2008 November archive at Zeal For Truth

« Older

Loading Newer »

Less

Excerpts Headlines Full Length

Archive for November, 2008

Links: Images of Crises

Published by Colin November 28, 2008 in General. 0 Comments

Remorseful Ex-Officials Decline Pay From UBS

As a number of American banks resist calls to rein in executive pay, the unthinkable is happening — at least in Switzerland, where three former officials of UBS, the troubled Swiss financial giant, said on Tuesday that they would forgo more than $27 million in compensation.

…

In the United States, lawmakers and regulators have expressed profound frustration over a perceived lack of remorse among executives who made millions while peddling investments in securities whose plummeting value has pushed the financial system to the brink of collapse. Executives have resisted cuts.

Total outlays from the Fed and the U.S. government agencies that are directly attributable to the financial crisis exceeds $8 trillion.

Washington Times: End the Fed?

A Hard Choice: A young medical student decides if she wants to join the diminishing ranks of abortion providers

A Command of the Law:

Of the 770 detainees grabbed here and there and flown to Guantánamo, only 23 have ever been charged with a crime. Of the more than 500 so far released, many traumatized by those “enhanced” techniques, not one has received an apology or compensation for their season in hell.

What they got on release was a single piece of paper from the American government. A U.S. official met one of the dozens of Afghans now released from Guantánamo and was so appalled by this document that he forwarded me a copy.

Dated Oct. 7, 2006, it reads as follows:

“An Administrative Review Board has reviewed the information about you that was talked about at the meeting on 02 December 2005 and the deciding official in the United States has made a decision about what will happen to you. You will be sent to the country of Afghanistan. Your departure will occur as soon as possible.”

That’s it, the one and only record on paper of protracted U.S. incarceration: three sentences for four years of a young Afghan’s life, written in language Orwell would have recognized.

We have “the deciding official,” not an officer, general or judge. We have “the information about you,” not allegations, or accusations, let alone charges. We have “a decision about what will happen to you,” not a judgment, ruling or verdict. This is the lexicon of totalitarianism. It is acutely embarrassing to the United States.

And now for something completely different: The Consequences of Gay Marriage

Do you have a work spouse?

Alain Badiou, big name philosopher and French leftist weighs in on the financial crisis

Biblical Christian Giving Part II: Commentary on Second Corinthians 9

Published by Chris A November 26, 2008 in Religion and Theology. 4 Comments

In my previous commentary of the preceding chapter of this book, I highlighted the following observations:

Biblical Christian giving is the result of grace, enabling believers to give above and beyond their natural ability to do so.

Giving is an expression of Christian love, and is a proof that such love is real and vital.

Christ became poor so that his followers might become rich.

It is absolutely necessary that those who receive offering conduct themselves honorably, so as not to discredit the ministry.

Preparing the Gift

1For it is superfluous for me to write to you about this ministry to the saints; 2for I know your readiness, of which I boast about you to the Macedonians, namely, that Achaia has been prepared since last year, and your zeal has stirred up most of them. 3But I have sent the brethren, in order that our boasting about you may not be made empty in this case, so that, as I was saying, you may be prepared; 4otherwise if any Macedonians come with me and find you unprepared, we–not to speak of you–will be put to shame by this confidence. 5So I thought it necessary to urge the brethren that they would go on ahead to you and arrange beforehand your previously promised bountiful gift, so that the same would be ready as a bountiful gift and not affected by covetousness.

Here Paul urges the Corinthians to collect their promised offering ahead of time. In doing so, they will neither disappoint Paul nor the Macedonians that accompany him. This concept stands in stark contrast to the habit of many Christians who give emotionally. They give only what they “feel” like giving at the time an appeal is made, rather than being prepared to give a certain amount. Paul indicates that such giving could be “affected by covetousness”.

6Now this I say, he who sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and he who sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. 7Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

Here Paul likens the idea of Christian giving to the concept of planting, and says that the harvest of one’s giving is dependent on the amount of seed he plants. Anyone who gives should expect that he will receive as a result. That should not be his primary motivation for giving, but it nevertheless should be understood that his receiving is at least partially the result of his giving. However, rather than this being a simple question of measurable capital, the condition of the heart is the most important factor. A seed sown cheerfully is not equal to a seed sown “grudgingly or under compulsion” though the dollar amounts may be the same.

Defining “Rich”

8And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that always having all sufficiency in everything, you may have an abundance for every good deed; 9as it is written,
“HE SCATTERED ABROAD, HE GAVE TO THE POOR,
HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS ENDURES FOREVER.”

Here Paul says that God’s grace is not only able to make one completely sufficient in everything, but also provide an abundant supply so that one may have enough to give for “every good deed.” The only way this is possible is for a person to have much more than he needs. The person who thinks he is being humble being content with very little may unwittingly be selfish. It is good to be content in whatever state we are in, but we should not neglect the good we could do for others if we had more. We should not only concern ourselves with our own sufficiency, but should expand our vision to include those to whom we may contribute.

Notice that verse 9 says, “He scattered abroad, he gave to the poor…” What did he scatter? Seed, of course. Here again the concept of sowing and reaping in connection with giving is being emphasized. The financial abundance provided by God’s grace cannot be separated from giving as an act of faith, which allows access into this grace.

God Supplies Seed to the Sower and Bread for Food

10Now He who supplies seed to the sower and bread for food will supply and multiply your seed for sowing and increase the harvest of your righteousness;

Where does seed come from? Your job? No, from God. It is he who multiplies our seed for sowing. Although employment may be an avenue through which one may receive God’s blessing, it is only one of many channels through which blessing may pass. Therefore, we should not limit our capacity to receive from God to the only resources our puny brains naturally gravitate towards. Remember what Jesus said?

“Give, and it will be given to you. They will pour into your lap a good measure–pressed down, shaken together, and running over. For by your standard of measure it will be measured to you in return.” (Luke 6:38)

Therefore the equation is as follows: we give and God returns our giving by influencing men to give to us, period. We may receive it through employment or we may not. The specifics are none of our concern. However, if we consider our job to be our primary source rather than God himself, and fret when we lose it due to circumstances beyond our control, we are setting ourselves up for failure.

Seed is not for Hoarding or Eating

11you will be enriched in everything for all liberality, which through us is producing ⁽thanksgiving to God. 12For the ministry of this service is not only fully supplying the needs of the saints, but is also overflowing through many thanksgivings to God. 13Because of the proof given by this ministry, they will glorify God for your obedience to your confession of the gospel of Christ and for the liberality of your contribution to them and to all, 14while they also, by prayer on your behalf, yearn for you because of the surpassing grace of God in you. 15Thanks be to God for His indescribable gift!

Going back to verse 10, there are two types of provision mentioned here: seed for sowing and bread for food - the emphasis is on the former. One should not be mistaken for the other. The seed is that portion of one’s income that is to be given. Therefore, all Christians should be aware of the fact that a portion of what God provides to them should be given and another portion should be kept. This should not be interpreted to mean that people should not maintain an abundant supply in reserve, just that one must be convinced that all he keeps should be kept rather than given.

How can one differentiate between the money that should be kept and the money that should be given? On the basis of other principles in this chapter we may say that our giving should be prepared based on what we purpose in our hearts; our giving should be done willingly and cheerfully, and our giving should be done generously. What constitutes generosity for one will not necessarily constitute generosity for another.

Postcard from England: Our Government Housing Story

Published by Colin November 24, 2008 in Essays. 9 Comments

An international move is almost always stressful - especially the problem of housing. Most people have “on the ground” knowledge of the neighbourhoods in their cities, the kind of amentites that come standard in their country, the prices and all kinds of information that is aquired over time. Moving to a new country completely removes this familiar knowledge.

Our move was no exception. We were very nervous about finding a place to live before leaving the US. The most immediate information that plagued us was the cost - we were looking at around $1,000 a month for a one bedroom apartment. Our current house (which rented for $700 a month) would probably have rented for around $2,000 in Bristol, UK.

The Promises
Thus, when we were offered furnished housing from one of the top universities in the UK, we were thrilled. It radically reduced the stress associated with our move as the University, which delivers some of the best education in the country, surely could do something as simple as manage a property. We had to take this reasoning on faith - as the university had no pictures of the flat we were offered, nor could we visit the flat because of the limited time they had to clean and prepare it for us. But, we accepted this, as the rent was about half the price as private flats in the neighbourhood, and we felt we could trust the university.

I have a lot of knowledge about economics, and I know that government housing is bound to be a failure. But even I was allured by the siren song of government’s ability to possibly improve my situation at least - even if I knew that this was theoretically bankrupt.

A “Furnished” Apartment
When I finally got the keys to the apartment - I was faced with the beginning of a long and increasingly worsening revelation of problems. This began, innocently, with the condition of the “furniture” that was waiting for us. The bed was stained and mouldy - with the previous tenants sheets still on the bed. The table was plywood as were a couple small bookshelves - warped from past water damage. The chairs were those plastic, utilitarian models that fill public school classrooms, and a couple of hospital waiting-room style ones, fabric torn and stained. Moreover, these were all just stacked against the wall.

Fortunately, when people from our church saw our situation - they gave abundantly the furniture out of their own houses to supply us. We stacked the government furniture against a wall in our bedroom and waited four weeks before someone finally came to remove it.

When we tried to cook something on our stove, it began to fill the room with smoke. The layer underneath the range had been burned to a crisp and was not cleaned. We attempted to turn the oven off and it would not go off. We found that the wiring was faulty. It took four weeks, citations of violated health codes and threats of legal action before we recieved a “new” stove - that is an old one, also dirty, but that was wired correctly, at least.

Our lights still do not work correctly. An electrician came around after two months and checked them - he agreed that the wiring was faulty and that someone would be around “within a few weeks” to fix them.

Our bathroom sink was unusable, as the pipes in the back had completely split and were just dumping water on the floor. We shaved and brushed in the kitchen. This had caused significant damage to the floor, which was peeling around the edges and the bathroom had a terrible odour.

“One night it was so awful that I slept in the car out on the street…”
Soon we found that we began to get sick whenever we spent more than a few hours in the apartment. I was especially affected, as I would wake up on the middle of the night - every night - unable to breathe. I would have to quickly run into the kitchen and throw a window open and stick my head outside to catch my breath. I then would spend about thirty minutes cyclically boiling water, breathing it in until it was cold, then repeating. Five nights we slept head to feet on the couch when it was really bad. And one night it was so awful that I slept in the car out on the street. I kept a pot or bowl near my bed every night - as a woke up multiple times with copious amounts of phlegm in my throat that I had to cough out in order to swallow and breathe.

This was the routine every-night for my first three weeks at the university. We contacted the government almost daily about the problem. They would promise to fix it within a few days - or to check the problem - but never followed through. Finally, after finding that our entire bathroom floor was infested with toxic black mould underneath - we again petitioned for the university to act. They finally sent someone to fix the floor, who, upon tearing it up, showed me the spouts that had literally mushroomed up from the years of mould that had grown in the floor. As of now, the floor still has not been repaired - there is merely damp and rotted wood, with nails poking through, which we have to traverse in order to take a shower or use the toilet.

Visitors in the Night
A few nights ago, we received an email from the government informing us that some flats in our building had reported mice, and that something was being done to fix the problem. We were relieved, that we at least did not have this problem.

That night, we awoke to several mice in our bedroom, crawling under our bed, in our garbage, darting under our doors and along the walls. When we sleep at night, we hear them running through the walls and in the ceiling, and do our best to ignore them - hoping to get enough sleep to accomplish our goals for the next day.

There Be No Shelter Here
In all of this, we deal with constant cold - as our windows have not been updated in a hundred years. They are single pained and allow the cold to freely enter our house. I am typing this right now in three layers of clothing in my own house. We can see our breath at night.

Our hot water often goes out - leaving us to shower in lukewarm water - in a bathroom where the ventilation is literally a hole in the side of the wall that goes directly outside. It is the coldest room in the house.

Worst of all - we are trapped in this house for a year. We are paying roughly $1,000 a month for this nightmare (not including utilities) and I expect that if we want to leave, we will have to pursue legal counsel. Our contracted rights have been violated numerous times, but naturally the government arbitrates it own contracts. I should have realised the folly of trusting the government - especially with everything I know. Hopefully we’ll be able to get out of here within a few weeks. If not, it is going to be a long winter

Links: Gimmie, Gimmie Bailout Money

Published by Colin November 21, 2008 in General. 3 Comments

Bailing out the Big 3

EndTheFed.us - Protests against the Federal Reserve Kick off this week

The fervour over Obama in Namibia

Taliban leader says: We have no faith in Obama

Mission Accomplished?

Iraq’s cabinet on Sunday overwhelmingly approved a proposed security agreement that calls for a full withdrawal of American forces from the country by the end of 2011. The cabinet’s decision brings a final date for the departure of American troops a significant step closer after more than five and a half years of war.

Perhaps the surge worked? Victory in Iraq Day.

All Apologies

I Sometimes find strangers’ manners so lacking that I have started engaging in an odd kind of activism. I call it reverse etiquette: I supply the apology that they should be giving me.

American doctors hate their work

What Happens If You’re on Gay Rights’ ‘Enemies List’

An animated map of religions over time. History of Religion

Biblical Christian Giving Part I: Commentary on Second Corinthians 8

Published by Chris A November 20, 2008 in Religion and Theology. 14 Comments

In chapters 8 and 9 of this epistle to the Corinthians, Paul communicates the importance of giving. For this article, I have chosen to break away from my usual format in order to write a brief commentary, examining each verse. This is being done in order to make the scriptures the primary focus, since this happens to be one of those subjects that people have varied opinions about. By examining the scriptures, it is my hope that we might come to some agreement about what the New Testament teaches concerning giving.

If we can acknowledge the Bible to be correct in every area irrespective of our own prejudices, then we are in a position to allow God’s word to transform our thinking, fashioning it to that of the Christ ideal. Submitting to God must involve the willingness to abandon our own opinions when it is apparent that they are in conflict with God’s. My prayer is that all who read this article and any that may follow do so with an attitude of humility. I do not claim that my commentary is perfect in any way, yet I am fairly settled on the observations I have made, and at present do not see any reason to assume that my analysis could portray any significant deviation from what seems to be a rather direct message. Nevertheless, I welcome any reasonable alternate conclusions, knowing full well the opportunity for error when one undertakes the task of commenting on an entire chapter of scripture.

Giving as a Grace

1Now, brethren, we wish to make known to you the grace of God which has been given in the churches of Macedonia, 2that in a great ordeal of affliction their abundance of joy and their deep poverty overflowed in the wealth of their liberality. 3For I testify that according to their ability, and beyond their ability, they gave of their own accord, 4begging us with much urging for the favor of participation in the support of the saints,5and this, not as we had expected, but they first gave themselves to the Lord and to us by the will of God.

Notice how this chapter begins. Paul opens by communicating his desire to reveal to the Corinthians the grace of God that was given to the Philippians or the “churches of Macedonia”. The verses following the first verse indicate the attributes of the grace he was referring to. Despite being very poor, the Philippians were very liberal in their giving – even giving beyond their natural ability to give. How is this possible? It is only possible because of the grace of God – his ability to do for them what they could not do for ourselves. Another attribute of this grace is demonstrated in their desire to give, such that they literally begged for the opportunity to support other Christians. Let that soak in. How many poverty-stricken Christians do you know who are so excited about giving that they are pleading for the chance to do so? In fact, I would venture to say that most poor Christians limit their giving because of their financial struggles. Yet these people considered it a favor to be able to participate in the offering. Here is an important question: Why did they even have to beg to give in the first place? We cannot say for sure, but perhaps it was because the apostles did not want to accept an offering from people who experienced such dire lack. It would not be out of the ordinary today for someone to make excuses for poor people who “are not able” to give.

6So we urged Titus that as he had previously made a beginning, so he would also complete in you this gracious work as well. 7But just as you abound in everything, in faith and utterance and knowledge and in all earnestness and in the love we inspired in you, see that you abound in this gracious work also.

Verse 6 apparently indicates that Titus was instructed to teach the Corinthians about the principles of giving in order to bring into fruition the grace of God pertaining to giving – the potential of which could have only be realized through sound teaching. As a result of this teaching, the churches were expected to give abundantly.

Love is an Act before it is a Fact

8I am not speaking this as a command, but as proving through the earnestness of others the sincerity of your love also.

Wow. Did you hear that? Prove the sincerity of their love? That is hard statement. In other words, “If you really love God and you love the saints, prove it!” Many people would read that and think, “But aren’t we supposed to give from our hearts? Why is Paul so direct? Isn’t this arm twisting?” Love demands action; it isn’t optional (1 John 3:18). That Paul would have the gall to strongly suggest that the Corinthians actualize their love by giving should in no way be perceived as manipulation.

God’s Riches at Christ’s Expense

9For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sake He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich.

Now before I attempt to explain this verse, let me ask a question: What is the subject under discussion her? The obvious answer is money, right? I mean we are talking about the grace of God that enables people to give of their substance to the work of God. Yet so many people will, because of their religious programming, read this verse and conclude that it means something far different than the context makes clear. Jesus was made poor. Spiritually poor? No, he was poor in the sense that he did not have much monetary substance when he walked the earth as a man. So then, through his poverty we have the ability to become rich. But that’s just talking about spiritual wealth, right? No! The concept of immaterial blessing has not once entered the conversation, and if Paul were to bring it up out of the blue it would make absolutely no sense whatsoever. Paul is speaking of a redemptive blessing afforded to believers through substitution. Just like he was made sin for us so that we might become the righteousness of God in Christ, he was made poor so that we might live lives of abundance. Isn’t that what the scripture says?

Giving as a Benefit

10I give my opinion in this matter, for this is to your advantage, who were the first to begin a year ago not only to do this, but also to desire to do it. 11But now finish doing it also, so that just as there was the readiness to desire it, so there may be also the completion of it by your ability. 12For if the readiness is present, it is acceptable according to what a person has, not according to what he does not have.

Notice what Paul wrote in verse 10. He said that it was advantageous for the Corinthians to give. Most people do not think this way. They think that once something is given, it is gone; therefore, how could there be any advantage to give? Such thinking is very contrary to the concept of giving as it is outlined in the scriptures.

Verses 11 and 12 speak of the completion of their desire to give, suggesting that they had previously received light on the subject and are now being asked to follow through and prove the fruit of what they already know to be true. In verse 12, Paul seems to preempt the attitude of someone who might be tempted not to give because of personal lack by saying, “For if readiness in present, it is acceptable according to what a person has, not according to what he does not have.”

10I give my opinion in this matter, for this is to your advantage, who were the first to begin a year ago not only to do this, but also to desire to do it. 11But now finish doing it also, so that just as there was the readiness to desire it, so there may be also the completion of it by your ability. 12For if the readiness is present, it is acceptable according to what a person has, not according to what he does not have.

Responsibility is not a Bad Word

13For this is not for the ease of others and for your affliction, but by way of equality– 14at this present time your abundance being a supply for their need, so that their abundance also may become a supply for your need, that there may be equality;15as it is written, “HE WHO gathered MUCH DID NOT HAVE TOO MUCH, AND HE WHO gathered LITTLE HAD NO LACK.”

Notice the sense of mutual responsibility being communicated here. Where responsibility is clearly defined there can never any be any doubt as to whether that responsibility must be met. Here again, it must be understood that Paul’s forwardness in conveying this responsibility should not be perceived as manipulative; nor should it be viewed as contradictory to the idea of giving from one’s heart.

Accountability as Honor

16But thanks be to God who puts the same earnestness on your behalf in the heart of Titus. 17For he not only accepted our appeal, but being himself very earnest, he has gone to you of his own accord. 18We have sent along with him the brother whose fame in the things of the gospel has spread through all the churches; 19and not only this, but he has also been appointed by the churches to travel with us in this gracious work, which is being administered by us for the glory of the Lord Himself, and to show our readiness, 20taking precaution so that no one will discredit us in our administration of this generous gift; 21for we have regard for what is honorable, not only in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of men.

Again, Paul goes back to discussing Titus, the one he previously said would help instruct them in order to bring into full maturity the revelation concerning giving. Here Paul speaks of the fact that Titus and an unnamed minister have been appointed by the churches to travel for the furtherance of the Gospel. This seems to suggest that the churches are financially supporting them in this endeavor. This being the case, coupled with the fact that they are coming to receive an offering from the Corinthians (as is made more clear in chapter 9) is reason enough for Paul to emphasize the integrity with which they conduct themselves. Perhaps this was said in order to disarm the argument that these ministers intended to deal unscrupulously with the funds they were to receive from the church.

Star Trek as Ethics

Published by Colin November 18, 2008 in General. 30 Comments

Since my last post on War and Veterans, I had the opportunity to watch some Star Trek. I am a huge fan of The Next Generation and watch at least three episodes a week. I could probably write a book about the ethics of Star Trek, but I thought that the one I watched yesterday had a particularly relevant dilemma to the discussion we’ve been having on the nature of sacrifice, collateral damage and war.

In this episode, machines called “exocomps” have been proven to be very handy in fixing problems on a mining station. Data, however, has determined that he believes the exocomps are alive - and that it is wrong to force them to labour on the station. A problem eventually occurs where Picard and LaForge are trapped on the station and it becomes possible to send the exocoms out into space and blow them up to free the trapped officers. The following situation takes place:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iJVsTyauvw

Commander Riker is the utilitarian and the consequentialist - he wants to do the greatest good, even if it means sacrificing others. He believes it is “less evil” to sacrifice the exocomps for the trapped officers than to pursue a more ethically pure path. Data (often personified as a pure logical being), however, acknowledges that it is unethical to sacrifice any innocent life by force, and is required to make a choice - insubordination to his superiors or acting to preserve innocent life. Eventually, they argue and determine that it is best to try and ask the exocomps if they would freely try and save the trapped officers.

In axiomatic thinking - which is the type of thinking we are dealing with here - the examples don’t exist to prove or dispove the theory, but to illustrate it. Empiricism presumes that a theory is only as good as its ability to work in consequence - but this ignores the possibility of any knowledge, ethics or morality outside of human experience (such as Christianity) and even ability (such as communism or anarchism). In other words, because no human is capable of performing the ethically pure action of saving the exocomps, it does not “disprove” or “nullify” the ethical principle. In the same way, just because humans are incapable of keeping God’s law and living up to his moral standard in practice, it does not mean that God’s law is nullified or unbinding. We are still judged by this standard, even though it is “unrealistic.”

This example illustrates my point to some degree. It is wrong, and always wrong, to sacrifice innocent life as part of a “greater good.” It does not suddenly become less wrong because of a given situation or for given consequences (”reality”).Morality is above reality - reality must be derived from the purity of reason, logic and morality - not the other way around. Even though Data’s actions are impractical, radical and unrealistic (only he, as personified logic, can chose to save the exocomps - no human was willing or able to do it) they are correct. Ethics is not on a sliding scale based on how able we are to work them out or how “realistic” they are. The failing is not with the theory or the ethical axiom - it is with humanity’s inability to adhere to the greater principle.

Links: We Got Some

Published by Colin November 14, 2008 in General. 2 Comments

The Economy
GOP should ask why U.S. is on the wrong track by Ron Paul

U.S. Shifts Focus in Credit Bailout to the Consumer

The Treasury Department on Wednesday officially abandoned the original strategy behind its $700 billion effort to rescue the financial system, as administration officials acknowledged that banks and financial institutions were as unwilling as ever to lend to consumers.
…
The program, still in the planning stages, would for the first time use bailout funds specifically to help consumers instead of banks, savings and loans and Wall Street firms.

The End of Wall Street’s Boom

Politics
Evangelicals and the 2008 vote - a map by Christianity Today

Catholics making a stand on abortion

Stossel writes about the road to serfdom.

More
Teenagers and TV sex (abstract to an article published in the journal Pediatrics)

How to Get Your Email Inbox to Zero Every Day

Raped 13 year old girl stoned for adultery in Somalia

On War Veterans and What Should be Remembered

Published by Colin November 12, 2008 in Religion and Politics. 45 Comments

Because this issue is tremendously sensitive for so many around the world (for a variety of reasons, I might add) I want to place a few fundamental points directly at the top. First of all, I have a rich tradition of veterans in my own family - my grandfather in the US was drafted and served in WWII. My father fought several years in the bloodiest era of the Ireland/UK conflict. My grandfather-in-law, whom I consider as my own flesh and blood, fought in three wars. My Grandfather in England was a conciousness objector during WWII - and probably bore many scars from this experience as well.

I have to note this at the start because, sadly, many readers struggle with separating abstract positions from specific persons (”how dare you say that about my grandfather who…” ). Secondly, they have difficulty separating tradition, ideology and propaganda from historical reality (”We were good and we were fighting evil…”).

The Premise
My only major assumption from which I am deriving my argument is that the State is not a morally neutral entity. Every single person, family or organisation that comes into contact with the state is either a victim or a collaborator with an entity that is wholly and entirely premised on theft, murder, lies and subjugation. If you have problems with this premise, then you might have problems with this piece. Please take the time to view these resources (1, 2, 3, 4) to give this argument a fair shake, as it will not be dealt with here.

Veterans are Primarily Victims
Veterans have similar ambiguity about their situation. Many are victims of the state - they were threatened with jail, fines even death unless they killed other men they otherwise would have no conflict with whatsoever. They were/are forced to commit crimes against others in order to prevent crimes being committed against them by the state. Many who sign up willingly are also victims - as these have been deceived by the state in order to engage in a cause that they might originally believe to be just, but only much later might realise was wrong.

Veterans, for the vast majority, are victims and should be remembered in the same way we remember those affected by murder, genocide and persecution. But we must also remember who did this to them - we must remember who is responsible for so many widows, fatherless children and a legacy of lost life - namely, the State.

It is one of the greatest ironies that it is the state which pushes for the celebration of veterans. The state wants us to remember “the sacrifice” of these men (as though most went to war willingly or without being deceived) and not the fact that many of these victims were in fact sacrificed.

There is No Moral Legitimacy in Aggressive War
I have reflected on this recently, as I have become good friends with a German my age here in England. We have remarked several times about how we would be on opposite sides of a conflict, quite possibly trying to kill each other if, by chance, we happened to be living in the 1940’s. I want only the best for my good friend - and how many men, who otherwise might be friends, whose wives would be friends, whose children would grow up together - wantonly killed one another under either the threat of aggression against them by their own nations or because their government led them to believe that their fight was one for the greater good.

There is no morality present in the philosophy of “the end justifies the means” - that by committing evil, we can bring about good. It is morally bankrupt. Morality is absolute and unchanging. It is not subject to men - it is above them. Any “morality” that can be bent, broken or adjusted based on the relative morals of society or by the designs and strategies of men is not morality whatsoever.

Soldiers Give Us Freedom?
Lastly, there is a tremendously erroneous idea propagated as part of this subject - that soldiers are somehow responsible for “our freedom.” In many instances, nothing is further from the truth.

The soldier, by his very nature, is contrary to freedom - his job exists to destroy property and life, as well as subjugate the freedom of individuals. Consider that if freedom comes from the military, then it is no better than mob-rule and might-makes-right. Is this a moral philosophy?

We do not gain our freedom from the military or as a gift of a benevolent state - as though our freedom were a welfare check or a gun. We obtain our freedom, as Thomas Jefferson eloquently wrote, from “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” Freedom is a gift from God, and choice and responsibility are given to men from His hand. Nature speaks of the greatness of God to do this and also testifies, in how He ordered it, to the fact of freedom as the inherent state of all men.

Aggressive war is a crime - a blasphemy against God’s order and purpose for men. This is what should be remembered. Offensive war (or pre-emptive, to use the new term) is sin and cannot bring about good, which only comes from God (James 1:17). In fact, the same passage reaffirms the moral objectivity of God and the absoluteness of his order: “with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.” If we dare to view wars and veterans in the same light, than we have to re-evaluate our support for wars, the way we remember veterans and the legitimacy and morality of our current authorities.

Postcard from Scotland: I Heart Education

Published by cchrisr November 11, 2008 in General. 8 Comments

By popular request, I will provide an overview of the education system in the UK as compared to that of the US. Students begin their education in Primary School at around the age of 5. Primary education is much like elementary schools in the US. They go through 7 years here before going to a secondary school (i.e. high school).

Secondary Education
For those of you who have read the Harry Potter series, you’re already familiar with secondary school in the UK. Students are required to attend this for 4 years. At the end of this time, students take their Standard Grade exams (once called O-levels) in 7-9 subject areas. Once the student completes these, he is able to enter the workforce similar to a US citizen who have receive a high school diploma. In the rest of the UK, the equivalent of Standard Grade is the GCSE. Secondary schools have an optional 2 years which begin at this point. Most students stay at least another year as it is required for university-level education (1 for Scotland or 2 for the rest of the UK). Starting in the fourth year of secondary school (but not generally until the fifth), students are allowed to take “Higher” courses. In the UK, these are known as AS-levels. These courses are roughly equivalent to most intro-level college courses in the US. Students focus their efforts here If a student stays for the sixth year, he takes “Advanced Higher” and/or additional Highers. Advanced Highers are generally equivalent in the UK to A-levels. Students staying this far do so for university admissions, however the quality of education at this level is closer to that of a (good) junior college in the US as it provides a solid base for specialization in the university. Students who do not go on to university in these optional years work towards their Higher National Certificate and/or Higher National Diploma. These are scaled slightly under the bachelor’s degree and are roughly equivalent to an associate’s degree in the US.

Qualifications
With all of that said, there is still more regarding education. In the UK, education’s main goal is marketable skills. Because of this, there is a unified structure of qualification levels (SCQF in Scotland, NQF in the rest of the UK). I will be following the Scottish structure, but the national one follows it closely. Once students reach their fourth year of secondary school, they begin to gain points on the SCQF. This is a general scale for depth of education, so that basic secondary education is low and graduate degrees are high. There is also a second scale (Scottish Vocational Qualifications or SVQ) which more broadly indicates the level of competence one ought to have. SVQ is a vocational scale utilized more often in apprenticeships than in education. Because of the way secondary school is structured in that it provides means for apprenticeships to begin while still in school, the two scales do correlate weakly. By the time a student reaches SCQF level 3, he is expected to be competent in basic, routine work (SVQ 1). By the time a student has completed the mandatory part of secondary school (Standard Grades), he will be on SCQF level4 (or sometimes level 5) and this should also correlate to SVQ 2 (is able to perform a broad range of skills). A student who stays in secondary school through the 2 optional years should be on the SCQF level 7 (sometimes 6) and is expected to have competency as a supervisor (SVQ 3). A student who graduates from a university with a regular degree is considered SCQF level 9 (Honours degree is level 10). The upper SCQF levels (11 and 12) are for Master’s and doctoral degrees (respectively). Additionally, there are two levels of the SVQ which can be awarded: management (SVQ 4) and senior management (SVQ 5).

Conservatives: This is Your Own Fault

Published by Colin November 5, 2008 in Politics. 68 Comments

While I am not interested in as ridiculous a tirade as Focus on the Family engaged in during this stupidity, I would like to make a few interpretations and predictions regarding the next four years of the Barack Obama administration.

First of all - a note to all you conservatives who voted for McCain and also Bush in 2004 - I am blaming you. This is what a voting philosophy of the lesser of two evils has gotten you. You marginalised and mocked the one man who even held a glimmer of old-right economic values and fiscal conservatism. Take a moment to consider the so-called “conservative” candidates you’ve supported as the lesser of two evils since Ronald Regan:

John McCain
George W. Bush
George W. Bush
Bob Dole
George Bush
George Bush

Are you now surprised that America, which generally supports you when you campaign for things like balanced budgets, lower taxes, private property rights, civil liberties, families and free-enterprise, has now elected the party of one of the most unpopular congresses in modern US history? You have allowed your party to be completely subjugated by a neo-conservative group of right-wing socialists - and this is what you deserve - a taste of your own medicine. I washed my hands of the GOP five years ago, partly because I saw this coming - it was an inevitable correction in the political marketplace.

Any changes that Obama now makes using expanded executive power is your fault. You gave George W. Bush unprecedented power in the executive to do all manner of unconstitutional things - now, the man you most fear inherits that power. You had the mandate to reverse the power of the executive branch and you expanded it more than ever - and Obama will now wield that with a vengeance.

In fact, you have set a precedent for using a congressional majority to vest power in the executive, because by circumventing the legislative branch, political agendas can now go through faster and with more force. Welcome to the Obama administration, because of the power you gave George W. Bush, expect the next 40 years of the left-wing agenda to come to pass in eight.

I suspect this includes:

Wage and price controls - When the economy continues to go sour after the bailout fix has run out, including massive inflation, Obama will use his expanded executive power to control wages and prices. There will be record unemployment, increased poverty and shortages of gas, food, healthcare and other essentials.

More wars - towards the end of the Obama administration, I expect him to send in troops or air strikes in some new country - probably Pakistan or Iran. Who knows, if the economy gets bad enough, Obama might very well start WWIII with Russia by sending troops to “protect democracy” in Eastern Europe.

Universal Healthcare - This will still take congress’s approval, but Obama will get some form of universal healthcare - putting the final nail in the coffin of what used to be the greatest and most innovative system in the world.

More Federal Control in Education - Again conservatives, this is your fault. You encouraged Bush to dramatically increase federal involvement in education. Now enjoy Obama using this new power to expand the role of the Department of Education.

I am glad that Obama has won. I can’t imagine what another four years of neo-conservative power-mongering would bring. Hopefully conservatives find a moment to humbly reflect in all of this - and repent of just how far they’ve fallen. Their zeal for power overshadowed their traditions and principles.

It might take another new-deal and depression for them to get it - but so be it. This may not be the candidate you directly voted for all these years, but he is the unintended consequence of every vote for a right-wing, neo-conservative socialist as the lesser of two evils. Conservatives: you deserve Barack Obama.

Zeal For Truth