All posts by ariah

So, When Does Life Begin?

https://tryingtofollow.com/wp-content/linkedimages/upload//i/picfu1/2008/08/29/21/5/0/7/5070e5528a19487590a0aa5163d0587c0_main.jpg

In an effort to not sway the conversation in any particular direction. I’m going to simply display the verses that to my knowledge (and a couple brief google searches) are used in making the case for and against abortion. In the context of when life begins…

Scripture typically used to make a case Against Abortion…

Psalm 139:13 For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother’s womb.

14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.

15 My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place.
When I was woven together in the depths of the earth,

16 your eyes saw my unformed body.
All the days ordained for me
were written in your book
before one of them came to be.

Psalm 22:10 From birth I was cast upon you;
from my mother’s womb you have been my God.

Jeremiah 1:4 The word of the LORD came to me, saying,

5 “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,
before you were born I set you apart;
I appointed you as a prophet to the nations.”

Luke 1:39 At that time Mary got ready and hurried to a town in the hill country of Judea, 40where she entered Zechariah’s home and greeted Elizabeth. 41When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.

And now for the verses that are used to make a case that “life” does not necessarily begin at conception but rather at birth.

Exodus 21:22 “If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. 23 But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

Ecclesiastes 6:3 A man may have a hundred children and live many years; yet no matter how long he lives, if he cannot enjoy his prosperity and does not receive proper burial, I say that a stillborn child is better off than he. 4 It comes without meaning, it departs in darkness, and in darkness its name is shrouded. 5 Though it never saw the sun or knew anything, it has more rest than does that man- 6 even if he lives a thousand years twice over but fails to enjoy his prosperity. Do not all go to the same place?

Job 10:18 “Why then did you bring me out of the womb?
I wish I had died before any eye saw me.

19 If only I had never come into being,
or had been carried straight from the womb to the grave!

I will leave my thoughts on the verses to the comments section to give everyone a fair opportunity to converse. If your reading this via email or rss I suggest you hop over and join the discussion.

Abortion: What If It’s Infanticide?

https://tryingtofollow.com/wp-content/linkedimages/upload/static.flickr.com/2081/2130942092_c48d8a1579_m.jpgI remember some evangelism training thing somewhere were the technique was suggested of challenging a person to accept Jesus on the grounds that if they were wrong it would mean eternity in Hell, so it probably wasn’t worth the risk. Don’t know how I feel about that tactic now, but for those (could include me) who don’t currently consider abortion as infanticide, I’m going to ask you to consider the “what if” today. We’ve dialoged already with the assumption that life begins at birth. Today we are going to dialog with the stipulation that life begins at conception. Tomorrow will discuss from a Biblical perspective when we believe “life” begins, but today we are going to, for the sake of productive dialog, stipulate that life begins at conception.

I believe the two things I mentioned Monday still apply to today’s conversation.

  • Men should yield the floor to their better half and allow women to lead the decision making as it relates to pregnancy, abortion and women’s rights. We need to support them whole heartedly in their decisions, but do all we can to support and not unduly influence.
  • We need to address the grave injustices that continue to face women in our country today. Equal Pay, paid maternity leave and better support for working and nursing mothers. Taking a stand against domestic and sexual abuse.  And removing discriminating stereotypes and media create pervasive struggles with body image for our young girls.

As to the issue of abortion itself. Assuming life begins at conception, abortion is murder. But, we must admit that it is unlike any other form of murder, it is unique in the relationship and physical connectedness of the mother and child. I am not saying that to diminish the value of the child, but to simply acknowledge that it is unique and should be considered as such. We think and respond differently to a suicide, an assisination or a fatal accident, though all involve the lose of life.

Is there a way to think of and respond to the situation, to consider the mother and child and the gravity of the situation that does not diminish the intensity of the situation, but also respects the values and rights of both the mother and child?

YouTubesday: Religion, Religion, Religion

Okay, so the email forwards recently about Obama are driving me crazy. Not from a political perspective, but from a “I’m ashamed to call my self a Christian and align myself with these people” sort of perspective. Anways, I figured I’d add to the religious cynicism and give some folks a few videos to find amusing or get angry at. Your choice.

First, a trailer for Religulous, seems interesting…

Then some late night Christian Television clips…

And finally a great monologue on using the Old Testament in modern day life, from the West Wing (also quoted in Jesus for President).

Hot Button Issue: Abortion

The+Halloween+pumpkin+belly

I’ve been extremely hesitant to bring this issue up here for a number of reasons. One, I think discussion on this topic has been dominated by men and I don’t want to simply add my noise thus drowning out the women whose voices are so important on this issue. Two, I’m not sure of my abilities to steer the conversation in a direction that keeps us away from the partisan political lines and fosters real geniune dialog. But, better to have tried and failed then to be silent and not screw this whole thing up (or something like that).

Here is what I’m proposing for the purpose of this discussion. We are going to take this in three parts. And will address each on a different day.

  1. Monday- The post and conversation will stipulate that life begins at birth.
  2. Wednesday- The post and conversation will stipulate that life begins at conception (fertilized egg)
  3. Thursday- The conversation will discuss when life begins (using the Christian scriptures as a reference and authority).

My hope is that this format will help us address some of the issues around the topic without getting into an emotional debate regarding when life begins (until Thursday). So, on with the discussion.

Much of my thoughts on the topic are up in the air, still shifting, not quite solid. But I do have a few I’m pretty sure about, and they mostly relate to the topic from my role as a male.

  • I think men, on the whole, need to shut-up and yield the floor to women on the issue of abortion. For far too long women have had to fight for their rights, to vote, to their bodies, against discrimination and for fair pay. And though they have won many rights in theory, men continue to hog the conversation, even when it comes to issues centered around women and their bodies. It’s time for men to step aside and trust and support the women in their lives to make the right decision.
  • And in the mean time, we need to seek to make women’s rights and fair protection a reality. We can start by fervently addressing domestic abuse and sexual assault which are vastly under-reported because of the stigma and shame and blaming the victim that occurs. We can make changes in our businesses and encourage others in our circles of influence, that support paid maternity leave and equal pay, that doesn’t discriminate against mothers who keep their children as a priority. We should make sure church and office policies support nursing mothers.

I think that might be enough for discussion. Remember keep in mind that regardless of your current opinion on when life begins, we are stipulating for the purpose of constructive dialog on this post that life begins at birth (not at conception).

Book Review: Rules for Radicals, by Saul Alinsky

I  recently re-read the book Rules for Radicals, by Saul Alinsky. This book had originally been a spark in my interest in community organizing over five years ago. Alinsky, according to wikipedia, is consider the father of community organizing. He was fairly notorious from the 1930’s to the 1960’s for his organizing of labor and union groups to civil rights involvement. And his book is full of great and creative stories of his organizing days.

The truth is, Alinsky was way more radical then I could ever hope to be. He seemed to be a man of solid convictions, but also steadfastly committed to getting the job done. Here’s a powerful statement:

…in action, one does not always enjoy the luxury of a decision that is consistent both with one’s individual conscience and the good of mankind. The choice must always be for the latter. Action is for mass salvation and not for the individual’s
personal salvation. He who sacrifices the mass good for his personal conscience has a peculiar conception of “personal salvation”; he doesn’t care enough for people to be “corrupted” for them. -p. 25

Wow, that is a challenging statement. He basically argues that any means is acceptable if it reaches your end. He uses Gandhi as an example, arguing that Gandhi was only non-violent because that was the best means to reach the end, and that after they won power from the British, Gandhi then was willing to use force (or at least didn’t argue against it) in maintaining that power.

Alinsky’s creative action and threats have included everything from tying up the bathrooms at O’hare to organizing proxies of stockholders to influence huge corporations. He was notorious for being one step ahead, and I hope I can glean some of his wisdom in future organizing.

Here are his rules for Tactics, which is a major component of the book:

Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.

Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people.
The result is confusion, fear, and retreat.

Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.

Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.”

Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues.

Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”

Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself. When Alinsky leaked word that large numbers of poor people were going to tie up the washrooms of O’Hare Airport, Chicago city authorities quickly agreed to act on a longstanding commitment to a ghetto organization. They imagined the mayhem as thousands of passengers poured off airplanes to discover every washroom occupied. Then they imagined the international embarrassment and the damage to the city’s reputation.

Rule 10: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, “Okay, what would you do?”

Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

Some obviously need some explaining, but for that you’ll have to pick up the book. Enjoy.

“The fact is that it is not man’s “better nature” but his self-interest that demands that he be his brother’s keeper. We now live in a world where no man can have a loaf of bread while his neighbor has none. If he does not share his bread, he dare not sleep, for his neighbor will kill him. To eat and sleep in safety man must do the right thing, if for seemingly the wrong reasons, and be in practice his brother’s keeper.”

A Rant Against Standardized Testing

My opinion on Standardized testing didn’t come from the Alfie Kohn book I just read, but I think he does an excellent job of addressing many of testings downfalls. Here is a concise list of facts from Standardized Testing and it’s Victims:

  1. Our children are tested to an extent that is unprecedented in our history and unparalleled anywhere else in the world.
  2. Noninstructional factors explain most of the variance among test scores when schools or districts are compared.
  3. Norm-referenced tests were never intended to measure the quality of learning or teaching.
  4. Standardized-test scores often measure superficial thinking.
  5. Virtually all specialists condemn the practice of giving standardized tests to children younger than 8 or 9 years old.
  6. Virtually all relevant experts and organizations condemn the practice of basing important decisions, such as graduation or promotion, on the results of a single test.
  7. The time, energy, and money that are being devoted to preparing students for standardized tests have to come from somewhere.
  8. Many educators are leaving the field because of what is being done to schools in the name of “accountability” and “tougher standards.”

Basically the main point being made is that standardized testing is not only useless in it’s intended goal of “keeping schools accountable” it’s actually very detrimental to education as a whole (students, teachers, schools, etc). Kohn goes on to discuss some of the implications of this system, but I think this is enough for a discussion to begin. If you have any questions on the Facts above, read the article, there is a paragraph or so on each one and will give you a better understanding of the point being made.

What are your thoughts on standardized testing?

Should We Stop Saying “Good Job!”?

I read a fascinating book by Alfie Kohn last week, which included an essay titled, Five Reasons to Stop Saying “Good Job!” and it definitely made me think critically about how and why we praise kids. I’ll include a brief paragraph and then just the bullet point reasons (with some supporting text), but it would be good for you to read the whole article (it’s not very long).

Lest there be any misunderstanding, the point here is not to call into question the importance of supporting and encouraging children, the need to love them and hug them and help them feel good about themselves. Praise, however, is a different story entirely. Here’s why.

  1. Manipulating children. Suppose you offer a verbal reward to reinforce the behavior of a two-year-old who eats without spilling, or a five-year-old who cleans up her art supplies. Who benefits from this? Is it possible that telling kids they’ve done a good job may have less to do with their emotional needs than with our convenience?
  2. Creating praise junkies. Rather than bolstering a child’s self-esteem, praise may increase kids’ dependence on us. The more we say, “I like the way you….” or “Good ______ing,” the more kids come to rely on our evaluations, our decisions about what’s good and bad, rather than learning to form their own judgments. It leads them to measure their worth in terms of what will lead us to smile and dole out some more approval.
  3. Stealing a child’s pleasure. Apart from the issue of dependence, a child deserves to take delight in her accomplishments, to feel pride in what she’s learned how to do. She also deserves to decide when to feel that way. Every time we say, “Good job!”, though, we’re telling a child how to feel.
  4. Losing interest. “Good painting!” may get children to keep painting for as long as we keep watching and praising. But, warns Lilian Katz, one of the country’s leading authorities on early childhood education, “once attention is withdrawn, many kids won’t touch the activity again.” Indeed, an impressive body of scientific research has shown that the more we reward people for doing something, the more they tend to lose interest in whatever they had to do to get the reward.
  5. Reducing achievement. As if it weren’t bad enough that “Good job!” can undermine independence, pleasure, and interest, it can also interfere with how good a job children actually do. Researchers keep finding that kids who are praised for doing well at a creative task tend to stumble at the next task – and they don’t do as well as children who weren’t praised to begin with.

You can read the complete article here.

I find myself agreeing with the majority of his points, though I think he might be taking it to an extreme (my opinion is still definitely out on this one). What are your thoughts?

YouTubesday: Racist, Racism and the 1968 Olympic Salute

How to Tell People They Sound Racist

First, if you haven’t heard of the famous 1968 Olympics Salute you should. Here’s a brief informative video about Tommie Smith and John Carlos.

Never heard of Peter Norman? I didn’t even know he had any active involvement in the famous “Salute”, but turns out he agreed to where a Olympians for Human Rights pin. I don’t know if he did anything else, but that simple act got him banned from the Australian Olympic team forever. Here’s a nicely done trailer for a documentary about him:

Hot Button Issue: Education

https://tryingtofollow.com/wp-content/linkedimages/upload/static.flickr.com/202/466722575_14805b5826.jpg

I’m not quite sure how “hot button” Education actually is in most people’s minds, but it’s an extremely important issue to me and thus one I felt worth to talk about in the political realm. Some of our earlier conversations got us into asking the question of what should be a government run entity. Some would say just military, police, maybe roads and a few other things. Others would say everything from healthcare to the airlines. In a conversation with someone last weekend it was mentioned that some of the skepticism about the benefit or success of government run programs has been what people look at as the “failure or public education.” Whether or not this is true (that it is a failure, or that that is where the skepticism comes from), I think it’s important to talk about as an issue and as it relates to politics.

I believe public education is necessary

The effort to privatize education and to create a voucher system are both things I feel are extremely dangerous for the good of our communities. On the surface they seem like possible solutions, but both in my gut and in the evidence and direction I’ve seen, they appear a dangerous alternative to community based public schools. The capitalist notion of competition can work wonders when your producing a product to sell, but education and a childs learning and developmental growth is not a product to sell or market. Children are our future and it is important that we share the responsibility of providing a solid education for all of them.

I do not believe these initiatives are driven by those valuing the best interest of our students, I think it is driven by corporations and industry greedily interested in expanding their profits. There is plenty of evidence to build conspiracy theories in this direction.

Inequality in public education perpetuates the racial disparities that have existed in our country since slavery

We are barely a generation past the Civil Rights movement that ushered in policy changes like Brown V. Board and the Civil Rights Act. Even with these national changes, inequality in public schools has been slow to change. There is both well documented statistics and reports as well as plenty of anecdotal stories of the poor public school systems in many of the urban communities in our country today.

I feel like the quiet undertone of the education debate is one of race, at least that has been my impression. When people talk about “failing schools” they are primarily pointing to inner city schools full of low-income minority students. And what I hear coming across in their critiques are racial stereotypes, biases and prejudices. Maybe it’s just me but I have a strong feeling it is not.

I just finished a book recently by Alfie Kohn who writes some fascinating insights into the education system. I’m going to quote some of what he’s written and try and create a dialog around in later this week.

Book Review: What Does it Mean to Be Well Educated?

So, one of my current housemates is a third grade teacher who recommended I read What Does it Mean to Be Well Educated? And Other Essays on Standards, Grading, and Other Follies, by Alfie Kohn. I’ve been devouring the book and have found Kohn’s insight fascinating. I’m going to post some quotes in upcoming blogs so I’ll keep this review brief.

I think every educator should read this book, or at least some of Kohn’s work (most probably have). I’m not sure that everyone will agree with his opinions, but I think he has brilliant insight that will help you see a different perspective and consider things from an angle you hadn’t before. Kohn manages to step back from the current debates that are often polarized to two sides and lends a whole new perspective the questions some of the very assumptions we currently take for granted.

The ideas are pretty radical at times, but I find I agree with much of what he says. He’s extremely critical of standardized testing, national standards, business and politicians involved in education decisions, and a huge opponent to grades.

Here are a couple quotes and links to a lot of the complete essays!

From Confusing Hard with Better:

But how many adults could pass these exams? How many high school teachers possess the requisite stock of information outside their own subjects? How many college professors, for that matter, or business executives, or state legislators could confidently write an essay about Mayan agricultural practices or divergent plate boundaries? We would do well to adopt (Deborah) Meier’s Mandate: No student should be expected to meet an academic requirement that a cross section of successful adults in the community cannot.

A list Two Cheers for an End to the SAT on why to ditch the SAT:

  • The SAT is a measure of resources more than of reasoning.
  • Aggregate scores don’t reflect educational achievement.
  • Individual scores don’t reflect a student’s intellectual depth.
  • SAT’s don’t predict the future.
  • SAT’s don’t contribute to diversity.

And finally From Degrading to De-Grading on why to do away with grades:

  1. Grades tend to reduce students’ interest in the learning itself.
  2. Grades tend to reduce students’ preference for challenging tasks.
  3. Grades tend to reduce the quality of students’ thinking.
  4. Grades aren’t valid, reliable, or objective.
  5. Grades distort the curriculum.
  6. Grades waste a lot of time that could be spent on learning.
  7. Grades encourage cheating.
  8. Grades spoil teachers’ relationships with students.
  9. Grades spoil students’ relationships with each other.

Feel free to read the complete essays linked above and let me know your thoughts.