The recent outcry over the TSA giving two equally offensive options to travellers — a revealing full body scan or a full body intrusive groping — will inevitably result in an outcry and backlash from flight crews and frequent flyers. I think there might be an interesting lawsuit in the making, too. The TSA claims the groping is done by agents of the same gender of the person being searched. Will they also certify that 100% of those doing the pat-downs are heterosexual? I mean, it seems that the logical reason for assigning agents of the same gender as the person being searched is to avoid claims of sexual assault by TSA agents… they don't want it to appear that, for example, a male TSA agent is feeling up a pretty young woman. Can they, will they, therefore certify that the FEMALE TSA agent is not a lesbian enjoying the process a bit too much? The conundrum is that they are probably legally forbidden from disclosing the sexual preference of a TSA agent, or even asking about it, so… Class action lawsuit(s) ahead? In the words of a great conservo-American, "You betcha."
11.13.2010
11.03.2010
A missionary in a foreign culture
Allow me to introduce myself. I am a missionary in a foreign culture.
Oh, I don't mean Hawaii as a location so much. We came to these islands about 30 years ago, burned out bridges to Alabama and adopted this place as home. I love it here. I don't mean I love the sun, sand and surf (those are nice extras) -- I mean I love the people of Hawaii and the place. I have failed and succeeded here, reared our children here, developed deep life-long friendships here and have invested our lives here. This is home, and these people are my people.
But the culture is still, in many ways, very foreign to me, and the election results last night pointed it out once again.
This week in my Fuller Seminary class we are dealing with living as if we are missionaries in a foreign place, and in our REUNION Church Leadership Meeting last night we talked about what that might look like in real terms, to live our lives as if we are missionaries in whatever context we work. We are looking for the natural bridges between those in the church and those in the community in which the church exists, the way an American Missionary to Nepal might do.
2 hours after that meeting I found myself experiencing a teachable moment when the election results from Hawaii came in. The young, attractive, nice guy, born-again Catholic, family-values, church-friendly, former judge, Lt. Governor, Republican candidate for Governor, Duke Aiona, was defeated by 17% by a 72-year-old, ultra-liberal, forner campus radical who favors same-sex marriage, abortion on demand and pretty much every position I find anathema. There are enough evangelical Christian voters in Hawaii to have easily elected Aiona, which tells me that many of them cast a vote for Neil Abercrombie because he has a (D) after his name, despite his moral views that hey might find repugnant. They voted on financial issues (citing the school furloughs) which are temporary, rather than on moral issues, which are eternal. That absolutely astounds me, and reminds me that in this culture I am a stranger, an alien, a foreigner… a missionary.
1st Peter 2:11 (NLT) reminds me, once again that we are merely "temporary residents and foreigners" -- missionaries in a foreign culture.
11.02.2010
11.01.2010
Is It True That “1 in 10 Teens Has Had a Same-Sex Partner”? – Kevin DeYoung
Be suspicious of statistics, especially those that seem too good or too bad or too surprising to be true.
You may have seen this amazing news headline: 1 in 10 Teens Has Had a Same-Sex Partner. The story on AOL Health begins this way:
Nearly one in ten teens has had a same-sex partner — double what previous research has shown, according to a surprising new study.
The latest findings, published in the journal Pediatrics, reveal that 9.3 percent of teenagers say they have had at least one partner who is the same sex as they are.
That’s about twice as many as indicated in a 2002 study of Massachusetts and Vermont teens showing 5 to 6 percent of teenagers had had same-sex partners.
“I don’t know that it means there’s an increase in prevalence,” said Massachusetts psychiatrist Dr. Daniel Carlat, AOL Health’s mental health expert. “As homosexuality has become more and more accepted in society, people are more willing to acknowledge their sexuality than they used to be.”
Wow! Who knew? 1 in 10 American teenagers has had a same-sex partner?! That’s really terrible/terrific (depending on your point of view). What a revelation!
The only problem with this revelation is that it’s false. If the reporter for AOL had taken time to read just the abstract for the Pediatrics article she may have seen the heading “CONCLUSIONS” (in all caps) and noted this summary:
Of sexually active adolescents, 9.3% reported a same-sex partner, a higher estimate than other published rates.
AOL speaks of 1 in 10 teens; the original article concludes 9.3% of sexually active adolescents reported a same-sex partner. There’s a big difference. The survey analyzed data from 17,220 teenagers. Of those, 7,261 (or 42%) reported having had sex. So according this study 58% of teens are not having sex with anyone and 9.3% of those have, had same-sex partners, or 3.9% of the total sample.
There are other reasons to be suspicious of the headline. For starters, as AOL reports later in the article: “The new research analyzed data from 17,220 teenagers in New York City who filled out public health surveys” (emphasis mine). The whole Pediatric article is not available online so I can’t comment on the ins and outs of the methodology. But I have to believe that a study dealing with “teens in New York City who fill out public health surveys” is going to yield some different results than, say, teens in Dallas or Atlanta or Sioux Falls.
And then there’s the disturbing information, which the AOL article also reports, that “About a third of teen boys who had bisexual experiences said they’d had forced sex, compared to 6 percent of boys who reported having only heterosexual experiences.” Later the article says that 36% of girls with bisexual experiences and 35% of boys with bisexual experiences endured some kind of “dating violence” in the past year. So, at the very least, a good chunk of the teens with a “same-sex partner” were forced into this experience. Indeed, the journal abstract concludes: “Adolescents with both-sex partners reported a marked prevalence of dating violence and forced sex.”
The lesson in all this is, once again, to be wary of dubious data. It is not true that 1 in 10 teens have had a same-sex partner. What’s true is that around 4% of teens in New York who filled out a public health survey reported a same-sex experience, and that a not insignificant number of those experiences were forced in some way.
Don’t believe everything you hear.
Be careful how you read and interpret statistics, especially in popular media; sometimes there is a reporting agenda, and more often there is just sloppy reporting or the inability of the reporter to ask the hard questions
10.26.2010
Be smart, Hawaii - look FORWARD!
It's one week before the critical election in Hawaii, an election in which the voters of my wonderful state will make a choice of a future-forward outlook or the plantation politics of the past.
The winds of political change are really roaring across America and the agenda of the current Presidential Administration and the current Congress is being soundly repudiated and rejected by the electorate. People who had never been involved in politics and had never attended any kind of rally or protest took to the streets by the hundreds of thousands to raise their voices in protest. They were largely discounted by the national media because the crowds were mostly white, mostly middle-aged and older, mostly conservative, mostly Christian, mostly middle-class -- the people nobody ever expected to organize and protest. Every major poll suggests that the liberal/left control of Congress has hit a brick wall and will come to an abrupt end on election day. The Republicans are about to gain decisive control of the House of Representatives, and might gain control of the Senate. If Hawaii is to have an effective presence and voice in Congress for the next two years, it is important that we send to Congress some representatives of the party in power. If we vote along plantation party of the past lines and send Democrats to Washington we will spend the next two years out of sync with every piece of major policy shift about to happen, and will see Hawaii out of the loop. Get smart, Hawaii. Pick a winner from the team that is about to sweep the championship!
The winds of political change are really roaring across America and the agenda of the current Presidential Administration and the current Congress is being soundly repudiated and rejected by the electorate. People who had never been involved in politics and had never attended any kind of rally or protest took to the streets by the hundreds of thousands to raise their voices in protest. They were largely discounted by the national media because the crowds were mostly white, mostly middle-aged and older, mostly conservative, mostly Christian, mostly middle-class -- the people nobody ever expected to organize and protest. Every major poll suggests that the liberal/left control of Congress has hit a brick wall and will come to an abrupt end on election day. The Republicans are about to gain decisive control of the House of Representatives, and might gain control of the Senate. If Hawaii is to have an effective presence and voice in Congress for the next two years, it is important that we send to Congress some representatives of the party in power. If we vote along plantation party of the past lines and send Democrats to Washington we will spend the next two years out of sync with every piece of major policy shift about to happen, and will see Hawaii out of the loop. Get smart, Hawaii. Pick a winner from the team that is about to sweep the championship!
10.13.2010
To my voting friends in Hawaii
Let's start with the requisite disclaimer: As a pastor and church leader I make it a point to see that my church never endorses candidates or takes partisan sides in elections.We never tell anyone who to vote for. It's important that I make that clear; I write this as a private citizen stating my personal views.
This looks like a really tight election season here in Hawaii. In the race for Governor there could hardly be a clearer choice. On the one hand, the Democrats have a classic old-school liberal/progressive ticket with Neil Abercrombie and Brian Schatz. They are far to the left of me on every social issue -- Abercrombie is pro-choice, and has voted against a ban on partial birth abortion. He voted with the interests of NARAL and Planned Parenthood 100% between 2000-2006. His voting record is supported by the American Civil Liberties Union, which is another way of saying he usually takes the side of the isue I find outrageously liberal. Athough he is a very healthy man, he is still 72 years old. I am not really sure a 72-year-old who has lived the past 20 years primarily in Washington, D.C. has his finger on the pulse of Hawaii's issues, and I am really sure he has missed the decided shift to the right we who live every day here have witnessed.
I never vote for (or against) a candidate because of race or ethnicity, but I really think the current Democratic ticket is a disaster in the way of balance… I speak as a haole here: two white males doesn't exactly suggest the diversity of Hawaii I see in my community, my church and my circle of friends.
On the other hand, the Republicans have a strong ticket led by a youthful Kanaka Maoli with a great personality, great intellect, and deep roots in the community. Duke Aiona is on the right side (pun intended) of the issues I think are of critical importance to Christian conservatives in Hawaii. His Lt. Governor running mate, Lynn Finnegan, is sharp and -- together -- they make an attractive, electable team that reflects the Hawaii I see all around me.
The Djou–Hanabusa race is another really clear left/right, liberal/conservative choice, and the national Democrats have been slinging a lot of mud around trying to discredit a really nice guy, Charles Djou. I really hope he holds and increases his lead and keeps his job.
In my area (Kaneohe - 48th District) I support a Democrat, Ken Ito. He has served this community well for 16 years and has been responsive to the voice of his constituents. When I have contacted him in the past urging him to support positions he has been responsive and his votes have reflected my views more often than not.
So those are my personal choices in key races -- Aiona, Djou & Ito.
10.12.2010
The tools keep getting better!
I am writing this note on my iPhone using the FREE Posterous app. It will turn this into a Twitter update & also update my Facebook status. One app to rule them all.
8.17.2010
7.08.2010
Connect with my church on Facebook
<!-- Facebook Badge START -->REUNION Hawaii<br/>
<br/>Promote Your Page Too<!-- Facebook Badge END -->
7.07.2010
If ever, NOW!
As a pastor and church leader I make it a point to see that my church never endorses candidates or takes partisan sides in elections. We certainly encourage our people to vote and participate in the political process, but we never tell anyone WHO to vote for. I wanted to make that clear, so that what I say next is clearly understood to be my personal view as a citizen, completely apart from my role as a pastor. If ever Hawaii needed to wake up and be sure we elect the right person as our next Governor, that time is NOW. There are three major front-runners in the race… Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann, former U.S. Representative Neil Abercrombie, and Lt. Governor James "Duke" Aiona.
I like Mufi, generally. He is smart, often church-friendly, and — other than being a Democrat — is someone I could find marginally acceptable. He is tap-dancing around the issue of same-sex marriage a bit. Mufi is LDS (Mormon) and the LDS church has been very active in the fight against legalizing and legitimizing same-sex marriage, but Mufi has yet to come out with a strong traditional marriage only position for fear of alienating his Democrat voter base. Neil? Mr. Abercrombie is your basic classic, ACLU 60s radical leftwing liberal. He lists his religious preference as Non-denominational Protestant, but every position he takes on matters of morality is the opposite of my own, so I am not quite sure what brand of protestantism he means. I think I'd prefer almost anyone over Neil for Governor, but he is a frontrunner. The Democratic Party has anointed him as their choice and he is getting the endorsements of the usual suspects. Thanks, but no thanks.
I like Mufi, generally. He is smart, often church-friendly, and — other than being a Democrat — is someone I could find marginally acceptable. He is tap-dancing around the issue of same-sex marriage a bit. Mufi is LDS (Mormon) and the LDS church has been very active in the fight against legalizing and legitimizing same-sex marriage, but Mufi has yet to come out with a strong traditional marriage only position for fear of alienating his Democrat voter base. Neil? Mr. Abercrombie is your basic classic, ACLU 60s radical leftwing liberal. He lists his religious preference as Non-denominational Protestant, but every position he takes on matters of morality is the opposite of my own, so I am not quite sure what brand of protestantism he means. I think I'd prefer almost anyone over Neil for Governor, but he is a frontrunner. The Democratic Party has anointed him as their choice and he is getting the endorsements of the usual suspects. Thanks, but no thanks.
Which brings us to Duke. Lt. Governor Aiona is a born-again Catholic believer. Of the three major candidates he is the only one who is decisively on the side of righteousness in the matter of same-sex marriage. I have personal confidence that he will push for a public referendum on the issue over further legislative action, and -- if the legislature does take the matter up again -- he would certainly veto it.
For that reason, among others, I will be voting for Duke Aiona for Governor of Hawaii and hope all my friends will do the same.
"But... I was BORN this way!"
The debate over nature vs nurture in the matter of same-sex marriage keeps coming up. The argument goes like this: you can't hold it against me that I am attracted to people of the same gender… I believe i was BORN this way, so it is just how I am wired!" The science on this matter is inconclusive, at best, and confusing, at worst. Battling experts make claims refuted by the studies of others.
For the sake of discussion let me work from the assumption (flawed, in my view) that some people are born with a propensity to be attracted to members of their same gender. An aside is necessary at this point: since some people seem to drift in and out of gayness (Anne Heche, former partner of Ellen DeGeneres seems to be a classic example) and some people in prison become "gay for the stay" it is obvious that no such blanket pronouncement that "all gays are born that way" can be made. A second disclaimer: I frequently hear "who would willingly CHOOSE to be gay when it means being rejected by family and disdained by society?" -- you can understand why the straight world sees that argument is specious during Gay Pride Week. There is no "Gay Shame Week" or "Please help me, I hate being this way week." Gay Pride Week is a time when the most outrageous, flamboyant, in-your-face aspects of the gay lifestyle are celebrated and paraded, so, yeah, it looks a lot like a choice to most people despite the coy denials. (But, I digress…) So, the argument goes, since gays are born that way, society should not only tolerate, but celebrate that difference, and remove all legal constraints and silence any voice that disagrees. Let's follow that logic to its natural conclusion. I am a 60-year-old man. I was probably born with a natural propensity to be attracted to beautiful 18-year-old girls. But I have been married for 39 years to a lovely woman who is no longer 18, but in her late 50s. I am able to keep my propensity for young hard-bodies firmly under control and focus my affections on my wife. If we buy the "I was born this way" argument, what are we to do with those who swear they were born with a natural attraction to children? After all, they can't help it… they were BORN that way.
For the sake of discussion let me work from the assumption (flawed, in my view) that some people are born with a propensity to be attracted to members of their same gender. An aside is necessary at this point: since some people seem to drift in and out of gayness (Anne Heche, former partner of Ellen DeGeneres seems to be a classic example) and some people in prison become "gay for the stay" it is obvious that no such blanket pronouncement that "all gays are born that way" can be made. A second disclaimer: I frequently hear "who would willingly CHOOSE to be gay when it means being rejected by family and disdained by society?" -- you can understand why the straight world sees that argument is specious during Gay Pride Week. There is no "Gay Shame Week" or "Please help me, I hate being this way week." Gay Pride Week is a time when the most outrageous, flamboyant, in-your-face aspects of the gay lifestyle are celebrated and paraded, so, yeah, it looks a lot like a choice to most people despite the coy denials. (But, I digress…) So, the argument goes, since gays are born that way, society should not only tolerate, but celebrate that difference, and remove all legal constraints and silence any voice that disagrees. Let's follow that logic to its natural conclusion. I am a 60-year-old man. I was probably born with a natural propensity to be attracted to beautiful 18-year-old girls. But I have been married for 39 years to a lovely woman who is no longer 18, but in her late 50s. I am able to keep my propensity for young hard-bodies firmly under control and focus my affections on my wife. If we buy the "I was born this way" argument, what are we to do with those who swear they were born with a natural attraction to children? After all, they can't help it… they were BORN that way.
7.06.2010
Lingle's veto - my thoughts
There's a way of life that looks harmless enough;
look again—it leads straight to hell.
Sure, those people appear to be having a good time,
but all that laughter will end in heartbreak.
look again—it leads straight to hell.
Sure, those people appear to be having a good time,
but all that laughter will end in heartbreak.
Proberbs 14:12-13 (The Message)
I am old enough, at 60, to have a bit of perspective on issues that the passionate young often lack. I hear people saying that the issue of same-gender marriage, or the exact equivalent by another name, is a civil rights issue. I can understand that argument to an extent — I honestly can… but it is really not that simple.
Everyone who has deeply held core beliefs bases them on something. (Read the first few chapters of Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis) For me, and historically in America, our shared fundamental values have flowed from the Judeo-Christian understanding of moral values. Even though we try to be tolerant of those who base theirs on something else, the strength of America has been built upon our mutually shared understanding that it is important for society to express a public morality that transcends religion: regardless of faith, we have a public morality that seeks to discourage public intoxication, while allowing the private consumption of alcohol. We recognize that married people sometimes cheat on their spouses, but we heap upon those who commit adultery appropriate shame. We know, as a society, that we can never completely eliminate the use of recreational narcotics, yet we, as a society, continue to maintain laws against such use, and express our displeasure toward those who indulge. In other words, we, as a society have always legislated matters of morality as perceived by the majority.
Homosexuality is one of those public morality issues. I don't really care what any two consenting adults want to do with each other, or to one another in private. I have some pretty definite opinions about the morality of such behavior, but I recognize that private behavior is impossible to control. In the early days of the so-called "gay rights" movement, the cry was for an end to active persecution of homosexuals. The Stonewall riots in NYC took place the year I graduated from high school. They were a reaction to police raids on a gay gathering spot.
Gays of the 60s said "Just leave us alone and we'll be happy. That's all we want, is just to be left alone!" That was a position most people found reasonable: leave them alone. But, once left alone (at least somewhat) and given tacit permission of the greater society to gather in private, the progression began…
From "leave us alone", to
Accept us for who we are, to
Celebrate us!, to
Remove every legal difference between us the rest of society.
It was at the "celebrate us" stage that the push back began. The overwhelming majority of Americans find homosexuality repugnant, as evidenced in referendum after referendum. They may be willing to look the other way and give tacit approval to private conduct they find deviant, but they are unwilling to applaud that behavior or celebrate it.
So now we have reached the stage of gay demands to be afforded all the rights and privileges of their straight neighbors, and they can't understand why everyone is not on board. It is because we, as a society still reserve the right to legislate a common civic morality. Yes, it is at its root faith-based, but it far transcends people of faith. Agnostics, atheists and people of faith share the understanding that there are things about which society takes a civic morality stance and says "this far, and no further."
The proponents of moving toward same-sex relationship acceptance never want the matter to be decided by the people; they aways try to end-run the civic morality views of the community by attempting to utilize activist judges or liberal-Democrat-dominated legislatures to overrule the clearly expressed will of the people.
The canard most often used is, "Well, if the issue of SLAVERY had been put to a popular vote in the 1860s we would still have slaves today!" The obvious — laughable — flaw in that emotional argument is that if we had voted on slavery in the 1860s the slaves would have had no vote and no voice, but this is not slavery, and it is not 1860: it is 2010, and if we hold yet another referendum on whether to override our sense of common civic morality and elevate gay relationships to the equal position of straight relationships, the gay people will have the same right to vote as I have.
The outcome will be the same as every public referendum on the subject. People don't care so much about private, consensual activity, but they prefer a common civic morality that attaches disapproval to gay relationships.
6.28.2010
TEDTalks (video) - Derek Sivers: Weird, or just different? - Derek Sivers (2009)
Check out this episode of TEDTalks (video) at Derek Sivers: Weird, or just different? - Derek Sivers (2009) - http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TEDTalks_video/~3/u7p6qmHV1s0/755
Sent from my iPad
Sent from my iPad
5.03.2010
Strike up Ruffles and Flourishes! GOAL!
This morning I achieved my goal weight of 180 pounds.
(He pauses, waiting for the cheers of the crowd to die sown…)
I am very happy to have attained this goal, and hope to keep losing; I'm setting modest incremental goals, so I think I will go for 175 and see how that works.5.01.2010
4.30.2010
4.29.2010
Hawaii Voters – Please remember in November
Here are the people who need to file for unemployment. They are the members of the Hawaii House of Representatives who ignored the expressed will of the electorate and pulled a Pearl Harbor style sneak attack in the final hours of the Legislative Session, Passing HB444, the Civil Unions bill. Keep this list handy. If any of these people are from your area, please vote for anyone with a pulse who runs against them.
| Della Au Belatti 25th Representative District Hawaii State Capitol, Room 331 415 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 Phone 808-586-9425; fax 808-586-9431 |
|
| |
| Lyla B. Berg 18th Representative District Hawaii State Capitol, Room 324 415 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 Phone 808-586-6510; fax 808-586-6511 |
|
| |
| Joe Bertram, III 11th Representative District Hawaii State Capitol, Room 311 415 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 phone 808-586-8525; fax 808-586-8529 From Maui, toll free 984-2400 + 68525 |
|
| |
| Tom Brower 23rd Representative District Hawaii State Capitol, Room 315 415 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 phone 808-586-8520; fax 808-586-8524 E-mail repbrower@Capitol.hawaii.gov |
|
| |
| Rida Cabanilla 42nd Representative District Hawaii State Capitol, Room 442 415 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 phone 808-586-6080; fax 808-586-6081 |
|
| |
| Mele Carroll 13th Representative District Hawaii State Capitol, Room 405 415 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 Phone 808-586-6790; fax 808-586-6779 From Maui, toll free 984-2400 + 66790 From Molokai and Lanai, toll free 1-800-468-4644 + 66790 |
|
| |
| Pono Chong 49th Representative District Hawaii State Capitol, Room 404 415 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 phone 808-586-9490; fax 808-586-9496 E-mail repchong@Capitol.hawaii.gov |
|
| |
| Denny Coffman 6th Representative District Hawaii State Capitol, Room 317 415 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 phone 808-586-9605; fax 808-586-9608 |
|
| |
| Faye P. Hanohano 4th Representative District Hawaii State Capitol, Room 303 415 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 phone 808-586-6530; fax 808-586-6531 From the Big Island, toll free 974-4000 + 66530 |
|
| |
| Robert N. Herkes 5th Representative District Hawaii State Capitol, Room 320 415 South Beretania Street Honolulu, HI 96813 phone 808-586-8400; fax 808-586-8404 From the Big Island, toll free 974-4000 + 68400 E-mail repherkes@Capitol.hawaii.gov |
|
| |
| Jon Riki Karamatsu 41st Representative District |
4.27.2010
Turning 11, Pushing 60
Today is April 27, 2010 -- a milestone day for my Compassion sponsored child, Felma. I sent her Birthday Cards weeks ago, and arranged for a gift to be purchased for her, but I wish I could be in Davao to sing "Happy Birthday" to her and give her a hug.
She's an adorable kid. I told people that I thought I won the sponsored child lottery when I met her. I pray for her often, think of her often, and have incredible hopes and dreams for her future. She is young, and poor, and has no easy access to a computer or internet access. It is unlikely that she will see this, at least any time soon. But when she is released from poverty, educated and financially secure, she may have her own computer and she may be able to discover this post from her past. I want her to know that her sponsor loved her, worried about her welfare, and supported her dreams.
Happy Birthday, dear Felma. May your 11th year be your best year so far. I have her birthday on my mind as I ponder my own pending birthday. On May 19 I will turn 60. Sixty. SIX-OH. It sounds implausible… impossible to me that I will be sixty in three weeks. I don't feel sixty, but when I look in the mirror I see a face staring back at me that I hardly recognize. Sixty. In three weeks. Wow.4.25.2010
2 Pounds to go!
The goal is in sight... so very close. Just two more pounds til I hit my 180 target! You can do it, too.
Almost there!
My goal was to lose down to 180, and I am only 2.4 pounds from reaching that goal! Once I hit it, I'll set a new goal of 170-175 range. I feel better without lugging around basically the weight of a heavy bowling ball, most of which was in my gut.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)