Evil Doers' favorite newspaper

Amy sent me this editorial from the New York Times, with just one comment: "Amen."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/opinion/31mon1.html?ex=1199768400&en=6feb0b0f563c22ee&ei=5070&emc=eta1

Favorite bumper sticker in Horseheads this weekend

In an handmade sign, stuck in the back window of a cab of a pickup truck:

Manure happens.

In Cold Blood

I was skimming through the Associated Press wire Saturday, making some quick decisions about which stories to use - yes, no, maybe, cut it to a brief, run if there's good art, etc. I was simply grabbing potential stories that I would read and edit in full later, when I hit the preview for the file on the Carnation killings in Washington state.

This was the most complete account of what happened. It was so rare that so soon after a mass murder that the main suspects were caught and that the prosecutors were willing to lay out the full story of what happened. I was riveted and had to read the whole story in that tiny little preview panel.

Then I hit the paragraph that made my stomach turn, and was the reason why I told Amy the next morning, "Don't read Page 11A." If you don't want to read about a child being hurt, don't read any more of this post.

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

The AP version is slightly different, but the account in the Seattle Post Intelligencer went like this:

McEnroe allowed Erica Anderson to huddle with her children before he killed her. He was designated to shoot the children because Michele wasn't up to it, although both wanted to leave no witnesses behind, court documents say.
McEnroe apologized to each child before shooting each in the head at close range. Nathan had picked up the phone batteries from the floor and looked up at McEnroe, who told police the child gave him "the look of complete comprehension ... as if he understood."

Nathan was the 3-year-old toddler, and in that description, I could see my own youngest son. He's at that age where he seems to know more than he lets on. His intelligence, wit and charm are just now emerging.

It broke my heart to read that. I've read so much violence as a wire editor, but so much comes at you from a distance, cold impersonal. That description just cut through me.

For a brief moment, I considered not putting the story in the paper. I couldn't take it.

Then, I realized I wouldn't be serving our readers, or anyone else, by not running it. Not running the story wouldn't make it any less real. Not running the story wouldn't mean the murders didn't happen. Not running the story wouldn't bring back the victims. Not running the story would only leave our readers ignorant of a terrible tragedy.

I couldn't let my personal feelings get in the way of my job. I couldn't ignore this murder any more than another generation would have avoided publishing the story of the Clutter family murders in Kansas. That case became the basis for Truman Capote's book, "In Cold Blood."

Someone once told me that journalists do what we do to illuminate for others what sort of world we live in, so that they can make sense of it and maybe make it a better world.

I hope that someone, somewhere, in reading about the Carnation murders, can make some sense of it. Maybe someone can gain small glimmer of insight to help the rest of us.

Pulling out the knife

Since my last post on Iraq, the news from that country has improved dramatically. From the perspective of a wire editor, it's been dramatic. Up until at least a month ago, one of my main tasks had been to find a prominent place somewhere in the newspaper to play the major death, destruction and combat stories from that war.

Slowly, however, the major story of the day would be about the dramatic drop in deaths (while however still high.) Then, there was a stories of Iraqi refugees taking advantage of the lull in violence to return to their native country. Recently, there have been stories about streets and marketplaces reopening, even Iraqis going to amusement parks.

It seems most of the credit should go to Gen. David Petraeus. As I read it, this drop in violence is not really because of the increase of soldiers in Iraq, but more about the change of strategy, one in which our troops have become partners with Iraqi civilians in combatting the violence. Our soldiers have been living closely with the Iraqis, working with them to protect neighborhoods, and then larger territories.

This makes a lot of sense, and brings us closer to the goal of being able to safely pull out our troops. But we aren't ready yet.

It would make a lot of sense for the insurgents to lay low, at a time when our forces are stronger, and wait to attack when our troop levels go down again or when they pull out entirely. So, maybe that is why the violence has gone down.

Also, remember that Iraq cannot really heal until we pull out. We are the knife that has been driven into their body. Even after the doctors are able to safely remove the blade, the patient still may be in danger.

It is the Iraqi people who ultimately must solve the complicated problems that we have unleashed on them.

So now, I must pay it forward

I was in a hurry to get to work as I was checking out at Jubilee this afternoon, buying flour and sprinkles for a baking project. The checker had rung me up, and I was about to run my card through to pay the $3.38.

"Stop," said the woman behind me. She had a stern look about her. "I try to do three good deeds a day. I want to pay for his bill."

The stern look was just her way of letting both of us know "I mean it. I really want to do this."

I could only shrug and thank her. She took out her money to pay, and I gave the only response that made sense, "I will pay it forward."

So now, that woman will be on my mind as others cross my path, in checkout lines, at gas stations, on the street. I must keep an eye out for someone who will need a little help getting through the day. The amount of money or how desperate the person seems to be won't matter.

What matters is to actually DO something to help another, rather than just wishing them well.

Hadn't thought of this

A column out today by Ruben Navarrette Jr. proposes an interesting idea.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/17/navarrette/index.html

He suggests that the Clinton-Obama fight is getting dirty. I didn't think so until I read his column. For example there were stories recently about how Hillary Clinton had fired staffers and volunteers who had put out misleading information about Barack Obama.

My naive reaction was something like, "Wow, Hillary's playing it smart. She's doing battle with Obama, but being careful to make sure that it doesn't get dirty. She knows she doesn't want to look like the bad guy in a fight against Obama. So, she's firing anyone who lets it go in that direction."

But Navarrette suggests that Hillary easily had it within her power to have prevented these statements in the first place. He insinuates that these questions about Obama's drug use - including a question about whether he was a pusher too - were raised deliberately.

If we take Navarrette's idea to the next step, we might suggest that Hillary could have arranged all of this from the beginning. She may have asked these volunteers and staffers to do these things just so she could step forward and publically punish those involved and seemingly quash these erroneous ideas, ideas that still get aired in the public domain.

That way, she could look like the good guy and still plants the seeds of doubt about Obama.

Now that's what I call sneaky, if it's true.

There, and back again

So, I took a little personal journey with myself on the issue of racism. The journey started with my earlier post on the not-so-silent racism apparent in comments by Bill O'Reilly about Sylvia's restaurant in Harlem.

The journey took an uncomfortable turn a couple of weeks later while I was discussing photo selection in class. I showed the class a photo of a young Irish girl, probably about 11, smiling and having a good time at a St. Patrick's Day parade. There were words painted on her face, something like "Kiss Me I'm Irish" and a student pointed out that some other words around her mouth had been rubbed off somehow.

I made an off-the-cuff remark: "Probably washed off while she was drinking her beer." (Not cool, as Amy would say later.) And then, after a pause, I told the class, "Oh, I'm allowed to say that, I'm Irish."

But my own words left a bad taste in my mouth that day.

I am Irish, but that doesn't excuse what I said.

Just the previous week, we had discussed how to avoid using sexist and racist language in newswriting. My point then, as usual, is that it all comes down to showing respect for each other's culture.

As I drove home after making that comment about the Irish girl, I came to the conclusion that mine was worst kind of excuse. It's the excuse that opens the door to racial bigotry. The next step would be, "I can make fun of your race so long as I'm making fun of my own."

Suddenly, all the bad jokes I learned in my youth flooded over me. The jokes in which the punchlines hinged on the stereotypes that all Irish are drunks, all Poles are stupid, all Italians are cowardly, and all Jews are miserly.

With one off-hand comment, I had moved from journalism professor into the Mind of Mencia, and I did not like the company I was keeping.

The next week, I apologized to the class. I told them that if we are to respect each other's race and ethnicity, then it should begin with respect for our own.

The Irish members of the class - and there are quite a few - shrugged it off. The Irish love to tell jokes about their drinking, one said. A colleague who was visiting the class for an evaluation that day did not even mention the incident. He also said he was more than happy to be a reference for me. The incident faded into distant memory.

But I did think about it from time to time. There are some really good jokes about how much the Irish drink. They're funny without being mean.

So, where do we draw the line?

Was my sin not that I made an insulting comment, but that I made one that wasn't funny?

Sometimes I watch Jon Stewart on the Daily Show and how he and his correspondents banter back and forth about race, sex and ethnicity. But they seem to keep it light and fun. They don't ever seem mean.

Perhaps inappropriate racial humor can be described the way a Supreme Court justice once defined pornography, essentially that "I don't know how to describe it, but I know it when I see it."

Perhaps the test on racial/ethnic humor could simply be this:

1) It has to be funny.
2) It should not be mean. It should not cause harm. It should not inflict pain on the group that it is directed toward.

Meeting that test takes a comedic genius, and I suppose that in the end I have learned that that's not me. And, neither is it Bill O'Reilly

Not from me, from This is True

On the issue of violence against women:

NO REALLY -- I'M VERY SORRY: Vince Hogg, 45, and Beverley Burns, 42, "regularly had furious rows," a court in Fife, Scotland, heard. Their latest was no different: Hogg pulled Burns's hair and threw her against a wall. "He was angry about the fact a shower was leaking and caused a carpet to get wet," the prosecutor said. Hogg pled guilty and got probation rather than jail. But there have been "serious consequences for his line of work," prosecutor Joanna Nicholson told the court. Hogg has worked for the National Health Service for 27 years, she said, and was "heavily involved" in the Zero Tolerance Campaign Against Domestic Violence. He was recently promoted to anger management counselor, but that promotion was rescinded after his arrest. In the meantime, he was suspended with full pay, and will return to work at NHS. (Glasgow Daily Record) ...Remember kids, loopholes in "Zero Tolerance" are only for those who make the rules.

What it means

Thinking about how Bush bypassed the press and the mainstream media made me realize something else.

It means that for many years we've had a president that has refused to engage with a large part of the country. He's been a president who has ruled only through the power of his base, who has felt no need to explain things with the rest of us, who has avoided debate, discussion and alternate perspectives.

The main failure of the Democrats in 2004 was that they failed to draw him out into a true political discourse, but then again, no wonder.

Bush has ruled with a sledgehammer rather than a scapel or some finer instrument. And the whole world has been bludgeoned.

Oh, so that explains it

Monday on NPR's "On the Media", a White House correspondent explained that not only has Bush been giving regular press conferences - about once a month - since the defeat of the Republican party in 2006, but he has been giving the reporters as much as a day's notice. Previously, they would give as little as 45 minutes notice, and many reporters would not be able to get to the briefing in time.

This correspondent explained that before the 2006 elections, Bush simply saw no need for the mainstream media, no need for the White House press corps. He could bypass them and go directly to his main, conservative base through a system of networking e-mails.

I'm not surprised at this, and I think I heard something that there was something of a setup like this to disseminate information to conservatives, but I hadn't realized how thorough it must have been that they could go around the mainstream media entirely.

But now we know how this country has become so polarized. It's easy when we live in an age when we are not all getting the same story. Liberal and conservatives alike get our news filtered according to our political preferences.

And the gap between us grows larger each day.

Home movies

This weekend I watched some home movies from my childhood. It was the first time I'd watched them since my Dad died. Seeing him in those often blurry images with the washed out colors reminded me of Kurt Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse Five." It is in this book that we learn how those who have died are still alive, in the past. If our minds are open enough, we can still visit those times. So, for Vonnegut, the response to death is not grief, anger or even guilt, but the simple "So it goes." Just another point on the timeline of our lives.

My God, how have I offended thee?

"I am not the editor of a newspaper and shall always try to do right and be good so that God will not make me one."
-- Mark Twain

Someone tell me if this is original

On the topic of violence against women, I've had a couple of thoughts that I might include in a column. I'm just wonder whether I'm unconsciously recycling ideas I might have picked up from another source.

First thought:

If all women decided tomorrow that violence against women should end, violence against women would not end. (Although women can take steps to limit that violence.) However, if all men decided tomorrow that violence against women should end, then violence against women would end.

(Ok, unless it's violence by women against other women.)

Second thought:

I'm thinking of posing a challenge to the male readers, something like:

I ask that all men reading this column to make a promise to not commit acts of violence against women. For many of you, this will be an easy promise to make. Some of you will not make this promise. So, I'm asking why not. And as we think about all the reasons why a man won't make that promise, we can realize how entrenched this problem is.

Quote of the day

"Facing it, always facing it, that's the way to get through. Face it."

Joseph Conrad
English novelist (1857-1924)

Bridging the divide

I'd like to write something about the problem of violence against women. I believe men have a responsibility in putting a stop to it.

This is, in part, because I am reading Gavin De Becker's "The Gift of Fear." It is also because I am a man who lives with a woman who teaches self-defense and has a black belt in karate. My perspective on these issues has changed dramatically in the past decade.

De Becker writes about how clueless men can be to the danger that women face:

"... Whether or not men can relate to it or believe it or accept it, that is the way it is. Women, particularly in big cities, live with a constant wariness. Their lives are literally on the line in ways men just don't experience. Ask some man you know, "When is the last time you were concerned or afraid that another person would harm you?" Many men cannot recall an incident within years. Ask a woman the same question and most will give you a recent example or say, "Last night," "Today," or even "Every day."

So, I'm asking you - my friends who are reading this blog - how well has De Becker hit the nail on the head?

Photo Op

One of the most interesting photos to come out of last week's news, I think, was the shot of George W. getting Ohlmert and Abbas to shakes hands at the conference in Annapolis.

It seemed to be an attempt to recreate two of the most-iconic peacemaking handshake images: Clinton with Rabin and Arafat, Carter with Begin and Sadat.

Our wartime president is suddenly trying to earn his stripes as a peacemaker.

Good luck with that George. I hope it works. Really.

One thing I would point out, however. Clinton and Carter had their respective parties shaking hands after the peace deals were signed. You still have a long way to go.

You've been invited

So, I've just invited a small group to read this private blog. If you got my invitation, you got it because I value your opinion and welcome your comments. Don't feel obligated to read this constantly, but stop in to see what I have to say every now and then. What you see here may amount to what I might have rambled about years ago while drunk at 3 o'clock in the morning. I don't get drunk at 3 in the morning anymore - Coumadin nixes that - but I want to try to express some views.

(This also is sort of a replacement for sitting around with friends and shooting the breeze. With my schedule, I don't get the chance to do that either.)

What you will find here are my private thoughts as I consider writing opinion articles for potential publication. Some ideas may get printed, so I am looking for helpful criticism and feedback. Tell me what works, what strikes a chord, and what doesn't work. Point out any flaws in logic or errors in fact as you see them.

It is OK with me if you disagree with what I write. I want to know if I am heading into dangerous waters without a life raft. I want to know if you think I have drawn the wrong conclusions about an issue. So, post a comment when you are so inspired.

I also envision it possible that you will comment on each other's posts. So, of course I ask that you all be civil. But then again, I picked all of you because you are some of the most level-headed thinkers I have known. So, that shouldn't be a problem.

I'm kind of excited about this. I hope this will be fun and interesting for you.

Welcome, again

This is my second attempt at writing a blog. My first attempt was thwarted by the folks at Gannett Corporate who said a newspaper wire editor could not have a public blog expressing commentary and opinion on national and international news events. The problem is that it may tend to invite criticism from the public that my political views are affecting how stories are selected for the newspaper.

Fair enough.

(BTW, surveys show that newspaper employees have a full range of political viewpoints, it's just that for professional and practical reasons reporters keep their views to themselves. But, I have not been a reporter for about 10 years now. I had hoped that since I was simply a copy editor that it would be OK to finally express my opinions. However, it was because I am occasionally a wire editor that my blog had been rejected. Perhaps if some day I was no longer working shifts as a wire editor, I might be able to write publicly.)

So, this is now a private blog. If you are reading this, you are probably a friend, a colleague or a family member who I have invited to join my discussion.

Since this will not go public, I plan to use this just as a way to sort out my thoughts before attempting to write the occasional opinion piece. I did get to write an opinion piece for the paper a couple of weeks ago on the writer's strike:

http://www.stargazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071116/OPINION03/711160301/1004/OPINION

That column was successful enough that I asked if I could write more opinion pieces for the newspaper. The answer was yes, so long as - again - what I wrote did not conflict with my wire editor duties. (Or even appear to conflict.)

So, I can publicly express opinion through the newspaper, but only because the editors at the paper will be able to turn down anything I write when they see ethical conflicts.

That's OK with me. It's better to express what I can, when I can, than write nothing at all.

As I quote Teddy Roosevelt in the header for this blog:
"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."

I've reposted my old blogs below.

Thanks for reading

Triskaidekaphobia

Triskaidekaphobia (from Greek tris=three, kai=and, deka=ten) is a fear of the number 13. It is a superstition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triskaidekaphobia

Posted by Ed Bond at 9:57 PM 0 comments
Saturday, November 3, 2007

Do as we say, not as we do

So, the U.S. is having trouble getting Turkey to promise not to attack the Kurds in Iraq? Hmmm. ... Why is it, do you think, that we have absolutely no credibility as advocates for peace? Why is it that our arguments for restraint at a time of crisis fall on deaf ears? Perhaps it is because the Bush administration has not shown restraint when needed, has not served as an example of how diplomatic solutions can work.

In the buildup to the current Iraq war, much was made of the potential existence of weapons of mass destruction, and yet the Bush administration would not wait for the U.N. inspectors to issue their report on whether such weapons were likely to exist. When the U.S. invaded, Hans Blix suddenly became the most irrelevant person on the planet and any pretext that the U.S could be a serious broker for peace disappeared.

We showed no restraint in 2003. How can we ask that of others in 2007?

How can we help others seek peace when our leaders have been so eager to wage war?

Posted by Ed Bond at 9:14 PM 0 comments

The good news about Blackwater

Thursday, November 1, 2007

The good news about Blackwater is that as terrible as these allegations of atrocities may be, they have at least prompted the Iraqi government to stand up against an American company on behalf of their own people. This was an assertion of sovereignty by the Iraqi leaders, and it is this kind of strength that is needed if there is to be a new Iraq.

George W. may not have meant it for something like this, but this is an example of the Iraqi people standing up, so that we can stand down.

Posted by Ed Bond at 5:20 AM 0 comments

A metaphor for Iraq

If you find a stabbing victim lying on the ground with the knife still sticking out of his abdomen, you might instinctively want to to help him by pulling the blade out quickly.

Don't.

Any emergency room doctor will tell you that doing that could rupture more arteries, cause more damage. When we invaded, we stabbed Iraq in the stomach. Somehow we have to remove the knife without killing the patient.

Posted by Ed Bond at 6:11 AM 0 comments

"If you want peace, work for justice."

Tuesday, October 30, 2007
I went to a Jesuit college, and this is a phrase that I believe the Jesuits must have sewed into my brain while I slept because I think about it often nowadays. It's a quote from Pope Paul VI, but it's also attributed to H.L. Mencken. Either way, it says a lot about why the Middle East is in so much turmoil.

Posted by Ed Bond at 5:07 AM 1 comments

""If you want peace, work for justice.""

1 Comment - Show Original Post

Amy said...
http://www.boredstop.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=157&Itemid=32

October 30, 2007 9:40 AM

What the Dalai Lama had to say in Ithaca

Monday, October 29, 2007

"Achieving global peace must begin with each person attaining an inner peace first."

'Nuff said.

Posted by Ed Bond at 11:23 AM 0 comments

We broke it, we bought it

Sunday, October 28, 2007

I'm not a fan of war although it is sometimes a necessary evil. (Even when it's necessary, it's still an evil -- as Jimmy Carter put it.) And, I have never been a fan of George W.'s Iraq war or his trite slogans such as "stay the course." However, I find myself -- VERY reluctantly -- supporting the continuing involvement of the American military in Iraq ... and this is why.

When the U.S. invaded, we destroyed their infrastructure. We destroyed their border controls and their utilities. We set in motion the forces that has unleashed a horrific civil war on the Iraqi people. Let's not kid ourselves. Except for the removal of Saddam Hussein and his fascist regime, we did not make Iraq a better place.

We broke their country, and it is our responsibility to do what we can to help Iraq now. (God help me, I'm actually backing George W. on something.)

I never believed the administration's reasons for invasion. And yes, I would have preferred that we had never invaded in the first place, but that is no longer our choice. We cannot undo the events and decisions of 2003.

Pulling out completely now may be an action as driven by political expediency and misguided concerns as invading was four years ago.

Here's a thought: Why don't we ask the Iraqis what they want? Put our withdrawal up to a vote. Their vote. Respect them and show some confidence that they can determine their own future.

Posted by Ed Bond at 12:13 PM 0 comments

Four more years for a GOP White House

What did that say? Up in the headline, what did that say? Four more years for the Republicans in the White House? That's crazy talk. Doesn't George W. have one of the lowest approval ratings of all time?

But here's the nub of the problem: George W. is going to be gone from the White House after January 2009, no matter what. He's effectively already left the arena of electoral politics. The Republicans running for the nomination seem to know that, but the Democrats may not. The GOP candidates have distanced themselves from him.

So, the problem is that while the Democrats may wish they could still run against George W., every one of the Republican candidates are already prepared for -- and looking forward to -- running against Hillary. Running against George W. and his record is akin to running against an empty chair. (OK, I know, how is that really different from before?)

Don't think the Democrats can possibly blow it? Feeling confident that the Democrats can win the White House after eight years of crushing Republican leadership? I have two words for you:

Michael Dukakis.

Posted by Ed Bond at 11:52 AM 0 comments
Sunday, October 28, 2007

Silent racism

Saturday, October 27, 2007

The controversy over Bill O'Reilly's account of his visit to Sylvia's restaurant in Harlem -- "There wasn't one person in Sylvia's who was screaming, 'M-fer, I want more iced tea.'" -- gave me a lot to think about. We all need to think about it. And, what we need to consider is not just about whether Bill O'Reilly is a racist, but as to how prevalent racism remains in America today.

While it is a major advancement that in this society the "n-word" is no longer acceptable, that does not mean that the racists have disappeared. It only means that racists have learned to keep their mouths shut. They don't use the word because they fear the repercussions that would follow.

I grew up in a fairly insular Irish Catholic world on the Jersey Shore, and while I don't remember hearing the "n-word," I was left with a very general sense that the different was to be avoided, to be feared. I didn't see overt racism, but in my memories I now understand it was seeping out at the sides of my perceptions.

Things happened that I did not know about at the time, but now cleary show the racism. I have heard stories that when I was growing up that black people who tried to walk into my town would be stopped by the police and escorted out of the municipality. When I was in the hospital last year, my roommate told me of a trip his church group made years ago to a hotel not far from where I grew up. The hotel did not want the black members of the church group to get rooms. The church group did get rooms for all of their members, but only after a fight.

But my point is this, the absence of overt racism -- in word or deed -- does not mean there is an absence of racism.

Let's be thankful that the racists have learned to hold their tongues, but let's not kid ourselves that the racists have gone away. Bill O'Reilly's comments are an example of that silent racism seeping off to the sides.

We can't really expect them to go away either. The silent racists can not change themselves any more than a leopard could change its spots. Only when they really look into their own hearts can they see the truth.

What can we do? Let's not pass on silent racism to the next generation. Silence only reinforces the fear of the different. Instead, let us talk to our kids about heroes, men and women to look up to. Show them the heroes of all races, creeds and colors. People who stood up in difficult times and said what needed to be said, did what needed to be done. Probably the best example of this would be Martin Luther King Jr., and we don't even have to wait for his birthday to talk about him.

Posted by Ed Bond at 11:40 AM 0 comments

No man is an island

In the early 1990s, I was a reporter covering the protests in Allegany County against plans to build a low-level radioactive waste dump somewhere in that county. Hordes of protesters showed up whenever the state sent out a siting commission to pick where to put this dump. They would lock arms and block roads and do everything they could to stop or slow the commission from reaching a potential site. And, along a country road somewhere in Allegany County, I found a large group of protesters blocking the road and waiting for the state police to move in, arrest them and carry them off.

In that crowd, happily clinging to the arm of someone I took to be a younger relative, was M.M. Alexandra Landis. Dr. Landis -- who told me she had a Ph.d. and had taught at Harvard -- was an elderly woman who seemed to be delighted at the prospect of being arrested. I asked her why she was there, risking arrest. I have always remembered her reply.

"Are you familiar with John Donne?" she asked. Then, with no prompting, she launched into his poem:

"No man is an island, entire of itself
every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main
if a clod be washed away by the sea,
Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were,
as well as if a manor of thy friends or of thine own were
any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind
and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls
it tolls for thee. "

I thought of Dr. Landis this morning as I watched the EMTs take my elderly neighbor out of her home on a stretcher and put her in an ambulance.

Posted by Ed Bond at 11:01 AM 0 comments
Friday, October 26, 2007

Creationism

One of the more disappointing turns in modern thinking, I believe, is the resurrection of creationism. It's a turn toward the Dark Ages when learned men would be persecuted for expressing ideas contrary to the Bible.

For me, faith and science do not need to be in conflict. Through faith, we learn about God. Through science we learn about the world, the universe He created.

Stipulating that the world had to have been created 6,000 years ago in the span of six 24-hour days seems to me to put limits on God. It's a very narrrow, close-minded way of looking at the world. There are other breeds of creationists, those who may not stipulate a certain timespan, but may still insist that life all just spontaneously created. But still, it's an approach that says we must first turn to theology to learn about the world before we seek answers through science. That's just backwards thinking.

Science has given us answers that allow us to reach back billions of years in time, all the way back to the Big Bang. It has allowed us to explore the millions of years of visible life on this planet. And, none of these achievements reduce my faith in God. They don't make God any smaller. They make him more and more expansive. Science has answered many questions, but can't quite answer two big issues. 1) If the universe was created through a Big Bang, where all matter had been contained in single point no bigger than a thimble, then where did that come from? 2) How did life start on Earth?

Let science keep finding its answers. At the point where science can find no more answers, faith may begin.

Posted by Ed Bond at 6:08 PM 0 comments
Thursday, October 25, 2007

"We're all in it together"

I ran into slightly more frustration than usual at work last night, and it was really getting to me. Then I remembered one of my favorite lines from "Brazil." It's a Terry Gilliam film that takes a new spin on "1984." (Interestingly, it was made in 1985.) Robert De Niro plays Harry Tuttle, a rogue heating and air conditioning repairman who defies the bureaucracy by swinging around the rooftops to do the repairs that the government won't get to or won't allow. When asked by the star of the movie, played by Jonathan Pryce, why he does it, De Niro's character replies, "We're all in it together." That's what I say to myself whenever I'm in a frustrating situation, surrounded by other equally frustrated people.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088846/

Posted by Ed Bond at 5:01 AM 0 comments
Thursday, October 25, 2007

Today's favorite bumper sticker in Ithaca

Live simply so that others may simply live

Posted by Ed Bond at 12:18 PM 0 comments
Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Welcome

I've started this blog - in my spare scraps of time - because I need to speak out on a variety of issues.

I'm a busy guy. I work two jobs and have a family. I'm also trained as a journalist, so my natural instinct is to keep my opinions to myself. I did that because I did not want my sources to conclude that I was biased or slanted in some way.

However, I'm no longer a reporter although I still work in newspapers. And, I've realized that by sitting on the sidelines, I've allowed many ideas that need to be challenged to go unchallenged. I feel as if my silence can be taken as agreement with a host of misguided notions. So, I would like to speak out now, to clarify my views and to start a discussion.