Author Archives: MzEllen

•

(AP) A federal judge has overturned a decision by the U.S. Forest Service to allow oil and gas drilling near a forest and a river in Michigan's northern Lower Peninsula.

U.S. District Judge David Lawson of Detroit ruled Thursday the agency had acted "arbitrarily and capriciously" in 2005 by giving Savoy Energy LP of Traverse City a permit to drill an exploratory well near the Au Sable River's south branch.

When I was a kid I fell in love with the idea of Kirtland's Warbler.  It was the "underdog"  and I had never seen one.  My family (grandparents) owned property in Grayling and I remember the time spent there very fondly.  I believe at that time the "specialists" were pretty sure the bird would be extinct soon and it would have been if they had not worked hard to protect it.

One of the rarest birds in the world, Kirtland's Warbler is a small songbird.  They spend winters in the Bahamas and during the summer all of these birds come to the Northern Lower Peninsula of Michigan.

They are in danger for two reasons:  1) habitat and 2) cowbirds.

In the article I linked to above, a judge has ruled that the drilling company cannot drill in the area for which they paid for a permit to drill (and said permit was granted).


Here are the two quotes that (for those who care to pay attention) make the Sierra Club and the judge (a collaborative effort) look like idiots.

quote #1:

But the judge ruled the Forest Service didn't consider how degrading the area could harm tourism, and said the agency did a "woefully inadequate" job of evaluating how the drilling might affect the Kirtland's warbler, an endangered songbird that nests in the area.

quote #2

"We've said from the beginning we didn't want to stop them from drilling," said Marvin Roberson, a forest policy specialist with the Sierra Club. "We want them to drill from a place that won't be harmful to the old-growth forest or the recreational experience."

This is where a person has to have a little bit of knowledge to know that these two things are mutally exclusive.

  • Old-growth forest
  • Kirtland's Warbler...

Folks...Kirtland's Warblers...DON'T NEST IN OLD GROWTH FORESTS!!!There are not many areas of old-growth forest in Grayling - the only significant acrage that is listed anywhere I could find is inside the boundries of Hartwick Pines State Park (we camped there a couple of weeks ago).  This is not where the drilling would be taking place.  Sierra Clubs appeal to "old growth" is a misleading at best.

Kirtland's Warblers nest in Jack Pine Forests - one of the first tree to grow after a forest fire.  A Jack Pine Forest is  NEW GROWTH FOREST.

Not only does this darling little bird not nest in "old growth forests", they don't even next in older Jack Pine forests!  Kirtland's Warblers nest under (not in)  Jack Pine trees that are young - between 8 and 20 years old.

The DNR in Michigan is giving Kirtland's Warblers new and safe habitat in which to live.

How do they do this?

BY CUTTING DOWN TREES AND BURNING AREAS FORESTED WITH MATURE TREES!

Local anglers can make a good case for prohibiting drilling withing a reasonable distance of the AuSable River.  The Mason Tract (where the drilling would be angling under) was given to the state with the intent that it be maintained as wilderness.  I think that it should be maintained as wilderness.

So I am NOT saying that drilling should happen (there are good reasons that it should not), but that the people who want it stopped should at least get their act together and not let the Sierra Club undermine their credibility by appealing to the Kirtland's Warblers nesting area in the Old Growth Forest.

• 10 Comments

•

WordPress has "pages" that will stay in a hierarchy position (you can find it from the front page).  It seems to me that some of the communication problems that blog writers have is with definitions.  So I'm going to start a "page" that links to posts on "definitions".

The first one I'll define is "gender role".

I've heard a few egalitarians say, "male or female isn't a 'role', it's part of who we are." (or something to that effect).

If you (generic "you") are using the term in an acting (in a play) sort of way.  Yes, you are correct, being male or female isn't a role we play.  In fact, if you use the word "role" as a stand alone phrase, you would still be correct
HOWEVER...context, context, context.  When we write of "gender roles" we are not referring of acting. The term "Gender role" consists of two words used together that have a specific and  SOCIOLOGICAL  meaning.

When we write "gender roles", we are  referring to an "SOCIOLOGY" term.

~~~

From Answers.com

A gender role is a set of perceived behavioral norms associated particularly with males or females, in a given social group or system. It can be a form of division of labour by gender. It is a focus of analysis in the social sciences and humanities.  Gender is one component of the gender/sex system, which refers to "The set of arrangements by which a society transforms biological sexuality into products of human activity, and in which these transformed needs are satisfied" (Reiter 1975: 159). All societies, to a certain effect, have a gender/sex system, although the components and workings of this system vary markedly from society to society.

~~~

So we read here that "gender roles" are not a "faked" or "acted out" part in a play.  Gender roles (at least in history) have played a part in meeting the needs of society.

In a Biblical worldview, the gender debate surrounds "complementarian" (although I may choose to use a more descriptive term for what I believe is correct) and "egalitarian" beliefs.

•

Fiber One Haystacks

(1 Stack - 71 calories, 4g fat, 12 carbs, 5g fiber, 2g protein - 1 WW point)

SERVES 6

Ingredients

  • 1 cup Fiber One cereal
  • 1 (1 1/2 ounce)  milk chocolate candy bars
  • 1 tablespoon reduced-fat peanut butter

Directions

  1. Melt bar and peanut butter in microwave until smooth, at 30-second intervals.
  2. Be careful not to burn or overcook.
  3. Stir chocolate and peanut butter mixture.
  4. Add cereal and gently toss till coated.
  5. Drop onto wax paper, making 6 stacks.
  6. Refrigerate until chocolate hardens (about 30 minutes).

Enjoy!

•

Another Pair of Hands Poem

The skills of the hands used in a gesture of love
Sends receiver and giver blessings from above
For the nature of hands outstretched holds within such a power
They console and comfort at each and every hour

Through hunger, thirst, discomfort and pain
Another Pair of Hands helps share the strain
Of the misery and woe man inflicts on another
Held gently in Prayer the hands find our Father

And it is he who teaches, instructs and guides
He who calls us to explore the treasures we hold inside
Called to release our love like an ever-flowing stream
To elevate others to achieve their dreams

And so as His foot-soldiers we wait and accept God’s call
To out-stretch our hands to one and all.

• 25 Comments

•

I understand that the metaphor breaks down (metaphors do).

I understand that a wife does not exist to worship her husband (nor should she).  If the comment thread goes in that direction...it would be a bad idea.

I understand that a husband is not God (see above note about the comment thread).

What Can We Learn From Adam and Eve?

1) Eve was not a "less than".  Adam was the only creature that was created in the way that he was and Eve was the only creature created in the way that she was.

2) Eve was created to be a helper fit for Adam.  "ezer" was not in any way a "less-than" term.  It is used to describe God and it is used to describe help from God.  To be an "ezer" from God is to have a very special role and (I would think) would be a privilege and honor.  This is what Eve was created for.
3)  Eve was created to be a companion.  God said, "It is not good for man to be alone", and then, "I will make a helper for him."  One flesh - bone of my bone.  This is what Eve was created for.

My belief in reading all of this (including the parallels of a husband and wife to Christ and the church) is that Eve, created second, created as a helper and created "out of" man - was the...well...helper.  She (as helper) would have filled the need that Adam had for another "pair of hands".  God set the "job description", Adam set the path within that job description and Eve (by defintion as helper) helped.

How does that relate to Christ and the church?

How often have we heard the line, "Jesus with skin on?"   We (the church) are the representatives of Christ walking around on this green earth.

There is a job to be done, set by the Bridegroom.  Spread the gospel.  Protect the weak.  Feed the hungry.  Care for the homeless.

God, the Trinity, set the job description.  Christ gave us the "Great Commission".  The bride of Christ is His representative on earth to carry out the plan.

And a husband and wife?

God sets the job description - what are we supposed to do?  The husband (if the wife is to submit to her husband as Christ submits to the church) sets the path and the wife (as ezer) is his helping hands.

Does this make her "less than"?  No - it gives her an honorable part in the job that Christ has given.

Does it make the husband "more than"?  In the plan of Christ, no.  It gives him the burden of making (and taking responsibility for) the working out of the plan.

What can we learn from Christ and the church by looking at the first husband and wife?

Unity.  Job descriptions.  Honor in both roles.  Honor in service.  Job descriptions written by God.

• 5 Comments

•

I'm starting to do this...not only with places I visit, but also my own blog.  What is the "mood"?  I'm all for controversey - iron sharpens iron.  But when it's all about that, moods change.

Look at the last 10 20 posts.

Are the posts (okay, take away the "fluff", which definately has its place in the fun) about what that person believes and feels?  Do the posts challenge you, without being insulting (unless you are insulted because people disagree with you )?

Do the posts primarily tell you what's wrong with everybody else?  This person's sin and that person's heresy?  That can get wearying.  I visit a couple of those because they sometimes have news items that are useful, but I can come away with an eye toward the worst of people, not the best.

I have strong opinions and I want to be able to put forth those strongly.  Positively:  This is what I believe.

I have (and will) at times write strongly about somebody I disagree with, but I don't want the message of my blog to be hate.

And I do see that out there.  One blog, in particular..was started as a (frustrated) response to being ignored and simultaneously attacked - and having their denomintion attacked with falsehood.  Their comments were deleted (as were mine, actually) so this blog was started that (in the earlier times) focused a lot on "this is what ___ has wrong".  I watched to see what would happen and over time it became less of that and more of an apologetics blog, "this is what we believe and the basis on which we believe it".  It is a pleasure to read because (even though I disagree with a few points) it is written (primarily) in a positive perspective - although at times it points back to the original reason for the creation of the blog.  Which is fine, since the disagreement is no longer the only focus, the apologetics contribute much.

Another blog I read...there is no such balance.  Nearly every post has invective in it.  It's in my blogfeed so I get new posts when they come out, but I skim and seldom stay long.  The impact on my emotions is not the best.  (If you think it's you, it mostly likely is not...if you're that curious, ask)
So, there it is in a nutshell.  Test the mood...

•

My favorite coffee shop:  Biggby (used to be Beaners - as in coffee beans) made the top 50!  (they most likely had my help)

The Future 50, identified by Technomic, Inc. as the fastest growing chains with sales between $25 million and $50 million, includes 32 that defied the odds to grow sales by 20 percent or more in 2007. Of those, a dozen hit 40 percent or higher sales growth. As a group, they’re hot, they’re nimble and they’ve got what many of their large competitors don’t right now—momentum.

(Note:  when Biggby changed their name, it was not because of a lawsuit, complaint or any such thing.  It was because somebody told them that the name had the potential for being offensive and they did not want to offend anybody.)

~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~

And MORE  randomosity.

Dog bites man???  Not news.

Hippo bites woman?  Okay.  News.

The woman keeper was bitten about 9:45 a.m. in the outdoor hippo exhibit as she and colleagues were doing desensitizing training on Mahali, a 5-year-old male, to make dental work more comfortable for the hippo.

•

I've written on this a little bit in other places and it is a volatile topic and one that is difficult to discuss without getting emotional (for anybody).  I am writing from a philosophical point, not an emotional point.

I AM NOT "PRO-SLAVERY"; the post is to encourage the philosophical and Biblical viewpoint of calling sin "sin" and making sure that which we call "sin" is.
1) God does not regulate sin - He prohibits it.

If Scripture never tells us that an activity is sin, the burden of proof is on the one who calls it "sin".

The easiest way to prove slavery "sin" is to stand on the "golden rule".  Treat others the way you want to be treated.  If you would not want to be a slave, don't enslave others.  As a Christian...that makes perfect sense.

The next question would be:  might there be (or ever in history have been) a reason that being a slave might be better than the alternative?  Are there any circumstances that slavery would be beneficial/harmful to either the individual or the society.
2) right off hand, I can think of four different kinds of slavery  mentioned in Scripture:

  • debt slavery
  • kidnapping for the purpose of slavery
  • prisoners of war
  • punitive slavery

---Debt slavery:  If a person finds themselves overloaded with debt, they have the opportunity to work off that debt to the person owed.  They are released at the end of the time, they are free of the debt.  They are able to bail themselves out.  (that's a definition, not a judgement.)

NOTE:  I do not see this as being a good or practical thing in the society that we have today.  Looking at the "debtor's prisons" that we read about, it might have seemed a good option at the time.

SIN or not? (from Scripture only, please)?  (I'd rather have a discussion than put forth my thoughts - but would most likely play devil's advocate either way)

---Chattel slavery:  there is no justification of this act.  Slave trade was on the list of Tyre's condemnation and no matter what I might find about the other sorts of "manditory labor", the kidnapping and enslavement of a group of people - and the further keeping of their descendents in slavery is wrong.  Sin.  Condemned.  There is no justification for this.  (I believe that the preying on impoverished parents of children and purchasing them for the purpose of slavery that we see to day in parts of Africa and Asia are included in this segment.

---Prisoners of war:  three choices - dead.  refugee camp.  slave.  None of them are good choices.  (Again this is for discussion purpose and I'll gladly play devil's advocate for either side - but argue from Scripture)

NOTE:  the Geneva Convention permits the use of prisoners of war for "forced labor".  There are strict guidelines about what sort of work can be done, working and living conditions and prohibits the use of forced labor on actual military jobs.  A prisoner of war can be made to work in an agriculture setting, but cannot be made to manufacture bombs.

Using a prisoner of war for "forced labor" is not the same as conducting a war in order to get prisoners in order to get slaves (see kidnapping)

---Punitive slavery:  Sorry, but I think I could convinced to be at least a little bit in favor of this one.

California:  a "soccer mom" was loading stuff into the back of her car and was rear ended by an "illegal alien" (undocumented immigrant) - who happened to be driving under the influence of alcohol.  This wife and mother lost the use of her legs and looks forward to many months of rehab and the expenses incurred not only as part of treatment, but also with living as a person with impairments.

- instead of being shipped back to Mexico - again - after being caught driving drunk - again - what if this man were put in a place where his labor contributed to the income of the woman that he injured?

Michigan:  A man shoots and kills a cop, depriving the officer's wife and children of his love, support and income.  We now have a single mom with three kids.

- instead of being imprisoned for life, what if this man's labor went into a college fund for the children of the man he killed?

Anywhere:  a young man steals a car and wrecks it.  The insurance company pays, the owner of the car pays, the young man may lose time.

What if a person who steals property and destroys or damages it was made to work for the owner of the property in order to make restitution?

From Scripture, please?

(NOTE:  this post is only philosophical ramblings...mostly due to the continued and wearying and offensive habit of some egalitarians of comparing a Godly marriage where the husband is the leader...to chattel slavery)

What we think of as slavery (in the modern sense) fits into the "kidnapping for slavery" slot.  Race-based slavery fits into that slot.  Kidnapping and breeding of a group of people for the purpose of slavery is sin.  Condemned.  Wrong.

This  "chattel" slavery (and subsequent denial of the slave's humanity) can (in NO WAY) be justified.  The other three (especially in Scripture) have no impact on the way that the humanity of the slave (or bond-servant in some cases) was seen.  In two of the cases the "slavery" was more "manditory labor" which was brought about by the actions of the person in bondage.

Again, I am not in ANY WAY advocating for a return of the chattel slave system, a dehumanization of a race, the manditory

From an emotional standpoint:  I have no desire to be a slave or own a slave.  To my modern mind, the idea is not at all attractive.  As a Christian:  slavery is to be avoided and I think that it is sin for a Christian to seek to be a slave.

•

At least for the time being...I've got posts on all sorts of topics coming off my keyboard and I tend to enjoy blogs more where I don't have to scroll down a bunch to read all the new posts...so I'm going to try to "schedule" mine a little bit.

I've got a post on the "gift of tongues" in pagan religions (including Mormonism), I've got a post on Christ and church/husbands and wives/Adam and Eve.   I'd like to cover the life and times (and theology) of John Calvin.  And there's a lot of political stuff going on that is interesting (especially since Michigan has the worst single-state economy in the country...what Granholm has done for Michigan, Obama wants to do for the country.

There's also room for "randomosity".   Mostly I know that I can have a tendency to become a "one trick pony" and I'm not that.  A flexible basic outline keeps me from hyperfocusing.
Sunday seems good for Sola (Reformed stuff) - also, randomosity.
Monday (lunes in Spanish) seems to be the day for the links I've collected over the week.  I'm going to start adding links to my other "little" blogspot blogs, which include diet/exercise and what I'm reading.

Tuesday (I don't why) I'll think more philosophically.  Other world religions, deep thoughts about life and living.  Stuff.

Wednesday is a good day for the "gender" topic (and Wordless Wednesday)

Thursday...Thursday photo challenge (my favorite photo scavenger hunt) and politics

Friday, Fit Friday

Saturday:  TN Photo Hunt (my other favorite photo scavenger hunt) and  denominational stuff (although that can overlap with politics...and philosophy.  And gender).

Just so you all know...I'm enjoying blogging, but I love variety...