FDA Halts Imports of Farmed Fish From China

I didn't realize how much food we imported from China.  It makes me really consider reading more carefully the lables on food - where does it come from.  I've never had a problem getting things from overseas - I like fresh fruits: hence the produce from Chile, Brazil, the "banana republics," etc.  I don't want farmers to go unemployed nor do I want them exploited.  "Fair trade" is the way to go.

But China?  I thought we only got mandarin oranges from there... not fish!

Christians forced out of Baghdad district - Los Angeles Times

I have nothing to say about this article.  I think the article speaks for itself entirely.

Limits on Student Free Speech

While I do not like the content of his shirt "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" I'm not sure that I like the ruling either.  The part that bothers me is the reasoning behind the verdict.  I'm treading in deep water with this, but according to the news report, it's the interpretation not intention of the speech that can be censored.  Secondly it sets the precedent that a school can limit what a student does outside of school.

1. Interpretation.  While the communication model shows that information being transmitted is not always received as intended, I don't like the idea of the interpretation being the decisive factor in a free speech case.  "Go kill liars" is clearly intended to incite some action.  Namely that the listener is instructed to go kill liars.  On the other hand, "God hates lying tongues" (Proverbs 6-16-17) is not inciting action.  Based upon the reasoning reported by the news, however, I could be held accountable if someone took that statement as a call to action.  (ie, if God hates something, it's bad, if it's bad we should kill it, therefore if God hates lying tongues, we should kill them)  I however, do not intend to have anyone be killed, nor am I instructing anyone to kill.
2. Outside of school.  In general, I favor schools having some limits on what can be done on school property.  The public is paying for the students to receive an education.  As such if some activity (or speech) is detracting from the learning environment, the students are not getting what is being paid for.  And no, I'm not advocating that all learning is acceptable.  I don't think that learning how to build a bomb or attack a fixed position is what a middle school student needs to learn.  What we (as paying customers) require for is the approved curriculum (the product) to be taught to the students.  To ensure this process is successful, all disruptive behavior (ie, actions that impede the process) should be banned.  The learning environment, however, does not include outside the boundaries (field trips being within the boundaries) of the school.  As such, the school should have no jurisdiction over the students outside of those boundaries (the same principle as my argument why schools shouldn't ban students from having blogs, myspace, youtube, etc on their home computers).

The biggest problem I have is when these two principles are combined they form a horrible situation.  If some school administrator decides that students espousing religious views outside of school can interpreted as inciting wrongful behavior guess what happens?  It then becomes wrong for the student to espouse those views. 

For example:

• All Sinners go to hell
• All have sinned
• All are going to hell
• Jesus is the only way to heaven
• All who do not go to heaven will be thrown into the lake of fire

Those statements are very basic beliefs of Christianity.  And they are confrontational.  They are not nice, safe, politically correct statements.  Should a student be punished for saying them?  No.  Should a school be the place to proselytize?  No - that would disrupt the learning environment.  We can't just limit the religious instruction to ideals that we "agree" with - that would be unconstitutional and wrong.  But neither should any school be allowed to limit what religion a student follows.

It's not here yet, but soon Christians will again have to start breaking the "law" just like Peter did.  Am I advocating that you break all laws?  Nope.  The only "law breaking" would be against the (future) interpretation of the 1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech...

Los Angeles to plunge 3700 feet below Pacific

 I know some of you would be elated for this to happen and others would be devastated.  However, it appears that it will happen... in a billion years or so:

Link to Why a Rocky Mountain high?

War on Christianity?

 An interesting blog I found on MySpace:

In the world of the media and entertainment, Christainity is fair game. Rapper Kanye West, famous for declaring (during a charity fundraiser) that George W. Bush "doesn't care about black people," appeared on the cover of the Rolling Stone as Jesus Christ wearing a crown of thorns; there was a little protest. Andres Serrano depicted a crucified Jesus in urine in his "Piss Christ." Terrence McNally's play about Jesus as a "young gay man" having "sexual adventures with his 12 disciples" was seen by large crowds in New York. This contrasts with the attitude towards Islam. As of this writing, the Washington Post and most other major news media have failed to publish the Danish cartoons ridiculing Muhammad that sparked anti-Western riots in Muslim countries. At CNN's Website, a remarkable editor's note appeared at the bottom of a story about the cartoons: "CNN has chosen to not show the cartoons out of respect for Islam." This from CNN, whose founder, Ted Tuner, called Catholics, "Jesus Freaks" and said Christainity was a "religion for losers..."

Link to blog.myspace.com/melodydamayo

Photos Updated

I've finally uploaded pictures of my recent vacation.

Photos are of

My Sister's High School Graduation

A trip with my youngest brother

And Mothers' Day 2007

Los Angeles Times: Hollywood's leap of faith with 'Evan Almighty'

This movie looks like it'll be a good one.

You can see the trailer here.   As a modern retelling of the story of Noah, I think it is fitting that this movie is coming out now.  Looking at the world around us, we seem to be living like in the days of Noah.  However, thanks to my disappointment with the Pirates 3 movie, I don't think I'm going to see it on opening day.  I like seeing movies when the first come out - I guess in some ways it gives me a pop culture item to talk about "around the water cooler."  Seeing Spiderman 3 on opening day was fun - even if a little foolish to attend a 12 AM showing when I had work starting at 5 AM that day.  But I didn't like Pirates 3.  They squeezed a 30 minute story into 3 hours.

Since this is the year of the "three-quel," I did see Oceans 3 (not too bad) but really looking forward to Bourne 3.

Five Love Languages

Gary Chapman has a great book on how to communicate love between individuals.  The basic premise is that people communicate love through five ways:  Quality Time, Physical Touch, Acts of Service, Words of Affirmation, and Receiving Gifts.  Some people "speak" the languages with differing degrees of fluency.  And we don't "hear" in the same "language."  Gary says that we default to speaking the language that we listen to best.  But that doesn't mean our feeling of love is communicated effectively.

Reading the book would get you a better idea of the concept, but you can see the rough sketch if you take the quiz.

My Primary Love Language is Quality Time.  What is yours?

My Detailed Results:
Quality Time:	10
Physical Touch:	9
Acts of Service:	8
Words of Affirmation:	2
Receiving Gifts:	1

Runners -- Let thirst be your guide

Here's a study that will be of some interest to the runners out there. 

Link to Runners -- Let thirst be your guide

One Minute Painting