It seems that most pastors are either hesistant to speak their political minds or qucik to drag out their soap-box and stump for their candidate. It is hard for me to trust either option, though I do value my own freedom to speak my mind in an election cycle. Then again, when speaking my mind about the candidates involves quoting the Simpsons...I probably should just be quiet.
Okay, I can't resist. Here is the synopsis of the party platforms, ala The Simpsons. Republicans- We Want What's Worst For Everyone. Democrats- We Can't Govern.
"Don't blame me...I voted for Kodos."
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Feeling sorry for Sarah
Disclaimer: I am a dedicated third-party voter. I do not support the Republicrat Party that maintains a monopoly on our national political discourse. Out of this conviction, I forsee no instance where I would support a two-party system by voting for Coke or Pepsi. I am a dedicated Diet Mountain Dew voter.
You can't help but feel sorry for Sarah Palin. Well, maybe you relish her misery. I don't know. But I am going to ask an open and honest question. How would the average American do on the Great American Political Quiz? If you don't know the answer to that, you have been out of college for far too long.
How many voters do you think have been ever been outside of the country (Cancun, the Virgin Islands, and Bahamas excluded)? How many of them could name and describe any Supreme Court case apart from Roe vs. Wade? How many can describe the 'Bush Doctrine' or tell us who, when, and where that term was coined? How many know why Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac were created? For that matter, how many could find Afghanistan on a world map?
The point is that much of the population of our country is ignorant about politics, history, even religion. Sure, they can name all the winners of American Idol. But what about the first five presidents? Four? Two? Though we fight to keep them in (or out) of our courtrooms, how many of our nation's PASTORS can actually recite all 10 Commandments? If my seminary experience is any indication, the answer is somewhat emabarassing.
I suppose we ought to hold our candidates for office to a higher standard than the general population. They should know these political facts. But part of me thinks we are, as a nation, a bit hypocritical when we shame Sarah Palin for her answers to these questions. After all, we are the nation that invented the open book test.
If anything, as a pop culture nation, we should also shun candidates who can't get basic sports facts right. Barack Obama, life-long basketball fan from Illinois, a Big Ten state says 'Nitally Lions'? I mean, come on. Nitally? Do you even watch Sportscenter, Barack? Joe-Pa. Joe-Pa. Sheesh.
You can't help but feel sorry for Sarah Palin. Well, maybe you relish her misery. I don't know. But I am going to ask an open and honest question. How would the average American do on the Great American Political Quiz? If you don't know the answer to that, you have been out of college for far too long.
How many voters do you think have been ever been outside of the country (Cancun, the Virgin Islands, and Bahamas excluded)? How many of them could name and describe any Supreme Court case apart from Roe vs. Wade? How many can describe the 'Bush Doctrine' or tell us who, when, and where that term was coined? How many know why Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac were created? For that matter, how many could find Afghanistan on a world map?
The point is that much of the population of our country is ignorant about politics, history, even religion. Sure, they can name all the winners of American Idol. But what about the first five presidents? Four? Two? Though we fight to keep them in (or out) of our courtrooms, how many of our nation's PASTORS can actually recite all 10 Commandments? If my seminary experience is any indication, the answer is somewhat emabarassing.
I suppose we ought to hold our candidates for office to a higher standard than the general population. They should know these political facts. But part of me thinks we are, as a nation, a bit hypocritical when we shame Sarah Palin for her answers to these questions. After all, we are the nation that invented the open book test.
If anything, as a pop culture nation, we should also shun candidates who can't get basic sports facts right. Barack Obama, life-long basketball fan from Illinois, a Big Ten state says 'Nitally Lions'? I mean, come on. Nitally? Do you even watch Sportscenter, Barack? Joe-Pa. Joe-Pa. Sheesh.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Money...I should have paid attention a little earlier.
Like many Americans, my eventual goal is to own the house in which I live. Currently, I am renting a house which is bad insofar as I am paying (and losing) money in rent each month. On the plus side, for the first time in my adult life I am actually living in a house instead of an apartment. Its about 50/50. I do have the option to buy this house at some point, maybe getting some credit for rent I have already paid. Or I might find another house in the Hartford area to buy. That is a step I am ready to take. Except for this money thing.
Yes, the whole financial crisis has pretty much destroyed any means by which I could afford a house. That's not to say I am a financial risk. At least I don't think I am. Sure, I have some college debt and a little for my car. I don't, however, tend to carry a balance on credit cards and for the most part spend wisely. Still, I don't quite have the means to save up enough month to month to make a decent downpayment. Now, with the rules getting tighter on borrowers if indeed anyone can borrow money at all, I expect I really can't afford much of anything. That, indeed, is sad.
As a first-time home buyer I could sit back and complain that I have had nothing to do with this mess and shake my fist in the air because I now am unable to participate in the American house grab. On the other hand, I could hope and pray that market conditions might remain favorable to me as far as prices and interest go. I am not sure what to do. What I do know is that the prospects for me and my future family don't look good at the moment. So, like millions of other Americans, I sit and wait this one out. I think what could have been just months ago. But maybe this will work itself out.
Yes, the whole financial crisis has pretty much destroyed any means by which I could afford a house. That's not to say I am a financial risk. At least I don't think I am. Sure, I have some college debt and a little for my car. I don't, however, tend to carry a balance on credit cards and for the most part spend wisely. Still, I don't quite have the means to save up enough month to month to make a decent downpayment. Now, with the rules getting tighter on borrowers if indeed anyone can borrow money at all, I expect I really can't afford much of anything. That, indeed, is sad.
As a first-time home buyer I could sit back and complain that I have had nothing to do with this mess and shake my fist in the air because I now am unable to participate in the American house grab. On the other hand, I could hope and pray that market conditions might remain favorable to me as far as prices and interest go. I am not sure what to do. What I do know is that the prospects for me and my future family don't look good at the moment. So, like millions of other Americans, I sit and wait this one out. I think what could have been just months ago. But maybe this will work itself out.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Economy? Yikes!
Out of curiousity I was browsing through the dictionary (yes, I spend hours doing that each day...not really) to find a definition of the word 'economy'. While economy can refer to the organization or management of resources, I knew there was another meaning that I couldn't quite pinpoint. Voila! Here it is, definition 2a: thrifty and efficient use of material resources; frugality in expenditures. Hmm...that doesn't seem to describe our ecomony. Millions of Americans have cars, houses, entertainment centers, educations, iPods, and lattes that they cannot afford. Yet, the growth of our economy is dependent on our own personal lack of economy. This is definitely a downside to our consumer economy.
While I like to blame guys in grey suits for lots of things in life, I have to stop myself here. Sure, corporate greed has played a large role in this current crisis. Most ndividuals don't bank at Bear Stearns, get loans from Fannie Mae, or even have AIG insurance. Yet, we are all affected by this culture of spending and carried along willingly in its currents. As I understand it, the housing crisis is simply the tip of the iceberg. Some people bit off a little more than they could chew for their mortgages and banks lost their gamble that people would pay them back. Okay, but that can't account for the entire crisis, can it? I don't think so. But it does point out to a very large problem in society that threatens to undo us all: cheap credit.
I am only 31 years old and yet I am already in debt up to my ears...mostly for college. But I am pretty well off compared to many my age who have college loans, car loans, AND huge credit card bills on top of it. Add in a mortgage and wow! Yet, up until now it was pretty easy to get a loan for pretty much anything. Because it was easy, we began as a society to live beyond our means. Put the Starbucks coffe on the card, then the jeans, and oops...need to make a tuition payment. Bam! Instant debt. This is what scares me, as an individual and as a pastor. If all the banks in the country called in our debt right now, we'd be sunk. Man, I wouldn't even know how to go about talking to all those who lost everything. My job wouldn't be easy...but there seems to be a leather bound book somewhere in my office that tells me about stuff like this. If only I could find it!
While I like to blame guys in grey suits for lots of things in life, I have to stop myself here. Sure, corporate greed has played a large role in this current crisis. Most ndividuals don't bank at Bear Stearns, get loans from Fannie Mae, or even have AIG insurance. Yet, we are all affected by this culture of spending and carried along willingly in its currents. As I understand it, the housing crisis is simply the tip of the iceberg. Some people bit off a little more than they could chew for their mortgages and banks lost their gamble that people would pay them back. Okay, but that can't account for the entire crisis, can it? I don't think so. But it does point out to a very large problem in society that threatens to undo us all: cheap credit.
I am only 31 years old and yet I am already in debt up to my ears...mostly for college. But I am pretty well off compared to many my age who have college loans, car loans, AND huge credit card bills on top of it. Add in a mortgage and wow! Yet, up until now it was pretty easy to get a loan for pretty much anything. Because it was easy, we began as a society to live beyond our means. Put the Starbucks coffe on the card, then the jeans, and oops...need to make a tuition payment. Bam! Instant debt. This is what scares me, as an individual and as a pastor. If all the banks in the country called in our debt right now, we'd be sunk. Man, I wouldn't even know how to go about talking to all those who lost everything. My job wouldn't be easy...but there seems to be a leather bound book somewhere in my office that tells me about stuff like this. If only I could find it!
Thursday, August 28, 2008
5 Reasons Why You Should Consider Using the King James Version
Here I am again talking about the KJV. Next thing you know, I'll be hitting the revival meeting circuit with Oral Roberts. Anyway, here are 5 reasons why you should consider reading the King James Version.
1. It is beautiful. There is a reason why you study this thing in Literature courses. While some might feel that beauty comes at the price of clarity (especially considering the plainness of the original language), to experience the English language at its best, you need to read the KJV or Shakespeare. I pick the bible!
2. It is common to all. Step back for a minute. Think of all the scripture you can quote. If you are Presbyterian like me, it is probably not much! But the things you DO know probably come from the King James Version. The Lord's Prayer. The 23rd Psalm. Even John 3:16. Most people quote these from the King James Version. It gives us English speakers a common bond and language to share.
3. It is a good translation. Sure, the KJV doesn't make use of the earliest manuscripts. It might not match up well to modern bibles in terms of content (or vice versa if you are of the King James Only variety). However, the KJV is an excellent translation of the Greek language. Seriously! As long as there are not too many textual variants in the passage, the translation of the KJV will stand up to anything you come up with on your own. I used it to check my Greek from time to time. Chop off the -sts or the -ths and you are good to go.
4. It is pre-modern, thus making it post-modern. We hear all about post-modernism these days. And the result? Crappy modern sounding English translations like The Message. (Sorry, I just can't drink the Eugene Peterson Kool-aid.) If the commentators are right about the post-modern desire for mystery and ritual, what could be better than the King James? It sounds archaic and at times down-right spooky. That is what the post-modern world loves, so this should be the version of choice!
5. It is free to use. Most people don't realize this, but most modern bible translations are copyrighted. If you are going to quote from them, you need permission. Otherwise, it is time to pay up. Lest you think this is a joke, I was part of a one-act play in college based on the book of Job. Two weeks before we went live, the playwright discovered that his script, based on the NIV, could not be performed because it was based entirely on copyrighted material. I am not sure how he resolved this, but needless to say, it is a problem. On the other hand, the KJV has passed out of copyright in the U.S. That is why you find it so many places. That is why the Gideons used it for their bibles. Its completely, totally, 100% free to use!
And there you have it. Pick one up, try it...
1. It is beautiful. There is a reason why you study this thing in Literature courses. While some might feel that beauty comes at the price of clarity (especially considering the plainness of the original language), to experience the English language at its best, you need to read the KJV or Shakespeare. I pick the bible!
2. It is common to all. Step back for a minute. Think of all the scripture you can quote. If you are Presbyterian like me, it is probably not much! But the things you DO know probably come from the King James Version. The Lord's Prayer. The 23rd Psalm. Even John 3:16. Most people quote these from the King James Version. It gives us English speakers a common bond and language to share.
3. It is a good translation. Sure, the KJV doesn't make use of the earliest manuscripts. It might not match up well to modern bibles in terms of content (or vice versa if you are of the King James Only variety). However, the KJV is an excellent translation of the Greek language. Seriously! As long as there are not too many textual variants in the passage, the translation of the KJV will stand up to anything you come up with on your own. I used it to check my Greek from time to time. Chop off the -sts or the -ths and you are good to go.
4. It is pre-modern, thus making it post-modern. We hear all about post-modernism these days. And the result? Crappy modern sounding English translations like The Message. (Sorry, I just can't drink the Eugene Peterson Kool-aid.) If the commentators are right about the post-modern desire for mystery and ritual, what could be better than the King James? It sounds archaic and at times down-right spooky. That is what the post-modern world loves, so this should be the version of choice!
5. It is free to use. Most people don't realize this, but most modern bible translations are copyrighted. If you are going to quote from them, you need permission. Otherwise, it is time to pay up. Lest you think this is a joke, I was part of a one-act play in college based on the book of Job. Two weeks before we went live, the playwright discovered that his script, based on the NIV, could not be performed because it was based entirely on copyrighted material. I am not sure how he resolved this, but needless to say, it is a problem. On the other hand, the KJV has passed out of copyright in the U.S. That is why you find it so many places. That is why the Gideons used it for their bibles. Its completely, totally, 100% free to use!
And there you have it. Pick one up, try it...
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Hunting for the KJV
The other day, while I was browsing the shelves at the local Cokesbury, I had an urge. It was a little strange, but something that has been tugging at me ever since. I don't own a good King James Bible. I have one of the $5 Wal-Mart variety on my shelf. I know I could find an armful if I just looked around the church. Still, I was bothered by the fact that I don't own a nice copy of the KJV. I have two copies of the NIV Study Bible, The Harper Collins Study Bible, The NRSV Classics Devotional Bible, and The New Interpreters Study Bible. But I decided that I wanted a good King James Study Bible. So, that became my obsession for a couple hours the other day.
In case you wondered, here are your 3 basic options (to be found at Cokesbury, Wellspring, Family Christian Store, Barnes & Noble, or Borders...yes, I visited all five!):
First is the Zondervan KJV Study Bible. This is the cheapest of the three in hardcover. That would seem to be all that is going for it. The introduction states that the study notes are intended for the 'Conservative Christian'. Strike one. The back cover includes an endorsement from Jerry Falwell. Strikes two...and three. It looks nicely put together and I almost decided to go with this one because of the price. It has nice type-setting and the print is easy on the eye. It is not too bulky and is available in paperback. (No leather cover, however). Still, I just couldn't get past the endorsement from its biggest fan.
Second is the Nelson KJV Study Bible. This one was hard to pick out from the Nelson KJV Reference Bible, which contains no study notes. Again, the introduction states that the bible is for the 'Conservative Christian'. What is up with that? I shouldn't have asked. Turn to the next page...Jerry Falwell is listed as one of the editors. Yikes! Dr. Falwell must really be a fan of the Authorized Version! Its okay...I don't like the layout of this book as much. The print is too dark (I know, it sounds weird, but you'd have to see it). There are symbols that function as pointers to study notes, including a 'set of keys' that are included to indicate essential doctrines. I found these study notes to be heavy-handed and certainly a little bit awkward as they intruded into the text itself. This version was more expensive, though it did come in a nice leather bound addition. Sadly, I don't think it would be proper to buy a Study Bible that you would want to throw across the room every time you sat down to read.
Last, but not least...in this case best (relatively speaking) is the Life Application Bible KJV. I have had a Life Application Bible in the past. It is a beautiful creature. I love the typesetting and layout. It was nicely bound, the kind of bible you'd pass on to your child. This bible was almost identical to the one I remember. The main problem here is that the study notes aren't study notes as much as they are life application questions. It is a little different approach, though it doesn't seem nearly as heavy handed as the Nelson version. There is still some good textual information, though nothing like the Harper Collins or Interpreters. Also, it is the most expensive. However, it was the bible I eventually chose, in the leather bound version no less! Thank God for Amazon! (I saved almost $20 ordering it online!)
All in all, you can find some good KJV bibles out there. It is funny, though, how different store skew towards one version or another. Cokesbury really didn't have much in the way of KJV. They were selling a lot of NRSV Study Bibles. (BTW, the paperback of the Interpreters Study Bible is only $15 at the DSM Cokesbury...get it while its hot!). Wellspring had the largest collection of KJV bibles and that was my basic spot to compare bible version. Family Christian is the place to go for the Message, evidently, as well as the NIV. B&N and Borders had about the same variety. (They had the cheaper paperbacks in more abundance...plus I snagged THE BEST Illustrated Bible Dictionary I have ever seen for only $10 on the bargain shelf.) Basically I wanted a KJV that was easy on the eye and that I would look forward to reading. I got what I needed. As for why I want to read the King James Version...I'll get to that later.
In case you wondered, here are your 3 basic options (to be found at Cokesbury, Wellspring, Family Christian Store, Barnes & Noble, or Borders...yes, I visited all five!):
First is the Zondervan KJV Study Bible. This is the cheapest of the three in hardcover. That would seem to be all that is going for it. The introduction states that the study notes are intended for the 'Conservative Christian'. Strike one. The back cover includes an endorsement from Jerry Falwell. Strikes two...and three. It looks nicely put together and I almost decided to go with this one because of the price. It has nice type-setting and the print is easy on the eye. It is not too bulky and is available in paperback. (No leather cover, however). Still, I just couldn't get past the endorsement from its biggest fan.
Second is the Nelson KJV Study Bible. This one was hard to pick out from the Nelson KJV Reference Bible, which contains no study notes. Again, the introduction states that the bible is for the 'Conservative Christian'. What is up with that? I shouldn't have asked. Turn to the next page...Jerry Falwell is listed as one of the editors. Yikes! Dr. Falwell must really be a fan of the Authorized Version! Its okay...I don't like the layout of this book as much. The print is too dark (I know, it sounds weird, but you'd have to see it). There are symbols that function as pointers to study notes, including a 'set of keys' that are included to indicate essential doctrines. I found these study notes to be heavy-handed and certainly a little bit awkward as they intruded into the text itself. This version was more expensive, though it did come in a nice leather bound addition. Sadly, I don't think it would be proper to buy a Study Bible that you would want to throw across the room every time you sat down to read.
Last, but not least...in this case best (relatively speaking) is the Life Application Bible KJV. I have had a Life Application Bible in the past. It is a beautiful creature. I love the typesetting and layout. It was nicely bound, the kind of bible you'd pass on to your child. This bible was almost identical to the one I remember. The main problem here is that the study notes aren't study notes as much as they are life application questions. It is a little different approach, though it doesn't seem nearly as heavy handed as the Nelson version. There is still some good textual information, though nothing like the Harper Collins or Interpreters. Also, it is the most expensive. However, it was the bible I eventually chose, in the leather bound version no less! Thank God for Amazon! (I saved almost $20 ordering it online!)
All in all, you can find some good KJV bibles out there. It is funny, though, how different store skew towards one version or another. Cokesbury really didn't have much in the way of KJV. They were selling a lot of NRSV Study Bibles. (BTW, the paperback of the Interpreters Study Bible is only $15 at the DSM Cokesbury...get it while its hot!). Wellspring had the largest collection of KJV bibles and that was my basic spot to compare bible version. Family Christian is the place to go for the Message, evidently, as well as the NIV. B&N and Borders had about the same variety. (They had the cheaper paperbacks in more abundance...plus I snagged THE BEST Illustrated Bible Dictionary I have ever seen for only $10 on the bargain shelf.) Basically I wanted a KJV that was easy on the eye and that I would look forward to reading. I got what I needed. As for why I want to read the King James Version...I'll get to that later.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Science....bleh
An article in the online version of the New York Times caught my eye this week. The article was about Florida's requirement that evolution be taught in schools as 'the organizing principle' of modern science. It seems silly to me that this has to be a state law, but of course it plays right into the headline worthy "Evolution vs. Creation" debate. The focus of this article was a teacher by the name of David Campbell who sees teaching evolution as his mission. While he teaches, he is worried about the backwoods, religious fundamentalism of many of his students. He is concerned that he say just the right things so that he doesn't lose the captain of the football team who also happens to be a member of Fellowship of Christian Athletes. It would appear that Mr. Campbell is an evolution missionary bent on making sure all of his students think and believe like he does. Very strange, really, as he has the benefit many of us pastors would kill for: a captive audience.
I jest. I am not for or against the teaching of evolution. Science was terribly boring, ahem...is terribly boring to me. I barely made it through chemistry in high school. When Mrs. Hughes excitedly promoted Physics by saying 'its only applied math' that was a double strike for me! So with apologies to Uncle Sam for not becoming an engineer and designing missles or something, I checked out of science mentally and phyisically. I wonder how ANYONE things that teaching a scientific theory can be exciting. Which is why I think this whole religion vs. science debate is simply overblown and terribly boring.
As a complete 'hater of science' in the mode of Homer Simpson (Did he say science?! No dad, he said...uh...'Pie Pants'! Mmmmm....pie pants!), I have to ask the question: Is it necessary to teach 'evolution'? I mean, can you be a chemist without being subject to boring lectures about natural selection? Can you be a physicist and not read 'The Descent of Man'? Heck, do you really need to understand the fossil record to make a better tasting steak? After reading this article I imagine Mr. Campbell's elite stormtroopers forcing students to study evolution ala Clockword Orange. Seriously...is it that important to focus on evolution specifically? Can't you just teach science?
Let me take the flip side. I am a pastor. My job is to teach people about the Bible. Do I start with an all-encompassing lecture on the Reformed Tradition before I preach every sermon? Of course not! After years of hearing me preach, I would hope that if you sat down my congregants with a list of things Reformed preachers preach about, they would realize I was Reformed. But I don't feel the need to have all of my parishoners universally accept all the points of Reformed Calvinism before I move on. I am not naive enough to think I am preaching to a bunch of Calvinists. In fact, I know two or three who would probably jump right out the stained glass windows if they knew what Calvinists actually believed! Is it important to me as a minister to know it? Yes, of course! Is it important for my congregation to know it? Yes, I think so! Can they still be Christians...can they still be Calvinists...if they don't accept every last point of Reformed theology? Sure, you bet.
I know the evolution thing makes for a sexy debate. Personally, I have only cared about it when the teachers are arrogant jerks. That does happen sometimes and sadly, it doesn't do much to help anyone's openness to scientific theory. However, all being equal, our country is in deperate need of scientists. I hate science. And there are probably quite a few others like me who choose some other sort of career. But, in an age where you NEED scientists, and CRAVE scientists, why start by pissing off a good half of your students with this? Why not just teach science, math, computers...and when it crops up...mention it and move along? Makes sense to me. Ever read this sign: "Don't pee in our pool. We don't swim in your toliet." That's all I have to say about that.
I jest. I am not for or against the teaching of evolution. Science was terribly boring, ahem...is terribly boring to me. I barely made it through chemistry in high school. When Mrs. Hughes excitedly promoted Physics by saying 'its only applied math' that was a double strike for me! So with apologies to Uncle Sam for not becoming an engineer and designing missles or something, I checked out of science mentally and phyisically. I wonder how ANYONE things that teaching a scientific theory can be exciting. Which is why I think this whole religion vs. science debate is simply overblown and terribly boring.
As a complete 'hater of science' in the mode of Homer Simpson (Did he say science?! No dad, he said...uh...'Pie Pants'! Mmmmm....pie pants!), I have to ask the question: Is it necessary to teach 'evolution'? I mean, can you be a chemist without being subject to boring lectures about natural selection? Can you be a physicist and not read 'The Descent of Man'? Heck, do you really need to understand the fossil record to make a better tasting steak? After reading this article I imagine Mr. Campbell's elite stormtroopers forcing students to study evolution ala Clockword Orange. Seriously...is it that important to focus on evolution specifically? Can't you just teach science?
Let me take the flip side. I am a pastor. My job is to teach people about the Bible. Do I start with an all-encompassing lecture on the Reformed Tradition before I preach every sermon? Of course not! After years of hearing me preach, I would hope that if you sat down my congregants with a list of things Reformed preachers preach about, they would realize I was Reformed. But I don't feel the need to have all of my parishoners universally accept all the points of Reformed Calvinism before I move on. I am not naive enough to think I am preaching to a bunch of Calvinists. In fact, I know two or three who would probably jump right out the stained glass windows if they knew what Calvinists actually believed! Is it important to me as a minister to know it? Yes, of course! Is it important for my congregation to know it? Yes, I think so! Can they still be Christians...can they still be Calvinists...if they don't accept every last point of Reformed theology? Sure, you bet.
I know the evolution thing makes for a sexy debate. Personally, I have only cared about it when the teachers are arrogant jerks. That does happen sometimes and sadly, it doesn't do much to help anyone's openness to scientific theory. However, all being equal, our country is in deperate need of scientists. I hate science. And there are probably quite a few others like me who choose some other sort of career. But, in an age where you NEED scientists, and CRAVE scientists, why start by pissing off a good half of your students with this? Why not just teach science, math, computers...and when it crops up...mention it and move along? Makes sense to me. Ever read this sign: "Don't pee in our pool. We don't swim in your toliet." That's all I have to say about that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)