About Funky Dung
Who is Funky Dung?
29-year-old grad student in Intelligent Systems (A.I.) at the University of Pittsburgh. I consider myself to be politically moderate and independent and somewhere between a traditional and neo-traditional Catholic.
I was raised Lutheran, spent a number of years as an agnostic, and joined the Catholic Church at the 2000 Easter Vigil.
Why Funky Dung?
I haven't been asked this question nearly as many times as you or I might expect. Funky Dung is a reference to an obscure Pink Floyd song. On the album Atom Heart Mother, there is a track called Atom Heart Mother Suite. It's broken up into movements, like a symphony, and one of the movements is called Funky Dung. I picked that nickname a long time ago (while I was still in high school I think), shortly after getting an internet connection for the first time. To me it means "cool/neat/groovy/spiffy stuff/crap/shiznit", as in "That's some cool stuff, dude!"
Whence Ales Rarus?
I used to enjoy making people guess what this means, but I've decided to relent and make it known to all. Ales Rarus is a Latin play on words. "Avis rarus" means "a rare bird" and carries similar meaning to "an odd fellow". "Ales" is another Latin word for bird that carries connotations of omens, signs of the times, and/or augery. If you want to get technical, both "avis" and "ales" are feminine (requiring "rara", but they can be made masculine in poetry (which tends to breaks lots of rules). I decided I'd rather have a masculine name in Latin. ;) Yeah, I'm a nerd. So what? :-P
Wherefore blog?
It is my intention to "teach in order to lead others to faith" by being always "on the lookout for occasions of announcing Christ by word, either to unbelievers . . . or to the faithful" through the "use of the communications media". I also act knowing that I "have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors [my] opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and [I] have a right to make [my] opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard to the integrity of faith and morals and reverence toward [my and their] pastors, and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons." (adapted from CCC 904-907)
Statement of Faith
I have been baptized and confirmed in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I, therefore, renounce Satan; I renounce all his works; I renounce all his allurements.
I hold and profess all that is contained in the Apostles' Creed, the Niceno- Constantinopolitan Creed, and the Athanasian Creed.
Having been buried with Christ unto death and raised up with him unto a new life, I promise to live no longer for myself or for that world which is the enemy of God but for him who died for me and rose again, serving God, my heavenly Father, faithfully and unto death in the holy Catholic Church.
I am obedient to the Magisterium of the Catholic Church. That is, I promote and defend authentic Catholic Teaching and Faith in union with Christ and His Church and in union with the Holy Father, the Bishop of Rome, the Successor of St. Peter.
Thanks be unto Thee, O my God, for all Thy infinite goodness, and, especially, for the love Thou hast shown unto me at my Confirmation. I Give Thee thanks that Thou didst then send down Thy Holy Spirit unto my soul with all His gifts and graces.
May He take full possession of me for ever.
May His divine unction cause my face to shine.
May His heavenly wisdom reign in my heart.
May His understanding enlighten my darkness.
May His counsel guide me.
May His knowledge instruct me.
May His piety make me fervent.
May His divine fear keep me from all evil.
Drive from my soul, O Lord, all that may defile it.
Give me grace to be Thy faithful soldier, that having fought the good fight of faith, I may be brought to the crown of everlasting life, through the merits of Thy dearly beloved Son, our Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen.
Behind the Curtain: an Interview With Funky Dung (Thursday, March 03, 2005)
I try to avoid most memes that make their way 'round the blogosphere (We really do need a better name, don't
we?), but some are worth participating in. Take for instance the "interview game" that's the talk o'
the 'sphere. I think it's a great way to get to know the people in neighborhood. Who are the people in your
neighborhood? In your neighborhod? In your neigh-bor-hoo-ood...*smack* Sorry, Sesame Street flashback.
Anyhow, I saw Jeff "Curt Jester"
Miller's answers and figured since he's a regular reader of mine he'd be a good interviewer. Without
further ado, here are my answers to his questions.
1. Being that your pseudonym Funky Dung was chosen from a Pink Floyd track on Atom Heart Mother, what is you
favorite Pink Floyd song and why?
Wow. That's a tuffy. It's hard to pick out a single favorite. Pink Floyd isn't really a band known for
singles. They mostly did album rock and my appreciation of them is mostly of a gestalt nature. If I had to
pick one, though, it'd be "Comfortably Numb". I get chills up my spine every time I hear it and if
it's been long enough since the last time, I get midty-eyed. I really don't know why. That's a rather
unsatisfying answer for an interview, so here are the lyrics to a Rush song. It's not their best piece of music,
but the lyrics describe me pretty well.
New World Man
He's a rebel and a runner
He's a signal turning green
He's a restless young romantic
Wants to run the big machine
He's got a problem with his poisons
But you know he'll find a cure
He's cleaning up his systems
To keep his nature pure
Learning to match the beat of the old world man
Learning to catch the heat of the third world man
He's got to make his own mistakes
And learn to mend the mess he makes
He's old enough to know what's right
But young enough not to choose it
He's noble enough to win the world
But weak enough to lose it ---
He's a new world man...
He's a radio receiver
Tuned to factories and farms
He's a writer and arranger
And a young boy bearing arms
He's got a problem with his power
With weapons on patrol
He's got to walk a fine line
And keep his self-control
Trying to save the day for the old world man
Trying to pave the way for the third world man
He's not concerned with yesterday
He knows constant change is here today
He's noble enough to know what's right
But weak enough not to choose it
He's wise enough to win the world
But fool enough to lose it ---
He's a new world man...
2. What do you consider your most important turning point from agnosticism to the Catholic Church.
At some point in '99, I started attending RCIA at the Pittsburgh Oratory. I mostly went to ask a lot of
obnoxious Protestant questions. Or at least that's what I told myself. I think deep down I wanted desperately
to have faith again. At that point I think I'd decided that if any variety of Christianity had the Truth, the
Catholic Church did. Protestantism's wholesale rejection of 1500 years of tradition didn't sit well with me,
even as a former Lutheran.
During class one week, Sister Bernadette Young (who runs the program) passed out thin booklet called "
Handbook for Today's Catholic". One paragraph
in that book spoke to me and I nearly cried as I read it.
"A person who is seeking deeper insight into reality may sometimes have doubts, even about God himself.
Such doubts do not necessarily indicate lack of faith. They may be just the opposite - a sign of growing faith.
Faith is alive and dynamic. It seeks, through grace, to penetrate into the very mystery of God. If a
particular doctrine of faith no longer 'makes sense' to a person, the person should go right on seeking. To
know what a doctrine says is one thing. To gain insight into its meaning through the gift of understanding is
something else. When in doubt, 'Seek and you will find.' The person who seeks y reading, discussing,
thinking, or praying eventually sees the light. The person who talks to God even when God is 'not there' is
alive with faith."
At the end of class I told Sr. Bernadette that I wanted to enter the Church at the next Easter vigil.
3. If you were a tree what kind of, oh sorry about that .. what is the PODest thing you have ever
done?
I set up
WikiIndex, a clearinghouse for reviews
of theological books, good, bad, and ugly. It has a long way to go, but it'll be cool when it's finished. :)
4. What is your favorite quote from Venerable John Henry Newman?
"Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt."
5. If you could ban one hymn from existence, what would it be?
That's a tough one. As a member of
the Society for a Moratorium on the Music of
Marty Haugen and David Haas, there are obviously a lot of songs that grate on my nerves. If I had to pick
one, though, I'd probably pick
"Sing
of the Lord's Goodness" by Ernie Sands.
“Many parents/boyfriends/husbands threaten (even before a pregnancy) to disown/beat/etc. pregnant girls.“
And I don’t think compelling women not to get abortions by more removed means is any better, either.
“And I don’t think compelling women not to get abortions by more removed means is any better, either.”
Really?
Don’t you think beating or killing a women to entice her to kill and forcing her & her baby to live are quite different things?
—
“I didn’t say they weren’t different, did I? Nor did I say that they were equal. I merely said that compelling a woman into childbirth is no better than beating her.”
I disagree.
It is true that both lead the woman to do something they may not want to do.
However, I believe protecting human life is better than enticing human death.
Don’t you now “think [that] almost ALL of us are involved”?
—
“That means the only people involved are people who are, well, not really involved.” theomorph 07.10.05 – 2:58 pm
I don’t believe you thought of the fact that almost all of us know of at least 1 person intimately who has been involved with/in the abortion industry.
I think almost ALL of us are involved.
—
(I got one of those errors the other day, too. Then when I tried to post my comment again, it said I had already commented, even though that comment never showed up. When I posted the same comment from a different computer, it worked fine. Go figure.)
Re: Rob’s comment –
Yet another argument against democracy on the grounds of “the tyranny of the majority,” eh?
Personally, I think the real answer is much, much simpler: The vast majority of Americans simply do not care enough about this issue to get involved. It doesn’t affect them personally, and they are more worried about social security, the war in Iraq, high taxes, a bad economy, or whatever affects them directly. For most people, the abortion issue is just philosophy (and controversial philosophy to boot), and that isn’t enough to make them get involved. Since abortion is legal, people who seek it aren’t complaining, and people who don’t seek it aren’t having their activities hampered. That means the only people involved are people who are, well, not really involved.
D’oh. I’ll try to remember to pass the bug report to Halsoscan. Was that the full text of the error?
I didn’t say they weren’t different, did I? Nor did I say that they were equal. I merely said that compelling a woman into childbirth is no better than beating her.
If one thinks that abortion is acceptable, of course they will not get actively involved with one who wants or thinks they need an abortion unless they’re asked. (In essence, ignoring the issue implicitly approves it.)
In my experience, without being asked, people have offered to put up the female and the baby in their home. If abortion was used as birth control, some would offer to be available if she needed an excuse to leave a situation.
Further, it’s not true that someone has to be actively engaged in the decision making to be involved. Many parents/boyfriends/husbands threaten (even before a pregnancy) to disown/beat/etc. pregnant girls. The laws of the democratic world (minus a few countries) make it legal (approve) to dispose of pre-born children. Many people ignore or look down on pregnant girls and women.
On the other hand, many services are available for pregnant women. People sacrifice their time and money to help. Many organizations condemn killing, especially of the most innocent.
We’re all involved.
—
Nah, not tyrrany of the majority.
Manipulation by the power-hungry is more what I’m thinking.
Sure, I know plenty of people who have gotten abortions. There are a couple of them in my family. But I am not them, I did not make their decision, and unless they come to me and ask for my thoughts on the matter, it is really none of my business what they did.
Knowing somebody connected to abortion does not make you “involved.” Wishing that nobody get an abortion does not make you “involved.” The only thing that makes you “involved” is having had an abortion, seeking one, being actively included in the decision-making process by the person who had or is seeking one, or providing them. The rest of us are just self-righteous moralizers, one way or the other.
The problem that I, a Roman Catholic, pro-life Republican (in that order) have with 95-10 is that one of the proposed solutions is almost as bad as the disease to be remedied. Namely, mandatory contraceptive coverage in all group health care plans nationwide.
1) I see little ethical difference between snuffing out a human life and preventing a human life from coming into being.
2) Many so-called contraceptives actually act as abortifacents sometimes. The morning after pill and regular birth control pills sometimes prevent implantation of fertilized egg cells, essentially causing abortions. Let’s be clear: the “Dems for Life” want to promote use of these poisons and say they’re preventing abortions!?
3) As a Roman Catholic who might one day be an employer, the “Dems for Life” (for whom I once had a great deal of respect, by the way) are demanding that I either pay for “medications” that run contrary to my religion and its moral teachings, or else deny my hard-working employees the health care coverage that Catholic teaching on social justice would require me to provide. In other words, I can’t be a business owner and a good Catholic.
4) Any kind of health coverage mandates, including contraceptives, causes people to lose health coverage because health coverage becomes more expensive and employers balk at providing it. Again, no Catholic who is conscious of good social teaching should want to see that.
5) Given the failure rates of contraceptives and the promiscuity that it breeds in the culture, I’m not certain that this particular provision of 95-10 would reduce abortions.
Dump that provision, and I’m pretty happy with it.
Unable to save comment (get failed)
Yep.
Let me try again:
Some strategists in the pro-life/anti-abortion camp believe that any attempt to reduce abortions without outlawing it completely is counterproductive. They know that the movement is fragmented. For example, many people do not favor outlawing abortions in the case of rape, incest, or when the mother’s life or health are endangered.
If you reduce the number of abortions without completely outlawing it, you reduce the number of people in your camp. This reduces your political power. The 94-10 initiative also plays against the stereotype that all Christians are Republican. This is also dangerous to some people.
Years ago, they passed a law through congress outlawing the so-called “partial birth abortions.” Clinton would have signed it, but only if there was a provision to permit such abortions if they were necessary to save the life of the mother and if no other way could be found to deliver the child.
Congress refused to ammend the law. If it hadn’t been ammended and if Clinton had still signed it, the Supreme Court would have struck it down. If Bush packs the SC with three of his own, they would STILL strike such a law down if it does not permit a woman to defend herself.
The more abortions that are performed each year, the better it is for the pro-life movement, because it gives them more power.
If the 95-10 Initiative gets any support, you can bet that there will be extreme attacks on anyone supporting it by the religious right, since it takes power away from them.
It’s sort of like Bush supporting the hard-liners in Iran. He helps them by polarizing the vote, they help him keep Americans frightened. Win-win, if you’re evil.