This is from CitizenLink, a daily email thingy that comes from Focus on the Family:
Australian Web Site Tells Kids: ‘Die to Save the Planet’
Planet Slayer, a Web site of the Australian Broadcasting Corp., features a greenhouse calculator that tells kids when to die in order to save the planet.
The site instructs users to take a quiz to “find out what age you should die at so you don’t use more than your fair share of Earth’s resources.” Typically, your cartoon character — a pig — blows up at the end of the quiz, leaving a puddle of blood. If your answers are "green," the site tells you, "You will live forever."
Wesley J. Smith, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute, took the test and was told he should have died at age 7.4.
“This is being sold to children, and it is shameful and profoundly nihilistic,” he wrote on his blog. “It illustrates again how profoundly anti-human and pro-death certain aspects of our culture are becoming."
Art major Aliza Shvarts '08 wants to make a statement.
Beginning next Tuesday, Shvarts will be displaying her senior art project, a documentation of a nine-month process during which she artificially inseminated herself "as often as possible" while periodically taking abortifacient drugs to induce miscarriages. Her exhibition will feature video recordings of these forced miscarriages as well as preserved collections of the blood from the process.
The goal in creating the art exhibition, Shvarts said, was to spark conversation and debate on the relationship between art and the human body. But her project has already provoked more than just debate, inciting, for instance, outcry at a forum for fellow senior art majors held last week. And when told about Shvarts' project, students on both ends of the abortion debate have expressed shock — saying the project does everything from violate moral code to trivialize abortion.
But Shvarts insists her concept was not designed for "shock value."
"I hope it inspires some sort of discourse," Shvarts said. "Sure, some people will be upset with the message and will not agree with it, but it's not the intention of the piece to scandalize anyone."
The "fabricators," or donors, of the sperm were not paid for their services, but Shvarts required them to periodically take tests for sexually transmitted diseases. She said she was not concerned about any medical effects the forced miscarriages may have had on her body. The abortifacient drugs she took were legal and herbal, she said, and she did not feel the need to consult a doctor about her repeated miscarriages.
Shvarts declined to specify the number of sperm donors she used, as well as the number of times she inseminated herself.
Art major Juan Castillo '08 said that although he was intrigued by the creativity and beauty of her senior project, not everyone was as thrilled as he was by the concept and the means by which she attained the result.
"I really loved the idea of this project, but a lot other people didn't," Castillo said. "I think that most people were very resistant to thinking about what the project was really about. [The senior-art-project forum] stopped being a conversation on the work itself."
Although Shvarts said she does not remember the class being quite as hostile as Castillo described, she said she believes it is the nature of her piece to "provoke inquiry."
"I believe strongly that art should be a medium for politics and ideologies, not just a commodity," Shvarts said. "I think that I'm creating a project that lives up to the standard of what art is supposed to be."
The display of Schvarts' project will feature a large cube suspended from the ceiling of a room in the gallery of Green Hall. Schvarts will wrap hundreds of feet of plastic sheeting around this cube; lined between layers of the sheeting will be the blood from Schvarts' self-induced miscarriages mixed with Vaseline in order to prevent the blood from drying and to extend the blood throughout the plastic sheeting.
Schvarts will then project recorded videos onto the four sides of the cube. These videos, captured on a VHS camcorder, will show her experiencing miscarriages in her bathrooom tub, she said. Similar videos will be projected onto the walls of the room.
School of Art lecturer Pia Lindman, Schvarts' senior-project advisor, could not be reached for comment Wednesday night.
Few people outside of Yale's undergraduate art department have heard about Shvarts' exhibition. Members of two campus abortion-activist groups — Choose Life at Yale, a pro-life group, and the Reproductive Rights Action League of Yale, a pro-choice group — said they were not previously aware of Schvarts' project.
Alice Buttrick '10, an officer of RALY, said the group was in no way involved with the art exhibition and had no official opinion on the matter.
Sara Rahman '09 said, in her opinion, Shvarts is abusing her constitutional right to do what she chooses with her body.
"[Shvarts' exhibit] turns what is a serious decision for women into an absurdism," Rahman said. "It discounts the gravity of the situation that is abortion."
CLAY member Jonathan Serrato '09 said he does not think CLAY has an official response to Schvarts' exhibition. But personally, Serrato said he found the concept of the senior art project "surprising" and unethical.
"I feel that she's manipulating life for the benefit of her art, and I definitely don't support it," Serrato said. "I think it's morally wrong."
Shvarts emphasized that she is not ashamed of her exhibition, and she has become increasingly comfortable discussing her miscarriage experiences with her peers.
"It was a private and personal endeavor, but also a transparent one for the most part," Shvarts said. "This isn't something I've been hiding."
The official reception for the Undergraduate Senior Art Show will be from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on April 25. The exhibition will be on public display from April 22 to May 1. The art exhibition is set to premiere alongside the projects of other art seniors this Tuesday, April 22 at the gallery of Holcombe T. Green Jr. Hall on Chapel Street.
Apparently my Husband doesn't have enough to do when he's at work. Next time he moans about all they pile on him, I'm just gonna roll my eyes at him because today he sent me one of my blog entries that he entered into some online thingy that translated it into "Gangsta." Take a look:
I am a human napkin. Second Son sits next ta me on a B-to-tha-izzench at tha gangsta table. There is always a few times dur'n a mizzy that he wiznill slide over ta cuddle wit me n wizzy his grill on mah arm while he's there. F-to-tha-izzirst Playa has bizzy kniznown ta gizzy me a hug n wipe her nizzy on mah shirt frizzont while she's at it.
I assumed tizzle I became they human napkin coz of laziness or sum-m sum-m, but I'm beginn'n ta thizzay it's sum-m sum-m thiznat is innate coz tha otha day, Third Siznon, who is only 22 months old, was saggin' his hands at tha kitchen sink. I was mackin' there wit him n afta he finished rins'n tha soap bubbles diznown tha drain he reached over ta me n said, "Dry hands, Mama" n proceeded ta gizzle mah shirt ta do tha job. While he was at it he gave me a big hug.
I am a human napkin, n I am loved. ;-)
www.gizoogle.com – beware using the translator, it sometimes chooses some language that would not be appropriate for all eyes.
Jeff Johnson - OneNewsNow.com - 1/25/2008 4:00:00 AM
Birth rates are up in the United States, and most are saying that's a good thing. But Associated Press began its reporting of the highest U.S. birth rate in 45 years with a negative spin -- describing Americans as "bucking the trend in many other wealthy industrialized nations." However, Carrie Gordon Earll of Focus on the Family has a different take.
"We consider this to be very positive," she reports.
But according to Associated Press, unnamed experts blame the rise on "a mix of reasons, [including] a decline in contraceptive use, a drop in access to abortion, poor education and poverty." Other media reports blamed lack of career opportunities for the increase in U.S. fertility rates. But Earll thinks the media may be missing the real reasons behind the shift.
"What it says is, to a great degree, Americans are still pro-baby. They are pro-child, and they're having children," she points out. "And we think that also speaks to the resilient message of the pro-life movement -- that children are a good thing, they are blessing, and that we want to be having them.
In light of the negative reports, Earll warns media consumers to take any analysis of new statistics propagated by the mainstream media with a grain of salt. "You do need to take into consideration their political and ideological perspective," she maintains, "because that will have an impact on how they interpret the data."
I find this sentence from the story amazing and it just leaves me speechless and sad: Other media reports blamed lack of career opportunities for the increase in U.S. fertility rates.
Well, okay. A lot of thoughts go around in my head on this topic, but it's almost painful to think that I would need to point out that having children could actually be more fulfilling than a career and that I and thousands (millions???) of other mothers have not had children simply because we couldn't get a job. It just seems like something that is too obvious. Or is it just me?
Family Research Abstract of the Week:Blue Laws Not So Blue
State and local ordinances restricting commerce on Sunday were fairly widespread in America from colonial times until 1961. That's when the Supreme Court opened the door to constitutional challenges to "blue laws," after which most were repealed on merchants' claims that they imposed hardships on the public. But now comes a study by two noted economists that suggests rather than spreading a case of the blues, the secular fencing off of one day a week for worship, rest, and family yielded important social dividends.
Using datasets from the General Social Survey (GSS), Jonathan Gruber of MIT and Daniel M. Hungerman of Notre Dame found that the repeal of Sunday-closing laws in 16 representative states between 1955 and 1991 triggered "a very strong reduction" in the frequency of church attendance in those same states between 1973 and 1998. Then looking at data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey and state-by-state spending by congregations of four representative Protestant denominations between 1950 and 2000, they found that repeal triggered significant declines in giving to religious organizations, as well as in church budgets. Finally, looking at the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY), the economists found that repeal yielded increases in alcohol and illegal drug use among a cohort of young people, ages 14 to 21.
Quantifying the strong and "striking" correlation between blue laws and church attendance, their analysis found that the change in state laws reduced attendance by about five percent of the median, what they term a sizeable effect roughly one-third as large as the well-established higher rate of attendance among women relative to men. They also observed a downshift in attendance-frequency categories, including a 15 percent decline in GSS respondents claiming to attend church weekly and increases in those claiming rare attendance. In addition, the sizeable decline in giving amounted to a 13 percent reduction in giving by individuals, as well as a statistically significant 6.3 percent drop in per-member spending by congregations associated with the United Methodist Church, the Southern Baptist Convention, the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church, and the United Church of Christ.
Their analysis of the NLSY data, which tracks church attendance since 1979 and substance use between 1982 and 1994, found large and significant negative effects of repeal among church-attending youth that extend beyond a cut back in attendance. They found that church-going teens (relative to their peers that do not attend church) were 5.5 percent more likely to drink, which lowered the gap in heavy drinking between the religious and nonreligious youth by 50 percent. In addition, they were 11 percent more likely to use marijuana and 3.6 percent more likely to use cocaine, effects which closed the gaps completely in these behaviors between churched and unchurched youth.
Specification tests, which included controls for a state's socioeconomic characteristics and changes in other types of social participation, confirmed that these findings were not driven by declines in religiosity that may have been occurring before repeal or by declines in membership and giving to nonreligious organizations after repeal. So while opening the mall on Sunday might deliver short-term gains to the corporate bottom line, these findings offer hard evidence that the move to turn the Lord's Day into just another hectic day of buying and selling was not possible without a critical loss of social capital.
(Source: Jonathan Gruber and Daniel M. Hungerman, "The Church vs. the Mall: What Happens When Religion Faces Increased Secular Competition?" National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 12410, July 2006.)
Aug. 2, 2007 - The Freaky Origins of Christian Rock
I came across an article titled The Freaky Origins of Christian Rock. It is about the beginnings of Contemporary Christian Music (CCM). It was interesting to read where CCM has sprouted from. Kinda scary, actually.
I am a product of my teenage brother's and sister's music from the 70's. I was still in elementary school back then. With three teens in the house, there was constant music. My brothers and sister had a ton of albums and 8-tracks, and I listened right in with them. Name just about any song from the 70's and I will be able to sing at least a little bit of it. I remember sitting on my big brother's bed with my next oldest brother and little brother listening to our older brother's Cheech & Chong album. We laughed and laughed and laughed and listened to that album over and over. I'm sure we missed a lot of the "real" humor of the album, and I cringe when I think of the things, like this album, that I was exposed to at so young an age.
Moving on to the 80's and my own teenage years, I continued to be steeped in secular music. I listened AND taped Casey Kasem's Top 40 every Sunday afternoon, and the Top 100 Countdown on New Year's Day. I watched Solid Gold, American Bandstand, MTV and Entertainment Tonight. I lived and breathed the stuff. Again, name a song, and I can probably sing it for you. My husband makes fun of me because I can sing along with the muszak at the grocery store. What can I say.....it's a special gift?????
When our first son was born, I found I didn't have the heart to listen to secular music anymore. It just seemed wrong to expose him to the lyrics, music and culture that could bring nothing to him. I segued into CCM, but have become increasingly disillusioned with this music and it's representatives. Take a look at the band Kutless. If you didn't know any better, you would look at those boys and probably label them as a secular band. I mean, they look just like one. Look at the band Stellar Kart. Ugh. I cringe looking at those boys. I'm sure they're very sweet and all, but what are they doing that is any different than a secular band? Both of these bands are opening in the Newsboys current tour. I mean, it LOOKS as if they are trying to emulate the secular bands. Their music sounds like a secular band, they look like a secular band. They've just changed up their lyrics to mention God. Is that it???? Is that all they have to give? They look like the rest of the chaff.
I have no desire for my children to try to emulate a bunch of boys and girls who can think of nothing better to do than to emulate secular bands in everything but their lyrics. Aren't we called to be set apart? And yes, there are other CCM artists who don't look quite as scary as the boys in the above-mentioned bands do. I understand that. But in so many ways, if you look into their lives, and the award shows they all attend, again, it seems like more imitations of the ways of the world. One evening, I tuned into the Dove Awards and was shocked and amazed to see dancers in scanty costumes dancing around the stage to a Christian song. I've never watched it again. It was just too much.
So....I will not encourage my children to listen to CCM. I feel as if I have no choice.
A lot of people talk about how homeschooling is so kewl because they, the parent, are getting a second chance at an education they never had. I second that wholeheartedly! What was it about nouns and adverbs that couldn't be absorbed into my poor head back in......ummmmm........I barely even remember what grades I studied grammar, but you know what I mean. ;-)
While we are learning academics along with our kids, my Husband and I are learning a few other things as well. One of the least flattering would be our attitude towards certain kids. And the amazing thing, is that this attitude is really only towards kids, not adults. I'm embarrassed to admit it........
Okay. My son has this friend. Sweet, sweet, SWEET boy! Really, there can never be any complaints about this boy's behavior at all. He's just a good kid. But you know, if we were in public school, this kid would be an outcast. He's sweet, he's just not COOL. My husband and I have discovered that we still have the leftovers of our Public School Personality Files in which we place the friends of our kids, or really, any kid that happens across our paths as we navigate through life. Ugh. We are thankful that it doesn't seem as if our kids have picked up on this nasty habit so far.....but then I think to myself, "Does that mean that MY son is uncool, and that's why he has this friend?????" How pathetic and UNCOOL is that? Lots to work on and pray through - it's LITERALLY not all about academics, eh?
A pastor at our church sent a link to this YouTube video featuring Neil Postman in 1995. Neil is the guy who wrote Amusing Ourselves to Death. It's a short, 10 minute interview in which he discusses the potential impact that Cyberspace could have on our culture. As I wrote, this was 1995. You will be amazed at how much he predicted has come true, and provoked to thought as he asks, "What problem does this technology solve?" and "Is it MY problem?" and "If not, what is the purpose of this technology? Am I using the technology, or is it using me?"
I think it's something to seriously consider as we fight worldliness from grabbing hold of our children. As you know from my earlier post, I love my iPod! We have two computers in our home, plus a laptop that we use whenever the mood strikes, cell phones, an MP3 player, digital cameras, blah, blah, blah. I have consistently been amazed at the draw all this technology has on our children. They're like moths to the flame. After all, my husband's cell phone has those cheesy Pac-Man and Basketball games on it, and the kids all love to talk to people on the cell phone. Computers have games which they would spend hours and hours playing if my husband and I would let them. First Son listens to the iPod while mowing, and all the kids love taking turns with the digital camera. There's just so much that sometimes to me, who grew up in the 70's/80's, it seems as if I could easily slip into sensory overload.
This month we have turned off the t.v. in our house and already limit computer games and other technology, and in just the six days that we have experienced with no t.v., my husband and I are amazed at how the kids are interacting so much more with each other. And we limited t.v. to the weekends! As Neil Postman indicated in his interview, technology can isolate people....bring about a life dedicated to individual pursuits, which of course leads to selfish, me-first attitudes. We all struggle with this problem without technology. For me, Neil's interview is a great reminder to be careful as we implement technology into our homes and guard the hearts of our children.
That's the title of a sermon delivered by John MacArthur. James Dobson featured this sermon on his show last week. My husband and I just got the chance to sit down and listen to it tonight, and man, it's a heavy talk, and had us both speechless. Here is the blurb about it:
The Bible records that, "because the Israelites forsook God and no longer served Him, He became angry with them. He sold them into the hands of the Philistines and the Amorites, who that year shattered and crushed them." Is modern-day America, which has forsaken godly principles in favor of rampant immorality, in danger of similar judgement? Will God abandon our nation as He did with Israel? He already has, says the Rev. John MacArthur. Well-known pastor and theologian makes a strong biblical case for his dramatic assertion. This thought-provoking message should move believers to pray for revival in our nation as never before.
"One of the most tragic scenes in the Bible ... is the scene of the strongest man who ever lived, a man by the name of Samson, finding out he had no strength ... He said, 'I will go out as at other times and shake myself free [of the Philistines].' ... But he did not know that the Lord had departed from him. So the Philistines seized him." -- Rev. John MacArthur
Definitely take the time to listen if you can. Go HERE for Part 1, and HERE for Part 2. If for some reason you can't listen, you can find a transcript of the message HERE.
I got this link from a pastor at our church. It's an op-ed piece written by Peggy Noonan about how we're scaring our kids. What she wrote is so right. I know people who have the t.v. going constantly in the evening. How much can our kids take?
When our oldest was five, we also had a two year old and a newborn. After a long day, I enjoyed sitting down and watching the 30 minute news program. It was relaxing to me, and I didn't really think the kids were paying attention. I don't really remember tuning in Walter Cronkite when my parents watched him, but I may have listened more than I remember, I don't know. Anyway, our son started having nightmares and being generally worried about life in general. My husband and I were starting to wonder what was wrong with the boy when I read an article that said that our young ones should not be exposed to the news until they are 11 or 12ish. So I stopped watching the news, and First Son began to relax and the bad dreams went away.
Since then, we have sheltered our kids like nobody's business. Our kids do not watch Saturday morning cartoons, a huge majority of movies that come out that LOOK LIKE kids movies, the news, magazines, newspapers, and they are not allowed to listen to the radio. And ya know what? Our kids are happy. They enjoy their days, and I'm glad that my daughter is not all wrapped up in looking like the latest American Idol contestant. Who thinks that American Idol is family-friendly???? First Son was told by a friend in the neighborhood that he liked playing with him because unlike the 11 year olds in his public school, First Son did not act "all cool." There is really something to be said from sheltering our children from our very worldly popular culture. As our pastor wrote in his email, it is so important to preserve the naivete and innocence of our children. Why should we be embarrassed that our children are labeled "innocent", "naive", or "sheltered?" Shouldn't we be glad when our kids don't understand jokes that are off-color?
Romans 16:19 says, "For the report of your obedience has reached all; therefore I am rejoicing over you, but I want you to be wise in what is good, and innocent in what is evil."
These are the things from which we do not shelter our children:
1) Life doesn't end when we die. There's more to come, and they have a choice to make about what happens after this life. They can either spend it in Heaven with God, or in Hell apart from God forever.
2) There are Christians in the world who die for Christ. They are tortured, ridiculed and killed because they believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. We regularly read our kids stories about martyrs for the faith. We talk about it. We pray for those who are suffering today. You may think this is just an adult problem, but what about the children whose parents are killed? I would guess that it is certainly an issue for them.
hsmomof2 also wrote a post about how we scare our kids with global warming info. Her blog entry, plus the article from our pastor, really got me going. I pray that we would all protect our kid's innocence. They are so precious. I like what Peggy Noonan wrote:
"[Our kids] need a stable platform on which to stand. From it they will be likely to step forward into steady adulthood. Without it, they will struggle; they will be less daring in their lives because life, they know, is frightful and discouraging."
Trying to be the perfect Mom is so very humbling because I am so far from perfect. I have so many areas to work on in my own life so that I can be an effective Mom to my own four children. With this blog, I plan to share my struggles and victories and hope to hear from you about your own so we can encourage one another!
The link above is to my store where there are titles that have encouraged me as a parent or that we have read together during our Family Read-Aloud time in the evenings and were a huge hit with everyone. I hope you can find something intriguing for yourself and your family from our list of favorites.
.gif)
