amount of health care expenses goes to unnecessary surgeries and tests that may benefit the doctor and the hospital, but don't actually help the patient.

Also, clearly we need what Sarah Palin so (cough) eloquently and accurately (cough) referred to as "Death Panels." People should be encouraged to write living wills and should be encouraged to talk to their families and doctors about end-of-life options. While families and individuals have the right to pay for whatever they wish to, I'm not sure the government (or an employer, for that matter) should pay for 90-year-old Oma's terribly expensive open heart surgery, especially when Oma has liver cancer and isn't expected to live another year anyway. (I've seen several incidents of close to $1 million spent on people like Oma--that's probably taxpayer money there).

An additional possibility: a 10% to 30% copay on the first $10,000 or so, to keep things competitive and keep costs down (but still allow people access to health care when they need it). Medicaid assistance if a person can't afford the copay.

Private or employee insurance (to upgrade to more expensive care such as having your own room in a hospital, etc.) would still be available to those who can afford it. And people could pay out-of-pocket for any upgrade they want.

I think it's a politically moderate proposal, as likely to offend Democrats as Republicans. I also think it's what we need to cut health care costs down to what other people in the civilized world pay (ie--half as much as we pay).

Thoughts?

Adaptation to Survival--the church needs to cater to single adults in their 30s if it wants to keep them

Society is changing. Many people, including members of the church, don't get married until they're in their 30s. From what I've seen, the vast majority of single church members in their 30s would like to be married.
I'm turning 30 pretty soon. I guess I shouldn't be surprised when a song that came out during my mission gets airplay on the classic rock station. And while single adults (should) get kicked out of the young single adult ward when they turn 31, 31's not too far off for me. I'm happily married, but many of my friends are not, and when they turn 31, they have two or three options. First, they can enter a regular family ward. Second, they can enter an older singles ward, if there's one in the area. Third, they can go inactive.
The regular family ward is great for regular families and for older people, but for single people in their 30s and 40s? I'm trying to think of single people (active) between 30 and 45 in our ward, and I honestly don't think there are any. They don't really stick around. Older singles? Sure. Midsingles? Not so much.
Older singles wards don't exist in many areas, and where they do exist, they're attended mainly by those in their 50s. Hardly a great place for a 31-year-old man who's looking for an eternal companion.
So, most often, singles in their 30s go less active. The church largely ignores them, doesn't provide opportunities for a decent social life, so they leave.
Enter the "Midsingles" group.
The Midsingles group is for singles between 31 and 45. Every single in this age group in a stake (or a group of two or three stakes) can attend one specific family ward--so all of the active midsingles in a specific geographic area can meet and socialize together. If they can meet in the same building as the young single adults, so much the better--many of them will be friends with the YSA, and a man that just turned 31 will still be able to interact with his largest dating pool--young women between the ages of 27 and 30. The singles can receive regular callings in the family ward, but then participate in activities just for themselves (FHE, etc.) The family ward provides a primary, so those midsingles with children can still attend as a family.
Like with regular YSA wards, midsingles can choose to stay in their home ward or go here; less active midsingles stay with their home ward.
This program is currently going on--most of it seems to be in California. See http://midsingles.wordpress.com/ for more details.
I'm wondering if there are enough midsingles in Cincinnati to warrant this program--our ward, as small as it is (average attendance of 80) and in the same building as the YSA branch, would be the perfect place. Would this work where you are? Do you see any downsides?

Most miserable cities

A full 25% of the 20 most miserable cities in the US are in Ohio. Ouch. Yet somehow Cincinnati isn't on the list? Not sure how that happened...

Sigh

You hear the one about some wacko Utah politicians who were criticized by 18 BYU scientists for their (mis)understanding of global warming? Or the law professor who is the grandfather of "Intelligent Design"? If only they understood this cartoon...

Another One Bites the Dust

Congrats to my brother and his new wife, who got married yesterday in Idaho Falls. We didn't get to spend as much time out west as we would have liked, but the trip was worth it to see my brother/friend/old roommate get married.
It's also, like always, impressive to see a pair of uncles/aunts take the long haul from Bluffdale to Idaho Falls for the wedding. They did the same for my wedding, and it meant the world to me.
Wish we could make it out here more often--there are other things we've missed because we can't afford to take a few days and the $600 to travel back. We probably won't consider coming back until the next wedding (or until I'm earning a good paycheck).
But hey, you're welcome to come visit us...
It's kind of between Nauvoo and Kirtland (it adds just two hours to the drive), so if you want to do the church history tour, you can visit us and have a free place to crash...

Criticism at Church

April is in charge of singing time in Primary, so I watch Peter during Sunday School. There are a grand total of two children under the age of 18 months in our ward, and both Peter and his friend were in the Sunday School class yesterday.
Peter was being a bit squirmy and a little loud; I tried settling him down, and then took him out. Fifteen minutes later he'd settled down a bit so I took him back in; he again insisted on being noisy, so I again took him out. I'm not sure how long we spent in the classroom, but it wasn't more than 10 or 15 minutes, and it's not like he was yelling and screaming. Just complaining a bit.
After class, a member I don't know very well, came up to me and said,
"Brother Jones, I know I don't know you all that well, but could you take your child out of the class a bit earlier? (The teacher) said it sounded like a bus station in there."
Now, average attendance in this ward is 80. We've been there for 18 months. We've been very active in the ward and gotten to know most of the active members fairly well (partly because of the small size of the ward, and partly because of the nature of my calling). I know everyone in the EQ, and all of the ward leadership--I know at least 75% of the active adult men fairly well. I don't know this man (and honestly, I don't really want to). I don't know the Sunday School teacher either. They are both the type who don't reach out to new members and don't really participate in the ward (as far as I know) beyond their callings.
I reacted politely to his criticism, (and now somehow need to balance it with criticism from others that I take Peter out of the classroom too quickly). Inside, though, I was angry.
How do you (and should you) react to child-raising criticism from ward members? Does the source of this criticism matter?

Lawyers and Science

Last week was the "Creation Lesson" in Sunday School. The teacher did a fantastic job of keeping the lesson doctrinal, despite attempts by some class members to veer off into tangents.
On one of those tangents, someone makes some remark about scientists, and someone else, a long-term member of the ward and an attorney, says "scientists think they know everything; they're so prideful."
And the retort: "And lawyers are so humble." I wish I could have been the one to say that, but that award goes to the local statistician.
Seriously, with a past in science and a future in law, I think I have a unique perspective on the subject. Any group is going to have pompous jerks (even Sunday School classes may have them). Sure, some scientists are prideful. But if you want to find large amounts of pride in well-educated groups, you'll have much more luck finding it among politicians, economics and business people, and lawyers.
Scientists are well-aware that they don't have all the answers. If they did, they'd be out of a job. And the majority of the many scientists I have met have been wonderful, humble people.
And I've met a lot of nice lawyers too, in the past 18 months. Dozens. Some wonderful people. And some incredibly pompous, arrogant, soulless jerks. Who's more prideful, on average? No contest.
Oh, the irony of a lawyer calling scientists prideful...

LDS Athlete

The Winter Olympics are still several months away, but it appears that one Australian athlete, Torah Bright, will be one of the more popular athletes in the competition. She's a snowboarder, she's already won a few world championships, and she has the kind of looks and personality that attracts positive media attention.
And she's active LDS.
If all goes well, we should be hearing a lot more about her as the Olympics approach.

Rock Band? Wii?

I've started doing our taxes, and it's apparent that having a kid while making very little money results in huge tax returns.
We've been a bit short on cash the past couple of months, and our spending has gone down--our credit card bill this month is the smallest it's been in a long time. We want to keep it that way--but we also want to do something fun when we get our tax return.
What I want: Rock Band (and possibly Dragon Age).
What April wants: Wii.
We do not have a game system (outside of our PC, which should be able to handle Dragon Age).
I looked up info on Rock Band on Wii, and it appears as if Wii users can't purchase additional tracks or CDs past the basic ones. That option is a necessity for me. (For example, I'd absolutely need to have Boston's full first album).
So, my questions:
1. What are the best Wii games? (Primarily for April).
2. What game system is best with Rock Band? I'm looking at both the ability to download additional songs as well as price.
3. How do you hook a game system up so that you can download new songs? Does it require a certain kind of internet access? I've never actually owned a game system, so...
4. How do game systems hook up to a monitor? (We have an extra flat-screen computer monitor--can you connect a game system to those? Or do you need a TV with the proper connective abilities?)

Awesome

Trans-Siberian Orchestra is finally doing a non-Christmas tour, featuring Beethoven's Last Night in its entirety (plus other stuff during the second half). Their first stop will be in Cincinnati--on March 25, my 30th birthday.
As far as I know, that show is TSO's very first non-Christmas show. And I'm going to make sure I'm there.
Talk about a cool birthday gift.
Savatage is gone, and I'll never be able to see them in concert, but a non-Christmas TSO concert--it'll be the next best thing. Most of Savatage will be there (unfortunately, I'm not sure about Jon Oliva or Zak Stevens). And having to travel just five miles to see them (a whole 3 blocks if I'm walking there from work)--let's just say that I've never been more excited about a concert. Never.
If you're a fan, March 25 would be a perfect time to come visit...

Misunderstandings and Missionary Work in Europe

One of my biggest pet peeves is something that is highly damaging to missionary work in Europe. It can manifest it in many different ways: here are two examples I've heard given at church.
1. A statement made in a Sunday School class for teenagers close to missionary age. "All of the good blood in Europe has already been converted, and they immigrated over here, and that's why missionaries in Europe don't get any baptisms."
2. A statement made by a church leader over the pulpit. "We're in Europe not for the Europeans, but for people from Turkey and other countries who immigrate to Europe."

BS. (I thought about spelling BS out, since it's certainly deserved here, but I'll restrain myself).
In the strongest sense possible, BS.

In response to the first statement: missionaries in Europe do get baptisms. They baptize actual Europeans. There are plenty of good Europeans in Europe, and some of them are willing to accept the gospel. Telling future missionaries they won't have success can be (and often is) a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's something Satan himself would say.

In response to the second statement: again, Europeans do get baptized. And once they get baptized, many of them remain active. Contrast that with non-Europeans who (in my experience) all go inactive. I served in two wards and two branches, and never once met an active member who was not either European or American (including South American). We tried working with a couple of these inactive members (Middle Eastern and African, mainly), but the language and/or cultural barriers were just too great--they didn't feel comfortable in the congregation. I know some missionaries in Europe in the past specifically sought out foreigners for easy baptisms, but such work is less effective. It doesn't work. It's not why the Lord sends missionaries to Europe. Missionaries are in Europe to serve Europeans.

If you know someone who's serving or who will serve in Europe, tell them this: Europeans are good people. They are intelligent, and they have good hearts. And missionary success among Europeans is very possible, as long as the missionary believes it's possible. Satan has his lies, and too often church members pass them on. Don't believe them. Believe in the people you're sent to serve, and believe in yourself.

Psycho Mormon Politician

So I was up in Idaho Falls a couple of weeks ago, visiting the in-laws, when I heard about a local guy who's running for governor of Idaho. Now the current governor isn't exactly the type of guy I'd vote for. And Butch Otter sames like a strange fictional name. Kind of like Rex Rammell, one of the guys who's trying to replace him. Only problem is, Butch Otter, as extreme as he is, looks like a sane moderate compared to Rex Rammell.
Rammell is LDS, lives in Eastern Idaho, and has recently arranged a meeting for LDS Elders to discuss the White Horse Prophecy, the Constitution hanging by a thread, and all sorts of other....we'll be polite and call them space doctrines. They're of questionable origin, and the church has distanced itself from them.
Here's a link to a copy of his invitation. Here's a link to the church's response.
Best of all, though, was an area authority who, within my hearing, said that Rex Rammell had "said some very idiotic things." Ouch.
People have certainly been excommunicated for less--I imagine there's a chance that will happen here, if Rammell doesn't back down. Fortunately, he doesn't have many followers--most people think he's wacko, even in Eastern Idaho.

Impersonating Mormon Missionaries

Apparently, ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), tired of just arresting/detaining Mormon missionaries (I wrote several posts on that subject here), has started impersonating them.
That's right. Apparently, they dress up as LDS missionaries to track down illegal immigrants.
The article that mentions this practice is here.
If this article is correct, and this is actually happening, I imagine church leadership (along with the ACLU) will have serious problems with the practice. It's even possible that the church could sue to force ICE to stop.
Hopefully the next few weeks will reveal more info on this. I imagine the Salt Lake Tribune will pick up the story and do some research on it. I'll post more info as it comes to light.
(Hat tip: www.timesandseasons.org)

Low crime

Merry Christmas! (And please, if someone wishes you Happy Holidays, don't be offended).
We're packing up, ready to fly into Salt Lake late tonight.
Meanwhile, experts are confused as to why crime rates have dropped recently--especially since poor economic times usually lead to an increase in crime. (See, for example, this article.)
The article misses something obvious--something I predicted about a year ago. Living in Cincinnati, I've seen a bit of how Obama's presidency has affected blacks. I think a detailed study would show that blacks are committing less crime now than two years ago (because of a role model in the White House), while whites are committing more (due to the recession).
There may be other factors at work here, too, but Obama's presidency has raised test scores of black students (see this article). It would make sense if it also affected crime rates.
What do you think?

Is there anybody out there?

As I sat in Sunday School today, trying to keep Peter from crying, I missed the presence of a fellow Democrat who moved out last summer. Someone I could roll my eyes with when the teacher or class members made unwarranted political remarks (which happens more than you'd think); someone to give moral support if the need came to step in to make a comment like "no, your ideal capitalist rich/poor society conflicts with 4th Nephi, where a near-perfect society had no rich and no poor," (but with more tact).
Today that was especially important, as the topic was government--a topic ripe for non-doctrinal political intrusion.
There may be other Democrats in the ward, but I think many ward members feel that all active ward members are Republicans, and so the Democrats don't speak up (or go less active, or never join in the first place) and the Republicans make unthinking political remarks.
The Clinton bumper sticker was my only tip that that guy was Democrat.
Maybe next summer, when half our EQ moves out and is (hopefully) replaced by an equal or greater number of elders, one of the new move-ins will have an equally revealing bumper sticker, and I'll again have someone there for much-needed moral support.

Chuck

New favorite show:
Chuck.
Chuck is a mild-mannered Buy More employee who, as part of the Nerd Herd team, fixes electronics, who went to Stanford but never graduated and who lives with his sister and her fiance--until someone downloads government secrets into his brain. Then, he becomes a government spy, and his old life becomes his cover.
Firefly fans will enjoy the presence of Adam Baldwin, who plays a supporting role.
Chuck's a little bit like the movie "Get Smart." Funny, exciting, and definitely (intentionally) goofy.
Plus, prominently featuring Mr. Roboto (Styx) and Tom Sawyer (Rush) doesn't hurt. Both songs end up saving the day.
Check it out. Hopefully your library system is decent enough to offer the first season (my library, unfortunately, is not). Definitely my favorite comedy.

Visit missionaries

My younger brother had his mission farewell at about the same time I got a job offer--so we didn't end up going to Utah at that time, and I haven't seen him for a year-and-a-half. He hasn't met Peter yet.
He's in the Indiana mission, which is not too far from where we are--and he is currently a mere two hours away (he was just emergency transferred after his blowgun-carrying, squirrel-trapping companion seriously broke his ankle and so went home to Texas four months early).
So, the question is, do we see if we can go out to meet him? Or would that be too weird?
What do you think?

Mormon Paparazzi

Anyone else see a problem with a website devoted to following the prophet around (including details about what restaurants he visits, etc. etc.)? I'd link to it, but I don't want the guy who runs it to find his way over here (this isn't a private blog, and I welcome stuff from people I don't know, but I don't want to get into arguments with the people running the website). In any case, type in "Follow the Prophet" (one word) and end it with a .net to find the site.
I don't envy people who have no privacy. I saw one of the 12 in the men's dressing room at the SJ temple (I'm pretty sure he went through the same session as I did), and I thought, "I could go introduce myself, or I could let him have some peace from having strangers introduce themselves to him." So I let him have peace. Being shy might have had something to do with it too (so shy that when I attended the same ward as Steve Young, I tried to avoid him only to have him come over and ask me my name). I think my reaction would be different out here in the midwest/south, if only because well-known church leaders wouldn't be harassed as often at restaurants, etc. etc. because almost no one knows who they are, and so they would have an easier time finding privacy, but I think everyone is entitled to some degree of privacy somewhere. That includes at the temple and taking your wife out to eat. And if the masses discover your favorite restaurant, it may be good for the business at the restaurant, but it's not good for your sanity as a human being. I have my doubts about the prophet going to dinner at Dee's again now that the paparazzi and the obsessed fans know he likes to eat there.

150 years

150 years ago today, what is probably the most important book in all of science, and definitely the most important book in all of biology, was first published.
Origin of Species.
I quote from the book:
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.

Our understanding of how the world works has changed immensely in the past 150 years, and much of that was due to the publication of this book. We now understand how diseases evolve (so there's a new flu virus every year, and HIV is impossible to stop). We now understand who pesticides only work for so long (the animals they're used on evolve).
Almost every big idea in biology--how organisms change, genetics, DNA, ecology, etc.--has been discovered in the past 150 years, and much of that has to do with Charles Darwin's research.
What a great time to be alive.

Cooking

So I accompanied April to the church Thursday so I could babysit while she attended the meeting formerly known as Enrichment. (The EQ babysits so all the women can attend, which ended up being pretty useless this time around because the only kids there belonged to the two guys who were babysitting, and who both rather would have watched their own children from the comforts of their own homes).
We'd been told about the "great food" served after the meeting, and so we both looked forward to our reward. A collection of side dishes and desserts, none of them especially great, with the exception of an oatmeal spice cake.
"This is good," I told the other babysitter, because I wanted to comment on liking something there, and I didn't feel any of the other food merited praise.
"You like it? I made it," he told me.
Figures. The one good dish at a Relief Society meeting, and it's made by a guy. Of course, that doesn't stop people in Sunday School from saying stuff like "real men aren't in the kitchen baking cookies," or making jokes about how guys can't cook anything but grilled meat.
Maybe it's time to reverse the stereotype.

Phone calls

What's the latest you'd call a family you don't know well, on a weeknight, for a non-emergency? What's the earliest in the morning you'd call?
The message we received this morning reminded me of why I like to turn phones off at night. Since our house phone is run through the computer (magicJack, the poor people's phone, which has saved us hundreds of dollars so far), turning the phone off is effortless. And it stops those annoyingly late phone calls in their tracks.

Pictures

April's posted some new pictures of Peter at the other blog. Go check it out.

Gay rights in Utah

Most of you know about the LDS church's take on gay marriage, and the support the church and members of the church gave to Proposition 8 in California.
Meanwhile, in Salt Lake, the city council has been working on a bill that would make discrimination against homosexuals in housing or employment illegal. The First Amendment of the Constitution pretty much protects religions already (in other words, they LDS church does not have to hire or house those who practice homosexuality, or even those who are homosexual who don't practice homosexuality--although they do hire and house the latter). But the proposed bill would mean that non-religious entities would not be able to discriminate.
Many of the conservative politicians (especially the extremists) in Utah have voiced disapproval about the proposed bill.
Yesterday, the church came out in support of the Salt Lake bill. The official statement is here.
In my opinion, the church has reached a happy medium here--protecting homosexuals from discrimination while protecting marriage. It's relatively rare for the church to make new official political statements, so I'd encourage you to look this one up and read it.

No English? Here's a citation.

20 cops in Dallas gave out at least 38 citations to drivers who couldn't speak English--for not being able to speak English. An excellent opinion article on the incident here.
Besides the fact that all of these cops lack common sense, what else is going on?
Is it racism? Xenophobia? Frustration at not being able to communicate? Does it really matter what we call it? It's ugly, and it needs to be stopped.
We may be over a lot of the racism against blacks (except for the racist belt, apparently). But other minorities are still discriminated against on a regular basis.

Ranked #5

University of Cincinnati's football team is ranked 5th in the nation. After BYU's big loss (a loss to TCU would've been okay, but an overwhelming defeat is not), it's good to have a more successful team to root for. They just beat Louisville 41 to 10 (ouch, Brent--sorry about that).
The funny thing is that everyone around here is an Ohio State fan. We live less than 5 miles from the University of Cincinnati, yet our neighbors put up Ohio State flags and cheer for Ohio State instead of the local team. Only this year, Cincinnati's the better team.
So I'm rooting for all the MWC teams (and hope they prove again that the BCS system is crap) and I'm rooting for my current school's team. It's the first time in over 50 years that they've been ranked above Ohio State, and that's definitely something to cheer about.

This guy has class

Some of you may disagree with me, but I can't imagine getting all of the abuse from fellow church members that Harry Reid has gotten, and still keeping my cool.
The church is pretty specific about there being good in both political parties, etc., and I know of General Authorities that adhere to both parties.
But keeping your cool when fellow church members tell you that, because of your politics, you can't be a good member (or a member at all)--wow. I have to admit, I don't keep calm--but Reid sets a great example for me.
Here's an article about how he deals with it.

Science Music Videos

These music videos give me chills every time I watch them. Yes, I'm still a science nerd. But the wonders of the universe combined with catchy music is too cool to not pass on to you.
Science needs more people like Carl Sagan and Bill Nye. Science needs warm, well-spoken spokespeople. The anti-scientists have plenty of popular spokespeople, and science needs to take time out from all that intensive research, and show the public, in a non-threatening manner, what all that research is about.
Meanwhile, I'm waiting and watching for another series like Cosmos.

The Church's take on freedom of religion is politically liberal

Elder Oaks, in 1992, stood before part of Congress as a representative of the LDS church and said, "we would prefer that the Supreme Court reverse the Smith case and restore the full constitutional dimensions of the First Amendment protection of freedom of religion." The link is here (scroll halfway down for the specific article).
I'm oversimplifying, but the Smith case was basically about whether members of a religious group could engage in religious ceremonies that involved peyote (an illegal drug). The majority ruled against the religious group, and thus against the freedom of religion.
What's most interesting here (besides the fact that the LDS church wants these people to be able to use peyote for religious purposes) is that those who voted for religious freedom were liberals, while those who voted to restrict religious freedoms were conservatives.
In other words, the LDS church, when dealing with religious freedoms, is decidedly politically liberal.
Scalia, Rehnquist, White, Stevens, Kennedy, and O'Connor all voted to restrict religious freedoms. Scalia, Kennedy, and O'Connor are all conservatives, placed on the Supreme Court by Reagan. Stevens was appointed by Ford (a Republican) and is usually seen as liberal (although sometimes, like here, he doesn't vote that way). I don't know much about White, but from what I can tell he was neither conservative nor liberal.
The dissenters--those who agreed with Elder Oaks and the LDS church--were all liberal. They include Blackmun, Brennan, and Marshall. Marshall was a liberal, put in by Johnson. Blackmun, put in place by Nixon, started conservative but became quite liberal (and was firmly liberal when the Smith case came along). Brennan was the leader of the liberal wing of the Supreme Court, placed there by Eisenhower.

It's obvious that both political parties have good parts, and both have bad parts. The church keeps repeating this, but I'm not sure it's getting through to the majority of the members. It's clear, however, that the liberals on the Supreme Court are more interested in protecting our religious freedoms than the conservatives.

TV shows

A while back I posted on shows on Hulu. I've recently watched a little bit of three more shows:
1. Bones: OK. Reconstructing dead people is OK, I guess, but it kind of gets old after the second or third time. Decent show, but not worth my time.
2. Fringe. I had high hopes for this one, but it's all pseudo-science and no science. X-Files had the rational Scully to contrast with Mulder. Fringe is all Mulder, and somehow he's always right. The plot's interesting, but I can't suspend my disbelief when every single crackpot idea they come up with ends up working.
3. Fast Forward. So far, I like it. Science fiction, pulling two actors from Lost and one from Firefly, with a cool idea and decent characters. We'll see if the characters develop as time goes on. I'll keep watching this one.

I'm also watching Heroes. (I've found myself caring about a couple of the characters, even if the show has dropped a bit in quality. And I figure that Lost had its poor moments, but managed to recover, so maybe Heroes will too).
Looking forward to the last season of Lost.
Want to watch Joss Whedon's Dollhouse, but I'm not willing to pay money for it, so that one might have to wait until Hulu offers the first season, or until I can get my hands on it some other way.

What your car says about you

An interesting study about what your car says about you. Essentially, Honda and Toyota owners have a much better chance of having a college degree than Ford or Chevy owners.
I haven't looked at car reliability statistics for years, but when I did, Toyota and Honda were significantly more reliable than Ford and Chevy. When we finally have money to afford another car, I imagine we'll get a Toyota or a Honda to replace our Geo Prism (another car with a good reputation, but no longer being made).
What do you think--why don't Ford and Chevy owners have college degrees while Toyota and Honda owners do?
Also, as a side-note, apparently the founder of the company that did the study has a PhD from BYU.

By degrees

We're blessed to live in a country that offers us some protections. The poor can get food, shelter, and healthcare. Not quite up to European standards (and our standard of living isn't quite as high as, say, Norway's), but not too bad.
But the way these systems work can create problems.
For example, let's say your family can get Medicaid if you make $16,000 or less a year. If you make $16,001, you can't get Medicaid. Now, Medicaid is worth a lot more than one dollar. So, really, you get more benefits if you work just a little bit less. With the price of health insurance these days, those benefits can be quite significant.
An intelligent government healthcare plan would, like Medicaid, be based on the poverty line. But it would change by degrees. If you make less than 80% of the poverty line, you'd get Medicaid for free. At 80%, you'd pay a small fee for Medicaid. That fee would increase slightly at 90% of the poverty level, and continue increasing slightly, depending on your income and family size, until you're paying for it at cost.
That way, no one gets a significantly better deal by working less, poor people have an incentive to work, and those who make just over 90% of the poverty level don't get screwed over (like they do now).
Of course, all of this would require some sort of government option--but the government option already exists. You just have to stop working to get it. And that's the problem.

Planning a trip

We have three trips planned in the next year:
First, we'll be going down to Indiana in two weeks to visit my cousin and see forests in the fall. Just a two days, one night thing.
Second, we'll be flying out to Utah/Idaho for Christmas and the New Year.
Third, (and the one that will require the most planning), we want to take the week I have off for spring break to visit Kirtland, Palmyra, a friend who will (hopefully) be living in upstate New York, Toronto, and possibly Montreal (if time allows).
Unfortunately, Rick Steves just does guidebooks for Europe. And my experience with all other guidebooks has been less-than-satisfactory. (I spent three nights in a hostel in Paris that another guidebook had listed; my experience was so bad that I then made sure that, for the next ten weeks, every place I stayed in was recommended by Rick Steves).
Where would you visit in Northern Ohio/Upstate New York/Eastern Canada? Any positive experiences? Any places to avoid? Rick Steves can't help me, but maybe you can.

Healthcare reform

A friend posted an interesting link on facebook--Five Common Myths About Healthcare Around the World.
Definitely worth looking at if you're interested in having an informed opinion on the healthcare debate.
Hopefully this time around we can have some sort of positive change. I care less about whether it comes from the Democrats (Obama) or the Republicans (Bennett) than I do about whether we pull some type of reform off, or we leave things as they are. The insurance companies would like to leave things as they are, but even they are starting to realize that the worse things get, the more we'll want to get rid of them; even the insurance companies are starting to realize that some type of minimal reform is necessary in order for them to stay in business in the long-run.
There are multiple ways to reform the system that are superior to the way things are now. Let's hope we choose one of them for better healthcare at a reduced price.

Oops

Cal Thomas, a conservative radio talk show host, Fox News commentator, and newspaper article writer, recently had this to say in a newspaper opinion column: "With Democrats controlling all three branches of government..."
Now, if someone occasionally says something stupid in public, I'm willing to give them a break. If a blog-writer says something wrong, it's not such a big deal. But this is a newspaper column that goes out to a great number of newspapers. It should've been carefully written and fact-checked. So I'm not sure what happened here. I guess there are three options:
1. Cal Thomas is lying to make it seem like Democrats have more power than they actually do.
2. Cal Thomas thinks the Judicial branch (the Supreme Court) is Democrat when it is most definitely Republican.
3. Cal Thomas doesn't know what the three branches of the government are.
I think this is an honest mistake, and that Cal Thomas got confused about what the three branches of government are. I think he forgot about the judicial branch and split the legislative branch into two branches. It's sad when political commentators don't know enough about their own country's politics to correctly identify the three branches of government.
For the record, those three branches are the executive (president), legislative, and judicial. And the judicial branch still leans to the right.

Gossip

Tim's definition of gossip: discussing true or false details about someone else that that person would not want you to discuss, and that's none of your business anyway.
Our bishop got emotional today as he recounted a recent discussion with a ward member. The ward member expressed surprise and disappointment that she had not found out about another ward member's serious illness sooner. The ill ward member had asked others to keep the details quiet, and those others had done so.
The bishop told us how proud he was of our ward--that we didn't engage in gossip.
What a great bishop.
I know I've been horrified to find out that people knew things they had no business knowing about me (no, not some dastardly sin or bad habit, but a secret nonetheless). I lost a great amount of respect for the person who spread that gossip to those who had no business knowing it.
If it's gossip, don't spread it.
On a side note, the newest member of our ward expressed delight that his first Sunday here we already had his membership records and hometeaching assignments for him. "In Utah, it took six months for us to get callings." I love living out here.

Things

Things I love:
A happy baby. He's a charmer. And as the only baby in the ward, he gets to practice that charm quite a bit.
Jungle Jim's, the international grocery store around here. Sure, it's a 30-minute drive. But it's worth it just to get awesome cheese and whatever else looks good. Too bad the bread isn't up to European standards--but I guess I can go to Panera for that.

Things that disturb me:
People getting in a huff about Obama speaking to our school children. He's the president. The only reasons I can think of for getting in a huff about this is, one, you're paranoid, or two, you don't want your child to realize that Obama isn't as bad as you make him out to be. Next thing you know these same parents will object to the daily recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools...
Ignorance about healthcare. Our healthcare system is a problem. Many people know this (including many Republicans--who had political power for eight years and yet chose to do nothing about it). We're the only country that claims it's first world that does not have some type of national health care system. The employer-based method doesn't work. It destroys market-incentives (limited options when it's your employer, and not you, picking your insurance), and it creates instability when people switch or lose jobs. There are better ways. The rest of the civilized world knows that. As the healthcare problem gets worse in the US, we are starting to realize that too.

Things I'm grateful for:
A three-day weekend, and spending two of those days with my wife and child.

Before you forward

I posted quite a while ago about an email forward my old principal sent to all his teachers. I think reason #27 I decided teaching wasn't for me was I don't want to have a gullible boss. Most high school principals are glorified politicians/jocks, and are not especially intelligent.
Anyways, apparently with the new proposed healthcare bill, gullible people are still forwarding that type of email. So I tracked down some hints on how to tell if a forwarded email is accurate or not (hint--if you got it forwarded from someone and you're sending it on to others, chances are the email is seriously deficient).
Snopes can help too. Of course, the best advice is not to send it in the first place. And don't believe it when you get it.
Oh, and if I'm in your email forward list, leave me on there. There's little I like more than directly refuting a bogus claim in an email forward, no matter how minor the mistake might be.

Facebook poison

A friend from BYU recently posted his political views on Facebook, saying he'd re-elect President Obama. The post got a lot of comments (partially because this guy has almost 800 friends...)
I "liked" the post, and then started receiving emails commenting on the post. This comment, for some reason, appeared in my email but not on facebook: "...you CANNOT claim you are LDS if you support their politics and the leftist values."
I responded:
"In response to an unfortunate post that appeared in my email but no longer appears here--
One can be a member of the church, in good standing, and support any number of political views. Heck, I know Mormons in good standing who believe all sorts of wacky fringe stuff. To say that one cannot accept European-style politics (which is not fringe) and still be a good Mormon is to strip the majority of European Saints of their religion."
The response (and I'm leaving out some of the insults to Obama supporters and to Obama himself), "No, you cannot claim you are LDS and support church morals if you support current administration - it is totally opposed."

For the record: I support the current administration (although I may not agree with every decision they make). I am LDS. The majority of European Saints like Obama much better than they liked Bush. They like their "socialized medicine." In the US, they would consider themselves Democrats. And they are fantastic members of the church.

How do we combat Facebook poison? What do we say if it comes up in Sunday School or at a ward activity? How do we combat the lie that says that you have to sit on the "right" side of the fence in order to be a good Mormon?

End-of-life healthcare

I recently went over the medical and billing records of an elderly lady. She was in fairly poor health, living in a nursing home, recovering from open heart surgery, when she had some complications and was admitted to the hospital. Three or four weeks later she died. Cost of healthcare for those weeks?
Over $800,000.
That's right. Close to a million bucks.
And it wasn't her money. In any case like this, you and I end up paying for it, either through insurance or taxes. And cases like this are quite common.
Thoughts on solutions?

Things work out

Just over seven years ago I was desperately looking for a summer job. I'd started looking long before classes finished. I'd gotten a job offer before the semester ended, but felt prompted to turn it down. And nothing else was presenting itself.
I spent every day looking for work. I made the mistake of moving home, and so I not only had to put up with not being able to find work, I also had to put up with nagging parents. "I saw that McDonalds is hiring. Why don't you apply there?" McDonalds? A notch below my very first job at Arby's? No way.
Life was pretty miserable.
Two months in, I decided I had to get out of the house. My mother was driving me insane. So I called an uncle in California, and asked if I could volunteer at the sleep clinic where he worked. He talked to the woman that would be supervising me, and two days later I was on a plane, headed to Palo Alto. I'd volunteer full-time for seven weeks or so, and hopefully make a good enough impression to be hired back at some later point. I paid my way (and in California that meant $20/night for a dorm room, plus the cost of food, transportation, etc.) Somehow I got out of having to pay for the room, and so my costs were fairly minimal.
The next summer, I flew back out. I worked for the entire summer and the entire fall, eight months total, and made more than three times as much as I would've made working at McDonalds (and I was working, between two different jobs, an average of 45 hours a week, whereas a place like McDonalds would've probably limited it to 15 hours a week--so I was really making nine times as much money). I paid off student loans, saved up money for next year's schooling, and had enough money leftover to buy a car.
I returned again after graduation, to work another five months. Again, made enough to pay for some education and a ten-week backpacking trip through Europe.
I went back for my second degree, and worked part-time for a couple of clinics in Utah. They didn't pay quite as well as Stanford, and they certainly were a step down in quality, but they helped put me through college the second time.
My boss at the Stanford clinic ended up writing one of my letters of recommendation for law school. And this summer, my healthcare background (along with my science degree and good law school grades) helped me snag a coveted law clerk job that pays well, is good experience, and looks great on a resume.
Lessons learned: follow impressions obtained from prayer and don't despair when they at first seem to be false impressions. Things work out, eventually.
Oh. And don't follow your mom's advice when she tells you to sell out and go work for McDonalds.

Is he really that stupid?

This isn't a conservative/liberal issue. This is just a stupid person alert (and if the liberal commentators make comments as dumb as this, I'll make fun of them too--but you don't get much more stupid than this).
(Caller from Canada): "Has anyone noticed that life expectancy in Canada under our health system is higher than the USA?"
Bill O'Reilly: "Well, that's to be expected Peter, because we have 10 times as many people as you do."
Wow. I still can't believe he's really that stupid. What does the number of people have to do with life expectancy? How is this guy doing a so-called news show?
What an idiot.
The hilarious link of stupidity here.

Trends

A few days ago I got onto facebook and noticed that two friends had just posted their opinion on the facebook poll: Are you in favor of a Government run healthcare system. I decided to immediately follow suit, so on my facebook page there are three identical polls in a row.
All three of us were in favor of goverment-run health care.
All three of us have lived in Europe, where government-run health care is a reality.
I have two friends that have posted quite a bit about health care on facebook recently. One of them has lived in Europe (and actually, he's European, but living in the US and married to an American). The other one has not lived in Europe. Any guesses as to which friend supports government-run health care and which one doesn't?
I wonder if that trend holds steady for larger number of people--if living in Europe (or at least Western Europe) means you're much more likely to support government-run health care.
Anyone out there who's lived in Europe sometime in the past twenty years (and I'm not talking about a few months of study abroad) and doesn't support government-run health care? Let me know.

Front page news

The law firm that I clerk at made front page news on Cincinnati's newspaper a couple of days ago. Front, top, center. Not too shabby, considering there are only five attorneys at the Cincinnati location. It probably helped that a local sports team was involved (fans sued them and won). The important stuff the firm does--the life and death stuff (and the stuff that makes the money) may make the news, but not the front page. The stuff I'm working on won't be hitting page 22 of the local news for another year at least, if at all.
Anyway, we're visiting Utah/Idaho in two weeks, and I'm going to be dropping my name and my resume at a couple of law firms. Being the first person in my extended family to ever attend law school (although at least two relatives plan on following in my footsteps), and as my home ward is entirely lawyer-less, my attorney connections are limited to one friend's dad. So if any of you know any attorneys (especially ones that work for places that do environmental, medical, or pharmaceutical work) let me know. I'll need all the help I can get.
I still have two more years left, but now's the time to apply for summer work next year, and that job is usually the job that hires you on after graduation, so we might be spending next summer in Utah (or somewhere else out west) if I get lucky.

Alternative Medicine

The LDS Science Review (a blog from a scientist/Mormon) writes on alternative medicine--something our government has spent a ridiculous amount of money trying to validate, with almost nothing to show for it. The political power behind it, a Senator from Iowa, said, "One of the purposes when we drafted that legislation in 1992 . . . was to investigate and validate alternative approaches. Quite frankly, I must say it's fallen short. I think quite frankly that in this center, and previously in the office before it, most of its focus has been on disproving things, rather than seeking out and proving things."
Science is science. It doesn't care what your purpose was when you drafted that legislation. It cares about reality. And really, most of this stuff is not that hard to disprove. "Take this...it might be a herb or it might be a placebo." Then analyze the results. I'm sorry the good Senator is surprised the evidence all comes back negative. Or that fake acupuncture actually works better than real acupuncture. Or that any number of herbs work no better than a sugar pill.
Looks like Republican politicians aren't the only ones that are a little slow on understanding science--this Senator is a Democrat. If I ever again hear someone saying we shouldn't be spending money on some scientific endeavor--how about we cut this project first?
Sigh.

Another undocumented LDS missionary article

Just thought I should provide this link to a newspaper article about missionary work and illegal immigrants.
http://www.sltrib.com/faith/ci_12787617
I hope worthy young people will still serve missions, despite the inherent dangers of being deported.

Public opinion

What does "generally agree" mean? If I were to ask you if scientists generally agree that humans have evolved, what would you say? What percentage of scientists need to agree for scientists to be in general agreement?
An interesting survey looks at the info in the US.

First, unsurprisingly, 97% of scientists say that humans have evolved, while only 60% of the public believe that scientists generally agree that humans have evolved. Does 97% constitute "generally agree"? I hope so, but either 40% of the public doesn't believe so, or they're greatly mistaken about what scientists really think.

The most surprising, "people are stupid" moment, however, has nothing to do with evolution. It has to do with whether people favor the use of animals in scientific research. A full 43% of the public opposes it. That's right. Not too far from half. Seriously? Oppose using mice, fruit flies, etc. in scientific research? Do you have any clue where medicine would be without using animals in research? We'd still be in the dark ages. Surprisingly, Republicans and old people (for once) come out on the side of science here. College grads do too--but then again, college grads almost always do, while those who are least educated are the least likely to side with scientists.

There are some other interesting stats there about public/scientist opinions on nuclear energy, global warming, other good stuff. Check it out.

Reviews

Dominion--an awesome game. We played it with friends in Louisville on July 4th. Very cool. We need it.

Amazon.com--crappy service. I found what I thought was a deal, and after I bought it they emailed me to tell me the price was a mistake, and they weren't going to honor it. No chance to give Amazon a thumbs down on their website, and nothing but a weak apology. Boo.

Distribution Center--boo. Be warned if you order via mail (and when you live where we do, you don't really have another option). Two months for a simple, common order (and it's not the fault of the post office). Unfortunately, they have a monopoly for certain items, so be sure to order well in advance.

UC Law Review--Orientation on a Sunday morning? The only time during the week when I absolutely can't be there? And the time when almost every other church-going student has church? Really, now. We'll see about that.

Robin Hobb

Now reading (on the bus, because that's the only free time I have these days):
Robin Hobb: Assassin's Apprentice (and the other two books of that series).
It's the second-best fantasy series ever finished (the first being, of course, Lord of the Rings). Really. A good plot, a complex world, real, compelling characters, and great writing style. It's a gem.
I've read it several times. Fortunately my memory's not that great, and so much of it seems new to me.
Any other recommendations? Preferably series that are already finished, so I don't have to go back and re-read everything after the next book comes out?