Otter's Rock

My J-term class this year was "Music of Spiritual and Religious Formation," a class I highly enjoyed. I chose to write a hymn text instead of a paper, and I finally got it done. Here it is! It's an Advent hymn, obviously, and the tune is "O Savior, Rend the Heavens Wide," #38 in the LBW for you Lutherans out there.

( Now is the Time to Keep Awake )


Quote of the Day:
You can safely assume you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out God hates all the same people you do.
-Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird

We hear all the time about how the Liberals are nicer people--they want to take care of people, and the environment, etc. Conservatives, being against government programs that do these things, are inherently less compassionate, right? After all, argue the Liberals, sure, in principle it would be better if people would actually donate their time and money to charity than have the government do it, nobody in today's era would actually do that, right? Which is why the government has to step in and do it.

I've always believed that in most cases, that belief that people would never give to charity says more about the people who say that than it does about people in general. And whaddaya know, an economist named Arthur C. Brooks did a study and found out that I was right! Note that he was expecting to find that Liberals gave more to charity (in general) than Conservatives did, and was quite shocked by his actual findings. That's a good indication that his findings aren't tainted by his own biases; I'm always a little leary when people find exactly what they set out to, y'know? Even if it does agree with what I believe. Anyway, here's the Amazon editor's review:

"Surprising proof that conservatives really are more compassionate--and more generous--than liberals

We all know we should give to charity, but who really does? Approximately three-quarters of Americans give their time and money to various charities, churches, and causes; the other quarter of the population does not. Why has America split into two nations: givers and non-givers?

Arthur Brooks, a top scholar of economics and public policy, has spent years researching this trend, and even he was surprised by what he found. In Who Cares, he demonstrates conclusively that conservatives really are compassionate-far more compassionate than their liberal foes. Strong families, church attendance, earned income (as opposed to state-subsidized income), and the belief that individuals, not government, offer the best solution to social ills-all of these factors determine how likely one is to give.

Charity matters--not just to the givers and to the recipients, but to the nation as a whole. It is crucial to our prosperity, happiness, health, and our ability to govern ourselves as a free people. In Who Cares, Brooks outlines strategies for expanding the ranks of givers, for the good of all Americans.

About the Author
Arthur C. Brooks is professor of public administration at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. He is the author of numerous articles and books on topics relating to charity and civic life, and his work appears frequently in the Wall Street Journal and other publications."

Among the findings of the book:
Conservative households in America donate 30% more money to charity each year than liberal households, even in spite of lower average incomes

Conservatives are also more generous in other ways, such as blood donations, and volunteer work. In fact, if liberals gave blood like conservatives do, the blood supply in the U.S. would jump by about 45%

People who mistrust big government give more than those who rely on the government to take care of the poor. This includes giving and volunteering even to traditionally “progressive causes” such as the arts and the environment

( More stats )

Quote of the Day:
I am not an American who “will cut the cloth of my conscience to fit this year's fashions.”
-Lillian Helman, The Senate Committee on Un-American Activities, 1952

When you have a government big enough to give you all you want, it will be big enough to take it all away.
-Barry Goldwater

God has a special providence for fools, drunks and the United States of America.
-Bismarck

I just signed up for sg_rarepairings ficathon. Deadline to sign up is September 17th, if you're interested in participating.

Seminary is going fine so far, but I am glad I took Greek in college and not here. In college it was a) slower (they cram what we did in two years into one school year at seminary) and b) better organized. Byron, our prof at Luther, wrote his own textbook because he didn't like the way most textbooks were written arranged. Flipping through the text used here at Gettysburg, and having sat in on a couple of classes so far, I'd have to agree with him. And I got an e-mail from the professor here after class today, asking me not to speak up when I know the answer, because he wants the people who haven't been through this already to work through it. It makes sense, but it will be frustrating, being the shy, retiring person I am. Not.

Hebrew: the alphabet is a killer. It looks nothing like any European alphabet, which makes it harder to memorize than the Greek alphabet. But I've been told that's the hardest part, and it's fairly straightforward once you've got that down. One can only hope. I'm remembering the Masoretes in my prayers tonight; they're the 5th Century CE group of Jews who managed to figure out how one could indicate what vowel when with what syllable without altering the text itself (which you couldn't do for obvious reasons). It's hard enough to figure out with the vowels, as a beginning student of the language. Without them? Eep!

Quote of the Day: He that leaveth nothing to chance will do few things ill, but he will do very few things.
-George Savile, Marquess de Halifax

Hello, all. For those of you who don't know me, I am a Grammar Geek. I get annoyed when people can't spell, or use semicolons improperly, or use the wrong homonym. It seriously bugs me, and I want to correct it.

Today's lesson is about homonyms, words that sound the same but are spelled differently and mean different things. This particular homonym pair are my pet peeves:
affect and effect

( All you ever wanted to know about affect and effect but were afraid to ask )


Quote of the Day:
Now, there's this about cynicism, Sergeant. It's the universe's most supine moral position. Real comfortable. If nothing can be changed, then you're not some kind of shit for not changing it, and you can lie there and stink to yourself in perfect peace.
--Lois McMaster Bujold, "The Borders of Infinity"

Okay, here's the first part of New Lives, the sequel to Consequences. This is everything posted so far at Fanfiction.net. FF.net gets updated weekly in small chunks; it'll probabbly be another month before I have enough small chunks to make a big chunk to post here on LJ.

( New Lives, Part 1 )

New Lives, Part 2
New Lives, Part 3

Quote of the Day:

Figures don’t lie, but liars figure.
-Dr. Marvin Slind

(Dr. Slind is a history professor at Luther College; I had him for "Rome: Republic and Empire" and "Modern European History (1815-present)."