I believe that the government that governs best governs least, but I would not call myself a through-and-through, principled libertarian. I’d prefer that the federal government be severely limited in its powers. Generally, I believe that governmental powers should be no greater than inversely proportional to a government’s scope. I believe such a notion is compatible with subsidiarity.
Life’s been busy, and it’s only going to get more so. I’m up to my eyeballs in graduate research and my first child is due August 25. Consequently, I’ve backed off blogging a bit. I haven’t stopped, nor do I intend to. However, my posting frequency has been too low to really sustain an active readership. To make up for this I’ve been syndicating content (with permission, of course). I intend to continue doing so, but I find myself in need of original content. A recent comment has made me keenly aware that Catholic content is sorely lacking. When Shaun Pierce got too busy to maintain Powerblog! by himself, he put out a call for co-bloggers and found able help in Jim Powers. So I am following suit.
Are there any devout Catholics who’ve thought about blogging or established Catholic bloggers looking for a bigger soap box out there? If so, drop me a line. It’s a non-paying gig, and all applicants will be vetted and go through a trial period if accepted. I can’t just let anyone write here, ya know. 😉
Need a demonstration of the fallen nature of man? You’re looking at him. Syndicating Peter’s post linking to P.Z. Myers’ screed about the Eucharist being just a cracker royally offended good friend, frequent commenter, and occasional blogger, Stuff. As a form of public penance, here are links to some Catholic discussion of Myers’ and his rabid rants.:
I realize that not everyone is capable of dedoublement*, and I don’t know if it can be taught. What I do know is that there would be an significant decrease in drama, wasted time, pain, and anger if it could. I would wager that only roughly 45% of the people I know are capable of detaching themselves from situations to look at things from a cold, factual, objective point of view. Those people tend to achieve whatever goals they set for themselves. Sometimes they’re also considered cut-throat or heartless, but it’s not necessarily a requirement.ÂÂ
I have watched family, friends, and even public figures nearly, if not completely, destroy themselves (careers, relationships, friendships, you name it) because they refuse to even attempt to remove their own emotions from the equation and look at facts. I don’t just mean personal feelings, as in how you feel, but how society plays into your understanding of circumstances as well. If people were more honest about facts, behaviors, and their contributions, people’s lives would be a hell of a lot more different.
The Department of Homeland Security is looking into requiring all airline passengers to wear a special bracelet that would allow the crew of a plane to cause an “electro-muscular disruption” (EMD) to immobilize disorderly passengers.
What about people with pacemakers? What about the small percentage of people with undiscovered conditions who may be killed by such a device? And who decides the sufficient level of disorderliness to justify the use of EMD? What about particularly paranoid airline crews? What happens if somebody is immobilized and mass hysteria breaks out among the paranoid passengers, who then beat the living daylights out of the immobilized person, causing severe injuries or even death? And if you’re worried about terrorists on airplanes, does this just invite them to figure out a way to immobilize people easily to avoid another one of those “Let’s roll” incidents?
As the legal threshold for government detainment and infliction of force against citizens seems to be falling, things like this do not bode well for freedom.