Green Jello Hotdish

The amount of fear in which mainstream America lives is utterly distressing to me. While not anything new or even profound, it reared its ugly head again to me today at work.

If you type your landline phone number into Google, it will return with your name, address — all the information that you have listed for yourself in the phone book. As with everything, it will also give you the opportunity to print out a map of the address. This is called a reverse lookup, and it has been available to people through the decades. One just used to have to call 411 to get it. (Of course, they’d have to create their own map, as well.)

Wanted to know where a person lived and had their last name? Just pull out the phone book.

This isn’t new. This isn’t privacy invasion. This isn’t a reason to sound the alarm. But just this morning I received a request to pull someone’s contact information off the synod Web site because they didn’t want that information on the Internet. So instead, now all a person has to do is call the synod office to receive it. Or look in our printed directories. But they can’t get it from our Web site, because heaven forbid someone with ill intentions searches for it and finds it there.

And what if they search in the phone book? Or call 411 for a reverse lookup?

Information is not inherently bad; nor is it inherently good. Its merely information. In the wrong hands, no matter where it is obtained, information can be used for bad reason.

Fear of information, I’ve found, is a generational difference. Those of us who were born post-1980 don’t have as much fear of what is available on the Internet. Makes sense given our upbringing with unfetted access to the Internet pre-psychos. (Or was it, really?) People born before then, though, the notion of Big Brother permeates the fear. Fueled by our governmental officials (who have ill intentions, I might add), this fear is manipulated in a way to create the illusion that privacy is possible — even plausible. But they’re the good folks. No need to fear the government, they want us to believe.

The enemy is not Google. The enemy is, as it has always been, sick and twisted people. They’re not leaving any time soon, but they seem to be calling the shots now. Grr-eat.

A couple weeks back — maybe even months now — both the Milwaukee LGBT Film Festival and the Milwaukee International Film Festival brought “For The Bible Tells Me So” here. My church made a group outing to both showings, but I wasn’t able to see it then. Last night while I was in Sheboygan at the synod’s fall conference, I made it to a showing at the Paradigm Coffeehouse.

Go. See the movie. Now. Why are you continuing to read this?

Watching the trailer, already fighting against spiritual warfare, I figured it would be a movie that left me saying, “Oh, gee. Situation normal. There are some crazies who can’t handle the thought of gay people, and they’re led by James Dobson and the gang.” I didn’t expect the movie to bring me to tears and leave me speechless for the better part of an evening. (And really, from me that’s the best review it can get.)

I found the trailer on YouTube and posted it below. Some showings coming up in Chicago and Madison; if anyone really wants to see this film but needs someone to go with them, I’m up for a road trip.

Motivated by a lack of quarters at the moment and a dwindling supply of clean clothing, I figured I should be able to wash my clothes in the bathtub of my apartment. Not knowing how to accomplish this, and having Google at my fingertips, I came across this blog post.

What a great idea — I figured there would be some environmental benefit by not using the dryer, but it’s such a simple, easy way to use less energy, and even get rid of some aggression by stomping on one’s clothes!

This article is so bad, yet sooooo funny.

“You say on your form that you’re not a fan of homosexuals,” Nickerson said.

“That I’m a racist,” Ellis interrupted.

“I’m frequently found to be a liar, too. I can’t really help it,” Ellis added.

“I’m sorry?” Nickerson said.

“I said I’m frequently found to be a liar,” Ellis replied.

“So, are you lying to me now?” Nickerson asked.

“Well, I don’t know. I might be,” was the response.

Ellis then admitted he really didn’t want to serve on a jury.

“I have the distinct impression that you’re intentionally trying to avoid jury service,” Nickerson said.

“That’s true,” Ellis answered.

So being a racist, homophobic liar may not quite get you out of jury duty so much as it will get you charged with contempt.

Universal health care. Anything less is unacceptable. Almost-universal health care is a great start, but Massachusetts’ plan may just very well be the most complicated, confusing bit of American public policy since Social Security.

Here’s a simple plan, based on my insurance policy. I think it’s pretty damn good insurance, and that it will work great for anyone who is employed and in my income tax bracket — 25% and higher. My employer contributes 16% of my salary for my insurance premium. I have single coverage and my insurance plan is managed by a major national organization (*cough*Blue Cross/Blue Shield*cough*), the same organization which manages many state governmental insurance plans across the country. I have a $300 out of pocket deductible per year, and one is hard pressed to find a health facility in America — even in certain parts of the world — that is not BCBS serviced.

So, group insurance is what lowers premiums and deductibles, right? OK, so let’s add just 10% to state taxes collected by employers per employee when their compensation would place them in the 25% income tax bracket. The new tax could not be passed on to the employee as to lower their net take-home pay. (I’m operating under the assumption that employees making $31,850 and more already have benefits packages including health care.) The employee, then, would be covered under the state health care plan. For full family coverage, the employer would contribute 13%.

As we go upward, employees in the 28% bracket ($64,250-$97,925) would have 14% and 18% contributions, in the 33% bracket ($97,925-$174,850) 20%/25% and in the top, 35% bracket would cap out at 27%/30%.

For employees in the 15% tax bracket ($7,825-$31,850 per year), employers would contribute 5% for single coverage, 7% for family. For those who are in the 10% tax bracket, or those who make up to $7,825 per year, the state would bear the burden of health insurance.

Employers would end up saving money, as they would not need to administer health benefits any longer. Employees would benefit by having large-scale, group insurance on an almost universal scale. States would then be able to reallocate resources to subsidize health insurance for the uninsured and deal less with underinsured. On top of it, insurance just got a whole lot easier.

Secessionist movements are alive and well in the former Republic of Vermont, according to yesterday’s Washington Post.

The article points out states’ rights arguments in a way all but ignored by the current crew in Washington — both administration and Congress alike. My personal favorite, though, is the description of the “true American Congress,” founded in Vermont:

A decade before the War of Independence, Vermont became New England’s first frontier, settled by pioneers escaping colonial bondage who hewed settlements across a lush region whose spine is the Green Mountains. These independent folk brought with them what Henry David Thoreau called the “true American Congress” — the New England town meeting, which is still the legislature for nearly all of Vermont’s 237 towns. Here every citizen is a legislator who helps fashion the rules that govern the locality.

When I was a stringer for a community newspaper, I covered local government for a small township of 3,900 or so. It was a typical township — most of the population was based in an unincorporated community. Three people served on the town board, but major business and initiatives were debated in an annual town meeting. There was when the budget was adopted, ordinances changed, so on and so forth. The town chairman once told me it was government at its finest.

I think we’ve lost that part of our heritage as Americans, as the article points out. As a city-dweller, I can’t imagine decisions being made en masse (would we have our annual town meeting at the Summerfest grounds?) but the American notion of government was designed to be local, cooperative and participatory. In designing the federalist-republic we now understand, the distribution of powers was key.

Vermont, after fair deliberation, should be allowed to make its own decision based upon the values of Vermonters of whether to remain in the United States or secede. I wonder what would happen if it became a self-governing commonwealth territory, similar to Guam or the Virgin Islands. Maybe it will become fully independent. In the end, the tenth amendment guarantees Vermont the ability to make decisions in its own interest.

Of course, statehood for the District of Columbia would balance out the equation and keep us at an even 50. Secession for those who want to leave and union for those who want to join. But if we let them do that, then everyone will want to use their Constitutional rights.

A female couple emerged from the Milwaukee County Courthouse yesterday as wife and wife. The hitch: one of the women is still a man.

Circuit Judge David Hansher confirmed with doctors that Barbara Lynn Terry possesses male genitalia and thus her marriage with new wife Nicole Winstanley is not prohibited under Wisconsin’s new same-sex marriage ban.

Barbara Terry legally changed her name from Ronald Francis Terry in 1980. Nicole Terry recently moved to Milwaukee from Melbourne, Australia after meeting Barbara on an Internet dating site.

I even have to admit things sound a bit weird. You see, when Barbara was Ronald, he was convicted in 1970 for rape. In an interview with the Journal Sentinel, Barbara says she has never felt any attraction to women. Nicole, on the other hand, is repulsed at Barbara’s, er, “maleness” and wants sex reassignment surgery as soon as possible.

Madison attorney and director for the family law project at the University of Wisconsin Law School Leslie Shear says the newlyweds should move to Massachusetts pending immigration visa decisions — it’s the only place where their new marriage will be valid post-op.

Last night a group of anti-war protesters got together on Oakland Ave and ruffed up an army recruiting station. The Journal Sentinel reports 21 were arrested following the mess.

Indymedia broke the news with pictures from the protest — which were featured on the 10:00 TMJ4 news along with their live standup on Oakland. The point of any protest, obviously, is to get the media focused on you for a minute or five. But the key response to this came from a commenter, Steve, over on Indymedia. I can’t summarize it better myself, so I’ll just let him finish the post:

Big Deal
20.03.2007 - 07:41
Congrats, kiddies. You got some ink. You broke some windows. That should bring the troops home any day now, huh?

You guys are angry, and I can relate, anyone who’s been awake for the last four years (not too many, sadly) is angry.

And having broken a window or two I am not about to rip you guys for doing the same.

But getting all dressed up and playing guerrilla ninja protest warrior is the easy part.

Now what are you going to do?

Just being loud and breaking stuff may make you feel good and may draw the attention of the lapdog media for a few seconds.

But now what do you do?

Yeah, right, dude, the people will see you’re pissed. That’s like, so incredibly interesting. Put that together with two bucks and you can buy a cup of coffee at Willow Creek.

The challenge is to come up with something that serves an interest that’s broader and more worthwhile than letting you blow off steam and making you feel good. Otherwise you’re just like those losers who break windows on State Street in Madison every time a sports team wins a big game.

What are you going to do?

C’mon, don’t be shy.

Vice President for Governmental Affairs the Rev. Rick Cizik at the National Association of Evangelicals, and the organization itself, are under fire from those within their own contingency for calling on Christians to fight against climate change spurring global warming.

You see, it’s deflecting attention from sanctity of life issues. I suspect that bad “L” word is being spoken of. In fact, I know so. But I digress.

According to this Washington Post report, Cizik is now primary apostate from the ranks which include the likes of Jim Dobson, Tony Perkins and Gary Bauer.

“Cizik and others,” they said, “are using the global warming controversy to shift the emphasis away from the great moral issues of our time, notably the sanctity of human life, the integrity of marriage and the teaching of sexual abstinence and morality to our children.”

Worse, they smeared Cizik because he had expressed concern about the size of world’s population in a speech last year at the World Bank. “We ask,” they wrote, “how is population control going to be achieved if not by promoting abortion, the distribution of condoms to the young, and, even by infanticide in China and elsewhere?”

They must have forgotten the children they encourage are going to need those unnecessary things like clean air and water along with dry land and a temperable climate. (You can read the whole letter here.)

The NAE has been a big player in the GOP victories of 2000 and 2004 and once again become a household name among liberalati and moderates since the release of the movie Jesus Camp, then again right before the 2006 midterms when ousted president Ted Haggard was outed paying for more than a massage with a Denver man in October.

On one side of the coin — the cynical side — I wonder how much the renewed interest in “return[ing] to being people who are known for [their] love and care for our fellow human beings and the Earth” is a calculated effort to climb back to good graces with the church-going public. But as a professional church worker experiencing the growing dissatisfaction with organized church and its political ties, the entire Christian community regardless of denomination, theology or polity are needing to reevaluate our standing within our gospel mandate to love and serve one another. On both sides, our motivation needs to hold up to Christ’s example of impoverished response to creation.

Having the weight of the NAE behind the fight to reverse the effects of global warming, no matter its motivation, demonstrates the notion of yet another reformation to go back to the core principles of our Christian faith: And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love. -1 Corinthians 13:13 (NRSV)

When news broke of the illegal bingo ring at Southridge, I couldn’t believe that they had finally done it: they found another group to pick on other than the nerdowells at Mayfair. Little old ladies and men playing bingo. Because we all know that’s a terroristic training cell if there ever was one.

The objectors were the churches, although the article wasn’t clear if it was churches against bingo or those who play bingo weekly to support their budget. No matter who it is these people need to get a life. Chief among them (no pun intended) is Greendale police chief Rob Dams, who feels it’s more important for strict legal interpretation than common sense.

“I called the head of Boston Store security and told him that either this stops right at this moment or we start making arrests,” Police Chief Rob Dams said.

Does anyone make demands like that, really? If you’re the king of England, I guess possibly, but a suburban chief of police? In case he hasn’t learned by now, it doesn’t look good for your department or community if you start handcuffing 88-year-old folks and their walkers.

In his own defense, he did recognize later in the article that the bingo games are small potatoes. But we also learn that the games have been going on for more than 20 years with a feature newspaper article from 2002 highlighting the playful games framed near the entrance. Was there an ongoing investigation since 1984?

And now here comes the battle of wits in Madison. Mary Lazich, the Republican senator from New Berlin whose district includes Southridge, is outraged and thinks the games were legal and if they weren’t they should be made legal. Greendale Republican Rep. Jeff Stone blames Boston Store for not doing its homework and doesn’t feel the state should play any part.

(If you pull up Rep. Stone’s picture from the Legislature, he even looks like a mean, grumpy old man who would take away senior’s fun.)

The head of the state’s Division of Gaming, said he saw an ad in the local shopper for the bingo games. But wait, didn’t the police chief say churches complained? I think something else is going on here, and none of it smells like roses.

While the state figures out which way is up, let the games go on. Let the regulars have something to look forward to. By the state’s own magic three criteria — prize, game of chance, and cost — even a mother and child playing bingo at home is illegal. The prize is extra dessert at dinner tonight. Bingo’s a game of chance. And the cost was incurred by the mother buying the game and ice cream. How ridiculous are we going to have to be?