There's no place like home

I sent my last missive - Why Do I Care About Other's Religions - to my email list and got this thoughtful message in response:

Tim,
You raise many good points. In our age of better communication and open exchange of ideas, this list is a very good example of this, why or how does religion persist? I ask not to bait you into an argument, but am curious about your thoughts on why people still believe in the face some of the points you raised. And on a similar note I am happy to say I have an atheist friend, you. I think the wide range of opinions on this list gives us all a more balanced view on life.

This is a very interesting question: In this age of enlightenment why is religion still around?

I'll start off by suggesting that we are not currently in an age of enlightenment. I personally feel we are heading down the slope into another dark ages. The religious right has become very vocal again (remember the Moral Majority in the late 70s?)

Science is looked upon as something bad or evil (the stem cell research issues, global climate change nay-sayers, the movie Expelled - which is full of lies - and Ben Stein's subsequent statement that science leads to killing people.)

Republicans are practically required to kowtow to religious leaders and are proud that they are ignorant about science and knowledge.

In a hearing about Abstinence Only Education, Representative John Duncan (R-TN) said "It seems rather elitist to me for people who maybe have degrees in this field to feel that because they’ve studied it somehow they know better than the parents what is best for [their children].” (If this doesn't flabbergast you, you need your flabbergaster reset. And this man is a politician who is creating laws for our country.)

There are a few bright spots. The latest Pew Forum Religious Survey shows that the number of atheists and non-affiliated people is increasing. There are many very prominent and vocal atheist and scientific blogs on the internet. And I have a lot of friends that are either atheists or non-religious.

And yet religion still persists. Why?

The other morning I started up the FJ1200 to ride to work. As it sat idling while I suited up, I noticed a spreading puddle of gasoline underneath it.

Damn it. I know what that is. When I rebuilt the carburettors last year, the one wear part I didn't replace was the inlet needle valves and seats. They looked pretty worn, but I didn't want to spend the money. And it ran fine all fall.

So I shut it off and drove the hack in to work instead.

I found a guy in New Zealand selling some needles and seats on eBay for a reasonable price, and I bought a set. They arrived a couple of days ago and tonight I decided to put them in.

I've taken the carbs off enough times now that it's not a huge deal and it goes pretty quick. I had the new parts in and the bike back together in about two hours. I also learned a new assembly trick for putting the crabs (sic) back on - if you mount them to the air box first, and then mount them to the cylinder head, it's a lot easier.

I cranked the bike over a few times to prime the carbs and then let it start. It was idling nicely, then it started to run rough and then I noticed a puddle of gasoline spreading underneath it again.


Whisky-Tango-Foxtrot?

So, since it was almost 9:00 in the evening, and I know all about gumption traps, I shut off the bike, put away my tools and went inside to write this blog entry.

Robert Pirsig coined the term Gumption Trap in his book Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

The book isn't really about Zen, and it's not really about Motorcycle Maintenance, but it does talk about some interesting things, and it is about a motorcycle trip to Montana - a trip I've made a few times. So I enjoy reading it.

A Gumption Trap is when you are working on something and something goes wrong. It takes the wind out of your sails and then you get frustrated and start to make mistakes. This turns into a downward spiral and things just get worse and worse.

It took me a long time to learn when I should just stop working on something instead of forging on and getting more and more frustrated until something major breaks.

But I did learn it.

But I still have to figure out why the bike is leaking gas.

And I noticed the fork seals are leaking pretty badly. Sigh.

PZ Myers points to a site that will rate your blog's content. His was G.

Mingle² - Online Dating

Apparently I used the word fuck twice and the word hurt once. Hurt is a PG word? What the fuck?

Well, maybe "just" isn't the right word. But Bush appears to be trying to start it back up.

President Bush and the Czech Republic’s leaders on Tuesday defended plans to base part of a U.S. missile shield here despite fierce opposition from Russia.

…Bush, in the Czech Republic as part of an eight-day trip to Europe, spoke as Russia’s opposition to the proposed defense system mounts. Russia believes the shield in Eastern Europe is meant for it, and says it has no choice to boost its own military potential in response.

Bush dismissed those concerns. He said he will make his case directly to Russian President Vladimir Putin later this week on the sidelines of the Group of Eight summit.

Shakesville has the full story.

And me? I'm getting scared again.

Jon Stewart on The Daily Show sums it up:

"When the disembodied voice on CSPAN calls you pussies, you're probably pussies."

WTF are the Democrats doing?

Crooks and Liars has the video.

According to Boing Boing, Jenni Engebretsen, the RIAA's Director of Communications, has been put in charge of PR for the Democratic National Convention.

Boing Boing also has a list of her "Greatest Hits".

If this is true, then I would guess that the Dems may have just lost a bunch of youth and techie votes, as the RIAA has been voted the most hated company in the world by that demographic. (An opinion I hold also.)

Astounding.

The San Francisco Chronicle:
Gonzales says the Constitution doesn't guarantee habeas corpus
Attorney general's remarks on citizens' right astound the chair of Senate judiciary panel

One of the Bush administration's most far-reaching assertions of government power was revealed quietly last week when Attorney General Alberto Gonzales testified that habeas corpus -- the right to go to federal court and challenge one's imprisonment -- is not protected by the Constitution.

"The Constitution doesn't say every individual in the United States or every citizen is hereby granted or assured the right of habeas,'' Gonzales told Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Jan. 17.

Gonzales acknowledged that the Constitution declares "habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless ... in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.'' But he insisted that "there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution.''

Man that Gonzales is as much a pig-fucker as Bush and the rest of them.

I truly believe our government has lost it's mind.

Here is a great column on the SFGate website entitled Sex Will Make You Go Blind
Single? Under 30? You are in grave danger. Your government says so. Please, stop laughing

...
It is the only viable explanation. It is the only way to account for something like, say, the latest twist in the Abstinence Education Program from Bush's increasingly laughable Department of Health and Human Services, a $50 million slice of embarrassing government detritus that is now actually encouraging all states to tell their single, youngish residents that they should -- how to put this so you don't shoot coffee through your nose? -- that everyone should avoid sex entirely, until they turn 30.

See? See your reaction? You are like: No way. You are like: Is the United States government really saying that? You are like: Laughter, a smirk, maybe a shrug and a sigh and a sad shake of the head and another glass of wine because, you know, what the hell is wrong with these people?

Maybe you think I am making this up. Maybe you think that our fair government, as sad and lost and nipple-terrified as it is, can't seriously be suggesting that, to avoid STDs and unwanted pregnancy and unchecked misery in their obviously sad and irresponsible little lives, single people under 30 should not have sex, like, ever. And maybe not even then.

You would, of course, be wrong.

It's for real. It's an actual HHS dictum and there are people who actually believe it should be adhered to, and I'm right now guessing you broke this rule this very morning and if you didn't you really, really wanted to, and if you're over 30 and/or married chances are you are sitting there right now wishing you were still single and/or under 30 just one more time just so you could squishily, juicily break that rule again, oh my God yes please. Just a guess.

He's right, that's my reaction.

This is total insanity.

As they say over at Pandagon all the time, Why is everybody in the U.S. Government so concerned about what people do with teh cock?

It's none of their fucking business!

Everybody with a functioning brain knows that abstinence only sex education doesn't work! People are going to have sex, no matter what you tell them (and why shouldn't they?)

So if you are really concerned with the teenage abortion rate, as all the fundimentalists claim they are, then you need to reduce teenage pregnancy. And if you want to teach abstinence, that's fine, but you need to teach them about birth control and safe sex too, so that when they do have sex, which they will, they don't get pregnant or contract an STD.

More from the column:

I remember Joycelyn Elders. I remember this feisty and outspoken surgeon general, appointed by Clinton back in '93, who dared to suggest, in public, that masturbation is fine and healthy and nothing to worry about and perhaps should be taught to teens as a safer alternative to riskier forms of sex.

The nation blinked. The Christian right, of course, was apoplectic. Clinton was forced to ask Elders for her resignation. Later, on the lecture circuit, Elders famously said, "As long as I was in Washington I never met anybody that I thought was good enough, who knew enough or who loved enough to make sexual decisions for anybody else." And there you have it.

I remember Ms. Elders (vaguely). I didn't remember that she was forced to resign because of the damned fundies.

I don't think anyone in the government should have any right to make any type of sexual decisions about anyone other then themselves.

Don't like gay sex? Fine, don't have it. But don't tell other people they can't have it just because you don't like it.

And I'll finish up with the end of the column:

I know, I know, it's all a bit silly. After all, the Bush government is all about restriction, contraction, containment and self-righteousness and pain. They're about as likely to pump out some positive sex vibes as the pope is to offer free condoms in the Vatican gift shop.

But Jesus with a Hitachi Magic Wand, one thing you can reasonably hope for is a government that's at least remotely in touch and relevant, the slightest bit informed about how life really is and hence will stop throwing these obnoxious bones to the gasping sexless Christian right. This is what you hope.

Meanwhile, we're still stuck with the same old questions: Is this really what our government is all about? Will this ever change? Can they really not hear all the derisive laughter?

Go read all of it. Now.

According to Newt Gingrich, the First Amendment protecting my freedom of speech (and yours) needs to go.

The most ironic part of this is that he was giving a speech at a banquet to honor people who stood up for freedom of speech.

And yes, of course, the excuse is that tired old pony, Terrorism!

Gingrich, speaking at a Manchester awards banquet, said a "different set of rules" may be needed to reduce terrorists' ability to use the Internet and free speech to recruit and get out their message.

Also tucked in there are these little gems:

Gingrich said he will not decide whether he is running for President until September 2007.

He also said court rulings over separation of church and state have hurt citizens' ability to express themselves and their faith.

Does he really think he has a shot at being the President?

Make the bad man go away Mommy!

From BoingBoing comes a link to the W.A.T.C.H. website where they list the "10 Most Dangerous Toys"

W.A.T.C.H. stands for World Against Toys Causing Harm - what a lame acronym.

And are they ever a bunch of safety-nannies. (Ninnies?) Sheesh.

Here are a few examples:

The Pyramid Stacker:

The Pottery Barn Kids stacking toy, which contains multi-colored tiers, includes pyramid-shaped rigid, wooden parts, intended to be stacked upon a solid-wood dowel. A toddler who falls on the inflexible toy could suffer severe impact injuries. The manufacturer fails to provide any warnings despite marketing the toy for toddlers as young as "12 months".

OMG! Your kid might fall on the non-soft toy. You should only ever give your kids soft toys to play with. Like mud.

The Sky Blaster:

"Sky Blaster" is sold as an "All In One Rocket & Launcher!" The manufacturer warns, among other cautions, not to aim at "the eyes or face of a person as an injury could result", and further instructs that users must "[a]lert all within range when launching Sky Blaster." Remarkably, despite these concerns, children are also encouraged to "bend fins ... to achieve spinning flights".

OMG! Who would sell a rocket to kids!

The Fear Factor Candy Challenge:

These "Fear Factor" pouches containing "spine-chilling spiders", "mystery meat", and a "buzzard buffet", pose a "candy challenge" to children, asking: "[I]s fear a factor for you?" The grotesque buffet, available in the toy aisle, is based upon the television series which sometimes features contestants competing to eat as much as possible in the shortest time. Toy aisles should not be used to encourage food-eating competitions, which invite potential choking and ingestion injuries, particularly for young children.

OMG! Not candy!

What a bunch of ninnies and safety-crats.

Wrap your kid in bubble wrap for the rest of his life why don't you? What's childhood without a maiming or a loss of an eye?

----

While I don't really advocate the maiming of children, I do have to say that I am continually dismayed by the parents who think that their children need to be protected from all possible injury.

Don't wrap every corner in your house with rubber. Let your kid bonk their head once in a while.

How is your child going learn from their mistakes if they don't get hurt?