Posted by Anthony on March 12, 2010
On the Drudge Report yesterday I saw a link for a contract for the Department of Education for shot guns. I’m having trouble wrapping my head around why this department should need shotguns. So I asked. 
Here is the reply I received:
Thank you for your email to []. [She] forwarded your email to the Office of Inspector General for response. The Office of Inspector General is the law enforcement arm of the U.S. Department of Education and is responsible for the detection of waste, fraud, abuse, and other criminal activity involving Federal education funds, programs, and operations. As such, OIG operates with full statutory law enforcement authority, which includes conducting search warrants, making arrests, and carrying firearms. The acquisition of these firearms is necessary to replace older and mechanically malfunctioning firearms, and in compliance with Federal procurement requirements. For more information on OIG’s law enforcement authority, please visit our Web site at: www.ed.gov/oig. The information is available on the front page of our site.
Thank you again for your inquiry.
Catherine G.
Public Affairs Liaison
U.S. Department of Education Office of Inspector General
I don’t know, still seems weird to me. What do you all think?
Posted by Anthony on
Yesterday I had the good pleasure to post on my recent ruminations that ‘love’ had taken a distinctly ‘feminine’ turn since who knows when. This generated a fair bit of response, including some remarks from women themselves who really resonated with what I said. Some responses were of the sort that I feared, though. Taking them all together, I felt a follow up was in order. Unfortunately, the first draft of this ran over 1,500 words, crying out for revision, so it still isn’t going to cover everything that a reader may want.
One of the things I noted about the responses was that it was believed that women were the target of the post. If there was a target, it was the men.
In my post, I had said that the hero in Twilight had the advantage of having real dangers to fight off. I noted, “I mean, I’d hunt down and slay marauding vampires for my wife, too, if only they existed.”
Many of the comments that I heard from women addressed how their men take the time and effort to protect them. Don’t misunderstand me, I think it is great for these things to be recognized as loving. It isn’t only the women that I wanted to get that message, though. We men need to know that these things represent aspects of real love. You see, my hunch is that changing the oil and locking the doors, etc, are a weak replacement- from the point of view of the men- for the glorious battle that they’d prefer. WAIT! There is more to read… read on »
Posted by Anthony on March 11, 2010
In my last entry I felt compelled to clarify that I was married- and that, to a woman, and not a pillow.
I felt this need because of this article I just read talking about a guy in Korea marrying… well, a pillow.
Far be it from me to prohibit anyone from living out the rest of their lives in a committed, monogamous relationship. But I do have some questions.
Q. Does the pillow consent? If consent is no longer one of the important elements constituting real ‘marriage’ where does it end? Will people be marrying shoes next? If shoes, why not toddlers? WAIT! There is more to read… read on »
Posted by Anthony on March 10, 2010
I’ve been thinking about the culture wars lately. I have a real problem with Christians who seem to be driving for a change in the culture just for the sake of having a ‘holy’ culture. I think we’d have to call that a legalistic culture. I believe that the Christian church should be about something more than creating white-washed tombs.
On the other hand, the nature of ‘culture’ is that it perpetuates itself, feeds itself, fuels itself. The culture is the air we breathe and the water in which we swim. It has the ability to mold us into its image, and once so molded, we mold others in that same image. Resistance isn’t exactly futile, but it is difficult. Conformity to the culture is the path of least resistance. It would behoove us, therefore, to ensure that the culture is not toxic. If the culture is healthy, the path of least resistance will more likely result in healthy beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. WAIT! There is more to read… read on »
Posted by Anthony on March 5, 2010
I am proud to announce that Athanatos Christian Ministries will be hosting its first annual online apologetics conference this May.
http://onlineapologeticsconference.com/
The theme for the conference is ‘literary apologetics.’ Potentially, future conferences will tackle some other brand of communicating or defending the Gospel through the arts. ‘Literary apologetics’ is, obviously, using the written word to carry out that endeavor. Notable examples are C. S. Lewis, G. K. Chesterton, and Dorothy Sayers, to name a few.
The purpose of the conference is to issue a call to Christians in the arts to express their faith through them and issue a call to the Christian Church to help them in a more deliberate fashion.
The conference is taking registrations now. The cost is $35 for the two day event, but discounts are available for students and there is an early bird special in place before March 15th.
Speakers:
Keynote:
Plenary: WAIT! There is more to read… read on »
Posted by Anthony on March 3, 2010
The headline I read today was “New charge on dinner tab is in bad taste.” The opening paragraphs seemed to set the stage for the article:
Nothing succeeds in the travel industry like a bad idea. The latest hidden mandatory add-on is a “health” charge added to restaurant bills. As far as I know, this scam cropped up first in San Francisco, but you can count on it to spread.
The rationale for this one is to cover the employers’ mandatory contribution to the City’s “Healthy San Francisco” health-coverage system. The charge actually is levied on employers, but at least some restaurants are adding a few dollars or percentage points to each customer’s bill to cover this charge.
Reading this, I assumed that the ’scam’ was going to be the new charge levied on employers to cover their ‘mandatory contribution’ to a city’s health-coverage system. Boy was I wrong!
Ed Perkins protests, “Employees’ health insurance is no less of a cost of doing business than rent, property taxes, food costs, security services and all the other inputs businesses require to operate. To single out health care for a separate surcharge is unwarranted.” WAIT! There is more to read… read on »
Posted by Anthony on February 15, 2010
A recent series of comments on an article of mine characterizing Obama’s desire to have the KSM trial in NYC as a ’show trial‘ prompted me to ponder one of the claims made in those comments. I noted what appears to be a parallel between “Mark’s” argument and atheistic objections to God along the lines of free will and the problem of evil. In saying this, I don’t mean to imply that Mark is actually an atheist. I have no idea if he is. Nor do I mean to unduly pick on him, because in my view youngsters are to be commended for venturing their opinions.
He insisted the KSM trial won’t be a ’show trial’ because the outcome isn’t rigged. I retorted that there was no doubt in my mind that if KSM was declared innocent, whether on the merits of the case or because of a technicality, there was no way that KSM wouldn’t end up in custody again, which is in effect an unfair trial under the constitution, for if a person is declared innocent under the constitution, he is free to go. Mark replied that what happens after the trial is irrelevant to the fairness of the trial.
I will leave aside other aspects of the conversation which you can read for yourself.
I find this to be an interesting argument that seems to be the same argument that many atheists appear to be running with when they decide that it is likely that God doesn’t exist because a loving, omnipotent and omniscient God wouldn’t allow such horrible evils to occur. WAIT! There is more to read… read on »
