Personal Update. Friday and Saturday I was wiped out by this bug going around -- so were most of the kids. Debbie was away at a retreat. I'm doing better now, and Sarah's temperature finally broke -- after being around 100 for a full week. I'll catch up later.

Hermeneutics in Everyday life! Suppose you're traveling to work and you see a stop sign. What do you do?
That depends on how you exegete (interpret) the stop sign.
1. A post modernist deconstructs the sign (knocks it over with his car), ending forever the tyranny of the north-south traffic over the east-west traffic.
2. Similarly, a Marxist refuses to stop because he sees the stop sign as an instrument of class conflict. He concludes that the bourgeois use the north-south road and obstruct the progress of the workers in the east-west road.
3. A serious and educated Catholic rolls through the intersection because he believes he cannot understand the stop sign apart from its interpretive community and tradition. Observing that the interpretive community doesn't take it too seriously, he doesn't feel obligated to take it too seriously either.
4. An average Catholic (or Orthodox or Coptic or Anglican or Methodist or Presbyterian or whatever) doesn't bother to read the sign but he'll stop the car if the car in front of him does.
5. A fundamentalist, taking the text very literally, stops at the stop sign and waits for it to tell him to go.
6. A seminary educated evangelical preacher might look up "STOP" in his lexicons of English and discover that it can mean: 1) something which prevents motion, such as a plug for a drain, or a block of wood that prevents a door from closing; 2)a location where a train or bus lets off passengers. The main point of his sermon the following Sunday on this text is: when you see a stop sign, it is a place where traffic is naturally clogged, so it is a good place to let off passengers from your car.
7. An orthodox Jew does one of two things: a) Take another route to work that doesn't have a stop sign so that he doesn't run the risk of disobeying the Law; b) Stop at the sign, say "Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, king of the universe, who hast given us thy commandment to stop," wait 3 seconds according to his watch, and then proceed. Incidentally, the Talmud has the following comments on this passage: Rabbi Meir says: He who does not stop shall not live long. R. Hillel says: Cursed is he who does not count to three before proceeding. R. Simon ben Yudah says: Why three? Because the Holy One, blessed be He, gave us the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. R. ben Isaac says: Because of the three patriarchs. R. Yehuda says: Why bless the Lord at a stop sign? Because it says, "Be still and know that I am God."
8. A scholar from the Jesus Seminar concludes that the passage "STOP" undoubtedly was never uttered by Jesus himself because being the progressive Jew that he was, He would never have wanted to stifle peoples progress. Therefore, STOP must be a textual insertion belonging entirely to stage III of the gospel tradition, when the church was first confronted by traffic in its parking lot.
9. A NT (New Testament) scholar notices that there is no stop sign on Mark street but there is one on Matthew and Luke streets, and concludes that the ones on Luke and Matthew streets are both copied from a sign on a street no one has ever seen called "Q" street. There is an excellent 300 page doctoral dissertation on the origin of these stop signs, and the differences between stop signs on Matthew and Luke street in the scholar's commentary on the passage. There is an unfortunate omission in the dissertation, however; it doesn't explain the meaning of the text!
10. An OT (Old Testament) scholar points out that there are a number of stylistic differences between the first and second half of the passage "STOP." For example, "ST" contains no enclosed areas and five line endings, whereas "OP" contains two enclosed areas and only one line termination. He concludes that the author for the second part is different from the author on the first part and probably lived hundreds of years later. Later scholars determine that the second half is itself actually written by two separate authors because of similar stylistic differences between the "O" and the "P.
11. Another prominent OT scholar notes in his commentary that the stop sign would fit better into the context three streets back.(Unfortunately, he neglected to explain why in his commentary.) Clearly it was moved to its present location by a later redactor. He thus exegetes the intersection as though the sign were not there.
12. Because of the difficulties in interpretation, another OT scholar amends the text, changing the "T" to "H". "SHOP" is much easier to understand in context than "STOP" because of the multiplicity of stores in the area. The textual corruption probably occurred because "SHOP" is so similar to "STOP" on the sign several streets back, that it is a natural mistake for a scribe to make. Thus the sign should be interpreted to announce the existence of a shopping area. If this is true, it could indicate that both meanings are valid, thus making the thrust of the message "STOP (AND) SHOP."
13. A "prophetic" preacher notices that the square root of the sum of the numeric representations of the letters S-T-O-P (sigma-tau-omicron-pi in the Greek alphabet), multiplied by 40 (the number of testing), and divided by four (the number of the world-north, south, east, and west) equals 666. Therefore, he concludes that stop signs are the dreaded "mark of the beast," a harbinger of divine judgment upon the world, and must be avoided at all costs.
not original -- source unknown

Working. I've got a heavy day at work -- actually it may turn out to be a heavy number of days -- therefore, I won't be posting much.

I should note that I don't ever do this "on work time." This is something I do for fun in my own time, always giving priority to work. Sometimes the demands of work push into my own personal time -- I've got no problem with that -- I'm a professional and that happens. And so it's happening now. I'll post something fun to read in the meantime -- or go read one of the other blogs, noted above, on the left.

Celibacy -> Pedophilia? In Slate, William Saletan looks at the arguments of those opposed to celibacy and the counter-arguments of the tradition's defenders. Why is this a good essay? Saletan actually listens to each side.

Goodbye Gary, Hello Barry. The fun thing about living in DC is that we have an abundance of wonderful politicians. Therefore, there's always someone to replace those leaving. So now we welcome back Marion Barry and say good bye to Gary Condit.

Behind the Smarter Times. USC's Online Journalism Review:

Smartertimes' daily attacks on the Times over the past two years have proven that a small Web site can take on a venerable journalism institution. Indeed, with every passing morning, Stoll adds yet more of what he considers incontrovertible evidence to his case against the paper, claiming that "New York's dominant daily has grown complacent, slow and inaccurate."

It's places like Smarter Times that fulfill the promise of that brilliant Mac 1984 commercial.

The Book List. I'm not sure what to make of this. The following were ranked in this order this afternoon on the Amazon.com Top 25 book list:

22. The Natural: The Misunderstood Presidency of Bill Clinton
23. Fall on Your Knees
24. Satisfaction: The Art of the Female Orgasm

Clinton Lies. This is news?

Freedom of the Press for all. A Federal Judge in Boston today "ruled that nonprofessional news gatherers have the same rights as professionals." Do you think that someone should tell John McCain that the citizens have the same rights as the media?

I vant to be a clone. I'm still waiting for a response from Murtaugh and Reynolds to this article in the Weekly Standard.

More. There's an op-ed in the LA Times today by Kristol and Rifkin.

The most divisive issue. There's a good couple of articles in the Dallas Morning News, which tends to have a pretty good grasp of religion stories, on the different Christian churches reaction to the homosexuality issue. The Catholic Church reaffirms its ban on gay priests. See also, Louder Fenn's essay in response.

Angliban. Perhaps it helps to be Anglican to appreciate this little bit of humor.

Quote. "...the researchers might be deluded by Mother Nature, whose principal object in life is to make fools of scientists." -Lawrence Crum, a physicist at the Applied Physics Lab at the University of Washington, on "table-top fusion."

Congratulations! To Orrin Judd and wife on the birth of a son, Archer Garner.

In Memoriam
Sgt. Bradley S. Crose, 22, Orange Park, Fla.
Sgt. Philip J. Svitak, 31, Joplin, Mo.
Spc. Marc A. Anderson, 30, Brandon, Fla.
Pfc. Matthew A. Commons, 21, Boulder City, Nev.
Aviation Boatswain's Mate-Handling Petty Officer 1st Class Neil C. Roberts, 32, Woodland, Calif.
Tech. Sgt. John A. Chapman, 36, Waco, Texas.
Senior Airman Jason D. Cunningham, 26, Camarillo, Calif.

Honor. Not meaning to be melodramatic, but it is fitting to dwell on this subject just before sunrise, on the anniversary of the fall of the Alamo. There is much that makes America great and as a nation we are elevated by those who serve the cause of freedom, righteousness, and honor. Americans do not turn and run. From the Alamo, to Bellau Woods, to the "Frozen Chosin" and now to Sirkankel the men of America have shown that we don't retreat, we don't surrender, and "We don't leave Americans behind." (Brig. Gen. John W. Rosa, Jr., explaining why the men returned to the Battle at Sirkankel.)

But the everlasting promise
Kept along each bloody yard
No one leaves behind the wounded
'Cause there ain't no fight that hard.
--Frank Gross
December 29th 1950

"Retreat Hell! We just got here!"
-Colonel Wendell C. Neville, USMC
May 28th, 1918

"I am determined to sustain myself as long as possible and die like a soldier who never forgets what is due to his own honor and that of his country — VICTORY OR DEATH."
--Lieutenant Colonel William Barret Travis
February 24, 1836

Driving in Paradise. The people of Hawai'i have a reputation for being politically liberal and accepting of government. But there's also a streak of independence and it's this streak that's showing itself in the local reaction to the traffic surveilance cameras.

When I was a teenager, I lived in Hawai'i and I learned to drive there. I can attest that it is different than on the mainland.

NFL Intelligence Test. Cool -- I'd read about this a few years (maybe 10) back and always wanted to see it. It turns out part of the NFL intelligence test is on-line. Its a test that gets progressively difficult -- ESPN has an article explaining it and giving a little background.

Kill the Messenger, while you're at it. In Britain, the results of a 14 year study are in, showing that the government's policy of supplying condoms and birth control pills is a failure. The report unequivically states this policy is "completely wrong and misguided." According to the Telegraph, the "report found a higher conception rate in areas where a greater number of girls aged 13 to 15 visited family planning clinics." So naturally, the government head behind this policy, Simon Blake, is rejecting this report. Wouldn't want to be confused by the facts, would we Blake, old chap?

Suspending the Priest. Theological conservatives in the Episcopal church have stood by and watched while Bishops and ministers who deny the divinity of Jesus and/or His resurrection, who favor the ordination of practicing homosexuals, the marriage rite being extended to same-sex couples, and so on, should be pleased to see that, finally, a maverick priest is being suspended.

Wait, you say the suspended priest is opposed to the ordination of gays?

Update. What I'm really trying to say is that the theological liberals are every bit as intolerant and bigoted and close-minded as they suppose their theologically conservative bretheren to be. Don't let their masks of piety and acceptingness fool you. They can't wait to throw the first stone.

No Decisions Today. It doesn't look like there will be any Supreme Court Decisons today -- I note that at 10 am, Justices Kennedy and Thomas will be testifying to the Senate Appropriations committee. I suspect there might be at least one question on judicial salaries, given that Justice Kennedy signed on to Stephen Breyer's dissent (.pdf) yesterday. It's interesting to note that three justices on the Court, apply an economic analysis -- adjusting for inflation and comparing to changes for other occupations -- to the Compensation Clause (judges “shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.” U. S. Const., Art. III, §1.)

Indian Century? With a tip of the hat to Iain Murray, here's a good essay by Jim Bennett on India.

Iain, the Edge, as I prefer to call him, thinks this might be India's Century. I agree that India is on the ascendency. However, I think the real boom is going to be in Africa and it's not just because of England, but because of England's real power legacy in Africa: the Anglican church. Nigeria alone has over 17 million active Anglicans, as opposed to 2 million in England, 2.5 million in the USA and 2.4 million in Canada. [All Anglicans in the U.K. are 27million]
Source: http://www.adherents.com .

Rubes? Did Ralph Neas really refer to Pickering's black friends as "poor rubes...?" This from the Washington Times:

When blacks in Judge Charles W. Pickering Sr.'s hometown of Laurel, Miss., had almost nothing but praise for the federal appellate court nominee, liberal activist Ralph Neas "told the New York Times that this sort of local opinion didn't matter, because the poor rubes don't know the judge's real record," the Wall Street Journal observes in an editorial.
Mr. Neas, as president of People for the American Way, has led what even some liberals have described as an ugly campaign to falsely depict Mr. Pickering as a racist.
"What's going on here is that Mr. Neas has been caught red-handed," the Journal said. "He and his allies have been caught race-baiting for political purposes, and in a way that bears not even a passing resemblance to reality. The question now is whether Senate Democrats are going to keep playing the race card, too."

I searched both the NY Times and the WSJ and did not find a record of this. According to dictionary.com, a rube is "an unsophisticated country person. [Probably from Rube, nickname for Reuben.] . . . not very intelligent or interested in culture [syn: yokel, hick, yahoo, hayseed, bumpkin, chawbacon] .

Update. I think the "rube" comment must have been an editorial characterization by the WSJ.

Nat Hentoff has an essay today attacking Pickering's attackers. While acknowledging he would oppose Pickering and opposed Robert Bork, he lambastes the NAACP and PFAW for their "borking" of Judge Pickering. In the NRO, Byron York writes that the Republicans may be putting together a strategy for getting the nomination through.

Frankly, I think all these groups are doing is practicing the "big lie," tenderizing the nominee to make him easier to defeat, truth be damned. It's a form of artillary, designed to give their comrades in the majority on the Judiciary Committee the needed cover to vote down this nominee. That's the tactical attack -=- the broader strategic attack is to paint the Bush administration as extreme to prevent nominees who might be mainstream conservatives from getting nominated.

More Scores. This time on religion:

1. Seventh Day Adventist (100%)
2. Orthodox Quaker (96%)
3. Eastern Orthodox (91%)
4. Roman Catholic (91%)
5. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (89%)

Since I'm an Anglican, I wonder what I got wrong?

Notes on the SAT. First, did you know the SAT doesn't stand for anything anymore? My daughter asked me what it meant and I told her I thought it stood for Scholastic Aptitude Test, but if you search high and low for an indication from the College Board, they give no definition. I suspect that it's just a matter of trademark, but perhaps there's something more nefarious.

Second, the people who administer the SAT did revise the standards in 1995. Here is a note by the Edge. Here is a critique by Diane Ravitch; here is an explanation of the "re-centering;" here is a chart summarizing the impact of "recentering" at UVa and at MIT.

Finally, a few interesting things. Kaplan has a list of the top 100 vocab words (which will probably be banished as of Fall 2002). The Princeton Review has it's three basic tips. And PBS has a brief history of the test.

More Supremes. Okay, I'm done with the syllabus from each case: Three cases today, one a criminal procedure case, one a tax case, and the last, the FERC case mentioned below. Each one was virtually unanimous.

And I can see why Enron rings the media bell -- it was decided jointly with the Enron v. FERC case. Justice Stevens writes for the Court that FERC had the authority to preempt certain state schemes regulating power transmission. Moreover it had the authority to not proceed more agressively, as Enron was seeking. The dissent, by Thomas, joined by Scalia and Kennedy, argues that the federal agency did not properly engage in administrative decision-making. Justice Thomas is clear that he would not necessarily hold for Enron:

I would not, as petitioner Enron requests, compel FERC to apply the OATT to bundled retail transmissions. I would vacate the Court of Appeals’ judgment and require FERC on remand to engage in reasoned decisionmaking to determine whether there is undue discrimination with respect to transmission associated with retail bundled sales, and if so, what remedy is appropriate.

There's part of me that wonders if he would have to be so explicit with another company -- or if he has to spell this out because he's gunshy.

More. Fritz Schranck has a longer analysis of the tax case and demonstrates its import.

Supreme Court Report. Looks like the Court ruled the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission may preempt state power rules. No surprise.

I'll be interested in the voting breakdown and how this plays as an "Enron" story.

Update. Yep, the first reports from the AP see this as an Enron story: "...a partial victory for Enron, which had aggressively litigated over the regulations..."

Still no voting breakdown -- and I haven't seen the slip opinon myself. The AP indicates: "The court issued a mixed verdict in which it ruled unanimously on the major elements of the case, but divided over details."

Bravenet. FWIW, Bravenet is down.

Cover Watch. Time magazine: a stark "Can we stop the next 9/11?" easily trumps Newsweek's "Schizophrenia" (Andrea Yates). At least Newsweek eschewed the sleaze approach this week (almost).

Blue-Eyed Gospel. Ashley Cleveland has a new album out. Who is Ashley Cleveland? She is the best singer you've never heard of. When I get a chance, I'll put up an .mp3 and maybe a short .wav file from one of her songs.

Here's what Shawn Colvin had to say: "When I hear Ashley sing, it's like I'm standing at some railroad tracks, and when I look away for a second, out of nowhere, a train comes roaring by at about a thousand miles an hour."

White Raisins. Maybe the Koran was mistranslated? That's the issue being examined by a small group of scholars, according to this article. One example those "virgins who are supposedly awaiting good Islamic martyrs as their reward in paradise are in reality 'white raisins' of crystal clarity rather than fair maidens."

It's back. Judging from my messages, "what's wrong with this picture" is back.

Number 723. This is one of many reasons I could not ever be a conservative republican -- although I often find myself in agreement with them.

Can you find it? OK folks, sit down for this one. What's wrong with this picture?

Spend some time staring at it, it took me a while to see it...

Update It looks like this was shut down sometime after 2:30 today -- it wasn't my fault.

Too bad, it was pretty clever.

Inconclusive. According to the Telegraph, a committee reviewing the ethics of experimentation on a living human embryo acknowledges "arguments on either side of this debate are inconclusive and it is a matter of judgment." So they say go ahead.

One observation, this committee states:

While respecting the deeply held views of those who regard any research involving the destruction of a human embryo as wrong, and having weighed the ethical arguments carefully, the committee is not persuaded, especially in the context of the current law and social attitudes, that all research on early human embryos should be prohibited." [emphasis added]

I know there are people out there who support this experimentation, but doesn't it give you pause to have the decision grounded in "current law and social attitutdes." At different times, applying this rationale, we could be experimenting on Negros, women, Irish, Slavs, Jews, homosexuals, Jehovah's Witnesses, and the poor, among others. Should we be doing that?

What was he thinking? This headline on a story from the AP: "Teacher Won't Feed Puppies to Snake"

Take a Stretch. Rich Hailey writes well. I've done something like what he describes -- it's haunting -- unless you learn from it. Well done.

* * *
As an aside, I can change a diaper, write a sonnet (octet or sestet), balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure (and it should be noted that the best way to move manure, like mulch, is to pitch it, not shovel), program a computer, cook a tasty meal, and design a building. I think I could plan an invasion, conn a ship (I can sail a boat, can't be much harder), and fight efficiently. As far as butchering a hog -- I have no idea -- I don't think it would be very efficient, but yeah, probably. And last, die gallantly -- I hope so. Only one chance at that, in any event.

Schism. There appears to be a schism developing among the small, but growing, circle of Augustinian weblogers: pro-Madden and semi-quasi-anti-Madden. Count me in with Ben. And it's not some blind loyalty to the Silver and Black (which must be acknowledged); chief is that my wife still loves the big guy. Madden blew it with his suggestion at the end of the Superbowl (take a knee), but he was extremely forthright about his mistake.

On another football subject -- the signing of Romanowski -- he may fit with the historical image of the Raiders, he will ultimately be a detriment to the team -- he's way too undisciplined. The Raiders get the same treatment from the referees as do conservatives and/or Republicans from big media: this would be like Traficant becoming a Republican.

Humble Pride. I love America and my love is reinforced when I speak with those who have come here from other countries to live. This is a great country, but we need to avoid any smugness. Accordingly, don't look at what's happening in India and thinking it doesn't happen here. Remember, it wasn't that long ago that Janet Reno's troops burned to death 74 Branch Davidians, which prompted retaliation from a sick Timothy McVeigh. May God have mercy on us all.

Augustinian Blog Ring. Heh. I like the sound of it. My Dad will be proud to see me in such August company.

[At which, the Blithering Idiot was promptly booted out, the locks were changed and he was never heard from again.]

Birthmark. Excellent review and essay by Orrin Judd on Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Birthmark, which, as you may recall, generated a great deal of derision. Must reading. I would like to re-run the whole thing, but won't so go here now.

(don't forget to come back.)

BTW, this is why you get a literate man like Kass to do this. You put me on the committee and I'd be handing out Stephen King's Pet Semetary.

N o t h i n g. The sound of silence.

I've been waiting to read about Arab or Islamic condemnation of the Pearl murder.

Nothing.

Quiet.

Silence.

So I checked the Council on American-Islamic Relations website. Nothing.

ArabNet? Nothing.

American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee? Nothing.

The Arab American Institute? Nothing. [BTW, there is an interesting "Twin Towers" poster they are selling on their site. I'm not sure what to make of it. My reaction is to say, they are right that it is wrong to hate the innocent, and an American citizen of Arabian descent should not be shown any hostility. But I don't have a problem with anyone who hates the evil that was done. I'd like to see the Arab American Institute show a little intolerance of that evil.]

The Muslim World League? Nothing.

The Muslim Student League? Nothing.

Okay, surely the Muslim Peace Fellowship must have something. Nope (although, in fairness, this site doesn't appear to be up-to-date -- the same thing could be said for The Arab American Action Network and some of the other places I omitted).

Really, all I was hoping for was some statement, even a small one, from CAIR -- I went to the others hoping to shame them when I didn't find anything. When I do find one, I'll post an update.

Don't hold your breath. (if you do, the silence would be unbearable.)

Not just in fairy tales. Once upon a time, liberals favored vouchers for education -- I know I did. Stuart Taylor still does.

Clarification: I still favor vouchers, I just consider myself a post-liberal.

Mountain Meadows Massacre. We debate events that happened days and years ago. Here is a story on a massacre that happened over a hundred years ago. The latest implicated is Brigham Young himself. Very interesting.

Old McDonald Had a Deformed Cow. This is a fun ditty by Seamus Kennedy ("...stuttering cow... m-m-m-moo-m-m-m-mmoo here . . .dyslexic sheep . . . aab-aab here. . . " etc.) that point out one of the problems with cloning. You can listen to it in RealAudio (unless you're using the current version of RealPlayer) here.

Is this something that Reynolds, Murtaugh and all the other pro-cloners have addressed?

Blog-rolling. Why not? this screed by lileks is worth it.

Doomsday. The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists tells us that we're just seven minutes from midnight! (as opposed to 17 minutes away in 1991 -- at the end of the Reagan-Bush years).

Meanwhile the Rapture Index is now at 179, which according to the website puts it near the top ("Fasten your seat belt").

Update. I just realized I shouldn't have put this one on top of the last -- oh well.

Second Coming? Okay, USA Today is reporting today that Fox TV has released John Madden from his contract. The Oakland Raiders need a head coach. For a few hours, I can dream about his return.

Paul v. Jesus. There's a nice little discussion weaving it's way through several 'blogs. If you start here with Kevin's Ideas, you can work your way back. I don't have the time right now to thoughtfully address and add to what's been said in a big way, so I'll just toss out a few things.

We dwell on Paul because we have his letters -- its sort of a variation of the winners writing history. In this case, it's the writer being perceived as the winner, to the neglect of the work done by the other apostles and disciples of the Master.

Also, raised, in passing, in a much earlier note (although I don't recall where -- it may have been in someone's comments) was the notion that Paul toughened up Jesus' message of love. C. S. Lewis had a nice observation, which I'll quote in lengthy part:

A most astonishing misconception has long dominated the modern mind on the subject of St Paul. It is to this effect: that Jesus preached a kindly and simple religion (found in the Gospels) and that St Paul afterwards corrupted it into a cruel and complicated religion (found in the Epistles). This is really quite untenable. All the most terrifying texts came from the mouth of Our Lord: all the texts on which we can base such warrant as we have for hoping that all men will be saved come from St Paul. If it could be proved that St Paul altered the teaching of his Master in any way, he altered it in exactly the opposite way to that which is popularly supposed. But there is no real evidence for a pre-Pauline doctrine different from St Paul's. The Epistles are, for the most part, the earliest Christian documents we possess. The Gospels come later. They are not 'the Gospel', the statement of the Christian belief. They were written for those who had already been converted, who had already accepted 'the Gospel'. They leave out many of the 'complications' (that is, the theology) because they are intended for readers who have already been instructed in it. In that sense the Epistles are more primitive and more central than the Gospels -- though not, of course, than the great events which the Gospels recount. God's act (the Incarnation, the Crucifixion, and the Resurrection) comes first: the earliest theological analysis of it comes in the Epistles: then, when the generation who had known the Lord was dying out, the Gospels were composed to provide for believers a record of the great Act and of some of the Lord's sayings.

* * *
In the earlier history of every rebellion there is a stage at which you do not yet attack the King in person. You say, 'The King is all right. It is his Ministers who are wrong. They misrepresent him and corrupt all his plans -- which, I'm sure, are good plans if only the Ministers would let them take effect.' And the first victory consists in beheading a few Ministers: only at a later stage do you go on and behead the King himself. In the same way, the nineteenth-century attack on St Paul was really only a stage in the revolt against Christ. Men were not ready in large numbers to attack Christ Himself. They made the normal first move -- that of attacking one of His principal ministers. Everything they disliked in Christianity was therefore attributed to St Paul. It was unfortunate that their case could not impress anyone who had really read the Gospels and the Epistles with attention: but apparently few people had, and so the first victory was won. St Paul was impeached and banished and the world went on to the next step -- the attack on the King Himself.

--C.S. Lewis
"Modern Translations of the Bible"

Sir Thomas. Very long, very busy, very good day at work today -- on the way home I stopped at Borders which is having a sale on some DVDs. I picked up my all-time favorite: A Man for All Seasons, which is playing now, in the background, while I make dinner for the family (choir and dance night). All is well.

I think that when statesmen forsake their own private conscience for the sake of their public duties, they lead their country by a short route to chaos.

--Robert Bolt's Thomas More

10 Commandments Update. Addressing the issue I raised below, tres cool Eugene Volokh notes:

...I'm not sure your analogy between the Ten Commandments case and the pro-Bin-Laden speech case is quite right. When someone objects to *private* religious speech on the grounds that it's offensive, the Supreme Court quite correctly protects the speaker against the heckler. See, e.g., Cantwell v. Connecticut; Kunz v. New York; Pinette v. Capitol Square Review Bd. (though I think the plurality was more right than the concurrences, in general even the concurrences weren't that far from the right result).

It doesn't follow that the same should apply to *government* religious speech. You say "some rights are more favored than others," but the question is whether the State of Indiana has a right to speak in a way that endorses Christianity and Judaism (and whether it in fact spoke this way here).

There is, of course, nothing else to add. He's write right. I love the internet.

Ain't it the case? NY Times headline tonight: "Disturbing Finding on Young Drinkers Proves to Be Wrong" It seems to me, that is typically the case. The newspapers must have a trunk of "Finding on ____________ Proves to Be Wrong" headlines lying around.

Or a macro.

Noddings? I missed this earlier in running down the list of philosophers, but who in the heck is Noddings? [thanks to Orrin Judd for pointing it out.]

Update. Apparently, the test is referring to Nel Noddings. The entry in the on-line Philosophical Dictionary has this entry:

American philosopher. In her Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education (1984) and Women and Evil (1989), Noddings emphasizes the importance of personal relationships as the foundation for ethical conduct. Educating for Intelligent Belief or Unbelief (1993) offers a general account of epistemological values. Her comments on "Excellence as a Guide to Educational Conversation" (1992) are available on line. In Philosophy of Education (1995) Noddings examines in detail the relevance of philosophy—both historical and contemporary—for educational theory and practice.

Or as Wanda (Jamie Lee Curtis) said: "Aristotle was not Belgian, the principle of Buddhism is not "every man for himself," and the London Underground is not a political movement! Those are all mistakes, Otto. I looked them up."

I Kant. I scored way too high on that test vis-a-vis Immanuel Kant. Here's a Catholic critique of Kant which I endorse. Peter Kreeft begins with an anecdote:

Kant was attending a lecture by a materialistic astronomer on the topic of man's place in the universe. The astronomer concluded his lecture with: “So you see that astronomically speaking, man is utterly insignificant.” Kant replied: “Professor, you forgot the most important thing, man is the astronomer.”

Kant, more than any other thinker, gave impetus to the typically modern turn from the objective to the subjective. This may sound fine until we realize that it meant for him the redefinition of truth itself as subjective. And the consequences of this idea have been catastrophic.

If we ever engage in conversation about our faith with unbelievers, we know from experience that the most common obstacle to faith today is not any honest intellectual difficulty, like the problem of evil or the dogma of the trinity, but the assumption that religion cannot possibly concern facts and objective truth at all; that any attempt to convince another person that your faith is true — objectively true, true for everyone — is unthinkable arrogance.

And this is why I'm so distressed to find I have a high Kant level.

The Catholic Clinton. I've got to say that I always thought Clinton was just another version of Nixon -- willing to do anything to save himself, until he finally made Nixon look honorable. Now I think that Boston Cardinal Bernard Law is another Clinton. He must resign. More. More. More. More. More. More'

Update. I'm not Roman Catholic, so you should make of this what you will. I do have a deep respect for the Catholic Church, like one brother for another, so it does grieve me to see it going through this. I want the Catholic Church to be strong and healthy.

Three views of Evil. What a better way to end lunch by dwelling on the three understandings of evil. James Hitchcock, writing in Touchstone, notes the first, oldest understanding was dualism, the second is that good and evil are abstract concepts. The third is that evil is nothing:

It differs from the first in that it does not concede evil an equal place with good and from the second because it affirms the goodness of the world, the loss of which is evil. It does not declare, for example, that losing a loved one is insignificant because human attachments are illusory. Rather, it affirms the good of the universe and defines evil as the privation of that good. Death is evil because it is the loss of life, illness because it is the loss of health, adultery because it is the loss of love and trust.

There is more -- read the essay.

The Offensive Bible. "I don't want the Bible rewritten so it won't offend women. It should offend women--and men, too." So writes Frederica Mathewes-Green with respect to the newest Protestant translation of the Bible. Like Frederica, I find that I'm not on either side -- read her essay -- to cut and paste any portion doesn't do it justice. (And it's not just about the Bible, it also touches on the broader issue of the evolution of the English language.)

Down again. Blogspot is down again -- no reason to mention it -- since no one can read anything. I just want to note it. Oh well, I get more than I pay for.

...an American, a Jew, a trophy. Mark Steyn writes about the Islamofacist scum and their toadies, the Fiskites, the anti-American, anti-west apologists

Is it too much to hope that militant Islam's apologists might finally put an end to their own "misconceptions"? Islam is not "the victim of the world," but the victim of itself. Omar Sheikh is a British public schoolboy, a graduate of the London School of Economics, and, like Osama and Mohammed Atta, a monument to the peculiar burdens of a non-deprived childhood in the Muslim world. Give 'em an e-mail address and they use it for kidnap notes. Give 'em a camcorder and they make a snuff video.

Let's assume that all the chips fell the jihadis' way, that they recruited enough volunteers to be able to kidnap and decapitate every single Jew in Palestine. Then what? Muslims would still be, as General Musharraf told a conference the other day, "the poorest, the most illiterate, the most backward, the most unhealthy, the most unenlightened, the most deprived, and the weakest of all the human race." Who would "the victim of the world" blame next? The evidence of the Sudan, Nigeria, and other parts of Africa suggests that, when there are no Jews to hand, the Islamofascists happily make do with killing Christians. In Kashmir, it's the Hindus' fault. There's always someone.

I'm Frodo. Like I said, I love these things -- except I don't have hairy feet.

Death and Scalia. The Post has a follow-up essay from the student who queried Antonin Scalia a few weeks ago about how he reconciles his Catholicism and his support for the death penalty. I'm opposed to the death penalty, but I found her argument pretty shallow (it's a variation of "he's a neanderthal"). She would do better to read some of the more current blogs, like this one by Rich Hailey. On the other hand, the Edge goes the other way.

Two Decisions. The Court announced two decisions today, both unanimous, both pretty much dealing with procedural matters. In the first, the Court overturned a lower court decision, holding that all prisoners must exhaust administrative remedies before seeking relief in Federal Court. The prisoner, who claimed to have been beaten, wanted to go straight to federal court to get relief, but under a 1995 law had to pursue administrative remedies first. The prisoner tried to say that the 95 law only applied to prison conditions. In the second case, the court rejected the assertion by a multinational insurance company that a fired employee had to make specific allegations of wrongdoing in the initial filings. The court held that the complaint as filed was suffient to proceed.

Now, if I hadn't already told you these were unanimous, but if I told you one was written by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, you'd guess she sided with the elderly plaintiff against the cruel corporation. And if I told you the other was written by Clarence Thomas ("youngest, cruelest justice" - NY Times), you'd guess it was the first. And you'd be wrong.

More on the first case. Go here for a nice essay by Fritz Schranck.

That Heckler's Veto. In a column, linked to by InstaPundit, Steve Chapman writes:

"It's a heckler's veto," says UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh. "Anytime I threaten a guy, he gets arrested and I don't."

But the heckler's veto has been rejected by the Supreme Court over and over, in cases where the threat to public order was far greater than it was this time. In a 1949 case, for example, a man was arrested for disorderly conduct after delivering a speech so inflammatory it produced disturbances in a crowd of some 1,000 people outside the Chicago auditorium where he was speaking. But the court threw out his conviction.

But it's not true that the Supreme Court rejects the heckler's veto. Why, just yesterday, the Court upheld a lower court decision ratifying the heckler's veto, as I noted below. It would be nice if the Court were consistent about this, but some rights are more favored than others.

My Scores. Oh, I love these things, though I don't know how reliable or valid this one is. But, via a shot across my bow, here's a Ethical Philosophy Selector

My scores:
1. Augustine (100%)
2. Aquinas (76%)
3. Kant (75%)
4. Spinoza (70%)
5. Rand (68%)
6. Plato (67%)
7. Aristotle (61%)
8. Bentham (61%)
9. Mill (61%)
10. Sartre (59%)
11. Stoics (56%)
12. Ockham (51%)
13. Hume (50%)
14. Nietzsche (50%)
15. Prescriptivism (47%)
16. Cynics (45%)
17. Epicureans (45%)
18. Noddings (44%)
19. Hobbes (22%)

Yeah, why not, I'll take it.

Breyer on Intellectual Property. The National Journal has a good article covering the importance of being Breyer in the upcoming review of the extension of copyright protection. While Breyer has been uneasy with it, I'll bet he defers to Congress.

Thoughts on the party. My thought at seeing the first report on the "1st British Blogger Bash in London" was that Andy Lamey was right: Libertarians can't get dates. I guess that's why the later pictures were posted. Or are these really from the party? It should be noted that only Perry is in the picture with babes ladies.

[what's the html code for just kidding?]

New Word. In a column a few weeks ago, Peggy Noonan sought contributions:

My second is more frivolous but I've been meaning to mention this for a while, and actually it's not frivolous. Since we have entered the age of weapons of mass destruction, since we are immersed in the fact of them and will no doubt be shaped in part by their existence, we need a way of speaking of them with a phrase that is easier to say and easier to grasp than "weapons of mass destruction" or WMDs. Ideas for a new name for WMDs are welcome, and will be forwarded to the administration.

The way I see it, there are basically four approaches to doing this, the first is to create a new word out of whole cloth, with no antecedent. I'm not feeling particularly creative in that regard, so I'll pass on that one. The remaining three build on existing words or concepts.

One way is to use an acronym, like NIMBY or MEGO, but in this case it doesn't quite work. You could do "madweps" (MassDestructionWeapons), which ain't bad. Then there is always the popular using someone's name, for example, boycott or gerrymander. The obvious choice would be "laden" or "qaeda." I'd reject laden for three reasons: (1) its already a word (2) it is a last name of innocent people, not just muslims, and (3) we don't want bin Laden to be remembered. And while you could apply that last rationale to qaeda, I like the idea of turning their name into a curse.

Oh, and the last approach is the borrowing from older words in combination to form a new one. In this case, you could take from latin as follows. From trucido (-are) meaning "to slaughter , massacre; to demolish, destroy" and arma (-orum) meaning "weapons of war" comes the following: "armatruci." My problem with the last is, as I understand it, and I have no training in Latin, is that arma has more of a defensive meaning, such as its use in armor, and does not adequately convey the aggressive nature of these weapons.

So what do you think? Should I pass these choices on?

Supreme Report. Not much to report from the Supremes today -- all the action seems to be cases which were rejected: the Florida voyeur dorm case (therefore, the webcams will stay on), the Indiana Ten Commandments case (which leaves in place the lower court order barring the replacement of a monument of the decalogue which had been defaced).

Zapped. Something happened to my stellar post on Stuart Taylor's article regarding the Pickering nomination. I'm still trying to figure out if I can retrieve it from the ether.

Cover Watch. Standing in the checkout line, seeing a nearly identical Time and Newsweek cover (Jamie Sale and David Pelletier) last week got me thinking which one I would buy. Time magazine's cover seemed to focus on justice and redemption for the skaters, whereas Newsweek's cover focused on the Sleazy side of skating -- with the emphasis on sleaze. In my mind, then, there was no question that Time was the winner.

This week, Time features Bono of U2 and asks whether Bono can save the world. On the otherhand, Newsweek hits the sleaze angle again -- "Sex, Shame, and the Catholic Church."

Advantage: Time.

Attack of the Alpha Girls. Seems to be the subject of the weekend. See this long piece in the NY Times and this shorter one in the Washington Post.

School Prayer. Back when the Supreme Court disclosed that the First Amendment banned organized prayer in schools, Engel v. Vitale, a young Catholic priest denounced "...the alliance of Protestantism, secularism, and Judaism which controls the public schools."

Who was this early version of Jerry Falwell? Click here or here to see what this guy is up to today.

Source: Religion, The Courts and Public Policy (1963) at 120. (as quoted in Goldberg Reconsecrating America 65 (1984).

Problems. Having a few computer problems -- mostly with MSN -- just got a huge batch of back mail -- so if I haven't responded, that's why -- I went through the first 20 and realized I still have 95 more. Back tomorrow -- or Sunday.

Go home already. So now the Ruskies want a gold medal for Slutskaya. "'We filed the protest last night because we think the judging was biased,' the head of the Russian delegation in Salt Lake City, Viktor Mamatov, told The Associated Press on Friday. 'Canadian pairs skaters were awarded their gold medals. Now that subjective judging harmed us, we want the same for Slutskaya.'"

Look, Anton Sikharulidze and Elena Berezhnaya fell during their competition, while the Canadians were flawless. Second, Russia swapped votes and pressured the spineless French (sorry about the redundancy) judge. We're dumb Americans, Viktor, but we're not senile -- our memories last more than a week. Third, Sluts wobbled around the rink like she'd been out bar-hopping with Oksana Baiul. Speaking of Oksana, maybe we should give Nancy Kerrigan a gold as well, eh, Viktor? After all she tied with Oksana -- Baiul got the gold by the tie-breaker.

At last, new reasons to hate the Soviets, err, Russians. Just in time for tonight's hockey game.

BTW, some of my earliest political/international memories were of the Russian tanks rolling into Prague in '68. Something that many of us will never forget. See Jaromir Jagr who wears number 68 on his back for that very reason.

Update Admiral Hailey writes something very similar -- and posts it at the same time -- too weird.

More. USA holds on to beat the Russian men in hockey -- setting up a gold medal game with the Cannucks. Also, the Russian protest over the skating results was rejected.

After this brief message, we'll be back with traffic and weather.

The Ninth Battle of Manassas. (Everytime the subject of development in Manassas comes up, it's always billed as the "Third Battle of Manassas.") I just wanted to tip my cap to Rich Hailey for his last shot across my bow. He has a very good, very thoughtful and thought-provoking response to my last ramble through the cause of the Civil War. If anyone read my note but didn't read his reply, you should.

Besides, he does great stand-up.

Stats. Iain ("the Edge") Murray sets forth five rules for dealing with statistics, based on an article by Wendy McElroy. Make that five and a half rules. He has some reservations about her sixth rule "who says so?" and I see his point. This was something that came up for me about a week or two ago when there was the inter-blog discussion about the harm caused by pornography. The opponents of the propostion ("porn is bad") demanded proof of the proponents (and I agree, to a certain extent, that the burden is on the proponents). I did find some evidence which would support my contention, but since it was coming from anti-pornography organizations, I could see it would be discounted out of hand. The Edge notes "To dismiss a study because of the authors' prejudice is a variant of the ad hominem fallacy. If the data appear to have been skewed, that, and only that, forms legitimate grounds for suspecting bias."

In any event, these five simple rules should be affixed to the frame of every computer monitor for easy reference.

My Scorecard. Yes, Sarah Hughes deserved the gold medal. Her performance was by far the best, both in terms of performance and style. Also, I thought her short program was better than she got credit for. You can see the judges scorecards for the top five performers from last night here. The scoring for the whole event is a little convoluted with it's mix of short and long program, weighted ordinal scoring, instead of cummulative combined points. It's a system that an IRS agent might love, but it leaves a lot to be desired.

USA Today reporter Christine Brennan indicates that the judges may have given Irina Slutskaya high enough scores to place second because that would be the only way to knock Michelle Kwan out of first and give Hughes the gold she earned last night.

My own scorecard borrows from the boxing 10 point must system. The best performer would get the top score -- a 6.0, and the next best a little below that, 5.9, and so on:
Kwan ------- Slutskaya ----- Cohen ------- Hughes
Tech. Pres. * Tech. Pres. * Tech. Pres. * Tech. Pres.
5.8 -- 5.9 ---- 5.9 -- 5.7 ---- 5.7 -- 5.8 --- 6.0 -- 6.0
or a combined:
11.7 (Kwan) 11.6(Slutskaya) 11.5 (Cohen) 12.0 (Hughes).

But I don't know, under my system, who would get the gold, because I didn't see all the performances on Tuesday night.

Bye-Bye Boris. The obvious solution to the Soviet, err, Russian temper-tantrum. Go ahead and forfeit the hockey game -- right.

More. The Russians ". . . have been gravely insulted by the fact that one of their athletes tested for high hemoglobin levels, and one of their judges is alleged to have been involved in rigging figure skating results."

Obvious Solution. The Sun-Sentinel reports on the latest challenge by those seeking to kill the "Choose Life" license plate in Florida: "Pro-choice groups are challenging the distribution system because they aren't eligible for any of the money under a state law reserving tag profits for agencies offering adoption services but not abortion services."

Maybe they should start a "choose death" license plate.

I didn't expect a kind of Spanish Inquisition. Neil Addison, writing in the Times, points out a provision in the UK, "religiously aggravated harassment," may have made outlaws of the Monty Python troop. Should they expect a Spanish Inquisition the next time they perform that skit?

<diabolical laughter>Ha ! Ha ! Ha ! Ha ! Ha !</diabolical laughter>

Top 10. Rich Hailey's Top Ten Signs You've Blogged Too Much is a classic.

Lovin' It. I love Kirk Franklin'snew album The Rebirth of Kirk Franklin. Nevertheless, I can't help but thinking the last track on the disc, the "hidden" track, Throw Your Hands Up has a line that sound's like it was taken straight from Smells Like Teen Spirit. ("...Here we are now, entertain us...")

Disappointed. The new head of the National Religious Broadcasters, a trade association of theologically conservative Protestant and Pentacostal broadcasters, resigned after making the following statement to the Minneapolis Star: "We get associated with the far Christian right and marginalized. To me, the important thing is to keep the focus on what's important to us spiritually. . . . We need to not be pulled into the political arena." [The article is not on-line, but the larger quote can be found here.]

I am disappointed that he resigned (or was forced out). FWIW, I think he was correct.

Sources: Christianity Today Weblog, WaPo.

Update: Google has the Star Tribune article cached.

CPCs. This morning's Washington Post has an article on the battle against Crisis Pregnancy Centers ("CPCs"). Except the Post can't quite admit that this is what's happening. The article explains that the NY Attorney General ("NYAG") is investigating complaints of deception at CPCs.

What is left unsaid, until the end of the article, and even then, only in the mouth of a CPC director, is that this is a political vendetta being carried out by the NYAG.

To put it in context, imagine the US Attorney General, John Ashcroft announced that, due to complaints he received, he was undertaking a review of every abortion clinic in the country. His speeches and quotes to anti-abortion groups would be included in the context of the news article and the thrust of the article would probably revolve around whether this was an attack on the fundamental right of abortion. There would be no coverage concerning the lack of regulation or oversight of abortion providers. (This latter point has actually puzzled me for years -- the abortion industry is one of the least regulated in the country, with even minimal regulations being tossed due to Roe. Generally speaking, most abortion advocates also favor a larger governmental role in business and in people's lives, except in the case of abortion. Is this a tacit admission that regulation is evil?)

What a day. I was awakened a little early this morning by our baby -- 4 am -- I'm usually up at 4:40. So I got an early start -- got a little work done. Posted a note here, which generated a lot of traffic. Thanks to everyone who stopped by -- 1430 hits today -- normally I get about 60-75. Then I had a great, but very busy, day at work. Worked straight through lunch, which is why there was nothing else added, then into the evening. Very productive. Nice evening at home with the kids, then doing a dance pick-up and run to the store for my oldest daughter. At about 9:30 the middle daughter was complaining about a pain in her stomach. It turned out she had a tick there and it was embedded. So we made a quick run to the night care and back home at 11:30. Long day. I'm closing up the computer and the house and going to bed.. Thanks again to everyone who stopped by.

Supreme Court Report. One case released so far -- the Court (Ginsburg, writing) upheld Wisconsin rules that prevent the sheltering of assets from Medicaid means testing. What's notable about this case is the split: 6-3, with Stevens, joined by O’Connor and Scalia, dissenting. "left," "middle," and "right," respectively. Decision in PDF (so far, not on the LII).

New Front on the Judicial Attacks. In the WaPo this morning, there's a new attack on yet another nominee (I wonder if this means the Neas-led coalition is pulling back on Charles Pickering? -- nah). The jist is that D. Brooks Smith, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for Western Pennsylvania, issued orders on a case assigned to him for a period of 30 days before recusing himself because his wife worked for a bank where funds were held by the defendant in an SEC case. The bank was not a party to the action, which the Post discloses -- in the 15th paragraph ("Mid-State Bank was not a defendant in the case and was not accused of wrongdoing by the SEC. The school districts were inconvenienced, but eventually gained access to all of their money when another judge lifted the freeze.")

The Post quotes two "ethics experts" (my quotes). The first, Steven Lubet ($1,000 to the Democratic National Committee in 2000, $0 to others) calls Smith's delay in recusing "an inexplicable lapse." Whereas Stephen Gillers ($1,700 to Democratic candidates since 1992, $0 to Republican, Libertarian or other) concludes the article "I can't say [Smith] certainly had to recuse himself . . . I can say that a serious argument for recusal is present in these facts, so that Judge Smith should have revealed the information" before making any rulings."

[Source for contributions: http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/index.asp ]

Sled or Sleigh? Putting and end to that tiresome soap opera that was known as USA-1, Bakken and Flowers take the gold. Sometimes things work out.

Chesterton on Ritual:

. . . humanity is divided into conscious ritualists and. unconscious ritualists. The curious thing is, in that example as in others, that it is the conscious ritualism which is comparatively simple, the unconscious ritual which is really heavy and complicated. The ritual which is comparatively rude and straightforward is the ritual which people call "ritualistic." It consists of plain things like bread and wine and fire, and men falling on their faces. But the ritual which is really complex, and many coloured, and elaborate, and needlessly formal, is the ritual which people enact without knowing it. It consists not of plain things like wine and fire, but of really peculiar, and local, and exceptional, and ingenious things-- things like door-mats, and door-knockers, and electric bells, and silk hats, and white ties, and shiny cards, and confetti. The truth is that the modern man scarcely ever gets back to very old and simple things except when he is performing some religious mummery. The modern man can hardly get away from ritual except by entering a ritualistic church. In the case of these old and mystical formalities we can at least say that the ritual is not mere ritual; that the symbols employed are in most cases symbols which belong to a primary human poetry. The most ferocious opponent of the Christian ceremonials must admit that if Catholicism had not instituted the bread and wine, somebody else would most probably have done so. Any one with a poetical instinct will admit that to the ordinary human instinct bread symbolizes something which cannot very easily be symbolized otherwise; that wine, to the ordinary human instinct, symbolizes something which cannot very easily be symbolized otherwise. But white ties in the evening are ritual, and nothing else but ritual. No one would pretend that white ties in the evening are primary and poetical. Nobody would maintain that the ordinary human instinct would in any age or country tend to symbolize the idea of evening by a white necktie.

Taken from Heretics.

Foghorn Leghorn Update. Virginia's beloved senior senator, the former Mr. Elizabeth Taylor, also known as Foghorn Leghorn or Sen. Claghorn has announced he's running for re-election. sigh. The guy doesn't have an honorable bone in his body. I remember when Foggy voted against Judge Bork he gave all kind of high-falutin' reasons why, but we all knew it was because he liked getting Sen. Dodd and Sen. Kennedy's cast-offs. He had to remain in good graces with his buds. At the time, Dick Obenshain's son acknowledged that his father would've voted for Bork. Richard Obenshain was the last man to beat Warner, but died in a plane crash.

Fodder for the Bias Watch. The AP story on the school paper grading case, mentioned below, contains the following three sentences, in this order:

The Bush administration backed the school district. Falvo's[the child's mother] lawsuit became an ideological contest between the rights of parents and the rights of teachers to run their classrooms, and between social conservatives and teachers' unions.

So then, are we to assume that the Bush administration backed the "right[] of teachers to run their classrooms" and the unions against parents and social conservatives?

I don't think so. It sounds to me like the AP reporter Anne Gearan is putting in something that isn't there. I did talk to a few "social conservatives" a while back, when the case was argued, and all thought this was a case of "those ACLU types" trying to meddle where they weren't welcome. In fact, I hadn't talked to anyone supportive of the parent in this case -- not that the parent might not have a sympathetic case. At worst, the thought was, if the statute did forbid this type of practice, it was an unseen consequence and deserved an amendment to permit such grading.

[More] I think I see Gearan's error. She must have dropped her "education" notecards and got this case mixed up with the school voucher case, to be argued tomorrow. That one does pit parents versus the teacher's unions. There's an essay on it in today's WSJ.

Standdown. My last note, now deleted, was in error. The case I was mentioning turned out to be two certs. on copyrights and sex offender lists posted on the internet. In addition, the Court held that having students grade each others work does not violate federal statutes on privacy.

Update. On the school case, the decision was unanimous. Also, it should be noted that the LII of Cornell was faster getting this up than the Supreme Court (as of 10:50 am, it's still not on the Supreme Court web page).

Scalia concurs in the judgment and writes a brief concurrence:

I agree with the Court that peer-graded student papers do not constitute “education records” while they remain in the possession of the peer grader because, as the Court explains, a student who grades another’s work is not “a person acting for” the school in the ordinary meaning of that phrase. Ante, at 6—7. I cannot agree, however, with the other ground repeatedly suggested by the Court: that education records include only documents kept in some central repository at the school.

FWIW, I think he's correct.

Sharkman Six. Okay, I'm not quite finished with the book (Sharkman Six), but I'll tell you it's a good one. I've alluded to it once or twice in the past few days and this morning I had to force myself to put it down, or I'd be late for work. It's the debut work of Capt. Owen West, USMC (Ret.) about the first Marines in Somalia. You can read the first chapter on-line (although, to be frank, the rest of the book is much better than the first chapter). In brief, Sharkman Six is a first person narrative of a Marine Lieutenant trying to lead his men and do right and good in Somalia, 1992, and the constraints of the Rules of Engagement. It's a book of honor and duty and the United States Marines.

In a recent issue of Book magazine, in the list of ten new authors to watch in 2002, Owen West is listed as "The New Tom Clancy." Not quite. He's unique, thankfully fresh; if I had to categorize him I say he's a cross between Jim Webb (Fields of Fire, A Sense of Honor, Something to Die For) and Pat Conroy (The Great Santini, Lords of Discipline).

This is a good book. (and I will let you know if the ending disappoints me).

Military Operations Other Than War -- what a concept.

Gruden Gone. Frankly, I'm stunned by the announcement that John Gruden has left the Raiders for the Bucs. I'm not surprised that he's leaving -- he's at his high point with the Raiders -- it's doubtful they could win the Division next year with the retirements and the continued aging of the oldest team in the league. What puzzles me is: Tampa Bay -- this isn't exactly sound management, as Tony Dungy found out.

ESPN is reporting that the Raiders will receive first- and second-round draft choices in 2002, a first-round choice in 2003, and a second-round choice in 2004.

So who's next? My favorite is Art Shell -- but I'm not sure where he is, or if he's even interested. ESPN, in addition to mentioning Shell, also lists former Viking coach Dennis Green and current Raiders offensive coordinator Bill Callahan "a seven-year NFL veteran whose primary area of expertise is the offensive line. But he has worked with Gruden since the two were Philadelphia Eagles assistants together."

And, since I'm talking football, let me say that the Texans made a great first pick of Tony Boselli.

Why Not? Kevin Holtsberry has a short, sweet explanation as to why he's not a libertarian. For the most part, I'm in agreement. I've seen a libertarian society -- it took place in the country called Somalia, 1992, and it wasn't pretty. Nevertheless, I think I've mentioned before, isn't God a libertarian? I'll explore this in a few days. [stay tuned - grin]

Lincoln's Best Speech? Not the Gettysburg Address, but the Second Inaugral Address says Ronald White. I agree (although it's a close call). Lincoln backed off from claiming the righteousness of the North and noted that both North and South

looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes his aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces; but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered--that of neither has been answered fully.

(I would continue on, but then my discussion would be longer and less sufficient than his address.) Lincoln concludes with these famous words:

With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan--to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations.

And it is these words which have echoed throughout our history, in the restoration of our enemies to seek a "just and lasting peace..." It will happen again -- indeed, it is happening in Afghanistan today.

Sandra Day O'Connor. The WaPo has a good article on Justice O'Connor in Monday's paper. While it contains some pretty standard analysis, there are some excellent sound-bites (print bites?) by Eugene Volokh

Church and State II. I'm of two minds regarding the prayer in school issue. On the one hand, I don't think government schools should be dictating prayer for the students (and teachers). On the other, I think the Supreme Court was wrong to determine that devotional readings, without comment, or even non-sectarian prayer in schools was the equivalent of the establishment of religion, and therefore, in violation of the First Amendment.

In the WSJ Opinion, Gen. Josiah Bunting III, superintendent of the Virginia Military Institute takes issue with the finding of a federal judge that VMI's prayer before meals violates the First Amendment. When I first heard this, I thought it was a no-brainer: under the recent history of the "school prayer" cases, there was going to be no way that this practice would survive. However, Gen. Bunting introduces the following facts which lead me to believe the practice should survive the challenge:

Just before entering the mess, all but our new cadets may fall out of formation and go their own way. They may enter the mess hall later, while the meal is still being served. Those who proceed into the mess hall are called to attention while the senior cadet presents the corps to the officer in charge. Then they are ordered to "rest," a position that requires them to remain standing, but not attentive.
A brief, nonsectarian, inclusive blessing is then recited over the loudspeaker by a cadet. . . After grace, the cadets continue with their meal.
VMI requires no participation in this grace. There is no mandatory head bowing, hand folding, eye closing or other manifestation of a prayerful attitude. In fact, cadets at rest can talk quietly, eat, drink . . . in short, disengage from the point in the ceremony where the prayer is recited. They are merely expected to remain standing until the ceremony is concluded. Such deportment is similar to what will be expected of them should they choose a military career; and it is a mark of respect that we would expect of them in any civilian setting.

I agree. The fact that the cadet can disengage from the prayer and may even begin eating and drinking -- thereby manifesting non-participation -- means the practice should be allowed, even though it is taking place on a state school.

What a contrast from Berkeley.

Church and State I. This article in a small Kansas publication notes a speech by a Christian activist notes

that original manuscripts and artwork showing the founding fathers as men of faith are systematically being lost or locked away.
In some cases, altered representations of the material is being passed off as original. And the alterations all remove references to faith or religious belief.
[Catherine] Millard said her research has uncovered enough instances to prove a pattern of quiet government censorship that tends to support more recent historical revisions portraying the Christian historical figures as either non religious or degenerate.

I seem to recall a former classmate of mine did some research along those lines and came up with similar findings.

testing don't know if this will get through -- having trouble today, both posting and opening the page.