Whispering Wind

Quotes from the late great Mitch Hedberg An escalator can never break: it can only become stairs. You would never see an "Escalator Temporarily Out Of Order" sign, just "Escalator Temporarily Stairs. Sorry For the Convenience." The thing about tennis is: no matter how much I play, I'll never be as good as a wall. I played a wall once. They're fucking relentless. This shirt is dry clean only..which means it's dirty.

0 Comments

NEW YORK (AP)- A city street collapsed under a sport utility vehicle early Monday, leaving the vehicle nose down into a deep sinkhole that officials said was caused by a water main break. The driver of the SUV escaped without serious injures but was taken to a hospital for treatment of shock, said Fire Department spokesman Brian Conlon. The vehicle was barely visible from street level inside the 12-foot-wide hole, partially in a pedestrian crosswalk in Brooklyn. It was resting atop a gas main and crews had to wait for the gas to be turned off before removing it, said Ian Michaels, a spokesman for the Department of Environmental Protection. Damage to the street was probably more extensive than was visible, since water leaking from the 8-inch main could have been washing away soil beneath the street for days, Michaels said. “It’s unlikely that the only part of the roadway that was damaged was that car-shaped hole,” he said. Michaels said emergency contractors would break up the road to determine the extent of the damage. Part of a subway line running beneath the road was also temporarily shut down.

0 Comments

TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP)—Pigs may not be able to fly just yet, but at least three of them glow. Taiwanese researchers said Friday they have bred the pigs with a fluorescent material in a move they hope will benefit the island's stem cell research effort. The fluorescent pigs are green from inside out, including their hearts and internal organs, said Wu Shinn-Chih, assistant professor of animal science at the prestigious National Taiwan University. From the outside, the pigs appear to be bathed in a light green tint, particularly their eyes, mouths and knuckles. Wu said the pigs are bred by injecting their embryos with fluorescent green protein taken from jelly fish. Pigs are commonly used to study human diseases, and Wu believes his technique will be useful in helping researchers monitor tissue changes over time. He said fluorescent cells would show up during stem cell treatment of diseased organs, allowing physicians to monitor the healing progress. "This was simply an idea of ours,'' said Wu. "We hope it can help with future stem cell research by cutting down on the time researchers expend.'' Last year, another team of Taiwanese researchers claimed they developed an alternative to laboratory mice for testing new medicines—using fluorescent fish to show the impact of experimental drugs on cancerous tumors. They took a gene that makes jelly fish fluoresce and transplanted it into the livers of zebra fish that were then later implanted with cancer cells for testing. The gene highlighted the cancerous tissue with a special tint, allowing the glowing zebra fish to be used for screening the impact of drugs. Next thing you know they'll be proudly announcing three-eyed pigs as a revolutionary resource for the blind.

0 Comments

What wondrous love is this, O my soul, O my soul! What wondrous love is this, O my soul! What wondrous love is this that caused the Lord of bliss To bear the dreadful curse for my soul, for my soul, To bear the dreadful curse for my soul. When I was sinking down, sinking down, sinking down, When I was sinking down, sinking down, When I was sinking down beneath God’s righteous frown, Christ laid aside His crown for my soul, for my soul, Christ laid aside His crown for my soul. To God and to the Lamb, I will sing, I will sing; To God and to the Lamb, I will sing. To God and to the Lamb Who is the great “I Am”; While millions join the theme, I will sing, I will sing; While millions join the theme, I will sing. And when from death I’m free, I’ll sing on, I’ll sing on; And when from death I’m free, I’ll sing on. And when from death I’m free, I’ll sing and joyful be; And through eternity, I’ll sing on, I’ll sing on; And through eternity, I’ll sing on.

0 Comments

Marlyne Hammon knows what it's like to feel hated and hunted. In 1953, when she was an infant, her father—along with dozens of other men in her tiny community of Short Creek, Ariz.—was arrested and sent to jail on charges of polygamy. She, her mother and siblings were forcibly exiled from the community and sent to live with a family in a nearby city. Her father was released after a week, but because the family feared further prosecution, they lived apart and corresponded in secret for the next six years. "Our community had this idea that we should live our lives quietly to avoid trouble," she says. "We were taught not to make a big ruckus." Not anymore. Hammon, who's involved in a polygamous relationship, is a founding member of the Centennial Park Action Committee, a group that lobbies for decriminalization of the practice. She's among a new wave of polygamy activists emerging in the wake of the gay-marriage movement—just as a federal lawsuit challenging anti-polygamy laws makes its way through the courts and a new show about polygamy debuts on HBO. "Polygamy rights is the next civil-rights battle," says Mark Henkel, who, as founder of the Christian evangelical polygamy organization TruthBearer.org, is at the forefront of the movement. His argument: if Heather can have two mommies, she should also be able to have two mommies and a daddy. Henkel and Hammon have been joined by other activist groups like Principle Voices, a Utah-based group run by wives from polygamous marriages. Activists point to Canada, where, in January, a report commissioned by the Justice Department recommended decriminalizing polygamy. There's a sound legal argument for making the controversial practice legal, says Brian Barnard, the lawyer for a Utah couple, identified in court documents only as G. Lee Cooke and D. Cooke, who filed suit after being denied a marriage license for an additional wife. Though the case was struck down by a federal court last year, it's now being considered by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, and Barnard plans to use the same argument—that Lawrence v. Texas, the 2003 sodomy case in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that individuals have "the full right to engage in private conduct without government intervention," should also apply to polygamous relationships. Almost always, when the legalization of polygamy is brought up, it's used to make a case against gay marriage. Most notably, Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania told the Associated Press in 2003 that legalizing gay sex would pave the way for legalized bigamy, polygamy and incest. This "slippery slope" argument angers some gay-rights activists who see the issues as being completely separate. "I frankly would not love to see an article [about polygamy advocacy] in NEWSWEEK because this is the connection that our opponents make, and we feel it's a specious one," says Carisa Cunningham, director of public affairs for Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders. Polygamy activists aren't thrilled with the association, either. Though they closely watch the gay-marriage battle, they are generally religious and conservative—and, like Henkel and Hammon, believe that homosexual behavior is a sin. Polygamy is a lifestyle choice for a relative handful of Americans. Experts estimate that there are between 30,000 and 50,000 polygamists in the United States who practice a form of Mormonism, though the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, most commonly associated with the term "Mormon," banned the practice in 1890. There's also a growing number of evangelical Christian and Muslim polygamists—some experts say they may even exceed the number who describe themselves as Mormon. Polygamy rights, not surprisingly, get little support beyond those who are actually polygamists. A May 2005 Gallup poll found that 92 percent of Americans oppose the practice, which is illegal in all 50 states. But the tiny movement may get its biggest boost from an unexpected source: HBO. This week the network debuted a new drama, "Big Love," which offers a sympathetic look at a polygamous family. "We value this as our way of life," says Hammon. "We've got to have a voice in this." Polygamists are finally speaking up—but will anyone listen?

0 Comments

Name: A Course in Miracles Founder: Helen Schucman Date of Birth:1909 Birth Place: Year Founded: In 1965, Helen Schucman began hearing a voice that would later identify himself as Jesus. She and her colleague, William Thetford, scribed the conversations into a three volume series that was published in 1976 Sacred or Revered Texts: A Course in Miracles is the sacred text, which includes a text, a workbook for students, and a teacher's manual. Size of Group: Over 1 and a half million copies of The Course have been sold, and over 2,200 study groups now meet worldwide II. History: Helen Schucman was an associate professor of medical psychology at Columbia University in New York. She had an interesting relationship with her colleague, Bill Thetford. When Schucman first saw Thetford she said to herself, "And there he is. He's the one I'm supposed to help". Schuchman did not yet know what this help would be. "Helen and Bill were obviously drawn together, as if they both recognized on another level a purpose to their association greater than simply a professional one" They became very close friends, but also had a very strained relationship. As Schucman recalled, "The relationship between Bill and myself deteriorated steadily. We had come quite interdependent, but we had also developed considerable anger towards each other" As their relationship worsened, Schuchman and Thetford desperately sought solutions to fix their problems. One day Thetford came to Schuchman and said, "There must be another way" Schuchman then began having strange visions and dreams. In the autumn of 1965, Schuchman told Thetford she felt she was "about to do something very unexpectedThetford advised her to write down everything that was happening to her. In her first attempts, not much transpired. But then on October 21, 1965, a voice said to her, "This is a course in miracles. Please take notes" This voice, claimed Schuchman, was the voice of Jesus. Schuchman recalled, "The voice made no sound, but seemed to be giving me a kind of rapid inner diction which I took down in a shorthand notebook". Schuchman began writing down everything the voice had to say. At first, the teachings were mixed in with material geared towards helping Schuchman and Thetford with their own relationships and lives. Jesus instructed that these passages be removed, "as they were not meant for the general readership" It took seven years, but finally A Course in Miracles was complete. In the winter of 1972, Schuchman and Thetford met Dr. Kenneth Wapnick through a mutual friend. He helped them edit the text and got it published through the Foundation for Inner Peace (FIP.) In June of 1975, Schuchman turned over the copyrights to FIP, and in June of 1976, the three-volume work, including the text, a workbook for students and a teacher's manual, was published Schuchman and Thetford wanted to remain anonymous in their association with The Course because they feared they would lose their jobs, and they did not want to be made into gurus or cult figures Ironically, neither Schuchman nor Thetford ever identified with the teachings of The Course. For Schuchman, ACIM "aroused tremendous anxiety". Shcuchman openly admitted that she was unable to, "integrate the teachings into her own life". Her own failure with The Course has led many people to doubt its relevance. Since the book's publication, over one and a half million copies of The Course have been sold and over 2,200 study groups have formed From the FIP, the Foundation for A Course in Miracles (FACIM) was formed by Kenneth Wapnick in 1983. FIP remained primarily in charge of publishing ACIM, while FACIM focused on teaching it. The main campus is located in Roscoe, NY. It has lodging, dining, classrooms, a bookstore, and a library, as well as recreational facilities, including swimming, boating, tennis, badminton, volleyball, and hiking In 1997, a West Coast branch opened in La Jolla, CA. The West Coast branch does not offer dining or lodging. FACIM founded the Institute for Teaching Inner Peace through A Course in Miracles (ITIP-ACIM), which is a credited teaching institution chartered by the New York State Department of Education The ITIP-ACIM focuses on both study and application in teaching The Course. Its goals for their programs are for students to develop a deeper understanding of The Course The Miracle Distribution Center is another organization founded around the teachings of The Course. Founded by Beverly Hutchinson and her brother in 1978, the organization began as a four person operation, and has now grown into a networking center for people studying The Course. MDC serves several purposes: a networking center, an educational center, and a spiritual counseling center. As a networking center, it publishes a bi-monthly newsletter entitled The Holy Encounter, compiles a listing of study groups, and sponsors a pen-pal project to connect students from all over. As an educational center, MDC facilitates weekly study groups, hosts annual conferences, sponsors lectures, and provides a 24 hour phone service that gives daily lessons from the workbook. As a spiritual counseling center, it offers help through e-mail, mail, fax, and phone; prayers through the Miracle Prayer Ministry; and assistance through the Counseling Referral Service. ACIM brought about other organizations, such as the Community Miracles Center, Miracles Counseling, and the Circle of Atonement. CMC "exists to provide supportive community relationships for A Course in Miracles students worldwide". CMC began in 1987, and offers online study groups, a monthly publication, and links to many other ACIM resources. Miracles Counseling "is an online counseling service" Their counseling is based on the principles of A Course in Miracles. The Circle of Atonement is a teaching and healing center located in Sedona, AZ. It is a non-profit organization that teaches ACIM through weekly study classes, workshops, seminars, correspondence courses, booklets, newsletters, and books. The Course received a lot of publicity due to believers such as Marianne Williamson. Williamson is the author of A Return to Love, which is her reflections on The Course. She promotes The Course through lectures and even on TV, appearing on the Oprah Winfrey show. Williamson preaches weekly to packed audiences. The majority of her followers are "guiltless baby boomers" and many were once involved in twelve-step programs. She also has many celebrity followers, earning her the nickname "Hollywood's Guru" She officiated at Elizabeth Taylor's wedding, and has other celebrity followers such as Cher, Bette Midler, and Shirley MacLaine Williamson is an inspirational speaker, telling her followers, "Align your mind with God and watch the miracles happen" Williamson believes the core teaching of ACIM, "is simply that God is love" III. Beliefs of the Group: According to A Course in Miracles Homepage, "A Course in Miracles is a self-study spiritual thought system that teaches that the way to universal love and peace-or remembering God-is by undoing guilt through forgiveness". This forgiveness is for others as well as oneself. The Course believes that only love is real, and that everything negative is merely an illusion of one's mind, including the world. Our world is made up of our own ideas, and this becomes truth as we know it. The world we see is simply a figment of one's imagination and realizing this leads to the ultimate truth: Heaven. The Course teaches that ego (not God) created the world. The world we see is illusional, and God does not know it exists The Course stresses that it is not the only route people can follow, because "they all lead to God in the end" The Course refers to the illusionary view of the world as "ego" or "wrong-mindedness." The ego has three parts: sin, guilt, and fear. Sin is "the belief that we have separated from God"; guilt is having sinned; fear is the belief that one deserves punishment for one's sins 33. Right-mindedness, on the other hand, occurs when one stops believing in the illusionary world and starts believing in God's World. The Course describes darkness as wrong mindedness, and teaches the necessity to escape from darkness. The process has two steps: 1.) Recognition that darkness cannot hide; 2.) Recognition that there is nothing you want to hide even if you could. Followers of The Course believe that Jesus came to Schuchman and presented The Course at that particular time for several reasons. These are outlined in the Foundation for A Course in Miracles (FACIM) Homepage. These include: The Necessity of healing the mind of the belief that attack is salvation; this is accomplished through forgiveness, the undoing of the belief in the reality of separation in guilt. Emphasizing the importance of Jesus and/or the Holy Spirit as our loving and gentle Teacher, and developing a personal relationship with his Teacher. Correcting the errors of Christianity, particularly where it has emphasized suffering, sacrifice, separation, and sacrament as being inherent to God's plan of salvation The Course is Christian in terminology, referring to Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and God, but its beliefs stray from the traditional ideals of Christianity. According to The Course, Jesus is one of many Christs, and we all have the possibility of becoming Christ. Jesus is, "an elder brother…entitled to respect for his greater experience" The Course also differs from Christianity in its belief of Heaven. The Course believes that man has never really left Heaven; we are still there but simply in a dream from which we need to awaken This process is atonement. The Course defines atonement as, "a lesson in sharing, which is given to you because you have forgotten how to do it". Unlike Christianity, The Course does not call for "worship, ritual, tithing, a formal church, conventional prayer, priesthood, hierarchy, or even a congregation" The Course defines terms in a different manner than usually defined in the English language. According to The Course, a miracle is "the change of mind that shifts our perception from the ego's world of sin, guilt, and fear, to the Holy Spirit's world of forgiveness". The miracle occurs when we realize that the word is illusionary. The ego is the belief in the false self, that the world actually exists. Atonement is the way to, "undo the ego and heal the belief in separation," and Jesus is the first person to complete this atonement ACIM sees the body as a consequence of the mind and a device which is only used to help heal the mind. Death, according to The Course, is the "central dream from which all illusions stem," and is the "symbol of the fear of God" It goes on to add, "If God created bodies, death would be real". But according to The Course, God does not create bodies. The workbook serves to help students in their studies. "The purpose of the workbook is to train your mind in a systematic way to a different perception of everyone and everything in the world" The workbook consists of 365 daily lessons, but one may choose to spend more than a day on one lesson. The lessons start out simple, but then build to more complex ideas. Lesson 1 states, "Nothing I see in this room [on this street, from this window, in this place] means anything" The student then applies that idea to things around him, "this pen does not mean anything" The manual for teachers is a guidebook to help them enhance the students' learning. It begins by describing the characteristics of 'God's Teachers': trust, honesty, tolerance, gentleness, joy, defenselessness, generosity, patience, faithfulness, and open mindedness The manual "is written in question and answer form and provides answers to some of the more likely questions a student might ask". IV. Issues and Controversies Is it Christian? The Course angers many Christians due to its contradictions with the Bible. One such contradiction is concerning Creation. The Course teaches that the world is an illusion created by man, whereas the Bible explicitly states, "In the beginning, God created the heaven and earth". Another big difference between The Course and The Bible is that The Course teaches that Jesus is not the only savior. According to The Course, "We don't need a savior. Salvation is nothing more than right-mindedness. We are the source of our own salvation". This belief obviously strays greatly from what Christianity teaches. Therefore, many Christians cannot accept The Course as legitimate. Christians argue that The Course is not a religion, "it is in reality nothing more than cloaked New Age philosophy lurking in the shadows waiting to spring on the unaware". They are also resentful towards The Course because one of the purposes of the Foundation for A Course in Miracles (FACIM) is to correct, "the errors of Christianity" Many Christians are alarmed by the growing popularity of The Course. "A growing number of Christians are being sucked into this whirlpool of spiritual confusion in which they exchange the truth for a lie," writes one critic of The Course. He goes on to write, "It is unequivocally anti-biblical and it is without a doubt promoted by satanic deception". A former Course believer, Moira Noonan, describes The Course as, "Satan's mock-bible," and also calls it a "course in brainwashing" One avid critic of The Course sums up his opinion, warning that, "It is a series of books and an organizations whose existence every Christian should not only be aware of, but also have a biblical answer for, in order to refute its heretical teachings" Copyright Issues Jesus advised Schuchman and Thetman to copyright The Course, however, he "cautioned her against publicly associating her name with it". At the Copyright Office of the Library of Congress, they were told that a copyright could not be assigned to 'Jesus' or 'Anonymous.' They eventually decided to register the copyright in the name of Anonymous, followed by Helen Schucman. Helen then assigned the copyright to FIP In 1999, FIP transferred the copyrights over to FACIM. Several court cases have sprung up over the copyrights of ACIM. One such case involved Penguin Books (who publishes The Course) and Endeavor Academy in Wisconsin. Penguin sued Endeavor for copyright infringement. However, Endeavor Academy argues that Jesus wrote The Course, and therefore it is not copyrightable. Penguin responded that Helen Schucman, not Jesus, wrote The Course. Schuchman simply used Jesus as "a symbol of the love of God," and The Course is actually her words for the idea of the eternal love of God. Penguin's response has an impact on students of ACIM because it challenges the authenticity of their beliefs. For some, the authorship is crucial to their relationship with it. If it is not Jesus, their relationship to The Course would greatly change; words that come from Jesus himself are very powerful; words that come from Helen Schucman do not carry as much weight. Since an important aspect of The Course is developing a personal relationship with Jesus, it is crucial to understand if the words are coming from him or not Another such court case was filed by Robert Perry (of the Circle of Atonement) against FACIM. When copyrights were turned over to FACIM, FACIM sent letters to several organizations that used ACIM at the core of their groups and told them that any material making any use of The Course had to be submitted to FACIM for approval. FACIM denied Robert Perry permission to use excerpts from ACIM in his upcoming book. Perry then filed "a legal motion calling for a judge to 'establish the right of COA to fairly use A Course in Miracles and other related works in its publications'". FACIM filed a counterclaim for 52 infringing works. FACIM also filed suits against several other groups for copyright violations. Many of these suits are still pending.

2 Comments

0 Comments

It's hard to find fault with Whole Foods, the haute-crunchy supermarket chain that has made a fortune by transforming grocery shopping into a bright and shiny, progressive experience. Indeed, the road to wild profits and cultural cachet has been surprisingly smooth for the supermarket chain. It gets mostly sympathetic coverage in the local and national media and red-carpet treatment from the communities it enters. But does Whole Foods have an Achilles' heel? And more important, does the organic movement itself, whose coattails Whole Foods has ridden to such success, have dark secrets of its own? Granted, there's plenty that's praiseworthy about Whole Foods. John Mackey, the company's chairman, likes to say, "There's no inherent reason why business cannot be ethical, socially responsible, and profitable." And under the umbrella creed of "sustainability," Whole Foods pays its workers a solid living wage—its lowest earners average $13.15 an hour—with excellent benefits and health care. No executive makes more than 14 times the employee average. (Mackey's salary last year was $342,000.) In January, Whole Foods announced that it had committed to buy a year's supply of power from a wind-power utility in Wyoming. But even if Whole Foods has a happy staff and nice windmills, is it really as virtuous as it appears to be? Take the produce section, usually located in the geographic center of the shopping floor and the spiritual heart of a Whole Foods outlet. (Every media profile of the company invariably contains a paragraph of fawning produce porn, near-sonnets about "gleaming melons" and "glistening kumquats.") In the produce section of Whole Foods' flagship New York City store at the Time Warner Center, shoppers browse under a big banner that lists "Reasons To Buy Organic." On the banner, the first heading is "Save Energy." The accompanying text explains how organic farmers, who use natural fertilizers like manure and compost, avoid the energy waste involved in the manufacture of synthetic fertilizers. It's a technical point that probably barely registers with most shoppers but contributes to a vague sense of virtue. Fair enough. But here's another technical point that Whole Foods fails to mention and that highlights what has gone wrong with the organic-food movement in the last couple of decades. Let's say you live in New York City and want to buy a pound of tomatoes in season. Say you can choose between conventionally grown New Jersey tomatoes or organic ones grown in Chile. Of course, the New Jersey tomatoes will be cheaper. They will also almost certainly be fresher, having traveled a fraction of the distance. But which is the more eco-conscious choice? In terms of energy savings, there's no contest: Just think of the fossil fuels expended getting those organic tomatoes from Chile. Which brings us to the question: Setting aside freshness, price, and energy conservation, should a New Yorker just instinctively choose organic, even if the produce comes from Chile? A tough decision, but you can make a self-interested case for the social and economic benefit of going Jersey, especially if you prefer passing fields of tomatoes to fields of condominiums when you tour the Garden State. Another heading on the Whole Foods banner says "Help the Small Farmer." "Buying organic," it states, "supports the small, family farmers that make up a large percentage of organic food producers." This is semantic sleight of hand. As one small family farmer in Connecticut told me recently, "Almost all the organic food in this country comes out of California. And five or six big California farms dominate the whole industry." There's a widespread misperception in this country—one that organic growers, no matter how giant, happily encourage—that "organic" means "small family farmer." That hasn't been the case for years, certainly not since 1990, when the Department of Agriculture drew up its official guidelines for organic food. Whole Foods knows this well, and so the line about the "small family farmers that make up a large percentage of organic food producers" is sneaky. There are a lot of small, family-run organic farmers, but their share of the organic crop in this country, and of the produce sold at Whole Foods, is minuscule. A nearby banner at the Time Warner Center Whole Foods proclaims "Our Commitment to the Local Farmer," but this also doesn't hold up to scrutiny. More likely, the burgeoning local-food movement is making Whole Foods uneasy. After all, a multinational chain can't promote a "buy local" philosophy without being self-defeating. When I visited the Time Warner Whole Foods last fall—high season for native fruits and vegetables on the East Coast—only a token amount of local produce was on display. What Whole Foods does do for local farmers is hang glossy pinups throughout the store, what they call "grower profiles," which depict tousled, friendly looking organic farmers standing in front of their crops. This winter, when I dropped by the store, the only local produce for sale was a shelf of upstate apples, but the grower profiles were still up. There was a picture of a sandy-haired organic leek farmer named Dave, from Whately, Mass., above a shelf of conventionally grown yellow onions from Oregon. Another profile showed a guy named Ray Rex munching on an ear of sweet corn he grew on his generations-old, picturesque organic acres. The photograph was pinned above a display of conventionally grown white onions from Mexico. These profiles may be heartwarming, but they also artfully mislead customers about what they're paying premium prices for. If Whole Foods marketing didn't revolve so much around explicit (as well as subtly suggestive) appeals to food ethics, it'd be easier to forgive some exaggerations and distortions. Of course, above and beyond social and environmental ethics, and even taste, people buy organic food because they believe that it's better for them. All things being equal, food grown without pesticides is healthier for you. But American populism chafes against the notion of good health for those who can afford it. Charges of elitism—media wags, in otherwise flattering profiles, have called Whole Foods "Whole Paycheck" and "wholesome, healthy for the wholesome, wealthy"—are the only criticism of Whole Foods that seems to have stuck. Which brings us to the newest kid in the organic-food sandbox: Wal-Mart, the world's biggest grocery retailer, has just begun a major program to expand into organic foods. If buying food grown without chemical pesticides and synthetic fertilizers has been elevated to a status-conscious lifestyle choice, it could also be transformed into a bare-bones commodity purchase. When the Department of Agriculture established the guidelines for organic food in 1990, it blew a huge opportunity. The USDA—under heavy agribusiness lobbying—adopted an abstract set of restrictions for organic agriculture and left "local" out of the formula. What passes for organic farming today has strayed far from what the shaggy utopians who got the movement going back in the '60s and '70s had in mind. But if these pioneers dreamed of revolutionizing the nation's food supply, they surely didn't intend for organic to become a luxury item, a high-end lifestyle choice. It's likely that neither Wal-Mart nor Whole Foods will do much to encourage local agriculture or small farming, but in an odd twist, Wal-Mart, with its simple "More for Less" credo, might do far more to democratize the nation's food supply than Whole Foods. The organic-food movement is in danger of exacerbating the growing gap between rich and poor in this country by contributing to a two-tiered national food supply, with healthy food for the rich. Could Wal-Mart's populist strategy prove to be more "sustainable" than Whole Foods? Stranger things have happened.

2 Comments

Something I found today that was interesting..... Fool-for-love move #1: Believing that falling head-over-heels in love at first sight is best. How to fix it: Flash-bang-wow chemistry is fun, but true love evolves over time—not through fleeting glances or over a few cocktails during one enchanted evening. “I have a client who thinks that he has to have this immediate passionate connection with someone or he won’t go on a second date, which keeps him from possibly finding a good match,” says Firestone. She suggests that if you’re still at least a little interested in the person, go out again. No one’s at their most natural state on a first date anyway, so you both benefit from another opportunity to chat. “Love at first sight is a myth, and it’s important to give different kinds of people a chance,” says Firestone. Being open to new experiences can be an important step on the path to finding a partner. Fool-for-love move #2: Having sex early on in a dating relationship. How to fix it: “If you sleep with someone right away, it can be a problem later, because you’ve bypassed the phase of ‘Tell me more about yourself’ and ‘What do you like to do on Sundays?’” says Laurie Puhn, J.D., author of Instant Persuasion: How to Change Your Words to Change Your Life. “It feels weird to ruin comfort levels by asking such basic questions after you've gotten physically close.” Puhn suggests that the next time you feel the urge for one night of fun, remind yourself that you can get unlimited nights of fun if you wait—without skipping any key getting-to-know-you steps. Set new timelines for yourself: Only after ten dates, a month, ten months, when you know you’re boyfriend-girlfriend—wh atever marks a slow-it-down improvement for you. Fool-for-love move #3: Falling for someone who’s taken. How to fix it: “Spoken-for people can be very attractive, because they’re often confident enough to flirt and you may be craving affection,” says Rinatta Paries, a love coach at FixYourLoveLife.com. “You may get the attention you desire in the moment, but you also get the heartache of someone who is not free to be fully attached to you.” No matter how much you say you don’t “need” a boyfriend or girlfriend who’s 100% there for you, the fact is, you do miss out when you settle for a partial partner. Paries recommends making yourself socialize with new people (join a book club or take a wine-tasting class, for example) and scheduling a string of dates online to help you remember just how desirable you are. You deserve someone who puts you first, so start auditioning mates who have long-term potential instead of devoting your time to one who’s proven he or she doesn’t. Fool-for-love move #4: Not letting people know you’re seriously looking. How to fix it: When you’re tired of being single, appealing to your friends for help can seem like an act of desperation. “Blind dates can be scary and uncomfortable, but it's a lot more uncomfortable to sit at home on a Friday night feeling depressed and lonely,” says Puhn. In fact, asking for introductions makes you feel proactive in your search for a mate, and it dispels any shame you might have about being solo. You’ll feel more positive and happy about dating, an attitude that will be attractive to others when you do schedule a date. So make a fresh start by telling your friends that you'd like to be set up. Even if they don’t know anyone right for you, once you’ve mentioned that you’re looking, you’re bound to score yourself more invites to parties, girls’/guys’ nights out, and other social events where you could meet, well, anyone. Fool-for-love move #5: Ignoring red flags (even if the person waving them is otherwise amazing). How to fix it: Have you ever found yourself thinking, “He’s great, even if he does drink waaaay too much,” or “She’s sexy; so what if she works for me?” When you’re smitten, it’s easy to overlook issues that threaten the very basis of a future serious relationship, but when you do, you’re sabotaging your shot at said serious relationship. “Every time you date someone with an issue you have to work to ignore, you’re settling,” says Paries. A better option? When red flags pop up, talk about them. Ask questions. Honestly decide if the baggage at hand is a deal-breaker for what you want long-term, and make the hard (but smart) choice to stop dating if that is the case. If someone isn’t ready for a relationship, has substance abuse issues, or is not a good prospect in another vital way, you are wasting your time if you pursue this person romantically. “If you can, keep the friendship,” says Paries. “You never know when a friend of a friend might be perfect for you.” And that’s because when it comes to the game of love, setting your priorities — and sticking with them — can pay off in ways you never expected.

0 Comments

Taking a break from writing in here for a while...school and the life of a girl trying to line up opportunities for herself (college stress again) has gotten to me, and I think I may pare down a little. At least for a while. Who knows? Maybe it's time to put this blog to rest after nearly two years. Or I may keep it. I'll be sure to make up my mind in a month or so.

0 Comments

Ok, pretty excited. I've the opportunity once again to take the train somewhere, and the fact that I like both the train AND the destination just makes it better. I still have brief worries about derailing or smashing into an oncoming train, but I'm more likely to get in my car and be killed than in any other way, so I'm pretty secure with my chosen mode of transportation. I'm only hoping I get two seats by myself again. Either that or I hope I sit next to an older lady. They are oh so much fun to talk to! I love asking them about stuff they did when they were my age. You'd be surprised what adventures many 90-year-olds have had! There is a lot we could learn from them.

0 Comments

There are many stories of spiritual masters embracing the presence of an annoying student in their community. There is even one story that documents a teacher paying an irritating person to live among his students. From an everyday perspective, this is difficult to comprehend. We generally work hard to avoid people and things that we find annoying so they don't bother us. From a deeper spiritual perspective, however, irritation can be an important teacher and indicator that we are making progress on our path. Being able to remain centered and awake even when we feel uncomfortable is much more impressive than doing so in an environment where everything is to our liking. No matter how good we are at controlling our circumstances, there will always be factors and people that we cannot control. How we respond to these experiences to a great degree determines the quality of our lives. The goal of spiritual development is not to learn to control our environment-which is more of an ego-driven desire. And while having some measure of control over our external reality is important, it is when we are confronted with a person or situation that irritates us and we can choose not to react that we know have made progress spiritually. It is when we have mastered our internal reality that we will have become the masters of our lives. The more we try to eliminate annoyances, instead of learning to handle them gracefully, the further we get from developing the qualities that come with spiritual growth, such as patience, tolerance, and acceptance. It is often in the presence of people and experiences we find annoying that we have an opportunity to develop these qualities. Fortunately for most of us, our lives offer an abundance of opportunities to practice and cultivate these traits! :)

0 Comments

Swinging back the other way now, I find myself settling into my former identity. I shake my head at myself: I seem to have more identities than a spy. I enjoy mass and belief in a God, but I also meditate, read the Dalai Lama's teachings, and still have a fond affection for my Buddhist brothers and sisters. Buddhism is less a religion (for me) and more a way of life (which, ideally, is what religion shouls be: action and example rather than empty beliefs and doctrine). It often comes into conflict with the seemingly warlike Christianity I am a product of, but I figure it is better to err on the side of nonviolence. I worry a little about this pendulum-like habit. The one consolation I have is that I think I'm swinging back to my true self this time. I feel like I'm greeting an old friend, and not a new and enthralling one. Perhaps I was simply readjusting myself to the new things that have entered my life (college, a boyfriend, moving out), a sort of psychological homeostasis. Whatever the case, I think I may have finally found a little peace. And I'm enjoying it.

0 Comments

0 Comments

I think I'm happier with how this turned out. A bit more representitive of me, I think. I've always like the Pre-Raphaelite style of painting. A busy week greets me and I have much to do.

0 Comments

Messed around a bit with my blog to reflect some adjustments I've been making, both inside and out. Not sure what I think about it yet. That's where you come in.

1 Comments

I've been pondering the purpose of vasectomies lately, mostly due to a conversation I've had with a guy who would not seem to have a problem with it. I understand his views, and they do have their validity, but something about the word turns my stomach. Is it just the Catholic puritanical values that have been instilled in me rearing their controlling little heads? Or is there somthing deeper, morally, that is tugging at my Jiminy Cricket of a conscience?

0 Comments