Sixty-nine and counting.
Today is my 69th birthday, and I will continue to keep an eye on the future. I am not sure what I am looking for or keeping an eye out for, but I will keep at least one eye open--just in case.
I also took a couple of steps this morning to be prepared for at least a few eventualities. A weekly accumulation of trash and recyclables was transported to the transfer station (The dump was closed years ago and replaced by dumpsters.) freeing up the usual allotted space for the ongoing accumulation of such and reducing any odorous evidence of the same. Then there were were two loads of laundry which produced among other things a clean pair of bib overalls--one of the two new pairs that I had received as a Christmas present. I trust that whoever it is that is responsible for such things does not decide that I am prepared only for more garbage and a dirty job or two.
Saturday, January 24, 2015
Saturday, January 17, 2015
Is punching a morally defensible option?
Yes, I am referring to a recent comment by Pope Francis and his description of a "normal response" to a curse which denigrates an other's mother. A punch may be a normal response, but that does not make it either an acceptable response or an action free of punitive consequences for the puncher on either moral or legal grounds. Once we open the door to a physical response to a perceived slight (intended or not), the offended party is in a position to calibrate their responding punch proportionate to the offense taken. For some, that is nothing short of the life of the other person. Do we want to return to duels at sunrise or gunfights at sundown?
I am not sure what Pope Francis meant in his off-the-cuff statement, but I do know how it is being interpreted in some quarters--something akin to a just war defense as his words are extrapolated to a national or sectarian religious insult. In the latter case, simply raising a serious theological question in a respectful manner can be construed as blasphemy.
Here is another take on the Pope's comment, which deserves thoughtful consideration.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/16/pope-francis-free-speech-charlie-hebdo
Pope Francis' comment strikes me as very much culturally driven. Let me try to explain. I grew up in an environment peopled by European immigrants and their descendants. The epitaph SOB was freely thrown about either directed at an individual or simply a free form curse. No one ever seemed to take it as an insult directed at one's mother. So if I don't speak Spanish and my cultural diversity is divisible only by one, I can be rightfully subjected to physical retribution for cursing in my mother tongue. When I was in the service, it was a very different story. Latino troops automatically interpreted this epitaph as an insult directed at their mothers, irrespective of the intent (in my judgment anyway) of the speaker. If the words were spoken by a peer, that peer was informed in no uncertain terms that offense had been taken.
I have a question for Pope Francis. I trust he will take his time in formulating an answer. What is an appropriate and proportionate response to a fatwa prohibiting snowmen?
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/Olive-Press/2015/0114/Seriously-a-fatwa-against-snowmen-Saudis-push-back-on-Twitter
Yes, I am referring to a recent comment by Pope Francis and his description of a "normal response" to a curse which denigrates an other's mother. A punch may be a normal response, but that does not make it either an acceptable response or an action free of punitive consequences for the puncher on either moral or legal grounds. Once we open the door to a physical response to a perceived slight (intended or not), the offended party is in a position to calibrate their responding punch proportionate to the offense taken. For some, that is nothing short of the life of the other person. Do we want to return to duels at sunrise or gunfights at sundown?
I am not sure what Pope Francis meant in his off-the-cuff statement, but I do know how it is being interpreted in some quarters--something akin to a just war defense as his words are extrapolated to a national or sectarian religious insult. In the latter case, simply raising a serious theological question in a respectful manner can be construed as blasphemy.
Here is another take on the Pope's comment, which deserves thoughtful consideration.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/16/pope-francis-free-speech-charlie-hebdo
Pope Francis' comment strikes me as very much culturally driven. Let me try to explain. I grew up in an environment peopled by European immigrants and their descendants. The epitaph SOB was freely thrown about either directed at an individual or simply a free form curse. No one ever seemed to take it as an insult directed at one's mother. So if I don't speak Spanish and my cultural diversity is divisible only by one, I can be rightfully subjected to physical retribution for cursing in my mother tongue. When I was in the service, it was a very different story. Latino troops automatically interpreted this epitaph as an insult directed at their mothers, irrespective of the intent (in my judgment anyway) of the speaker. If the words were spoken by a peer, that peer was informed in no uncertain terms that offense had been taken.
I have a question for Pope Francis. I trust he will take his time in formulating an answer. What is an appropriate and proportionate response to a fatwa prohibiting snowmen?
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/Olive-Press/2015/0114/Seriously-a-fatwa-against-snowmen-Saudis-push-back-on-Twitter
Monday, January 12, 2015
"You can take off your sunglasses now."
There are incidents that take place, and there are thoughts that occur within my internal space, both of which may lend themselves to an entry in the blog. But as I ponder these items and consider ways that I might expound upon them, I decide against making them the subject of a blog entry. I am just not ready for that degree of self disclosure.
I can't resist expounding upon and blogging an incident that occurred earlier this week and meets this criteria. (Those among my readers, who know the particulars of my situation, will understand why I could be gracious this time.)
I was wearing sunglasses on a recent drive home on a particularly bright and sunny afternoon with my wife in the passenger seat. As we got closer to home and the sun slipped behind some clouds, I was instructed, "You can take off your sunglasses now." I have become accustomed to receiving all types of driving instructions from my spouse. Everything from speed up or slow down, pass or don't pass, wash the windshield, use the turn signal, change lanes, and others that I am sure that I have forgotten, but that is okay, because I will be reminded as needed. This was the very first time that I was instructed to wear or not wear sunglasses. I didn't say anything, but I DID NOT TAKE MY SUNGLASSES OFF. I wasn't really being passive-aggressive. I actually thought it continued to bright enough to warrant sunglasses.
Several years ago after witnessing an instructional episode with my wife, a friend commented, "Your wife really is a kindergarten teacher." He explained that such natural born individuals have a compulsion to be in control, and in their role of teacher responsible for a dozen or more little ones, they simply have to be. It is critical to maintain control and order, rather than being put in the position of regaining control and restoring order once proverbial things have hit the proverbial fan. This compulsion doesn't always get turned off as the teacher leaves the classroom or playground and finds her or himself in a group of adults watching a Sunday afternoon football game.
This observation was later substantiated by an independent source. I related the incident and my friend's comment to another friend, who responded, "I know what you mean." His wife is a retired first grade teacher. He went on to describe how he is unable to casually shift his weight from one foot to another as he waits for someone or something in the presence of his wife. She immediately assumes that he needs to go to the restroom and does not hesitate to instruct him in very audible terms "You need to go to the restroom. Go."
These experiences have to make one wonder just what it is that women as mothers (and not just as teachers) observe about men in general, but never gets mentioned. Something tells me this must be SOME list. Maybe this is the gist of woman-to-woman conversations. They don't just talk about kids and grandkids.
Guys, let's be careful out there.
There are incidents that take place, and there are thoughts that occur within my internal space, both of which may lend themselves to an entry in the blog. But as I ponder these items and consider ways that I might expound upon them, I decide against making them the subject of a blog entry. I am just not ready for that degree of self disclosure.
I can't resist expounding upon and blogging an incident that occurred earlier this week and meets this criteria. (Those among my readers, who know the particulars of my situation, will understand why I could be gracious this time.)
I was wearing sunglasses on a recent drive home on a particularly bright and sunny afternoon with my wife in the passenger seat. As we got closer to home and the sun slipped behind some clouds, I was instructed, "You can take off your sunglasses now." I have become accustomed to receiving all types of driving instructions from my spouse. Everything from speed up or slow down, pass or don't pass, wash the windshield, use the turn signal, change lanes, and others that I am sure that I have forgotten, but that is okay, because I will be reminded as needed. This was the very first time that I was instructed to wear or not wear sunglasses. I didn't say anything, but I DID NOT TAKE MY SUNGLASSES OFF. I wasn't really being passive-aggressive. I actually thought it continued to bright enough to warrant sunglasses.
Several years ago after witnessing an instructional episode with my wife, a friend commented, "Your wife really is a kindergarten teacher." He explained that such natural born individuals have a compulsion to be in control, and in their role of teacher responsible for a dozen or more little ones, they simply have to be. It is critical to maintain control and order, rather than being put in the position of regaining control and restoring order once proverbial things have hit the proverbial fan. This compulsion doesn't always get turned off as the teacher leaves the classroom or playground and finds her or himself in a group of adults watching a Sunday afternoon football game.
This observation was later substantiated by an independent source. I related the incident and my friend's comment to another friend, who responded, "I know what you mean." His wife is a retired first grade teacher. He went on to describe how he is unable to casually shift his weight from one foot to another as he waits for someone or something in the presence of his wife. She immediately assumes that he needs to go to the restroom and does not hesitate to instruct him in very audible terms "You need to go to the restroom. Go."
These experiences have to make one wonder just what it is that women as mothers (and not just as teachers) observe about men in general, but never gets mentioned. Something tells me this must be SOME list. Maybe this is the gist of woman-to-woman conversations. They don't just talk about kids and grandkids.
Guys, let's be careful out there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)