• Blog Categories

  • del.icio.us links

  • Advertisements

Old Blog Posts September 11, 2006

Subject D.A.R.E To Keep Parents off Drugs
Posted Date: September 11, 2006 – Monday – 11:35 AM
Wow, we are all getting older, every one. Do you realize Kurt Cobain would be turning 40 in a few months if Courtney hadn’t killed him? (that was a joke, Love, so don’t try to sue me). GenX Poster Child, if there ever was one, Kurt might have been loosing his hair and gaining a pot belly if he’d been able to kick the smack (oh yeah, and get help for his cronic depression).

A recent report shows drug use has increased in the over 50 age range for the third year in a row. Although 18-25 year olds still do most of the dope, your Mom or Dad might be sneaking out on the patio for a midnight toke.

Interestingly enough, powers that be don’t seem too concerned with all the old people doing lines and smoking crack. “…they don’t have great influence on younger Americans, Walters said that teens are more influenced by peers.” Thanks, Walters and the PI, nice to know old people don’t matter.

Drug use among minors is a problem, and it’s dropping for the youngest age group, thank goodness. But I remember this old Onion t-shirt; It had a fake headline that read “Drugs Win Drug War”. (they always did have a rather nasty sense of humor.)

As America moves from one expensive, virtually unwinnable war to another, it’s got to ask itself, “While grandma on crank is way not cool, perhaps it’s time to regulate marijuana use among adults instead of criminalizing it?” And, the money saved could go to cracking down on drugs like crack and meth; both of which are devestating this country’s poorest communities. Pot might all but cease to be a “gateway drug” if reasonable limits on its use were made. And the numbers will look way better for the older crowd. I can attest to this; I saw the Steve Miller Band this weekend at Bumbershoot.
[Edit] [Delete] [View Comments]
Subject Coerced Statements and Secret Evidence
Posted Date: September 8, 2006 – Friday – 5:42 AM
Guys, this is BAD. Although Bush has admitted to secret CIA prisons (you know, the ones where they tortured detainees and violated the Geneva Convention in numerous ways), his main reason for doing it is to get Congress behind him.

“On Wednesday, Bush also called on Congress to immediately pass administration-drafted legislation under which those accused terrorists could be tried; the proposal would allow for the use of coerced statements and secret evidence.”

IE: they want to force people to confess to the crimes they think they did. If you are charged as a terrorist (not convicted, just charged), then you can be made to confess, even in the confession is tortured out of you. Then, that confession can legally be used as evidence against you.

Next, they want to charge people for crimes without disclosing the evidence for those crimes. In other words, you can be charged for a crime, but you are not allowed to see the evidence for that crime. So the question is, how can you defend yourself if you don’t know why you were charged? Does anybody else see the problem here? This violates the very concept of Justice.

This is not a “conservative” or a “liberal” thing. This is not a “republican” or a “democrat” thing. This is an American thing, a Constitution thing. Our founding fathers came from countries where forced confessions and secret evidence were standard, and they wrote the constitution to make sure this would never happen here. Well, it is happening, and it won’t be long before it applies to all citizens, not just “detainees”.

Here’s a thought experiment. Say someone put a bomb in your luggage; somehow tricking you into getting onto a plane with it. You could immediately be taken to Guantanamo Bay. A confession could be forced out you, using torture if necessary. Then, this forced confession would be used against you in a secret military court. Not only that, but further evidence would be reported to the court, but you would never see that evidence or get a chance to defend yourself against it.

Can you imagine a country were that is possible? I do…the USSR comes immediately to mind.

And here I go quoting the constitution again:

Amendment V:
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Amendment V1:
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.”

[Edit] [Delete] [View Comments]
Subject MySpace to sell mp3s from independent artists
Posted Date: September 4, 2006 – Monday – 11:30 AM
This is big news. MySpace is going to start selling music from artists signed up on the site. Microsoft is getting their Zoom network going, while iPod/iTunes dominates the music download industry; but sites like MySpace show us the future.

In one of the smartest and most encouraging moves I’ve seen lately, they will be releasing the music in the open mp3 format, which is highly portable and allows sharing, being interoperable with all PCs, most CDs and many DVDs, and most importantly all “iPods” out there. This is because the iPod is an mp3 player, although Tunes doesn’t SELL mp3s due to the studios.

Awesome…RIAA, meet your new business model.

[Edit] [Delete] [View Comments]
Subject Are you a member of a terrorist organization? Please answer Yes or No.
Posted Date: September 3, 2006 – Sunday – 10:52 AM

The five year anniversary of 9/11 is coming up, and the big question is, ”Are we any safer?”. I wish the question was, ”What are we willing to give up to be safe?”, but that’s another blog.

A friend of mine predicted that it would take about five years for TV, movies, and books to capitalize on our fascination with 9/11, because it would be unseemly to do it any sooner. To one degree or another, he was right. There has been a recent growth in releases dealing with 9/11, most recently ”United 93” and ”World Trace Center”. Due to gripes with the bad service and expense of movie theaters I haven’t seen either of these, but I’ll get them on Netflix as soon as they’re available.

When I’m interested in something, I’ll consume all the information on it I am capable of; and as the most pivotal historic moment of my life so far (bigger than the Berlin Wall coming down), 9/11 has passionately interested me. I still remember the first image of the second plane coming into the second tower, while the first was already burning. At that point everyone knew this was not an accident, it was an attack. As a close friend said immediately afterwards, it was an apocalypse.

And it changed us all. The entire world was affected, with impromptu memorials going up in all the major cities, in the US and elsewhere. People everywhere were grieving with us, and it was an amazing thing. Why does it take the worse things in the world to make us aware of the best things? But unfortunately, these things bring out the worse in us, as well. It didn’t take long for those same countries to be calling us all sorts of nasty things, for our unprovoked attack on Iraq. And for good reason, unfortunately.

From 9/11 on, this country has been aggressively manipulated by government and media, using threats of terrorism to advance its own agenda. I’m not making this claim lightly; the truth is there for anyone willing to look. The amazing thing to me is how much evidence there actually is; it’s blatant. Most who see what has happened comes to the same conclusion. This isn’t ”true” as in some biased, liberal ”Fahrenheit 911” sort of way. This is the truth in a bipartisan, objective way.

For us mere mortals, the 911 Commission provided the first details about that day. That this report happened at all is a miracle. In a tune by now all to familiar, the White House proclaimed that there would be no commission, that secrecy was of utmost importance. Nevertheless, it happened anyway, although the White House never supported it and constantly refused to divulge information, even when ordered by Congress! And then, after the commission was complete, it was edited by the military to remove any secret information. How much was edited is one of those secrets, of course.

Even in this watered down, officially stamped report, the facts were damning. The government and the FAA had acted ineptly, making a bad situation even worse. Additionally, there was ample evidence that 9/11 was going to happen well before it did, and this was known at the highest levels. Urgent emails lost, reports ignored; generally the government screwed the pooch every way it could.

For those who don’t want to read all the boring details, a documentary about the official report recently came out on DVD, called ”On Native Soil”. It’s approved by the families of the 9/11 victims, and it faithfully summarizes the events of that day. It’s a highly patriotic, very factual, and incredibly emotional documentary. A warning though; it contains graphic and disturbing images and statements.

Another excellent source of information about the war on terror, before and after, is the book ”Against All Enemies”, by Richard A. Clarke (shout-out to Ethan for the book loan). Clarke is a true Washington insider, advising Regan, Clinton, and both Bushes; he is certainly no raving hippie. Boy let me tell you, this book is SCARY. The problems hinted at in the 911 Commission Report are spelled out much more clearly here.

Infighting, ignorance, private agenda, computer problems, and general ineptness characterize the way our government is handling this situation, specifically the Executive Branch, the FBI, the CIA, and Homeland Security. Billions on Billions have been spent on the ”War on Terror”, and we are little safer for it. This was confirmed by 911 Commission in their latest report last year, although again they are much more politic about it. ( In an interesting intersection, Richard A. Clarke is featured in ”On Native Soil” as being the first official to apologize to the American public, a very healing thing for the families.)

As an aside, anyone remember Katrina? How ’bout those people stuck in New Orleans for days, with no running water or supplies? Everyone knows our government wasn’t able to handle a storm, of which it had at least 24 hour notice. What makes us think they could handle an even more unpredictable thing like a massive terrorist attack? What would the government do if they released smallpox in the middle of Los Angeles? If there is an answer to this, it is a secret answer and a bad answer, I assure you.

These are very real issues of utmost importance. I’m not saying we can ever be ”safe”; that probably only comes in death. But we can be SAFER; and we can have a government that works in our favor, as citizens. New advances in nuclear weapons and biotechnology are making new threats that need to be addressed in NEW WAYS, and even old threats should be treated similarly.

Making our country into something that most people do not hate would be a very good start. In order to not be completely negative, here are some things we could do that would actually help:

Transparency: In order to fight terrorism in all forms, this is absolutely essential. Truth, Justice, Accountability, Efficiency, Adaptability, all of these are dependent on Transparency. A government that is secretive runs a very real risk of becoming the new terror.

Decentralization: Centralized, hierarchal structures are easy to destroy, and should be avoided. As an analogy; if you take out a few floors you take out the entire building. Destroy some key parts of the system and the whole thing comes crashing down. We need to build critical infrastructure in a redundant, decentralized way, even if it’s harder and more expensive to do it that way.

Be Good: We must be a good citizen of the world. First off, most important, we must take special care not to be evil. This seems basic, but in the last five years we have broken a lot of international law, including the Geneva convention. So we’ve forgotten it. Secondly, we shouldn’t support evil. This should mean a lot less ”supporting” all around, because most countries do evil things. Next, and only next, can we begin to ”be good”. And by that I mean being reasonable, helpful, wise, and responsible. Essentially, we should demand of our government what it demands of us.


[Edit] [Delete] [View Comments]
Subject Most Beautiful Screensavers EVER
Posted Date: August 21, 2006 – Monday – 11:11 AM
OK, I never post about screensavers, but these just blew my mind. By far the prettiest ones I’ve ever seen; they have this organic, fractal quality to them. I was looking for information on Daren Aronosky’s new film “The Fountain”,and ran across these beautiful screensavers on the official site for the movie.

Aronosky hasn’t released a movie in six years, but his previous two movies, Pi and Requim for a Dream, are destined to be classics 90s American film.

In order to view the different versions, click on the little tab at the bottom of the page (the site defaults to the first one, but the 2nd and 4th are best, I think). Each screensaver can then be downloaded by clicking the link on that same little tab.

[Edit] [Delete] [View Comments]

Subject Kangaroo Courts and the USSA
Posted Date: October 3, 2006 – Tuesday – 2:03 PM
When I was younger, I read these rather cheesy books called “USSA”; in which was described a “Red Dawn” future, with Americans living in fear of their socialist government, trading bootleg Rock tapes and generally being subversive. But they were always afraid to be taken away by Secret Police and “disappeared”. The books were cheesy, but they scared the shit out of me. I thought about always being terrified you might be hauled off for no good reason, not allowed to defend yourself, tortured, and maybe never even be heard from again.

The books had a strong message, be glad you’re an American, Kid, ’cause it SUCKS in Russia! Extremely patriotic. And speaking of extremely patriotic, when I was a kid, we’d have these big group camping trips with kids from the the church. Very fun times, I remember them fondly. We used to do this stupid thing, called “Kangaroo Court”, but we thought it was a blast.

This completely nutty guy acting as “judge” would set up court,and starts hollering at everyone for “SILENCE!”. Which just made us yell louder than ever, of course. He’d bring out prisoners, maybe listen to their charges, then pronounce them guilty, making no sense but being really funny. Not necessarily in that order, either; If you were in his court, you were “GUILTY!” Didn’t matter if the charges didn’t make sense, you’d done it.

Everything decided before you even got there.

Of course, this was all in good fun, but it was also showing something basic. In order for there to be justice, every man must have the right to petition the courts for justice. You must also have the rights to hear the evidence against you, and the right to present further evidence of your innocence.

A very basic part of Western Law is this concept of “habeas corpus”, which is more strictly defined as “a legal instrument or writ by means of which detainees can seek release from unlawful imprisonment”. These days, it means putting someone in jail cannot reduce their access to basic human rights. Habeas corpus goes back to the 12th century; which is why it’s in Latin.

Even worse then being locked away would to be locked away and tortured. This is what a lot of people picture hell as…being at the mercy of sick freaks who can do whatever they want to you with no repercussions. (that was a joke…about the Latin.)

From the beloved wikipedia,

Torture in the Medieval Inquisition was used starting in 1252, although its use in Catholic countries was putatively forbidden by papal bull in 1816. Within that time frame, men of considerable means delighted in building their own torture chambers, quite literally kidnapping innocent citizens of low birth off the streets and subjecting them to procedures of their own invention, taking careful notes as to what techniques were more or less effective, and which body parts more or less receptive thereto [citation needed].

Isn’t that a picture to eat your corn flakes with, Middle America? Puke. I especially liked the “citation needed” part…let’s hear it for collective society.

This is an evil thing that America is doing,and we’re also putting ourselves in danger. If I could think of a better way of making MORE TERRORISTS, I certainly wouldn’t tell Bush. And even if we could somehow win this war on “terror”, think about what we’ve lost. As I’ve said before, “terror” can win in more ways than one, and I don’t yet see a possible win for us anywhere.

While I realize this Commission does not YET apply to U.S. Citizens, someday it might. And if that Day happens, welcome to the USSA.


Definition of Detainee: A person held in custody or confinement: a political detainee. )

The term Unlawful Combatant is in hot dispute. It appears to legally mean ” a belligerent civilian or spy.”, and they are not covered under the Geneva Convention.

Unlawful Combatants were first associated with terrorists by the Bush Administration. Terrorists have also been called “freedom fighters” by the Bush clan, until news of the massacres started to leak out. “citation needed”

Military Commission Act of 2006

From Amnesty International, Civil Rights violations in said Bill:

–secret detentions
— enforced disappearances
— the use of torture and other cruel and degrading treatment
— outrages of personal dignity including humiliating treatment
— denial of habeas rights
— indefinite detentions without charges or trials
— prolonged detentions incommunicado
— arbitrary detention
— unfair trial procedures

Amnesty Internationals Stop Torture Campaign:



The bill cites the Constitution for its authority. Could God make a rock so heavy, he couldn’t pick it up?

Interesting observation, related to the Inquisition…we’ve got a born-again Christian in the White House, and what does he start doing? Torturing people. Thank you. Point taken.

Could I tie the Bohemian Club into this somehow? Their owl is kid of weird.


When the Nazis came for the communists,

I remained silent;

I was not a communist.


When they locked up the social democrats,

I remained silent;

I was not a social democrat.


When they came for the trade unionists,

I did not speak out;

I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for me,

there was no one left to speak out.

Martin Niemölle

Variation of first stanza

Ironically, when the poem was recounted in the United States in the 1950s, the first stanza, referring to communists, was often omitted, due to the rise of McCarthyism and the Red Scare

if (person = terrorist) {
} else {

person = terrorist is an ASSIGNMENT operation, not a COMPARISON. very witty, from wired

[Edit] [Delete] [View Comments]
Subject All is not Waffles in Belgium
Posted Date: September 23, 2006 – Saturday – 1:21 PM
In a stunningly stupid move, a Belgium court has ruled that Google must not display snippets from any Belgian, French or German.news sources without explicity asking their permission. The reason for this is that Google “stole traffic from individual newspapers’ sites.”

There are two reasons I consider this stupid. First, search engines work on an opt-out policy. They assume that if you put something on the internet, you want people to read it. This should be a safe assumption, right? If you don’t want it known, don’t publish it.

If someone wants to “opt out”, all the have to do is publish “Robot.txt“, and Google and other search engines will skip their site. This is highly efficient, as nothing needs to happen most of the time. Imagine if indexing was an opt-in process; the web would be much less useful than it is now.

Second reason this is stupid, the claim that google “stole traffic” from these news sites. OK, if google was republishing the articles, I could see that. But that’s not what they do. They publish the first paragraph, and have a very prominent link to the article they are citing. So how is this taken as driving away traffic; isn’t this driving traffic towards your site? I know there are a ton of news sites I would never have used if it wasn’t for google news….how else would I find them?

Any webmaster worth their salt knows the truth here. Fortunes are made by moving up Google’s Page Rank system, NOT DOWN. This is easily proven with statistics; nobody has ever gotten more “clicks” by being lower in google’s result’s page, and no news site has ever gotten less traffic after being featured on Google’s new page.
[Edit] [Delete] [View Comments]
Subject Genetic Discrimination and Orthodox Christianity
Posted Date: September 22, 2006 – Friday – 10:09 AM

Last week, I wrote a blog that got linked to from a very popular site. I had as many hits in a day as I’ve had all year; that was pretty crazy. And I got a number of comments, most of them very reasonable and commendable, with only one person telling me I was deceived by the devil (I’m not decee…you’re the one who’s…Shut up, Richard!)

I was blogging about the last church I used to go to about a decade ago, hence the devil comment. My blog was pretty disjointed (leason learned; always try to write your best, because you never know who or how many may read it), but most seem to comment on my claims of sexism within the Mars Hill, the Bible, and Christianity in general.

Historical Fact: Time of Christ, men and women were tightly segregated in Jewish culture. A close analogy is the segregation in modern fundamentalist Muslim culture. Women could not hold any positions of authority, or speak politically. They could not own property, or work for themselves. They were always required to be obedient to at least one man, preferably someone in the family (even a son or a brother). Jewish scripture was interpreted in a literal way, and the Pharisees had made observation of the law a full time job.

Christian Fact: Jesus and his followers did change the emphasis of a large portion of the Old Testament; by adding new scriptures. To take the Biblical “words of Jesus” at face value, his teachings made no difference between men and women, they are treated absolutely the same. His message is remarkably clear: Treat your neighbor as yourself, the small is great and the servant is the master. His message was insane, and is almost as revolutionary today as it was then.

Thoughts on Jesus: He appears to have treated both sexes equally, but he never directly contradicted the sexism in his culture. His twelve MALE apostles started the new church, and to this day it is male-centric, as is its scripture. The Apostles made it very clear: Men and women were equal in spirit, as Jesus said. But in practical, earthly matters, men were in charge and women were not.

Heretical Wanderings: But that’s just mainstream scripture. If you look to non-canonical scriptures, like the Apocrypha and Gnostic Gospels, you find many books that contradict the apostles male dominated worldview. To the Gnostics, the Holy Spirit was Mother, to complement the Father and the Son. Wisdom was the Mother of YHWH, who was actually a petty and jealous godling:

In the Gospel of Phillip, it reads, “The creator, becoming arrogant in spirit, boasted himself over those things that were below him, and exclaimed, “I am Father, and God, and above me there is no one.” But his Mother, hearing him speak thus, cried out against him, “Do not lie, Ialdabaoth!”. That’s not your average “new” testament, eh?

Social Commentary: In more modern times, things have definitely changed, and men and women are more equal then we’ve ever been before The sexism women deal with today is not even close to what our ancestors had to deal with. I mean, women couldn’t even vote in the US until 1920! And going forward, the sexist Christian concept of “complementarian” (“Separate but equal”) will go the way of the Jim Crow laws that used the same basic idea. That is my hope…

Mars Hill: But some people think that “feminism” and “actual equality” are bad thing, and Mars Hill members and Mark are among them. If you don’t believe me, listen to Marks sermon titled “Spiritual Gifts VI: (1 Corinthians 14:26-40)“. In fact, in this sermon he makes the passage “silent in church” to apply to godless feminist only, while it does not apply to good christian women who submit to the men in their lives (pastor, deacons, husband, father).

He also interprets this scripture as being a reaction to a feminist agenda in the Corithian church. But this does not come directly from scripture, only from Christian tradition. Reading the Bible literally, it could just as easily been a question brought about because women were being GIVEN rights in the church that they had not had before, and some men/women were uncomfortable with this. Paul sets them “straight”, and says that although women have rights, they do not have the same rights as men.

Further Social Commentary: I do not mean to attack Mars Hill directly; as fundamentalist Christian churches go, they are much much healthier than most. Their members seem very happy with it. But fundamentalism and sexism go hand in hand, in Jewish, Christian, and Islamic culture, and is one proof that fundamentalism is wrong in principle as well as implementation.

Summary: Any system that makes 51% of the population submit to the other 49% cannot be universally valid. Here’s a really basic “fundamental” we need to realize; the right of citizens to be treated equally regardless of their genes! We must decide this issue now, before even more invasive gene sequencing makes our modern day discriminations look like nothing. To make this very plain, this is a moral, not a practical stance. We cannot judge people based on things outside of their control, or rate them only on our preconceived ideas of their potential.


[Edit] [Delete] [View Comments]
Subject “One Red Paperclip” guy got his house!
Posted Date: September 16, 2006 – Saturday – 9:41 AM
Less than a year ago, this guy Kyle really wanted a house, so he decided to barter for it. He started with one red paper clip, and now he’s got his house! This very cool, congratulations to Kyle for having a great idea and the moxie to follow through.

Really, we forget the internet is still a wide-open frontier, with all the opportunities that come with being on the edge of something new.

[Edit] [Delete] [View Comments]
Subject Boing Boing on Mars Hill
Posted Date: September 12, 2006 – Tuesday – 3:55 PM

I realized I hadn’t seen anything randomly beautiful in a little while, and realized I hadn’t been reading BoingBoing, a “directory of wonderful things”. I originally started reading because Cory Doctorow blogs there, and he’s a science fiction writer who really groks what’s going on.

Anyway, I see he blogged on Mars Hill, a “megachurch” in Seattle that I went to almost a decade ago.

First off, Mars Hill is a shining example of an effective Christian evangelical movement. If you are evangelical, you should be going to this church. It beats all other fundamentalist evangelical churches pants down.

That said, two quotes from the article sum up the reasons I don’t go to Mars Hill anymore:

“Mark Driscoll’s Jesus is no sandal-wearing pacifist. When Driscoll invokes his Lord, he describes an uncompromising disciplinarian who demands utter obedience from his followers in exchange for rescue from an eternity in hell.”

“The pastor’s wife gave Abolafya a book to study called “The Fruit of Her Hands,” which can essentially be summed up in Ephesians 5:22: “Wives, submit to your own husbands as to the Lord.” When Abolafya stretched out on her couch one evening to read the first chapter of the book, she screamed and threw it across the room. “

When I started going, we only had a couple of hundred members, now they have something like 4,000. I met people from that church through a community house I lived in the U-District with my cousin Matt. Good times, Good times.

There were ton’s of parties, drinking wine and beer, talking about philosophy, listening to cool music, dancing like fools. The people at these “get togethers” were intellectual, sensitive, liberal and devastatingly hip. And they were also madly in love with Jesus. They always listened and helped, and were ready to laugh or cry with you about whatever. Not even close to your average, shallow churchgoer, and I loved them dearly.

(Pastor) Mark was much more intense and dogmatic than what I’ve describing, but he was also one of the smartest guys in the room. He read something like a book a day, and can talk to you about anything. I remember being really confused by someone who was obviously intelligent and educated, but also passionately believed in fundamentalist Christianity. And he got good, smart people to follow him, that’s definitely the key to his success.

Even before I started going to Mars Hill, I had serious doubts about some very basic Christian doctrines: 1) The Authority of the Church, 2) The Divinity of Christ, and 3) the Infallibility of Scripture. Deciding on these things didn’t come easy, especially when you’re indoctrinated to believe that you’ll go to hell if you make the wrong choices.

The Bible I heard preached in church did not match the one I studied at home. Especially mismatched where the historical and scholarly aspects of scripture; the context in which it was written. I guess, in order for there to be faith there must be blindness.

Eventually I realized it was crazy to believe this particular book was infallible while the rest of them weren’t, especially since it was full of inconsistencies. And when I fully realized it said that women were second class citizens (over and over again), and that leaders should be unquestionably followed (over and over again), that was pretty much it.

If you are a fundamentalist Christian (and Mars Hill members are fundamentalists, regardless of their clothing), those paragraphs above were enough to banish me to outer darkness for all eternity (literally). I went from being a “loving, saved brother” to being a “unloving, damned heathen” by deciding that single thing. I’m not in touch with Mars Hill people anymore, and I’m barely in touch with family members who go to Mars Hill. I miss them, always, but things are different between us now. There’s nothing new in this story, really, it’s the same for people leaving all sorts of different cults and strict religions.

Looking back from the wise old age of thirty, I am SO GLAD I made that choice. I’d do it again, even knowing everything I would loose. Because that way of living is wrong, fundamentally. Not the community, or the faith, or the morals, those are all awesome and are absolutely necessary for anyone to be happy. It’s the persistent, infallible, patriarchal, blind power structure that’s the issue; keeping people in line decade after decade, century after century, in the name of Jesus.




[Edit] [Delete] [View Comments]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: