Three's a Party

I've been working really hard to figure out who I should vote for this presidential election.  One the one hand, Hilary Clinton is a criminal with plans that will ruin our country, while on the other hand, Donald Trump is a criminal with plans that will ruin our country.  Every time I would make up my mind who I would vote for, I'd read a news story that proved that would be a bad idea.  Now I feel like I can't vote for either candidate and still retain my integrity.

That's why I'm not voting for either of them.  I'm voting for a third-party candidate, independent Evan McMullin.  He happens to be a member of the Church, but that's not why I picked him.  I picked him because he's the least terrible candidate to choose from.  Don't get me wrong, I think McMullin will do a fine job, but he's also the only candidate that doesn't turn my stomach just thinking about voting for them.  Some may say that I'm throwing my vote away by voting for a third-party candidate.  To them I say that by voting for McMullin, I'll still be able to vote and exercise my civic duty without supporting a candidate who I detest.

So if you're struggling with who to vote for, remember that you have more than two options.

He's Got My Vote

Because a fictional super villain is still a better option than a real life one.  At least Lex is honest about his baldness...

Almost Duped

I almost fell for a Nigerian Prince Scam.  For those unfamiliar, this sort of scam has a Nigerian prince  (or other foreign dignitary) contact a victim for help: due to political unrest, he cannot access his vast fortune; he offers to send a large check and all you have to do is wire back a small portion of it so that he can free his family.  The problem is that the check is fake, but due to a law in the US, it will initially clear.  After a couple of weeks, however, the bank will find out that the check is fake.  If the victim sent the money as asked, they now owe their bank that amount and, likely, overdraft charges.

I had heard about all of this years ago (Allison nearly went through with it once), but this one had a new twist: I was asked if I wanted to be a secret shopper for Wal-Mart.  I thought that sounded pretty good, so I provided my contact information and asked for more information.  A few days later I got an email from a different email address telling me (in broken English) that I had been approved for the secret shopper program.  It continued by saying that I would receive a check that I was to use for my secret shopping experience.  I thought something was fishy, but when no check arrived despite their promises, I figured that they had given up.

Then the check arrived on Wednesday.  The letter gave me instructions to cash the check and transfer some money to some dude in Texas (they hadn't even bothered to come up with a fake business name) from MoneyGram and review the store from where I wired the money.  I will give the scammer props for giving detailed instructions for the kinds of things to look out for (professionalism of staff, cleanliness of store, etc.), making it seem more legitimate.  The big tip-off that it was a scam (in addition to changing the store I'd be reviewing) was that my "salary" was to be deducted from the check.  If I'd gone through with it, I would have lost over two thousand dollars.

I took the check to work yesterday and sent it through the shredder and I've blocked the person from my email.  I let my interest in something that sounded cool blind me from seeing some blatant warning signs.  In the future, I'll need to be more careful.

Headquarters

My final day in Denmark was more relaxed than the two previous days had been.  While there was one more meeting to attend, not everyone was present and our agenda wasn't very strict.  The meeting was also short, at least for Ritt and I, because we went on a tour of the main Danfoss office.

 

Danfoss is the second largest company in all of Denmark and is recognized through out the country.  I mention this as set up for the fact that there are multiple employees whose sole responsibility is to give guided tours.  Summertime is the busy season, but they have guest year-round.

 

Our tour began in the Mads Clausen museum, which is also the childhood home of Danfoss' founder.  The walls were covered with pictures and other interesting things.

 

Mads and his wife Bitten.



 

This ceiling was custom built by Russian POWs as part of a work-release program.

 

 



A cool looking clock.

 

After we walked around the house for a bit, we walked outside through the gardens.  Danfoss grows food and flowers that are available to all guests, free of charge.

 

The tour guide told us that this herb was a "Coca-Cola" plant. I don't know what it really is, but it did taste like Coke.

 

We then went into the original production facility, built in 1935, which focused less on the Clausen family and more on Danfoss.  (By the way, "Dan" means Danish and "foss" means river, because the first product made by the company, an expansion valve, sounded like running water.)

 

The original work clock.

 

A young Mads Clausen.

 

An original schematic for an expansion valve.

 

After quite a bit of history, we moved onto the main office, which is still use today.

 

 

While pretty to look at, the water feature and wall of living, growing plants help to regulate the building's temperature and filter the air, as well as block the smell from the fully-staffed kitchen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This was one of the scariest things I've ever seen: a constantly moving elevator with no doors. You step on when the car is lined up and step off when you arrive at your floor. It's been in the building since 1955 and there have never been any accidents, but I was still nervous taking it up.

 

At the top floor is Mads Clausen's original office.  It's currently being used by his Son, Jorge, but since he wasn't using the office when we were there, we got to go inside.  There is only one way to describe it: opulent.  While the rest of the building is clearly fancy and expensive, it's to be used by everyone.  This office was built for one man.  I didn't take a picture, but the desk was made out of green, Italian marble and was heated.  Also, there was a second, smaller desk that had a chair upholstered with Zebra fur.

 

This leopard was shot by Bitten while on safari. 

 

This baby giraffe died of natural causes. 

 

 

This lion was shot by Mads while on safari.

 

After looking at what is probably the most expensive room I've ever seen, we go to look down from the top floor.

 

Don't worry: the glass I'm standing on is strong enough to support over 50 tons.

 

 

Danfoss has an impressive solar farm. 

 

As we walked down the fifteen flights of stairs, we saw several pieces of original art. This was one of them. 

 



I didn't take that many pictures of the art, but I liked this one. 

 

 Looking back up.



 

 The tour of the main office and the museum at Danfoss was really interesting.  I got to learn a lot about the company and I saw some things that really surprised me.  It was a lovely cap to the trip and enlightening experience.

Traveling

For my trip to Denmark, I flew out of Baltimore, Maryland, had one layover in Newark, New Jersey, another in Frankfurt, Germany, arrived in Hamburg, Germany, before taking a two hour shuttle ride north to Nordborg, Denmark.  I knew it would be a long trip, so I planned to sleep while we flew over the Atlantic.

That was the plan, anyway.

For whatever reason, I was unable to sleep the whole flight.  Once I arrived in Hamburg, it was morning (Denmark and Germany are in the same time zone), so to avoid having my jet-lag be exacerbated, I stayed awake until about 8:30 that evening.  Taking into account that I had to wake up early to so Ian could drop me off before he had to be at work, I was awake for 35 hours straight.  That's a record for me, and one that I hope I never break.

The hotel I stayed at offered minimal accommodations.  This was the bed I slept on:

Two twin beds, which I was expecting from the description on the hotel's website.  What you can't see from the picture is that the blanket that's laid across the top is not folded over, it's laid sideways.  The blankets that were provided were barely as wide as the bed.  That means that if you roll over in the night, you'll end up uncovered.  Luckily there was another source of heat:

For the uninitiated, that's a radiator, a device that pumps hot water into a zigzag of pipes.  The heat from the pipes radiates into the room, hence the name.  This is a common source of heat in Denmark, despite being inefficient and outdated.

A closer look at the controls. Something looks familiar...

The bathroom was also not what I expected:

In case it's not clear from the picture, the shower was just a drain in the floor.  To be fair, the floor on the shower side of the curtain drops down by about an inch, but it was still weird not having more of a barrier.

Even with the strangeness of the hotel, it was still a nice enough place to stay, though the wifi was spotty.

Going back to the beginning of the trip, while I was waiting for my first plane in Baltimore, I mostly spent my time reading a book.  Once it was time to line up to board the plane, I noticed that the woman who had been sitting next to me gathered up her stuff at the same time I did.  I looked at her and politely asked, "Going to Newark?"  She was, and we ended up having a very nice conversation for the ten minutes it took for us to board the plane.  She was headed home to Los Angeles after visiting friends in Baltimore.  When I told her where I was going and what I did for a living, she was genuinely interested and asked a lot of questions.  I hadn't expected to have such a nice exchange with a stranger, but I'm glad that I spoke up.

Once I found my seat, I asked the older woman sitting next to me if Newark was her final destination.  It wasn't; she was headed to Oslo, Norway to visit her daughter.  I thought that it was kind of amazing that we, two random people, were both headed to Scandinavia.  We ended up talking the whole of the admittedly short flight.  She was worried that she would miss her connecting flight due to a delay from Baltimore; when we arrived I wished her luck and went to find the gate I needed for my connecting flight.  When I sat down after finding the right gate, my flight neighbor walked up to me to let me know that her connecting flight had been delayed as well and she wasn't going to miss it.  Apparently I had made enough of an impression that she sought me out so that I wouldn't worry.

The trip was long, but I got to visit Europe for the first time and I brightened the day of two strangers that I'll probably never see again.  I'd say that's worth the fatigue.

Siding with the Opposition

We live in a world with shifting views, especially with regards to faith and religion.  I recently heard about a survey that found that people of my generation are the least religious of any previous generation, to the surprise of no one.  With so many people firm in their stance against what I believe, I've mostly gotten used to being in the minority where religious devotion is concerned.  Perhaps that's why I get so annoyed when I have to agree with the opposing side.

As you're probably already aware, Kim Davis, the Rowan, Kentucky County Clerk is refusing to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples.  She cites her religious beliefs as the reason for the refusal, despite being ordered to issue the licences by the Supreme Court.  She says she is more concerned about God's judgement than the opinions of opponents and doesn't want her name and signature on the marriage licences of same-sex couples.  All of that makes sense to me; the part where she loses me is that she refuses to resign.

She is an elected official, put in office by the people of Rowan County, Kentucky to serve them in a specific capacity.  One of her responsibilities is to issue marriage licences, including to same-sex couples.  I find it unfortunate that the Supreme Court is requiring all states to recognize same-sex marriage, but that is the law.  If Ms. Davis doesn't want to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples, then she should quit.

It seems these days that more and more people are confusing what religious freedom and freedom of speech means.  For example, when I worked at IHOP during college, that particular location required all employees to work both Saturday and Sunday.  I asked that I not have to work Sundays due to my religious beliefs and they acquiesced.  If they hadn't, I wouldn't have worked for them.  The first amendment protects our rights from being infringed by the government, not by other parties.  With the case of Ms. Davis, while she does work for the government, she also agreed to perform the duties of her office when she signed up to be a county clerk.  If she doesn't agree with what those duties are, she certainly has a right to protest, but once the judgement is declared, she needs to either grit her teeth and issue marriage licences to the qualifying people within her county or she needs to resign.

One of the reasons this particular case is so frustrating is because so many people who are not religious will see this woman's behavior and label everyone who is religious as "crazy."  We as human beings tend to categorize things, even people, so for the many people out there that don't have any religious friends to serve as a counter-example, Ms. Davis is serving as a symbol of all Christians, making us all look like zealots who are standing in the way of "progress."

Again, I agree with Ms. Davis' beliefs and I understand her dilemma, but if she doesn't like the job for which she signed up, she needs step down.

Freedom of Intolerance

On Sunday, two armed men were killed by police when they opened fire on an auditorium in Garland, Texas.  The quick action under fire by the officers on duty is commendable and impressive (besides the two felled antagonists, no on was killed), but what sparked the ire of the gunman was nothing short of an act of hatred: an art exhibit on cartoons and caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad.  The event was put on by the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), an organization described by many as a "hate group" -- I heartily agree.

For those that don't know, Muslims believe no images of their founder, the Prophet Mohammad, should ever be made and any depictions of him are considered blasphemous.  With so many terrorists in the world inappropriately claiming Islam as their motivation, metaphorically spitting in their faces is just asking for trouble.

According to the AFDI, they put on the event in support of "free speech" and people who are challenging the "American way of life" (I assume that "American way of life" they're talking about is being mind-bogglingly stupid).  What the AFDI should really say is that they're a bunch of intolerant cowards that can't stand it when people do things differently than them, because that's the truth of the matter.  Yes, there are a bunch of radical Muslims in the world that are committing terrible acts, but they are the minority.  Judging an entire group of people based on the most extreme examples will only lead to trouble, as was seen on Sunday.

When I heard about what had happened, I felt a brotherhood with the peaceful Muslims in this country.  As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I have seen my religion mocked (and that mockery being praised), I have read about "radicals" that claim the same core beliefs I do but practice things that are denounced by Church leaders, and I have had people tell me to my face that I am going to hell.  The major difference is, of course, that the Church is true, but no one should be mistreated because of their religion.

While I still believe that Americans have the right to be stupid, I really am disappointed with how some people choose to exercise that right.

The Ugly Side of America

Samuel experienced his first real encounter with racism recently.  At the job he was working at, he was berated by his boss for talking back (he was trying to explain something that he did, but it was seen as back-talk).  Some of his coworkers told him that he was mistreated because the white manager always talks differently to the minority employees.  They told him that the best tactic is to simply agree to avoid conflict.

Samuel came home angry, but mostly confused.  He told me that in his native country, people judge others based on where they are from or what family they are a part of, but not because of how they look.  Plus, he told me that he thinks of me as his brother and I've never treated him differently simply because he's from Africa, so he just assumed that all people thought the same.  That is to say, some people are good and others are bad, but you judge them by what's in their heart rather than the color of their skin.  His bigoted boss was a real shock.

I am saddened that Samuel had to experience something as terrible as racism and that it took coming to the US to see it firsthand.  However, the restaurant he was working at has closed down, so he won't have to deal with that pig-headed boss.  Not only that, but he's already lined up his next job, this one run by a member of the ward, which almost certainly means that he won't see racism like he so recently did.

Again, I'm really disappointed that Samuel had to go through what he did, but I'm happy that I was able to be a good example and proof that just because one white person is a bigoted creep, not all of us are.

Fresh Start

I don't have much to report on my job status.  I've been applying to a lot of jobs and I've been hearing back from a lot of them.  I had one interview on Tuesday and I'll have another today.

As I've mentioned to a lot of people already but have yet to write about, this round of unemployment is already much better than the last one.  Last time it was right after Thanksgiving and no one was looking to do any hiring, while the beginning of fall is an natural "fresh start" time of year.  Last time I was still recovering from my seizure when I was let go, while I now have my condition under control.  Last time the longest professional job I had had had lasted five months, while my most recent job was in place for around eight.  Last time I had forgotten to ask permission to take writing samples with me and had to use writing samples from my college days, while this time I got permission to take a couple of samples with me to show off my skills.  Last time it took several weeks before I heard back from anyone, while this time I got calls the day after I updated my profile on several job sites.

Another thing that I've been feeling this time is that this next job will be a better fit.  When I prayed about taking the job at CAS Severn, the answer didn't come easily and it basically amounted to "Well, what else are you going to do?"  I only had the one job offer so it would have been foolish to not take it.  The answer I received, along with the experience I had there, lead me to believe that working for CAS Severn was a sort of "in between" job.  I see now that it wasn't a very good fit for me, but it did help to pad out my resume and I did learn a lot while there.  That said, I think that the next job that I'll take will be a much better fit and will be "the one," at least for now.

Of course, take everything I've written here with a grain of salt because, as previously stated, I don't have any offers yet.  Hopefully, that won't last long.

Beautiful Women Have a Hard Life

With recent events (the Fappening and Ray Rice's assault charges in particular), I've been thinking about how women are viewed in our society and I wanted to address some of the conclusions I've come to.

Women are Either Pretty or Worthless

When a male politician is condemned, the speaker attacks his policies, his voting record, and his political leanings.  When the same is done with a female politician, the same criteria are taken into account, as well as her appearance.  I've encountered numerous times online (which I recognize is not the same as real life) when former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton were belittled, sometimes justifiably, and inevitably someone would say how ugly they are, connecting their worth as a politician with their attractiveness.

This way of thinking dehumanizes women, turning them into objects of desire.  Now, some women have made careers putting themselves on display as models, but the same rules that apply to them should not apply to all.  We don’t objectify men in the same way at all.  Think about this: when a male actor puts on weight or otherwise "uglies up" for a role, we think that’s just part of his job; but when a female actor does it, she is making a great sacrifice for her art, because women are supposed to be pretty.

Pretty Women are Expected to Share Themselves with Everyone

Beautiful women are harassed constantly.  Ignoring assault (we'll get to that in a bit), I have heard of many complaints from attractive women that when they're alone in public, men are constantly trying to start conversations with them, usually as a way to ask for their phone number.  Whether at the store, the gym, at school, or even just walking down the street, stupid guys will hit on a woman, simply because she's attractive.  And maybe we could say "Well, there’s no harm in trying," bu when faced with rejection, many guys will turn and insult his former object of affection for not being interested in talking to a stranger.  Many girls will lie and say that they have a boyfriend to be left alone, because men find it easier to respect another man than a woman.

On a different level are female celebrities.  While the recent leak of personal celebrity photos was a big one, it's nothing new.  Our celebrity worshiping culture is obsessed with anyone even arbitrarily famous.  But make no mistake, woman have it worst.  Case in point, one argument in favor of the leaked photos is that they shouldn't have taken any pictures that they didn't want leaked to the public.  That argument falls apart when you consider that none of the photos were of male celebrities.  People want to justify their curiosity and criminal behavior by turning it around on the victims.  The only time a male celebrity has a personal photo leaked is when he accidentally (or "accidentally") releases it himself.

Men are not Responsible for Their Actions When Women are involved

The other day when I was in the locker room at my gym changing into my workout clothes, I heard a couple of other patrons discussing the Raven's decision to suspend Ray Rice for assaulting his fiancee.  Since I don’t follow sports or sport news, this was my introduction to topic.  These two guys at my gym were justifying Rice beating his fiancee because "you know how women be."  Like I said, I wasn't familiar with the issue, but I was dumbfounded that they were trying to make it the victim's fault.  This is just another version of "she was asking for it" and I’m ashamed that we still live in a society where that argument holds water.

When I actually made it out to the gym floor, I saw one of the TVs showing a loop of the surveillance footage that filmed Rice hitting his fiancee and knocking her off her feet.  And he was only suspended?  The leniency shown to him is pretty shocking on its own.

I wish I had solutions to solve these despicable problems.  Unfortunately, the state in which we find ourselves living in has been developing for a long time, so it will take a long time to undo.  However, I believe that my opinions in this matter stem from my faith and knowledge of the gospel.  As we work to share the gospel with the rest of the world, these problems can start to go away.  A woman shouldn't have to fear harassment or worse simply because she's a woman, beautiful or not.

(And no, I still don't consider myself a feminist.)

Sometimes the English Language Makes Me Sad

Is it necessary to include memes as official parts of the English language?  I mean, I know that the language changes and evolves, but do we really need "mansplain" as a word?

For those that aren't aware, the Oxford English Dictionary (the closest thing our language has to a presiding body) recently published new words that will now be included in their official dictionary.  Some words or phrases make perfect sense, like "Deep Web" and "octocoptor" since they describe actual things and are not simply a form of slang.  I'll even go for "tech-savvy" and "douchebag" since those words have each existed for well over a decade, so even if they're just slang words, they're slang words that everyone knows.

But "YOLO?"  That acronym didn't exist until three years ago, even if the phrase its abbreviating has been around for much longer.  And "cray" and "adorbs" are just really dumb abbreviations and portmanteaus like "listicle" and the aforementioned "mansplain" are, well, portmanteaus, so they shouldn't be official words.

Some of these words ("YOLO" in particular) seem like the OED is jumping the gun a bit.  Do you remember the Spice Girls' big hit "Wannabe" from the 90s?  It had a word in the chorus "zigazig-ha" that was utter nonsense.  Well, the Spice Girls were such a phenomenon that "zigazig-ha" was added to the OED.  I haven't heard anyone say that word.  Ever.  Now, the OED is a British publication and the Spice Girls were a British musical group, so maybe that word lasted longer in England, but I can't imagine it's still in use today.  It seemed like a dumb inclusion back then just like some of the new words now.

And before anyone brings it up, yes, I know that dictionaries act as a kind of historical document of language - I really enjoy looking up archaic meanings to common words - but, again, some of these words just seem like old, out of touch lexicographers are trying to prove that they're still cool and hip and are over-compensating.  Or maybe with the internet, English is evolving faster than I'm comfortable with and I'm just an old man that refuses that get with the times.

Now get off my lawn!

Do Americans Have the Right to Be Stupid?

Recently, celebrity doctor, Dr. Oz, has come under fire for faulty advice he's given out on his show.  As a way to pay for his show, in addition to traditional commercials, he has endorsed homeopathic products with little or no scientific evidence of being effective.  Some people have even put Dr. Oz's advice over that of their own physician.  He is being sued for his false claims.

Here's the question that no one is asking: is he responsible for people blindly following his advice?  This isn't really about him endorsing products (celebrities do that all the time), this is about Americans wanting to place the blame for their own stupidity on someone else.

So, going back to the title of this post, do Americans have the right to be stupid?  I believe so.  If I want be lazy and not work, I shouldn't be forced to - nor should I be cared for if I take that route in life.  If I want to only eat junk food and avoid vegetables like the plague, the FDA shouldn't be there to put broccoli on my hamburger.  I'm not suggesting that all regulations cease; it's nice to know that there can be no more than one rodent hair per 100 grams of chocolate produced in the US and I don't want that to go away.  What I'm saying is that too often, we want to be protected from ourselves.

I for one do not see Dr. Oz as a villainous person that is taking advantage of his show to hock sugar pills to unsuspecting saps.  I also don't see him as a victim who was duped into selling worthless crap.  He's a guy that got caught up in being a celebrity.  People say that as an actual doctor, he should know better.  I say that we should know better than to treat an advertisement as medical advice.

I realize that I'm at an advantage when compared to the average American: I'm a member of a church that teaches it's members to look beyond the surface and gain a deep understanding of the truth for themselves and not to simply take someone else's word for it.  With that kind of outlook, it's a lot harder to get swept up in lies and half-truths.

A Lesson in Tolerance

When I was a kid, I participated in several theater productions, both backstage and as an actor.  The main theater group I was a part of was run by a gay couple, Randy and Doug.  However, as a kid, I didn't know that they were a couple or even that they were gay.  I just thought that they were a couple of friends who liked theater.  I remember that I was still involved with this particular theater company in middle school.  It was around then that Ian told me that they were gay and I was shocked.  I didn't know that I knew anyone that was gay and here it turned out that I had known a gay couple for a few years.

Why do I bring this up?  I was thinking about this experience recently and I was impressed that my parents allowed me and my sibling to participate.  This was back in the early-to-mid nineties when the homosexual community was not nearly as accepted as it is today.  My parents could have easily not had us be involved with that particular theater company, but instead, they taught us by example that regardless of someone's lifestyle, they are still human beings and deserve respect.

Nowadays, it's easy to get swept up in an argument with each side taking things to the extreme, but it's important to remember that whatever side we fall on, the other side is made up of fellow human beings and they deserve to be treated as such.  I'm thankful that my parents had the foresight to show me that when I was a child.

Getting Perspective

Having a new job is stressful.  There have been a few days when I come home when I am not in the best of moods.  Samuel, being a friendly person, will often ask how my day was.  I try to be honest without focusing on complaints.  I might say something like "I've had better," and leave it at that (though there have been several "pretty good" days, too).  I'll then ask how his day was and almost always get a "good" as the reply, sometimes with further elaboration.

Lately, however, I've been more careful about what I say.  Nigeria has suffered great tragedy recently in the form of terrorist attacks that have killed hundreds.  If that wasn't bad enough, over 200 young girls have been kidnapped, likely to be sold into forced prostitution.  Samuel has lost sleep over worrying about these events.  He hasn't lost any family in all of this, but it still hits close to home.

Now, think about having that person as a roommate and try to complain about having to work hard at a job so that you can earn a ridiculous amount of money.  Mind you, Samuel never said that I have it too good to complain: he's far too polite.  Instead, I just feel like a heel for complaining about minor trials when his homeland is under attack.

This experience is a good reminder to me of how good I have it and how I should appreciate every stressful day that I experience because no matter how bad I have it, I have a clear picture of how it could be worse.

A Basic Right?

I heard a news segment yesterday about a business not wanting to provide certain types of birth control for their employees, citing religious reasons, despite the fact that the Affordable Care Act states otherwise.  The case has gone to the Supreme Court.  With my job dealing (indirectly) with government funded healthcare, I've thought a lot about this case and want to share my feelings.

I understand that certain types of birth control can help regulate a woman's cycle and that can be beneficial, but the case I referenced above doesn't deal with that kind of birth control, it deals mainly with so-called "morning after" pills.  In the report that I heard, some representative of the plaintiff said that the business was "picking and choosing" what part of women's health to care for, but that all of men's healthcare would be covered.

The problem with any of these arguments is that the underlying question is being ignored: do all citizens have the right to sex without consequences?  And this isn't about STD transmission because if it were, this case would be about condoms.  No, this is about being able to have sex without worrying about pregnancy.  To be clear, I relate to the worry.  When money's tight, the last thing you want to deal with is another expense.  I relate to that worry because while Allison and I were still attending OSU, she was late once.  We started getting worried, but as the days dragged on, we accepted our fate and even started getting kind of excited.  Once we found out that we weren't pregnant, we breathed a heavy sigh of relief, but we were ready to face what we thought was coming.

I am frustrated by the moral state of our country that states that birth control is a basic necessity that needs to be provided for all people.  If you don't want kids or aren't willing to accept the fact that pregnancy may occur, keep it in your pants.  (I just realized that as weird and alien a concept as polygamy seems to me, that's how everybody else feels about abstinence, or so their actions would indicate.)

I realize that I'm probably not swaying anyone in my audience as you're likely on my side already, but I've learned that writing out my arguments for some philosophical dilemma or what have you can help me make peace with it.  So thank you for allowing me a platform from which to speak.

Pointless Debate

If you aren't aware, a debate was held this week between Bill Nye, the Science Guy, and Ken Ham, the president of Answers in Genesis at the Creation Museum in Kentucky.  The debate was between which model of the universe works best: evolution or creationism.  I have not subjected myself to the actual debate, but you feel so inclined, a video of the proceedings can be found here.  Even though I have not seen the debate myself, I wanted to comment on why the entire thing was a waste of time for all parties involved.

First of all, evolution is taken as fact by its supporters when it is still a theory.  And do not be confused that I am misusing "theory" to mean "hypothesis," which is a common error.  No, I realize that gravity is still a theory, too, but no one is calling that theory into question.  My problem is that while there is certainly evidence to support evolution, it does not prove it.  Additionally, evolution is not observable since it takes, at minimum, tens of thousands of years for one species to become a different one.  And while scientists have found lots of related looking species, the conclusion that they are related is still an extrapolation of available data, though not an unreasonable one.  (Although whenever I hear someone say that evolution has been proven, all I can usually hear is hubris.)

The problem with the creationist side is two-fold.  First, it is impossible to prove there is a god.  I have faith that there is a god and that faith is supported in numerous ways, but I cannot prove anything to another person.  That's why Alma challenged the Zoramites to experiment upon the word to find out if it was true, because each individual person has to discover the truth for themselves.  The other problem is that the main "proof" of creationism is the Bible.  A lot of people on the evolution side are atheists (at least the loudest ones tend to be), so using a source to argue your point that is not recognized by the other side is completely futile.

The final problem is that neither model is correct, but both have part of the answer.  Family traits are clearly passed on from one generation to the next and there is a Supreme Creator, but there are still gaps.  One famous hole in evolution is human hearing.  We have a bone in each ear that picks up vibrations which our brains interpret as sound, but that bone is attached to no other bones; according to evolution, there would have to be a useless piece of bone hanging out in our heads for countless generations before it actually served a purpose.  The hole with creationism is that the depiction in Genesis is largely symbolic.  The universe was not created in seven 24-hour days, but rather seven periods that were interpreted as days by Moses.  You have to remember, for the Lord to explain to Moses about creation would be like explaining how an airplane flies to a toddler.

I am most certainly a man of faith, but I also recognize and appreciate the importance of science.  One thing I do not do, however, is follow either blindly.  I have seen enough in my life to remove doubt of the existence of my Father in Heaven, so it is not blind faith.  I love learning about new scientific discoveries, but I know that another new discovery around the corner could change our current understanding.  The two schools of thought are not diametrically opposed, as some seem to think.  They work best together, just as our Father intended.

A Special Brand of Weird

During my time visiting the Larsens for Christmastime, it was rather nice to just get a chance to hang out and talk with Ian and Amanda.  During my time there, I explained something unusual that I occasionally do while watching TV.  While I don't do this all the time, sometimes when an ad comes on, I'll repeat back random phrases directed at the audience, but spin it around so that it's a "Yo' mama" joke.  For example, a car commercial might say that their vehicle has the best mpg in its class and I'll repeat back, "Your mom has the best mpg in her class."  I have absolutely no idea why I do this.

Ian's response was that I'm "a special brand of weird."  He didn't say it maliciously, he was just dumbfounded that I would do something so absurd.  I replied back that, as someone who answers the phone "Ahoy," I was well aware that I was abnormal (for those that aren't aware, I answer my personal phone with the word that was suggested by the telephone's inventor, Alexander Graham Bell, rather than the more universally recognized greeting, "Hello," that is credited to Thomas Alva Edison, though it was a common greeting at the time; when I'm at work, I say "Hello").

This got me thinking about why I do things differently.  The TV ad thing has evolved mostly from me living alone.  I answer the phone differently just because I got bored of "Hello."  I also would consider myself a "facial hair enthusiast", which has gotten more popular in recent years, but it's still the exception rather than the rule.  I do things differently sometimes just to do them differently, not for any attention.

But I also don't care for sports and that has often made conversing with other men my age difficult.  It's not that there aren't other things to talk about, it's that after an exciting game, other men (and some women, too) will often not want to talk about anything else.  I've considered changing this just for the sake of getting along (as some have suggested), but I find professional sports rather dull.  If I personally know who's competing, then I have a stake in the outcome, but otherwise I just don't see why I should care.  And due to the way that football was often more of a focus at OSU than the education (the University built a professional-sized stadium without adequate parking and was in no hurry to remedy that error), I could never muster up enough school spirit to care if our team won or lost.

So, while my "special brand of weird" can sometimes get in the way, it mostly just means that I do certain things differently than others would expect.  I'm surely not the only one who answers their phone with "Ahoy," just as I know that I'm not the only guy who crochets (there's even another one in my ward) or who enjoys baking.  I may be weird, but one thing I am certainly not is boring.

Why Christmas is Important

This last Sunday, I led a discussion in Sunday School about how weird a holiday Christmas is: it started out as a pagan holiday with major connections to fertility rites, Santa is an amalgam of Saint Nicolas and Odin, and anything that is in connection to Christianity is an add on.  In spite of all of this, Christmas is still an important holiday.  My big question was: Why?  The following discussion was a delightful mix of members sharing their beliefs and their traditions and how this is the one time of year that we get to share with the rest of the world that we are Christians without getting too much flack.

It was a great discussion (I don't want to call it a lesson since it wouldn't have worked if I was the only one that talked) and I think what made it work was how much everyone felt invested in what we were talking about by sharing personal stories.

I've not always had the best relationship with Christmas, especially as a teen and young adult since there was so much work associated with the season, either with choir or retail work.  However, I see that the season is important, whether we celebrate it by having a visit from Santa or by baking cookies for our neighbors.  The holiday is about families and togetherness and worshiping the Savior and it's one of the few times that we get to do with the rest of the world.

Choose Your Side

When I was growing up, I was taught that caffeine was against the Word of Wisdom and that I needed to abstain from it.  However, while I was serving my mission I studied Section 89 much closer and learned that caffeine is not a part of the "don't" side of the Word of Wisdom.  We are told to avoid "hot drinks," which we've been told by our Priesthood leaders means coffee and tea.  Yes, coffee and tea both have caffeine in them, but so does chocolate and I know a lot of faithful members that indulge in that dark treat.  If someone wants to stay away from caffeine, even as a way to follow the commandments, that's up to them to decide.  Sort of like what someone constitutes as swearing: I occasionally say "crap" but I'm sure that others would find that that crosses the line.  (Incidentally, the reason I think coffee and tea are forbidden is to help build faith.  There are plenty of people who stay away from alcohol and tobacco for non-religious reasons, but coffee and tea are so ubiquitous that by abstaining, we stand out.  It makes our behavior that much more obvious and urges us to not be ashamed of our beliefs.)

Anyway, the reason I bring this up is that my introduction to cola was later in life than most.  While I was in high school, I sampled several things that I thought weren't allowed, all of them with caffeine (I never had tobacco, alcohol, or coffee, but I did have iced tea a few times - not sure how that one slipped through).  Since my high school was sponsored by Pepsi, that's often what I had.  Then I served my mission was in northern Ohio, which has a Pepsi bottling plant in Mansfield - a lot of locals felt like they were supporting the local economy by buying Pepsi.  By the time I returned home, I was a Pepsi fan.  Ian discovered the same thing that I had while on his mission - that caffeine is not against the Word of Wisdom - but since he served in Georgia, he came back a fan of Coke (Coca-Cola is headquartered in Atlanta).  To further cement his loyalty, during his military deployments, Coke was one of the few American products that he could easily get a hold of, giving him a small taste of home.  He once told me in all seriousness that, to him, Coke tastes like America.  We tease each other about the other's cola preferences, but the jesting is all in good fun.

I bring all of this up because I want to discuss some of the differences I've noticed between Coke drinkers and Pepsi drinkers.  First, I should mention the differences in flavor of the actual products.  Pepsi is slightly sweeter than Coke and I taste more orange oil in Pepsi verses more lemon oil in Coke.  Coke has bit more spice (I suspect that cinnamon is present) while Pepsi seems to have a stronger vanilla flavor.  Pepsi is also supposed to have less carbonation, which I don't care much for anyway.  Also, Coke still uses actual coca leaf extract in their formula and is the only US company that is allowed to import the plant.  Since I don't know what coca tastes like, I have no idea how it affects the flavor.

Now, on to the drinkers.  Coke drinkers are pretty picky.  While I was working at IHOP, we started out serving Coke, but near the end of my run at the restaurant, all of the fountain drinks were switched out for Pepsi products.  During the Coke-time (which sounds like a drug-fueled binge), when someone asked for a Pepsi, they would generally accept a Coke when offered one in it's place.  Once we had Pepsi, however, I saw a lot of people go with water rather than taint their tongues with something other than Coke.  I think has a lot to do with the fact that Coke is much more likely to be on tap, so people get used to it being available.  I prefer Pepsi, but I also recognize that most places serve Coke; if I want a cola, compromise is usually required.  Coke-drinkers aren't used to having to compromise, so in the rare instances that it comes up, they're more likely to refuse.

Another oddity is the so-called Pepsi paradox.  In blind taste-tests, Pepsi is the consistent winner, yet Coke is still the top-selling drink worldwide.  While Ian and I can tell the difference between them, we're exceptions to the rule.  Most people don't notice the subtle differences in flavor between the two products, they just choose a brand based on advertising.  I've even read reports about Coke-drinkers who choose Pepsi in the Pepsi Challenge, but refuse to change their habits because they feel such strong loyalty.  Maybe Pepsi-drinkers are the hipsters of cola aficionados ("Coke's too mainstream, man")?

Ultimately, the two drinks really aren't that different.  Yes, I still prefer Pepsi, but I also prefer Mars to Hershey's (I have for years, independent of any other connection to the company), yet I recognize that there are even fewer differences between the two chocolate recipes.  Whatever our preferred soda company, we usually pick a side and stick by it, even if the reasons for our choices are generally pretty flimsy.

Morality as a Constant

I recently encountered two different pieces of media that argued, very briefly, that morality is a social construct.  The first was a in a book that I've been reading on my lunch breaks at work, the terribly named Deathworld 2, and the second was a stupid video defending the existence of "pink toys."  These were each released nearly fifty years apart, yet they still take the time to argue the same thing.

In Deathworld 2, the main character, Jason, has been arrested by an overly righteous policeman and is being taken back to the planet he robbed to face his crimes (Jason cheated while at a casino in the first Deathworld).  In order to distract his captor, Jason challenges his beliefs by saying that morality is set by the society that creates it.  This of course angers the cop enough for Jason to make his next move.

In the video, the creator, Movie Bob, addresses the concern that apparently many people have about the perceived sexism of boy- or girl-themed toys.  You know, action figures for boys and dolls for girls.  According to Movie Bob, these toys aren't the problem, rather society is.  And then in an off-hand comment, says that morality changes depending on which society you belong to and that things for kids in the future will be better as more people recognize that.

I also recently read about the conversion of the king of Lamanites and how his people would rather die than to ever pick up another weapon of war.  These people had created their own moral code that said that a ruler could kill his servants if he was displeased with them, but it was a false code.  True morality comes from God and is unchangeable.  Just as the Anti-Nephi-Lehies changed their lives to align with the Gospel, we too are required to live according to the commandments.

Even though many aspects of society change as time moves forward, morality was given to us by our Creator, and since we didn't create it, we have no right to alter it.