I almost know what it feels like to have a disease named after you.

Yesterday's post required several man-hours of highly trained labor to produce. Yeah, I know, it reads like it took about ten minutes of a fourth grader's time, but "The miracle of the dancing bear is not how well it dances, but that it dances at all"- I was having computer problems that almost had me thinking the only way to reach my readers would be by postcard.

Ok, we've all joked about how twitchy Microsoft products in general are, and how Vista is easier to spook than an abused Arabian horse. But I developed a strange problem, even for the Vista/Explorer combo- whenever I attempted to paste from Works (I use Works rather than Word because I'm too cheap to pay for Word, while Works is bundled free. There, I said it.) to email or Blogspot, Explorer crashed! This was a catastrophe... I must have a spellchecker, and the email program doesn't have one. (well, it does, but it borrows the dictionary from Word. And as I haven't paid to activate Word...)

So, with a bit of trepidation, I contacted MSN online chat tech support. Man, did I get a pleasant surprise- their customer service people are just as nice as their products are twitchy! After the first screener determined I wasn't the type who calls to complain that the cupholder that slides out from the side of the computer is broken, I was quickly transferred to a real tech named Cathy. She was both patient and good humored (meaning she sent a smiley face at one of my bizarre comments), and quickly set up a shared desktop link. Then over the course of a couple of hours, she did a disk clean, optimized performance, ran both the MSN9.6 and the Explorer 7.0 through all kinds of cartwheels, uninstalled and reinstalled them, retested, and finally declared that she had determined that the MSN software was not at fault, apologized for not doing more, and gave me a case number and contact info for the Microsoft troubleshooters. As it was approaching midnight, I put that call off to this morning.

So this morning, after breaking fast and getting fresh coffee, I call Microsoft. The answering computer connected me to a nice man from India (I'm not guessing from his accent, we chatted about the weather here and there) who also set up the shared desktop connection, and started plumbing into the bowels of the browser. He was able to determine that one of the automatic security updates sent out yesterday had caused an unforeseen compatibility problem, and that downloading the latest generation of Explorer would solve it. He actually thanked me for bringing them the problem so quickly, because it was a specific combination of conditions that had caused it, and that he would immediately email this information to the developers and other techs so they would be prepared for the complaints they were sure to be getting shortly.

For a moment there, I felt special. There must be millions of year old laptops using Vista and Explorer who download their updates faithfully, and I was the very first to complain- the kind of perverse pride Baron Munchausen might feel at having a syndrome named for him. But then it occurred to me that perhaps there weren't as many as I thought- of student laptops whose owner was too damn cheap to activate the preloaded Microsoft Office Suite when the six months free trial expired- it was only the combination of Works, Explorer 7.0, and the specific security update that would cause the problem.

Oh, well, the real point is that I received hours of individual attention both from the Microsoft Network and from the Microsoft Explorer tech team, and they solved the problem, (and more; my computer is running better now than it did before this all happened!) and they did it all for free. The cost for the right to bitch is the obligation to give kudos when deserved. Kudos, MSN. Kudos, Microsoft.

Equal rights for Gods and Goddesses?

Remember last October how Joe Biden concealed a statue of the Goddess Diana behind a draped flag when he gave a speech in Pueblo? (See it at The Wild Hunt ) Everyone assumed it was the brass boobies that offended- but maybe not! President Obama gave a speech at Georgetown University Tuesday, and the White House requested a similar cover-up, but in this case it was the name of Jesus that was covered up. Perhaps it was the divinity rather than the cleavage at issue. We could test the issue- ask him to speak at a UU church, and see if the White House asks us to cover up our patron saint

The 50 best US Television Shows

It's always interesting to see what others think of us and our culture- here, courtesy of the TimesOnline, a British critic gives us The 50 best US Television Shows

My question for the telephone forum

I received an email from the UUA yesterday announcing a telephone forum with the candidates for UUA President.
"On Friday, April 17, at 3:00 PM (EDT), the Unitarian UniversalistAssociation will host a one-hour telephone forum with the two candidatesfor UUA president, Rev. Dr. Laurel Hallman and Rev. Peter Morales. The forum will originate from UUA headquarters in Boston and will bemoderated by UUA Secretary Paul Rickter.

Those wishing to ask questions of the candidates are invited to submitthem by emailing secretary@uua.org no later than Thursday, April 16,9:00 PM (EDT).

Those who wish to listen to the conversation are invited to call1-213-286-1201. When connected, please enter the following access code:117-113-425.For technical difficulties during the actual conference call, pleaseemail electionforum@uua.org ."

My question is this: I notice that the time and day of the forum guarantee that whatever time zone one lives in anywhere in the continental US, it will occur during the workday. Do you assume that everyone interested in, let alone voting in this election is retired, or has an employer willing to let them place an hour-long long distance phone call on company time?

Religious Right concedes defeat

That is the headline of a story last Friday in the Telegraph.co.uk . "Leading evangelicals have admitted that their association with George W. Bush has not only hurt the cause of social conservatives but contributed to the failure of the key objectives of their 30-year struggle." They see the church as the main victim of this failing. "Unease is rising that a nation founded - in the view of evangelicals - purely as a Christian country will soon, like northern Europe, become “post-Christian”. Recent surveys have suggested that the American religious landscape has shifted significantly. A study by Trinity College in Connecticut found that 11 per cent fewer Americans identify themselves as Christian than 20 years ago. Those stating no religious affiliation or declaring themselves agnostic has risen from 8.2 per cent in 1990 to 15 per cent in 2008."

Their anger is not aimed at liberals, however. "A growing legion of disenchanted grassroots believers does not blame liberal opponents for the decline in faith or the failures of the religious Right. Rather, they hold responsible Republicans - particularly Mr Bush - and groups like Focus on the Family that have worked with the party, for courting Christian voters only to betray promises of pursuing the conservative agenda once in office." I see an object lesson for liberal Christians and UUs in all this. We have been taking the same route, with far too many expressing their religion by faxing congressmen rather than serving their community. We are in a very real and present danger of having this evangelical's lament becoming ours: "Ray Moore, president of Exodus Mandate, a South Carolina-based group which organises home-schooling for Christian children, said: “Political involvement by Christians is not wrong, but that’s all the big groups did for 25 years. They were more concerned with fund-raising and political power than they were with our children’s welfare.” Any objective observer would say that sounds a whole lot like us- anyone who receives the social justice emails must acknowledge it.

We must take this lesson to heart. Politicians and political movements come and go- the pendulum always swings. I have lived long enough to see both the Democratic and Republican parties, both Liberalism and Conservatism, declared dead and buried. The way to avoid being swept aside by the swings is to lead on moral principal rather than following partisan positions- which we have been guilty of in the past. I hope the new President of the UUA, no matter who it may be, will stand firm on the separation of church and political party, so that we UUs can avoid in the future the frustration the Religious Right is feeling today.

Forgiving one's religion

Is the message of Wiccan priest Harry Dorman, published in the Traverse City Record-Eagle . "Beyond interfaith considerations, there can also be "intra-faith" issues creating points of discomfort within one's own faith. In such instances, we may need to forgive our religion in order to set aside its perceived imperfections." He says. "...one must step back and embrace the larger question -- whether a circumstance is significant enough to destroy the faith-follower relationship.
If the answer is "no," the proper action becomes that of forgiving one's religion and moving on within it. This is a better course of action than quickly and/or blindly divorcing one's religion in favor of another -- one that most likely comes with its own imperfections."

This is a message people of all religions need to hear, but Wiccans and UUs possibly the most. Nobody can bad-mouth a Wiccan like another Wiccan, and some UUs can hold grudges for decades- but that's only half the story. NeoPaganism and Unitarian Universalism share an important trait- having a much higher percentage of adult converts than most mainstream religions. This results in a high percentage of people who have been hurt, are still resentful, and spend a lot of time and bandwidth bad-mouthing their former religions.

While understandable, this behavior is unseemly. Whether your pain came from a former religion or a current congregation, give it up- forgive your religion. As Rev. Dorman says, "Learning to forgive ourselves, those around us and, when necessary, our religion will help us find joy in our diverse and interconnected existence."

An inadequate answer

In the latest post in the "Peter Morales for UU President" blog, Morales Addresses “Humanist/Theist” Question , Peter addresses the following question: "Our denomination seems to be undergoing a philosophical shift. Twenty years ago in our congregation, the concept of a “Christian UU” seemed nonsensical. Now our congregation has a Christian UU minister and many of the secular humanists of previous generations, despite the acceptance of diversity that we say we believe in, are feeling bereft - bereft of a sanctuary from the world of deity (Christian or otherwise). The UU church was the one place in many UU’s lives where those who lived to a different drummer, theologically speaking, could live without the expectation that they subscribe to a divine being. Where they could go on a spiritual or religious journey without having to subscribe to the supernatural. How will you lead us as we struggle with this fundamental challenge?"

I thought his response began well- "Religion is not ultimately about what we believe. Religion, literally “that which binds us together,” is much more about what we love, what we share and what we aspire to become. A congregation is a religious community of memory and hope." I thought he carried that a bit too far with "Only in modern western society are religious groups defined by what they believe."- that's only true if you define "modern" as "within the last couple thousand years", and "western" as "including the middle east, and as far as the Indian subcontinent and up to Tibet", but I realize that's a quibble. But I don't believe he ever directly addressed the last and most important sentence of the question, "How will you lead us as we struggle with this fundamental challenge?"

I would have liked to have heard him address some of the underlying assumptions of the question. While I realize that historically many UU congregations have been- and many still are- majority atheist, has there really ever been a time when the very concept of a "Christian UU" was "nonsensical"? And if so, wasn't that an offense against our tradition of openness and welcome, rather than a policy to be protected? Why does the presence of a theist in the congregation create "...the expectation that they subscribe to a divine being."? Not all Christians are evangelical, and many other faith traditions actively discourage- even forbid- conversion. While I am happy to answer questions about my faith, for example, not only do I not seek converts, I would be less likely to accept one than an orthodox rabbi. Am I, or that rabbi, really so scary atheists need a sanctuary from us?

I believe that the questioner was right that finding fellowship between atheists and theists is a fundamental challenge we must struggle with. This may be an even more important issue that the much-debated question of growth, for growth is certain to throw ever more theists and atheists into the pews together... and if the presence of a Christian UU Minister is going to leave atheists "feeling bereft - bereft of a sanctuary from the world of deity (Christian or otherwise).", and believers are going to hear Dawkins quoted at them, (which the questioner did not do, but is a common happenstance in my experience), then not only will the new members not stay, but many old ones will leave. It's all well and good to say, "Compassion, community, justice, peace. These are good humanist values. They are also the teachings of Jesus. Let’s join hands and bring these values to life.", but we need leadership to get there from here.

A religion for hard times?

I have been pondering Doug Muder's UUWorld article by that title, and his blog follow-up , which sums up the article nicely: "What I want to call faith -- and I think I'm being consistent with many major religions here -- is a third response to uncertainty, one that senses a way to move forward without demanding promises about how it will all come out. That kind of faith is independent of dogma, and many UUs have shown it at some point in their lives." He asks in the article, "Does Unitarian Universalism provide, support, or engender that kind of faith?", and asks those of us who have survived hard times to testify about our experiences.

Like many others, I'm a hyphenated UU- in my case, a UU-Pagan. My Pagan faith does not guarantee that everything will be alright in this world. Nor does it provide certainty about the afterlife, if any; the only thing I'm sure of that in respect is that the Divine is not small or petty- if I make myself worthy of this world, I need have no fears about the next. In a way, my Pagan divinities have something in common with a good general or political leader... a good leader does not promise victory; he gives his followers the tools needed to win, then asks them to do their best.

What tools am I given? My Pagan faith tells me that I am loved. It gives me a place in the universe- "Like the trees and the stars, you have a right to be here." It gives me techniques to still panic, find calm, and banish despair. It shows me how to take that calm, gather energy, and address my problems. It sets boundaries, what situations and solutions are acceptable, and what is beyond the pale. This prepares me well for what Doug calls "the third response", moving forward without demanding promises; indeed, to my faith, that is the first response.

But that is after the hyphen- what about the UU part? There are echoes of much of my credo in the Principles and Purposes- though the PPs are stated as suggestions rather than truths. My spiritual life has been greatly enhanced by my UU experiences- making community with a far more diverse group than I had known before, invaluable discussions, small groups, fascinating forums and blogs, But despite having been an enthusiastic UU for more than a dozen years, I'm afraid that UU itself is still like monosodium glutamate in my life- a flavor enhancer for what I already had, rather than a stand-alone religion in its own right. For me, the answer to Doug's question is that UU does not provide or engender that faith. It does support it- although even there I have to ask whether UU supports the faith, or merely provides a venue to meet the friends who support that faith.

But I also realize that I come to this question with my own preconceptions, so I will repeat Doug's question to all of you with a different slant to it. This is directed at the unhyphenated UUs; those who were raised UU, or came to UU completely unchurched, with no previous faith tradition, and have survived truly hard times: Did Unitarian Universalism give you what you needed to persevere through those dark times, or did it merely enhance and assist what you already had? Was it the entree, or the monosodium glutamate? What did it give you?

Some flaws in the Belief-O-Matic test

The The New Unitarian took the Beliefnet Belief-O-Matic test and posted his results, which inspired patter pensée to do the same. I've done this before, but decided to do it with commentary this time, as I have some questions about how they get their results. In any kind of sorting program, the choice of criteria and how heavily to weight them is crucial- in Cladistics , for example, if you count bipedal locomotion too highly, you'll have humans more closely related to ostriches than orangutans. Here are the results:

1. Unitarian Universalism (100%)
2. Neo-Pagan (94%)

Not surprising that these two are on the top; I claim them both- but I think the order should be reversed. There are two reasons why; the first is abortion. Pagans and NeoPagans tend to be as split as the general public on abortion, but I have never met, nor heard of, nor even met anyone who has heard of a pro-life Unitarian- except me. It should be noted however that I am pro-life in the moral and religious sense, but not in the political sense- I have come to believe that it is not possible to craft legislation that will not be abused by one side or the other. But I am unaware of any other UU anywhere who believes that life begins at conception.

The other dividing issue is God. Belief in a divinity is completely optional for a UU, but other than the Satanists, I have never heard of a Pagan atheist. They may argue about how many gods there are, but every Pagan I know agrees on at least one. Were I writing the test, I would weight these questions much higher in separating UUs from Pagans.

3. Liberal Quakers (91%)
4. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (86%)

I can't argue with numbers 3 and 4; I get along well with Quakers and liberal Protestants. Mainline Protestans are a little more problematical- there's this "Trinity" thing...

5. New Age (85%)
6. Secular Humanism (84%)

I find it hilarious that these two are rated so closely together. While there are tolerant religious humanists, everyone I've ever known who self-describes as Secular Humanist has nothing but contempt for anything New Age- or "Woo-Woo" as they prefer to call it.

7. Mahayana Buddhism (77%)
8. Theravada Buddhism (72%)

These two look better on paper to liberal eyes than they do in practice, especially in terms of social justice.

9. Reform Judaism (70%)
10. Baha'i Faith (68%)
11. Orthodox Quaker (67%)
12. Sikhism (67%)
13. Taoism (66%)
14. Nontheist (65%)

I have no real comment for most of 9-13, but Nontheist? Personally, I'd have put that at the very bottom!

15. New Thought (64%)
16. Scientology (60%)
17. Jainism (59%)
18. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (53%)
19. Orthodox Judaism (52%)
20. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (46%)
21. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (46%)
22. Islam (45%)
23. Hinduism (38%)
24. Eastern Orthodox (36%)
25. Roman Catholic (36%)
26. Seventh Day Adventist (27%)
27. Jehovah's Witness (16%)

No real arguments on these, either. How about you? any surprises on your matches?

10 terms not to use with Muslims

That is the title of a fascinating article from Christian Science Monitor writer Chris Seiple.
"As President Obama considers his first speech in a Muslim majority country (he visits Turkey April 6-7), and as the US national security establishment reviews its foreign policy and public diplomacy, I want to share the advice given to me from dear Muslim friends worldwide regarding words and concepts that are not useful in building relationships with them. Obviously, we are not going to throw out all of these terms, nor should we. But we do need to be very careful about how we use them, and in what context. " What follows is a study in how translations- even word for word- frequently do not convey the exact meanings intended; words, even ideas, are colored by history and culture that you may be unaware of.

While this phenomenon is fairly obvious to students of language and history, it is equally true but much less obvious that this occurs within cultures as well. We talk about the melting pot, and "American culture", but even with TV and the internet we are not a unified culture- just a few miles or a few years can still make a vast difference in the words we use and the meanings of them. If race and religion are factored in, the differences can arise within just a few blocks. Or even in the same house, between generations.

I first became aware of this as a teenager. My mother had destroyed some of my literature that she had found, deeming it obscene. During the course of the ensuing fight I called her a book burner. She burst into hurt and furious tears. "How can you call your own mother a Nazi?", she screamed. You see, when and where she grew up, a "book burner" was a Nazi. Not "Nazi" like people at church use it today, meaning "Republican", but a genuine Jew-killing, goose-stepping Nazi. So even though she had in fact just burned a book, she was certainly no book burner!

I know that this effect crops up in the blogs and forums I frequent. Sometimes a response will be (to me, or to the original poster if it's my response) so non-linear, so non-sequiter that it's obvious that we have just talked past each other without comprehension. But I suspect that sometimes when emotions flare, the same thing has just occurred, but just subtly enough that it wasn't caught. I wonder how much pain and violence has been caused over the years by an uncaught connotation-shift?

Yet more inconvenient truths

Some now say that variations in atmospheric dust levels affect the temperature of the Atlantic ocean far more than global warming. They are claiming that 70 per cent of the change in Atlantic temperature over recent decades has resulted from reduced dust, rather than climate change. What kind of Holocaust-denying, flat-Earth, anti-science right wingnuts are saying this?

"The new analysis comes from scientists in the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the University of Wisconsin. They say that the Atlantic temperature trend has been warmer by approximately a quarter of a degree each decade since 1980: but that most of this is actually because more sunlight is reaching the sea due to reducing levels of dirt in the air above it.
"A lot of this upward trend in the long-term pattern can be explained just by dust storms and volcanoes," says Amato Evan of Wisconsin uni. "About 70 percent of it is just being forced by the combination of dust and volcanoes, and about a quarter of it is just from the dust storms themselves."... The researchers say that predicting what will happen to atmospheric dust levels in future is difficult, with volcanoes notoriously random and African dust storms poorly understood. Nonetheless, according to Amato, future ocean-warming models will need to make allowance for them somehow or their predictions will be well out of whack." (my emphasis)

The Register story here
The actual paper here (requires subscription)

Does Satan exist?

That was the subject of an interesting debate on Nightline, here in two parts.





I rather doubt that anyone reading this blog would say that Satan exists- but it is important to understand that a majority of our fellow Americans do, and to understand what that means to them.

A Quantum God?

I have speculated that god may exist in the quantum world. Now, according to this BBC story,
physicists are wondering the same thing.

Calling out the gay-basher

This doesn't mean homophobia has ended, any more than the election of President Obama means that racism has ended- but it does mean we've turned the corner. Keep up the pressure!

Find out your brainsex

British neuropsychologist Dr Anne Moir is at the front line of the struggle to try and make the boys in Britain's schools enthusiastic about learning. Body sex does not necessarily match brain sex so Dr Moir has devised a test to determine the gender of the brain.

I scored a six, which is decidedly male, with some feminine traits- fair enough. But I wonder, is it just that I fit certain stereotypes, or are they stereotypes because they're true? I'd be curious to see if transsexuals score as being in the wrong body, or if the body controls enough of the stereotypes to make the test indecisive?

Biblical morality

One question Christians frequently ask Pagans is how, absent the Bible, can you develop a moral sense and moral code? Evidently their fears are justified; I scored a zero on this test of Biblical morality

Are some Anti-Racism, Anti-Oppression programs really another form of racism?

I have long thought so, and a recent news story reminded me of a lively blog discussion that touched on this. The blog discussion (here and here)concerned the definition of cultural racism used by a public school system:
Cultural Racism:Those aspects of society that overtly and covertly attribute value and normality to white people and Whiteness, and devalue, stereotype, and label people of color as “other”, different, less than, or render them invisible. Examples of these norms include defining white skin tones as nude or flesh colored, having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology, defining one form of English as standard, and identifying only Whites as great writers or composers.

Cut to the news story that reminded me of these discussions: First Lady Michelle Obama Reflects on Talking 'Like a White Girl' . I was particularly struck by this exchange between Ms. Obama and a grade school student:"And when one student asked her, "How did you get to where you are now?" she credited, in part, her command of the language.
"I remember there were kids around my [Chicago] neighborhood who would say, 'Ooh, you talk funny. You talk like a white girl.' I heard that growing up my whole life. I was like, 'I don't even know what that means but I am still getting my A.'"

In other words, she got where she is by "...having a future time orientation, emphasizing individualism as opposed to a more collective ideology, defining one form of English as standard,..." What if Barack and Michelle had grown up with more enlightened teachers who knew that defining one form of English as standard was racist, and encouraged them to keep it real with ebonics? What if Michelle had been told to conform to a more collective ideology with her peers, rather than adopting the white ambition for individual A's? What if they had been told that "a future time orientation"- things like punctuality and delayed gratification- were white concepts, and it was racist to expect it of them? While they are both so talented they'd have succeeded at something, there's no way in hell she'd have been a corporate executive, and he the President of the United States. How many minority children have been kept from being all that they can be anti-racism programs, using modern definitions of "racism", that result in the child being totally unprepared for real life after leaving the public schools? And isn't any program that results in real harm to minority children racist, regardless of intent?

Faust, Jabez Stone,

and Peter Tork rest easy- Californian judges have ruled that a contract written in blood is not legally enforceable.

I drove Ginger to work today

And as she works on the far North-east corner of the city, that involved a trip on I465. For those of you who don't know Indianapolis, that's the high speed Interstate loop around the city. Now, as anyone who lives in a major city with a three-digit loop knows, that can be quite an adventure at rush hour; either terrifying or exhilarating, depending upon your reaction to adrenaline. Over the years, I have developed a method of handling the traffic- I won't say it's the only way, but it at least has the virtue of being unique: I use signals. I have noticed commuters have three basic reactions to this:

Some will freeze behind the wheel in shock, like a deer caught in headlights. As they struggle for composure, their speed tends to bleed off a bit- if I time it right, it allows me to change lanes.

Others become confused- signals on the Interstate? Is he insane, or is this some new form of road rage? Either way, they want no part of it; they clear room around me until I look like a bit of penicillin mold on a Petrie dish.

A few- possibly resident aliens who learned to drive in Paris or Rome- have never seen a turn signal before, and rush up on you to see what's about to happen. Those are easily handled; just lightly touch the brake pedal enough to make the brake lights come on. Even a Roman taxi cab driver knows what those are, and respects them- at least when they're on the back of a pickup truck.

As I said, I have done this for a number of years now, and i think some other drivers may be copying my technique- I've seen other cars use signals twice now; once last October, and then again this morning. Who knows- maybe someone will put it on YouTube and it'll go viral! I hope they warn me first though, I'd like to wash the truck.

Police probe 'pagan' attacks on church

The congregation of a Grantown church has been alarmed by a year-long series of "pagan" attacks, according to a story in the Strathsprey & Badenoch Herald . The attacks have been in the form of messages, in red ink. Said Deacon Fishwick, "...He added: "The last one was a warning that we shouldn't bring in the authorities. It had a drawing of the all-seeing eye and said: 'We are always watching you'.
"It seems to be the work of a bit of a crackpot. They only ever pick out our church; none of the others have had this, but we don't know why.
"The notes are heathen quotations: things like 'Your days are numbered', 'Wrongs remain unrectified' and 'Judgement has been passed'."

The strangest thing about this story is that it comes from Scotland! Scotland? I mean, a psycho with an obsession about God's eye sending notes to a church for years about unrectified wrongs... that's just so Canadian!

Update
No, there's been no further news from Scotland that I'm aware of; this is an update about the post itself. I've received private comment about my oblique reference to Vancouver based church protester Kevin Annett - and now I'm told some other nutcase is claiming I was talking about him. It seems hard to credit- are there really people so starved for attention, with egos so vast that they claim any reference to a psycho must be aimed at them???