THE DISUNITING OF AMERICA

I oppose civil unions between same-sex couples on the following grounds:

First, there is no need for new legislation if civil unions are truly the goal. All Americans, have the right to enter into a civil contract with whomever they want. They can name power of attorney, living wills, beneficiaries and other civil matters in such a contract. They can have an approximation of the benefits of marriage in such a contract. (Dirty little secret: Civil unions are not about civil protections, they are about social engineering.)

Second, you cannot make unreality real. Marriage by definition is the union of one man and one woman as the central unit of society, designed for the bearing and rearing of children and for the stabilizing force that it has on society as a whole. A union between same-sex couples is not marriage.  No children can be born from such a union, and it is far from clear that raising children in a home united by civil union is good for the child or community.

          You cannot make a dog into a cat. You cannot make a tree into a frog. You cannot make something that is not marriage into marriage. The convolution of the language does not change reality. Same-sex couples can live together in loving, long-term relationships, but they cannot, and never can be, married. Those who talk about an evolving society and concept do not understand that, for homosexuals, evolution is a mixed metaphor as it cannot happen in society, only through biological reproduction in which they cannot participate.

Third, the cost to the government will be massive. Every statute and law which addresses marriage or legal relationships of married and related people in anyway, will have to be altered to fit the language of the Civil Unions bill. In essence, marriage will have lost its meaning, and this vital institution will be open to any and all comers, and any whim, fad, or cry for equal rights that may come down the cultural path in the future.  This will put the stamp of acceptability on bigamy, polygamy, and even bestiality. 

Fourth, why on earth would same-sex couples want to bring divorce upon their community? With a legally licensed union, and a contractual agreement between one another and the state, and across state lines, divorce is inevitable. Divorce is a terrible thing to have to endure and is the leading cause of poverty and children neglect.  Even among heterosexuals it nearly ranks as child abuse.  Out of compassion I ask, why in the world would any group want to add divorce to the equation of already complicated lives?

          Civil unions and homosexual marriage are not about civil rights.  They are about social engineering. 

OCCUPY THE HARVEST

          Don’t think I don’t see the irony of this post about farming, work, being close to the land etc. 

          I’m leaving on vacation in a couple of days so there will be no new posts for at least two weeks.  Lest you think I am indulgent, this will be the first two week vacation I have ever taken in 67 years.  See ya in a couple of weeks.  

          How many of these things do Americans believe anymore?

You reap what you sow

Everything has its season.

Time is cyclical: spring, summer, fall, winter. 

When we try to do what we do matters.

You get another chance next year, if you can wait that long. 

Behavior must be appropriate to the time.

You cannot harvest (eat) unless you plant (work).

People are not in control. 

Sunshine and rain fall upon all men.

There is always more to do.

You have to work every day.

You cannot manage the land or animals.  You can only nurture.

If you cannot feed yourself, you cannot be free.

Work is the process by which dreams become realities.

Good fences make good neighbors.

Fences need to be horse-high, pig-tight and bull-strong.

Dirt is not a four letter word.

Nature is interdependent. You can’t change one thing without changing everything. 

Flowers have to have bees.  Bees have to have flowers. 

Everything has its place and there is a place for everything.

You can’t plow a straight furrow if you look back.

In the morning sow thy seed and in the evening withhold not thine hand.

If you worry about the wind you will never plant. 

If you worry about the clouds you will never reap.

Big things come in small packages, called seeds.

You have to wait for things to grow.  Patience.

You don’t have to understand what happens in a seed to plant it. 

Where you plant makes a lot of difference.

Planting is not the beginning.  Planting begins with preparation.

Plant a diversity of crops.  You cannot know what misfortune may occur.

WHICH LAW

          There is a great irony in the world.  Science has nearly convinced mankind that we are all just animals.  Our anatomy and physiology is alike, and we appear to have the same needs for survival.  The conclusion many modern thinkers draw from this analogy is that should not, cannot be any moral laws such as taught by the religions of man.  Many people have accepted these conclusions and live their life without moral restrictions.  Of course there are many who believe this but who also practice moral principles and hold themselves to a set of standards based upon their own reasoning. 

          The irony, of course, is that those who believe we are just another species of animal often want to be free of any of nature’s natural restrictions.  They may want to eat without killing. Others may want to kill without eating.  Some wish to have sex without responsibility and others wish to have responsibility but limit reproduction.  Many wish to be left free to believe and preach whatever they want, but do not want to hear any opposition and would restrict the freedom of others to oppose. 

          Animals and plants are not free.  Each has its own nature and limitations.  Many can only reproduce at certain times of the year or at discreet intervals.  None can engage in sexual relations without some cost and responsibility.  Even the consumers must be responsible when they overgraze and area and their offspring suffer.  Something must die if others are to live. 

          Only humans think they are free of these requirements.  Mostly however, it is humans in industrial nations who behave this way.  Americans are especially subject to this irony.  I believe this is because we are now two or more generations removed from the land and nature.  MY grandfathers were all involved with the land in some way.  The law of the harvest, “Reap what you sow”, was engrained in them.  But my parents were only slightly involved in agriculture and that more than most of their generation.  I was raised and lived even more marginalized, except that I chose to study biology for a career. 

          I do not want to live like a caveman.  I don’t even want to live the demanding life of my grandparents.  However, I believe it is essential that Americans somehow get back in touch with nature.  If we intend to be “just an animal” we need to obey nature’s laws.  If we are something different than an animal we need to be living by a higher law. 

SUFFERING

          I have been thinking about science and suffering. 

          I became a scientist in part because I wanted to help people and alleviate suffering.  (The other part was avoiding the draft.)  Science is supposed to alleviate suffering, you know.  Instead I now find myself administering exams and writing columns, both of which may be excruciating to some people. 

          A lot of scientists seem to worry about suffering, although the people who seem to worry most about suffering are people who have never seemed to suffer very much.  Richard Dawkins, the late Christopher Hutchins, and other atheists are, or were, greatly exercised about suffering, although they themselves have University educations and live rather extravagant and indulgent life styles.  While atheism thrives in industrial nations, the suffering poor of the world seem to embrace religion. 

          Actually I’m not even sure what suffering is.  Presumably death qualifies, although I am not sure why since everyone gets to do that.  We often call surviving death suffering when the one who didn’t survive was a loved one.  Can a team actually suffer a loss?  I suppose pain is suffering, although pain exists on a kind of a continuum.  To what degree do we suffer?  If I skip meals in an effort to lose weight because I suffer from being overweight, am I still suffering? 

          I meet many people who are deathly afraid of being stung by a bee.  Yeah, it hurts, but I’m not sure I would call it suffering.  What about only having one shirt?  Is that suffering?  I guess that depends on how often you are able to do the laundry under those conditions.  What if you don’t own a car and have to live in a one room house?  Interestingly, many people who have to live under those conditions don’t act as if they are suffering at all.  I mean they laugh, love, play, get married, have children, and just have a good old time anyway.  In fact, they don’t seem to worry too much about suffering.  They often seem happier than me.         

          I’m not sure why scientists seem to worry about suffering so much.  Suffering isn’t a science, although my wife thinks I have turned it into such.  She just doesn’t understand how hard it is to be a professional windbag.  Sometimes my back just kills me from standing for all those lectures.  I wonder if being boring counts as a disability. 

          Science is supposed to deal with the real physical world.  I guess suffering feels real enough, but where is it?  Is there a tiny, fundamental particle of suffering out there of which all suffering is composed; like atoms or cells?   We could call it a sufferon.  Then we could classify suffering as to the number, kinds and arrangements of sufferons.  “Oh man!  I have seventeen sufferons today from talking so much!”  Or not.  This could really backfire on us when other people started counting and comparing their sufferons to ours.  Maybe it should remain a little vague.

          Many people seem to be concerned about who is responsible for suffering.  Interestingly, some seem to think it is God’s fault for not stopping it.  Shouldn’t they blame Satan for causing it?  Presumably God can interfere with Satan.  Can Satan interfere with God?  Apparently he can, when he causes suffering.  If God is a benevolent God then He would never cause suffering, even if He occasionally failed to prevent it.  So, who is guilty, the one who caused the suffering, or the one who failed to prevent it?  

          If a scientist fails to prevent suffering is the suffering his fault?  Is it enough to have tried to stop suffering or does it have to be actually stopped before God can take credit?  Well, thankfully, I don’t have to assign blame for suffering; I just have to alleviate it.  Unless suffering is my fault for not alleviating it like a good scientist should.  In that case, I can always blame God. 

           

           

BEFORE HUMANS A WILD ASS

          Before there were humans there was a wild ass and lilies.  Before there were humans there were cockroaches and daffodils.  Before there were humans there were fishes of the sea, fowls of the air, and grasses and herbs of every kind.  Of this the scientists and theologians all agree.  The sequence of Genesis is very much the sequence proposed by scientists for the creation of life.

          It is commonly thought that humans were created last because we were the epitome of his creation.  But what if we are an afterthought?  Does God love his other creations equally? 

          I believe that God loves his other creations in a way that does not necessarily conform to human purposes.  We are concerned with the usefulness of the tree and are confused by what good a mosquito could be for.  God took great pains and time to create beauty, grace, color, seasons, and motion in an infinite variety.  He used patterns that include us, but existed before us.  Did he create it all for us?  Or did He create it all for his own pleasure and delight in creation, and we are allowed to share in it? 

          In fact, we are even asked to exercise dominion over it.  What does dominion mean?  One definition is, “the power of life and death.”  It seems true that we hold that power over his creation.  How sad he must feel at times as he sees the death and destruction of his creations, not for our use, or for further creation, but for senseless greed and waste. 

WHAT COMES AFTER

          One of the failings of humanity is the tendency to not think beyond the goal.  This is sometimes only a mild problem, but also sometimes a significant issue, even to the point of disaster. 

          In 1982 I finally achieved my goal of receiving my doctorate degree.  Detours for military service, work to support the family, delays in research results, and working to pay off bills before tackling the next step all played a role.  The doctorate had been a goal for so long.

          To my surprise, I was left feeling very lost for a very long time.  It was almost a depression.  I had focused so long and hard on the goal I had not thought about what to do when the goal was achieved. 

          I have seen the same effect on young men coming home from a mission, or on being released from active duty military.  A young man may think about, and prepare for, a mission for 19 years.  But for two years he doesn’t give much thought to what he’ll do when he returns.  Even though he may have vague ideas about a career and getting married, he may find himself in the doldrums for several months.

          Have you ever noticed that it is easy to install apps, set up accounts, enter data, but it often very difficult to uninstall, delete accounts, change data, or exit programs.  Sometimes, especially in early software, that was an oversight.  Sometimes, in modern applications, that is planned.

          This not thinking beyond the goal can cause more serious problems when it is on a national scale, concerning matters over which we have little control.  For example, we may focus on the next election, thinking it will be a solution to our problems.  Of course the national debt will still be staggering regardless of who wins.  Our liberty will still be at risk.  The countries energy needs will still be unsustainable.  Our dollar will still have been inflated. 

          We may think that if the Supreme Court just find the health care law constitutional/unconstitutional (you pick) everything will be solved.  There will still be an aging population needing increased health care with fewer workers to support the system.  We may go to war, but if we don’t know what we will do after we have won, we will never be done.

          I may increase the number of beehives only to find I am unable to sustain the support and care each requires.  I may start a successful business only to find no easy way to get out of it.  I may win the election only to find the problems insurmountable and events unexpected.  I may leave a large estate, only to have a family at odds over their inheritance.

          We cannot know the future.  But to set goals without considering what will happen after they are achieved is ill conceived.  There should always be an exit plan.

         

THE HUNGER GAMES

Okay, I am in big trouble.  See, I am a beekeeper.  That is a form of agriculture.  And today I had my seventeen year old grand daughter rendering beeswax on a hot plate.  My fifteen year old grandson was operating power machinery (a power mower) to mow off the bee yard.  My fourteen year old and 11 year old grand daughters were checking beehives and handling bees, without even a bee suit on. 

I am sure that I just broke every regulation just proposed by the US Department of Labor regulating youth employment on farms. 

Are we insane?  Has America lost its guts?  Does the Department of Labor have the right to tell me how to raise my family?  Does the government want more unemployed youth?  Do they want the youth to have no practical experience or skills?  Does it make sense to ship food 1500 miles round trip to feed America?  Couldn’t it be raised close to urban centers by families?

I cannot see any possible reason for these regulations except to consolidate authority and provide job security for the DOL.  Unless, of course, the purpose is to destroy Americas ability to produce food.  But no one would want to do that of course.  Well, except for our enemies. 

I do not know how to stop this.  I have written to my congressmen and I get standard form letters in reply.  I complained about government interference in the Church and received a form letter from both Senators Udall and Bennet (both Colorado) that referenced women’s rights.  WHAT?  I protested these regulations and received stock replies about protecting children.  FROM WHAT? 

Can we truly wait for an election to stop this madness?  Do you suppose there will be an election this fall, or will the unrest be such that the President will “have to” declare Marshall Law and “postpone” elections?