Ash Wednesday, and update on Super Tuesday

Calories eaten yesterday: 1275
Fat: 28g (20%)
Carbs: 139g (43%)
Protein: 114g (35%)
Weight this morning: 133.4 (One week ago: 135.4)
Calories burned in exercise today: 86

Blessed Ash Wednesday everyone! I didn't get much exercise today because I spent my gym time in church. I got the ashes, received communion, and came to work. I walked the 30 minutes from the BART station and that was it for exercise. Hopefully I can get to the gym tomorrow.

I found a great quote in the bulletin from the service today. It's from The Rite Light: Reflections on the Sunday Readings and Seasons of the Church Year by Michael Merriman.

In today's first reading, the prophet tells us that repentance opens us to discovery of God's love and mercy...On this day, the phrase, "Remember, you are dust and to dust you shall return," is turned around into, "you shall have life, and you shall have it abundantly."

It is because of the cross at the end of this Lenten season that we have eternal life. Our bodies shall eventually return to dust, but our spirits will go on to live with God.

Ok, a word on the vote yesterday.

Judging from the Super Tuesday vote it looks like we'll have to choose between Hillary and John McCain for president. I don't care for either, but I would pick anyone over Hillary. Dear God, just do not give us her! I have nothing against a woman president; I'm just against everything Hillary stands for. Where did feminism go so wrong?

In California Props 91, 92, and 93 all failed, while props. 94-97 on Indian gaming all passed. I voted for 91 and 93 and against all the others.

In my county, measures A and B (Children's Hosptial) went down to defeat, and measure G passed. I don't remember Measure E on my ballot. Maybe it was just for those in Albany.

Technorati tagged: diet, low fat, weight loss, health, Super Tuesday, vote, obese, overweight, NutriSystem

Black History Month and "Diversity"

When I first became a Christian over 10 years ago and was searching for a church, I noticed a lot of churches billing themselves as accepting of "diversity." However, their meaning of diversity had nothing to do with the actual meaning. "Diversity" was (and still is) a buzz word for "we accept practicing homosexuals as members."

What does this have to do with Black History Month? Truthfully, not much. But some people equate homosexual practice to being black.

Now I'm not going to argue about whether one chooses to be homosexual. We cannot choose who we are attracted to. I did not choose to be attracted to men, and I believe that most homosexuals do not choose to be attracted to the same sex. In this sense, having feelings toward a person of the same sex is like our skin color - it's not chosen.

HOWEVER - and this is a big however - being black has nothing to do with behavior. Being black doesn't present a choice to do or not do something. Homosexuality is quite different. As rational animals, humans can choose whether or not to act on the desires we have. A person with homosexual desires can make a choice to act on those desires or not.

This is where my faith comes in. My faith tells me that acting on those desires is wrong. And here we come back full circle. Many churches who champion "diversity" think that acting on those desires is normal and natural and perfectly acceptable to God, whatever the Bible might say.

What brought this topic to mind? Glad you asked. At Easter each year I attend a local Episcopal Church. I am on their mailing list, so I get their monthly newsletters. I usually glance at the pastor's monthly essay to see what he has to say. February's newsletter (.pdf) was about - you guessed it - Black History Month and diversity. Listen to how the pastor uses the word "diversity":

At our Vestry retreat last weekend, each of us was acted to tell what it was about St. Paul's that we valued. It would be no surprise for you to know that "diversity" was a chief core value in the group. I suspect that is so among many of us.

But "diversity" can take on many meanings. [Tell me about it!] Is it race? Is it same-gender relations? Is it economic, or simply the fact that we enjoy one another's God-given uniqueness?

...I learned to see us in our different ways as a "salad bowl" where difference is recognized along with relatedness. I think that is what is valuable to us as a faith community about months like Black History and Gay Pride in June. These are times to give special attention to whom we are in our own diversity.

I encourage you to see this month as a time to celebrate our diversity as a faith community. It will deepen your own spiritual growth!

So here we have the pastor of a church equating Black History Month with Gay Pride Month. It should surprise no one that St. Paul's mission statement starts off with these words: St. Paul's Episcopal Church is a diverse, welcoming community. What they really means is that they are a typical liberal church who accepts people who practice things that Bible condemns. The real St. Paul wrote against homosexual practice in Romans 1, but this St. Paul's church accepts people into membership who engage in it.

I have no problem with diversity in the things we can't choose or change - our skin color, our gender, the people we are attracted to. But we must always live by the rules God has laid down if we our to call ourselves His children and take the name "Christian." And He has said homosexual practice is wrong.

Moreover, our own bodies tell us it's wrong. The vagina of a woman makes it's own lubrication to more easily accept a male's penis. The penis was not meant to go into the anus - it is "exit only" if you will, and teeming with bacteria that the penis is not meant to come in contact with. In case you are wondering, yes, I believe anal sex is wrong among heterosexual couples, too. Our bodies were not designed for the practice, period.

Technorati tagged: morality, politics, gay, homosexuality, diversity, Black History Month, Christianity

The Politics Test

You are a Social Conservative (38% permissive) and an... Economic Liberal (21% permissive) You are best described as a: Totalitarian Link: The Politics Test on OkCupid Free Online Dating Also: The OkCupid Dating Persona Test

Technorati tagged: politics, diary, life, quiz, quizzes

World's Smallest Political Quiz

ACCORDING TO YOUR ANSWERS,
The political description that fits you best is...

CENTRIST

CENTRISTS espouse a "middle ground" regarding government
control of the economy and personal behavior. Depending on
the issue, they sometimes favor government intervention
and sometimes support individual freedom of choice.
Centrists pride themselves on keeping an open mind,
tend to oppose "political extremes," and emphasize what
they describe as "practical" solutions to problems.

The RED DOT on the Chart shows where you fit on the political map.


Your PERSONAL issues Score is 40%.
Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 30%.
(Please note: Scores falling on the Centrist border are counted as Centrist.)

Well, that puts paid to Magnum's contention that I'm an ultra-conservative right-wing Republican, lol. Every political test I take puts me in a politically moderate catagory.

What's your score?

Abortion and Mother's Day

Think these two ideas are opposites? After all, abortion keeps a woman from becoming a mother. That's the whole idea. But, thanks to the National Organization for Women (NOW), these two ideas have been brought together in a beautiful Mother's Day bracelet bearing a charm reading "Keep Abortion Legal."

Is this more or less tasteless than the "Choice on Earth" Christmas cards they introduced a few years ago?

Marine cleared in mosque shootings probe

A Marine corporal who was videotaped shooting an apparently injured and unarmed Iraqi in a Fallujah mosque last year will not face court-martial, the Marine Corps announced Wednesday.

---

I must say I am glad to hear this. I saw the video, and given the circumstances, this man made the decision to protect his life and the lives of his comrades, as well as the civiliar cameraman from NBC. The insergents could have easily hidden weapons under their clothes and figured, "We're going to die anyway; let's take some Americans with us."

Sorry folks, but as sad as any death is, this one was justified.

Planned Parenthood

Seems that Planned Parenthood is up in arms over a decision by Focus on the Family to use $4 million in private money (NOT public funds as PP uses) to buy ultrasound machines for some Crisis Pregnancy Centers. I'm not sure why they are complaining. PP says, "For women with unintended or unwanted pregnancies, these machines represent missed or messed up priorities. Not the women's, but ours." Messed up priorities? In what way? Is PP afraid of a live birth of an unintended child? Gee, my sister was unintended. Maybe she should have been aborted.

Planned Parenthood gets more than $265 million in taxpayer money every year to fund their programs, and they are complaining that FOTF is spending $4 in private funds to help CPCs?!? What am I missing here?

In case you are wondering about people being trained to operate these machine, FOTF is also providing that out of the $4 million. From what I'm told many CPCs have machines but no one trained to operate them. This will bridge that gap.

How did I hear about all this? Well, quite frankly only because PP kicked up a ruckus. I don't usually listen to FOTF, so it's likely that if PP would have stayed silent, I never would have known. But because they did, a woman named Dawn blogged about it (April 26 entry). In it she links to an article from PP describing the outrage of these machines in CPCs. (FOTF calls them PRCs - Pregnancy Resource Centers. I use the old CPC name because that's the way I learned it.)

I've decided that in honor of PP raising a stink about this that I will donate to FOTF. I never have before, but because PP did this and I heard about it thanks to them, I will do something I wouldn't otherwise do. Take that, PP.

Links:
Ultrasound Machines Placed
Option Ultrasound Update

Terri Schiavo

It really looks like it's winding down and she will die a most horrible death (.pdf document).
http://terrisfight.org/documents/022505order.pdf

I don't know what to say except Kyrie eleison, "Lord have mercy." :(

This will be short because I'm tired and need to go to bed. We all know how the election turned out, so there's no point rehashing that. We just need to remember to keep Bush in our prayers, and the Kerry family as John Kerry's wife deals with breast cancer.

I'm Voting For _____ Because _____.

Full thread can be found here. If you have no account and it asks you to register, just enter as a guest.

From: The Mostly Respectful Brian P. (PENDELL1) 10:18 am
To: ALL

I'm starting this thread so people can tell who they're voting for, and why.
I don't intend this to be a matter for discussion or debate. I simply hope to foster greater understanding of different points of view. Who are you voting for, and why? If you're not voting, why? If you haven't decided, what factors make it difficult to decide?

Me first.

Who I'm voting for: Bush

When I made that decision: March of this year.

Why: Couple reasons.

1. Bush signed the partial-birth abortion ban which President Clinton vetoed twice. That alone tells me all I need to know about the differences between the two parties.
I consider abortion and it's related issues -- euthanasia, stem-cells, cloning -- to be the pre-eminent moral issue of the day, as segregation was the pre-eminent issue of the 60s. It is innocent blood being shed. I believe the death of millions every year overrides the other, legitimate concerns Democrats have, and until this problem is solved I don't believe God will give his countenance to any politician who supports this.

I believe that a lot of the strife we've had over the past two years can be traced to this. Kerry has taken many stands on many issues, but he has been unapologetic in his support for abortion without limit, no matter how much he "regrets" it. He has been ambiguous on Iraq, but he has been unambiguous in his support for the harvesting of human embryos for the sake of research. Despite his belief that life begins at "conception". Bush, on the other hand, has chosen the opposite approach. If they are different in no other way, they are different here. The choice, for me, is clear-cut and indisputable.

Further, I believe that much energy has been consumed in the spiritual world on this issue. Do you remember the 2000 election? I believe that was more than humans being unable to agree on an election result -- I think contending spirits were warring powerfully in the heavenlies, each having chosen a candidate to support and each trying to influence the election their way. I could feel it in the air when it happened.

After Bush's election, the drumbeat did not let up -- the Enemy stirred up hatred against him. Bush draws more aggravation and more stress than any President in recent memory, and I think the reason is that he is a pro-life President, and the Enemy cannot stand that. Consequently the immense hatred pouring out of Hollywood. The lies and deceit of the Michael Moores. The absolute deadlock on judicial appointments in the Senate. The slander campaign against him and Ashcroft. Why? Because, as real believers, they pose a threat to everything the Enemy stands for, merely by their existence.

Even today, what should be a walkover election is being contested powerfully. It is likely that this election, too, will be fought for months after the election. Why? Because, IMO, the Enemy is investing a lot of spiritual capital in taking Bush down. And those who -- willingly or unwillingly -- are deceived by him -- are caught up in that same paroxysm of unreasoning hatred that he himself feels. Because he wants abortion to continue, and God does not. Perhaps there is someone coming that he fears to come? And I believe there is another reason.

Does this mean that I believe all Democrats are evil? Not even close. I know many fine Democrats who love God with all their heart and soul and strength and mind, my own parents among them. But I believe their leaders have chosen the wrong side on THE issue that both God and the Enemy care about more than any other -- the paramount moral issue of our day. And until the Dems call their leaders to account on this issue, I do not believe they will be blessed.

But that's not the only reason:

2. Israel.

I noticed Clinton twisting the arms of several Israeli administrations to fit his "peace process", and I saw the terror that resulted. I see Bush giving them a free hand, and the result has been that -- while no one was looking -- Israel "won" the Intifada (Jewish World Review). Certainly terrorism is much less than it was.

I believe that if Bush is elected, this state of affairs will continue. And I believe with Charles Krauthammer (Jewish World Review) that if Kerry is elected, he will attempt to "rebuild our foreign alliances" by screwing Isreal.

I think this is another thing that both God and the Enemy have on their agendas -- one of the Enemy's pre-eminent goals since the beginning of creation is to kill Jews in carload lots. I'm not convinced that Isreal is fully in the right, but I certainly oppose the lies, deceit, and murder which characterize the tactics of their enemies. I think that Kerry's plan will -- inadvertently -- lead to much more terrorism, much more death in Isreal, but nothing anyone would recognize as "peace". So again, I choose Bush.

3. Iraq.

I'm not convinced Bush did the right thing in Iraq. It could be his biggest mistake. Then again, if it works out, it could be the greatest step forward for the Middle East in generations.

But right or wrong, we must finish the job. I don't believe Kerry will do that. He's got a very cogent discussion on his web site (JohnKerry.com), but his big solution seems to be to bring in France and Germany, which have already said they will not get involved no matter what he says or does (http://news.ft.com/).

If he really wants to "rebuild alliances", he has to do what France and Germany -- and his anti-war base, such as Michael Moore who believe that Saddam's leftover thugs are "freedom fighters" (spits) -- is to pull out, as quickly as possible. Declare victory and go home.

It may be that we will pull out of Iraq next year in any case -- we shall see. There's certainly a lot of speculation about that. And the sooner Iraqis are doing the job for themselves the happier everyone will be. But I still trust Bush to get the job done more than I do Kerry.

Why? Because Bush is stubborn. Consequently, I believe he'll finish what he starts. Kerry's nuances and sophistication lead me to believe he may not. Clinton's bug-out from Somalia and his handling of the rest of the world with kid gloves during his tenure does nothing to change my mind on this score. There's a time for a stubborn man, and there's a time for an open-minded man, and wartime is a time for stubborn men like Churchill and Patton.

--------------

You'll notice I haven't mentioned the economy in all this. That is because I do not believe the government has much power to effect the economy for good or for ill, and consequently it isn't even on my list of priorities. I've learned the hard way that little good ever came out of a government bureaucracy, and I certainly have no trust in the government being there for me when things go bad. The government programs have nothing to offer me, and I don't see how it can possibly help the economy, and while I care about poverty I think voluntary private action will do more than the government ever can or will.

Besides -- I believe what Jesus said about "seek first the kingdom and his righteousness and all these things will be added to you as well". If we get the moral issues right, the economy will take care of itself -- if we get them wrong, God will curse the work of our hands no matter how clever we are with the economy.

Respectfully, Brian P.

And my response, starting off by quoting a paragraph from Brian's post:

From: StumblingToBethlehem (Newbirth) 5:08 pm
To: The Mostly Respectful Brian P. (PENDELL1)

I consider abortion and it's related issues -- euthanasia, stem-cells, cloning -- to be the pre-eminent moral issue of the day, as segregation was the pre-eminent issue of the 60s. It is innocent blood being shed. I believe the death of millions every year overrides the other, legitimate concerns Democrats have, and until this problem is solved I don't believe God will give his countenance to any politican who supports this.

Totally agree. This is a BIG reason I am voting for Bush, because those lives override just about everything else. That, and the gay marriage issue.

Kerry would do a good job on healthcare (and as someone without insurance who needs expensive medicine, this could even benefit me directly). Kerry would do a good job on a lot of things. But he supports abortion, homosexual marriage, and frankly, I don't trust him when it comes to Iraq. He'll do okay, but I agree with Brian...we need to finish what we started, and Bush is the best man for this.

For anyone interested in praying for the election, here's some ideas. And no, this site endorces neither candidate. You can and should pray for the election without mentioning either candidate by name. Rather, as American Christians, we should pray for a godly candidate. Let God sort out who that is. :)

Election prayer: Election prayer from presidentialprayerteam.org.

About the March For (Some) Women's Lives

I was at a wine tasting/fund raising dinner on Saturday evening. Narsai David, old friend of my Dad's and local celebrity in this area was there, as was a family friend (who drove me), and another women seated at our end of the table. The subject of John Kerry came up, and they all agreed they would like to see Bush gone; the woman also mentioned she was at the March For Women's Lives in DC. As soon as I heard that, I thought about you and your name for it. I just sat there thinking, "How can they be so blind?" And yet, so was I at one time. All I could do was turn away and try to join another conversation because I was afraid of saying something that would make them all think me nutty. I knew anything I could say would only be counterproductive.

Yep, Dorothy, we ain't in Kansas anymore. Sometimes I really hate living here. There are so few of us conservatives that we really get drowned out.

At the race yesterday I saw soooooooooo many people carrying signs and wearing t-shirts that were either pro-Kerry or just simply anti-Bush. A lot of people were wearing t-shirts that said something like "Running for change." One woman had a hand-written sign pinned to the back of her t-shirt: "The only bush I trust is my own." In the whole race I saw ONE person - a middle aged man running with his wife - who wore a pro-Bush t-shirt. I made sure to compliment him on it as I jogged by.

I have to constantly remind myself that the whole country isn't like San Francisco because what I see around here every day is very depressing.

And now this new out of Massachusettes (sp). I tell you, signs of the end times....

Come quickly, Lord Jesus!

Having My Eyes Opened, take 2

I think what saddens me the most is the e-mail Herb sent to me and a couple other people, distancing himself from me. It's as if he's afraid of loosing these people as friends if he so much as says I have a right to my opinion. No, he was firmly on their side. I am deeply saddened by this. I've known him and Ren for around 10 years. I really thought we were closer than that. Only Bragi dared to stand up for me and say I had a right to my opinion.

On the way home I couldn't help but pray that God will help me to forgive everyone. I'm very angry over the whole episode and it can be hard to forgive, especially when the other party will admit no wrongdoing and feel completely justified in name-calling and other things. Lord, help me to forgive. Help me to let go of my anger. Let me see these people through Your eyes and love them as You love them. Amen.

Having My Eyes Opened

Well, I sent the little piece on war and celebrities to Herb and hit "Reply All" to give people a different opinion. I've been on his mailing list for months and I didn't mind the e-mails until all the e-mails became anti-war. To say the least, my opinion was not appriciated. In fact, one woman (she certainly was no lady), Ms. Sheffield, actually stated that she wasn't interested in my opinion. This is liberal-speak for "I don't want to hear any opinion that disagrees with mine and therefore refuse to discuss it with you." She also called my viewpoint "moronic" and employed other adult ways of handling disagreements. I truly feel sorry for people like her. Like a child, they stick their fingers in their ears and say, "Lalala, I can't hear you." (Which is how it ended when she said she would delete any further e-mail. At least I got the last word, even if she refused to read it, lol.)

But this was a good experience. Why? Because it showed me who these "anti-war" people really are. They don't even want to consider that there might be good reasons for the war. So instead, they call names and do everything else to end rational debate so they don't have to hear those reasons and can pretend they don't exist.

This has really opened my eyes because it wasn't just her. She was simply the most abusive one who had the guts to e-mail me. From what she said, there's an AMEN chorus to her point of view going on behind my back. As I said, they are afraid of any other POV and must protect themselves from it. The most common way is to use ad hominum attacks and refuse to reply to your opponant's arguments. They truly do not see this as sticking their heads in the sand. They don't think of themselves as being afraid of debate. No, they are the righteously angry protecters of America and freedom of speech - provided you don't say anything that disagrees with them.

Rumors of War

I still feel strange about this war - not gung ho for or against. *shrug* And I have one person ranting on IM to me about how Bush has committed war crimes, and another talking to me about Makani and her private forum and how she isn't at all like Obsidian and Otep. I'm getting it from both sides I guess.

The news is saying that Hussein was the target of this early beginning to the war. Personally, I doubt we'll get him. I think, like Osama bin Laden, he'll escape. Let's all pray for a quick end to the war and for protection of coalition troops.

No changes really on my Web sites except that I changed all main pages on all my sites so that the text scrolls over the background. I think it looks real nice. I also put some new pix up on Xena's site. Here Abby plays with a stuffed mouse that I put fresh catnip leaves inside. And, old pictures from before my move, Xena and Abby getting friendly with each other. (The top picture was taken earlier. Scroll down to the bottom three pics.)

poem: David, Why?

For David Nadel, who was shot and killed outside Ashkenaz, the dance club he owned.

David, Why?
What, oh what, your lot in life?
Why was it so filled with strife?
Why must the meek die by the knife?
And why did you have to go?

The good die young they say to me,
But I don't know why it had to be
That you wing you way o'er the crystal sea,
And why did you have to go?

In its season violence gains,
Until the Lord of all shall tame,
But until that time we have the pain.
Oh, why did you have to go?

You fought for the Park through thick and thin,
You fought and swore you'd never give in,
You fought for the way it had always been
Oh, why did you have to go?
David, why did you have to go?