Hockey and religion

There are parallels between Religious extreamists and Hockey nuts. Notice I didn't say religious nuts.

They are similar in their adamant defence of their "beliefs" in the face of scientific evidence.  What brought this to mind lately, is the furor over the new Ontario school bullying bill and the way a Catholic fringe group called the bill an attack on Catholics and religious values etc etc. (The CBC again giving more air time to a fringe group than is warranted).

The religious fanatics' response is very much like the hockey nuts who keep saying that fighting and hard checking is part of hockey and critics should just butt-out. It's tradition and should be left alone etc.

You can of course, get away with calling the hockey people "nuts", you usually cannot get away with calling the religious fanatics "nuts", and therein, of course, is a major difference.

But it points out an obvious fact;  that it is not the hockey, or the religion, or whatever else, that is the problem, it's the way people settle into their little foxholes of belief feeling completely safe and refusing to leave, no matter what.

One, of course, always thinks that he is viewing others in their little foxholes of belief from the vantage point of level ground. It may be, however, that we do not understand those people in their little foxholes because we are so deep in our own that we only see their heads poking out.

"Political correctness" gone too far

Recently I was again made aware of the school Principal, Erik Millett, in Springfield, N.B., who bowed to pressure from “a couple of families” to ban the singing of the Canadian national anthem in the school.

I don’t know which is worse, those who objected to the anthem being sung, or the principal who bowed to their ridiculous demands.  This “political correctness” nonsense has gone far enough. I’m all for avoiding needless offence, as I believe most Canadians are, and for that very reason, I find it completely mystifying that someone would offend an entire nation in order to avoid what can hardly even be understood as an offence to “several families”.

I can only assume that these “several families” are immigrants, for what Canadian would demand such a ridiculous thing? And, if I am wrong, I apologise deeply to all immigrants.

However, I would say this to all immigrants:

I sincerely welcome you into my country. It is a country that respects individual rights.
It is country in which EVERYONE has equal rights and everyone is equally important.
It is a country where EVERYONE has the freedom to practice their beliefs.
Which means that EVERYONE also has the right to enjoy freedom FROM religion and religious belief.
It also means that I will respect your right to disagree with those values, but I will not grant you the right to change them. This is the lifestyle we practice in my country, and if you feel impelled to impose the religious, cultural or political values that you fled your homeland from, on my country, then, I invite you to go back to your home, for this is not it.
And to those in my country who would, in the name of political correctness, compromise those values, I invite you to go with them.

Appalling Palin

Interesting little article by Rick Ungar in Forbes Magazine: http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2011/06/03/sarah-palin-paul-revere-warned-the-british/

Mainly focusing on Sarah Palin,  he also points out numerous other gaffs.  It really makes you wonder if maybe Bush was not that much out of the ordinary as far as brains go.  Even the writer himself (Rick Ungar) goes a little beyond the edge when referring to McCain as running for "leader of the free world".  Just who the hell do these people think they are?

9/11 coverage

We’ve heard an awful lot about the terrible events of September 11, 2001 during the past week.  And it really was a terrible thing. An unprovoked, unnecessary, and unjustified attack on innocent civilians resulting in nearly 3,000 deaths. And for what? An ideal? To make a point? Or was it revenge?  Whatever the reason, it wasn’t enough to justify taking the lives, in so cruel a fashion, of people who could have had no part in affecting the lives of the murderers.

And the legacy of that action?   An unprovoked, unnecessary, and unjustified attack on Iraq resulting in over 100,000 innocent civilian deaths. Civilians who could have had no part in affecting the lives of their murderers. And for what? An ideal? To make a point? Or was it revenge?

It makes me wonder if all the coverage of what happened in New York was misguided. Maybe a lot more tears should be shed over the 100,000.  Maybe the real terrorists are on this side of the ocean, because, after all, isn’t any unprovoked attack on innocent civilians a terrorist attack? And can’t we measure the magnitude of the atrocity by the number of dead? 

If someone who murders 3,000 is a terrorist, then what do you call one who murders a 100,000?

Atheist Registry??

There's a chap in Florida who seems to think that there should be a national atheist registry.  Not so that normal, rational-minded people would be able to contact each other, etc. No, this registry would be so that the "right-thinking", gun-totin' people of the US, especially those in the south, I would think, can deal properly with atheists.

I have read people pointing out that many Christian groups around the world are, in fact, becoming more militant, more ignorant, more despicable, than the militant Islamists. I am begining to believe that they are right. I don't know whether it's due to our colder climate or what, but I am very grateful that we have far fewer of these lunatics up here in Canada.

If you'd like to know more, heres a link to follow: 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/punctuated-equilibrium/2011/sep/04/1

Funerals

I've commented before on the nature of small town funerals, but the subject bears a closer look.  First off, people should not die during the hottest weeks of summer, especially when the church lacks air conditioning. If it is so equipped, then setting off for the after-life during the hot days would be a blessing for the community. But the local church doesn't have it and let's face it, situated as it is, in Northern Ontario, air conditioning is not something worth separating parishioners from their money for. 


Secondly, pastors should definitely base the length of their services not on the number of high points in the deseased life, but rather on the significance of the presence or absence of said device.

That asside, it was a normal small town funeral. People greeting friends and relatives that they haven't seen since the last funeral, or wedding. People getting reaquainted, catching up on news, recalling past glories, etc. People checking out the goody table, searching for Mrs. whats-her-name's peanut butter parsteries, etc. In short, as a social event, it was a hit.

Which brings me to the point I wanted to make. And that is that in the end,when you have done your thing and thrown it all asside for something better, the significance of that life, those years of toil and sweat, of struggle and pain, of greed and generosity, in short, your own hard fought contribution to the world in general, the very significance of your life, may actually be little more than a one or two hour social event.

Are Physicists losing their grip on reality?

I'm sure that physicists are gradually loosing their grip on reality. What's really loosened the grip is this dimension thing. In the past I could go along with the idea that there may be many additional dimensions that we just can't see because they bend in upon themselves in a space somewhere around the Plank length (smaller than very, very small).  Various numbers of these diminutive dimensions have been bandied about. People like Lisa Randall, apparently a leading US physicist in the dimension game talk of various numbers of these , from a dozen or so to "many".

Giving grudging acceptance to these enigmatic dimensions was easy, however, when no one was ever likely to prove or disprove them, and if they did, it wouldn't have an impact on my Saturday afternoon beer, or anything else for that matter.

Now, however they're going too far. Now they're saying that the early universe actually had FEWER dimensions, and that at higher energy levels  (like maybe in the heart of the Large Hadron Collider) there also may be fewer, ( there really are only 3 aren't there?, 4 if you count time). This characterizes a universe in which the most fundamental characteristic (including my most fundamental characteristic) may be a bit footloose. Evanescent, if you prefer. How, in a 2 dimensional universe, could you ever get beer into a can? Or, assuming the beer was already in there, how would you get it out?  And furthermore, if time were to be the unfortunate dimension to be booted into the void, what would keep everything from happening all at once? Or having happened all at once? ("Once" and "happened" being  rather nebulous concepts in that event).

Nevertheless, if you want the physicists' spin on it, check out this article:   http://focus.aps.org/story/v27/st10

 

My comment on the news

I just have to comment on some things that have been in the Canadian news lately:

HOCKEY:
Far be it from me to cast doubt on the mental capacity of Gary Bettman and other hockey movers and shakers, but doesn't it seem that their defence of  Zdeno Chara's hit on Max Pacioretty last Tuesday as "just part of the game" is a serious indictment of the game?  If broken heads are "normal & expected", then what does that say about the game?  After all Max didn't even have the puck, so what was the justification for hitting him? Maybe the average hockey player just isn't smart enough to play the game any other way, and maybe the average fan isn't sophisticated enough to prefer watching skill over brutality.  But then, I'm not a fan of the game, so I probably don't understand..

LYBIA:
Now, I'm no fan of American foreign policy.  To start with they are far more concerned with their own economic health than with any one else's well being.  In fact I firmly think they are socially and emotionally unfit to pretend to be the world's "policeman".  I certainly wouldn't want a mentally challenged, immature teenager, policing my community. However, for various reasons, the US seems to have accepted that role, and, surprisingly, the rest of the world has been content to sit back and let them do it. Which, in the case of Lybia is the real problem.

The US is faced with a dilemma. After propping up dictators throughout the world, (and in fact putting a lot of them into power), they now feel unable to intervene when they actually feel a moral obligation to do so.    So... where is the rest of the world?  Isn't there anyone else willing to take some initiative?  Doesn't any one else have an army?

FIGHTER PLANES:
It's interesting to hear Harper say that he doesn't want to get into an argument over numbers. But what big numbers they are.  The over-run for the new fighter planes will apparently be something like 12 billion dollars. When you say 12 billion fast, it really doesn't sound like much. After all it's only 12 of them. But say it as it really is: TWELVE THOUSAND MILLION DOLLARS, it has a little more impact. Or you could say that it is $400 for EVERY PERSON in Canada.  Actually, the total bill, THIRTY THOUSAND MILLION DOLLARS, is $1000 for every person.  Don't get me wrong, these may be the right planes to buy, and we may really need them, and if so, then tell us what the justification is and stop treating the critics as nit-pickers.

A bump in the Night

There was excitement at the community hall last night.

A goodly number of the town worthies had gathered at the Town Hall for the annual pancake supper, hosted by the local church in honour of Sh rove Tuesday.  Suddenly, midst all the babble and munching, there was a very loud thump and everyone felt the floor move.. Most people stopped talking (notable in itself) and looked around wondering who had fallen off their chair. Speculation was rife, and fruitless.

Ultimately, two intrepid young chaps ventured into the catacombs under the hall to investigate. They discovered that one of the teleposts holding up a floor beam had disintegrated under the increased load of all those pancakes.  Apparently it had been weakened by years of dampness, and broke apart, letting the beam, and consequently the floor, drop a couple of inches.

The town fix-it man was called, much joking ensued, and all was well.

--
http://leepaulson42.blogspot.com/

Interesting ruling on Monday in a case in England:

"There is no place in British law for Christian beliefs, despite this country’s long history of religious observance and the traditions of the established Church, two High Court judges said on Monday.

Lord Justice Munby and Mr Justice Beatson made the remarks when ruling on the case of a Christian couple who were told that they could not be foster carers because of their view that homosexuality is wrong. "

The complete article is at:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8353496/Foster-parent-ban-no-place-in-the-law-for-Christianity-High-Court-rules.html

It does seem to be a bit of a reach to tell people that they can't be foster parents because they think homosexuality is wrong.  I wonder if it makes any difference whether you are opposed to homosexuality on religious grounds or just on a mistaken understanding of human sexuality??

Not that I'm opposed to this ruling.... although they don't mention this angle in the article, I think that if you don't want Muslim beliefs to influence our lawmaking, you must also ensure that Christian beliefs don't either (although in this case they probably both believe the same thing).

The real problem is that you really cannot separate Church and State.  The Muslims understand this, and want to go all the way in using their faith to regulate their lives. Christians seem to want it both ways.

I think that it is a real test of your religion, in a way.  If it can't be used it to run every facet of life, then there is either something wrong with the religion or the lifestyle.  To say that separation of church and state is a workable arrangement is bunk.  Either change your religion, or change your state, one or the other....it is untenable to attempt to live by two sets of contrary rules.

Of course that's a bit simplistic... it assumes that everyone believes the same thing.... which they don't....You can't therefore, make everyone happy, so the only solution is to make everyone unhappy, which is exactly what most governments manage to do, and do very well.