Essay #1:
Please write a brief biographical sketch about yourself.
Limit your response to 300 words.
Mom had four boys by the time she turned 24. Dad worked awful hours in the stench of a tannery to support us and put himself through nursing school. She had joined the LDS church while living in foster homes; he was the youngest son of a single Mexican immigrant mother. Both ignited in their children a love of learning and virtue. Dad rid the house of its television, insisted his boys say “yes” instead of “yeah,” and taught us the names of every bone in the body. Mom ran a daycare from the modest duplex, took the kids on weekly educational fieldtrips, and shopped at garage sales for the best surprise we knew of: armfuls of used books.
As the oldest of the boys, I was the first to finish high school and serve an LDS mission. I served in the frozen southern reaches of Chile, learned Spanish quickly (thanks to Mom’s grammar lessons and Dad’s sangre Mexicano), and spent my mission loving and teaching the Chilean people. When I returned, I attended community college in Napa, California, then moved to Utah to attend BYU. I went to the beginning of a semester of BYU, but found I was financially unprepared and dropped out to earn some money first. I became a waiter, determined to follow Dad’s example by working hard and supporting myself. Within a year I had worked my way to the top of the restaurant’s hierarchy as general manager over two restaurants and almost two hundred employees.
The restaurant job was enjoyable, but my parents’ emphasis on education still burned within like an ember. Hence, I am applying again to BYU, hoping to get my English Language degree so that I might stoke the flame of my education and share its light with future generations.
Essay #2:
Please describe your educational, professional, and other goals. Describe how BYU
will help you achieve them. Limit your response to 300 words.
I have a slightly out-of-focus vision of my future. I’ll describe it to you the best I can. Of course, anything I write here is subject to unforeseeable change, but for now I’m working vigorously toward this vision.
In my future, I will attend BYU and receive a bachelor’s degree in English Language. During my time there I will find a virtuous and patient woman who will consent to marry me in the temple. I will take the appropriate classes to make myself eligible for consideration as an employee for the Church Education System. I will proceed to teach seminary or high school and get my master’s degree in something Englishy. Then I’ll teach Institute, and eventually get my doctorate. Along the way, I plan to continue in my hobby of writing fiction and screenplays. I believe I can work happily for a time as a writer of uplifting, educational, and entertaining programming for television.
Meanwhile, my wife will be bearing (or adopting) many children, and she’ll stay home from the workplace to raise them. It will be a home with plenty of books and education and love. We will live somewhere between San Francisco and Seattle. My wife and I will both serve in a wide variety of church callings, and will dedicate ourselves to living the gospel and teaching it to our children. Eventually I will teach English or linguistics classes at a University. My wife and I will die happy and old. We will have made significant contributions to education. We will have built up the church in our area and raised happy, interesting children. We will not have forgotten that it was at BYU that we first met, and where we began our commitment to learning and higher education.
Or I could go to UVSC, marry a woman with a nose ring and pink hair, get my degree in waste management, and manage a dump in Nevada where I have to work Sundays and my wife has to get a job to supplement my meager income at a convenience store where she meets a flashy man with a motorcycle for whom she eventually leaves me.
(OK, I didn't really put in that last paragraph)
Essay #3:
Please list and/or describe your participation and leadership during the last three
years in extracurricular activities, including performance groups, athletics, cultural
and civic clubs, and church and community service. Limit your response to 300 words.
I am always involved in some project or other. Most recently, I have written, directed, and acted in a series of short films that my roommates and I have been working on, mostly for fun, but also to have in our portfolios. A few years ago, I was a writer for BYU’s Hundred Hour Board—an exclusive question and answer forum that provides answers to students’ questions and allows its answerers to write creatively and do important research—though I wasn’t yet an official BYU student. I enjoy projects where I can write and be creative.
I also find occasion to perform meaningful service through my church callings. During the past few years I have been able to serve as a Family Home Evening group leader, Family Home Evening committee chair, and Sunday School president. These callings have given me the opportunity to plan dinners and activities for groups of 150 students, to prepare spiritual lessons, and to work with and organize the efforts of a variety of different people. I have also used these opportunities to effect service for the greater community, by organizing canned food drives for the needy and starting an annual Christmas toy drive for the children at a local battered women’s shelter.
I love music, and have been a member of Latter-Day Sounds, a traveling fireside choir that shares its testimony through uplifting spiritual music. I was also a member of the choir that performed Rob Gardner’s Joseph Smith the Prophet in Salt Lake City last year.
My employment has given me the opportunity to work with many people who are immigrants from Latin-American countries, and I have made audiotapes and taught lessons to help these wonderful people become proficient in English and learn enough about U.S. history to be able to pass their citizenship tests.
Showing posts with label BYU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BYU. Show all posts
Monday, October 01, 2007
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Dick
Let's forget for a moment that he shot a man in the head (it WAS a lawyer, after all). And forget that he's the less-popular VP to one of the most unpopular Presidents in this country's history. I can even let go of the fact that several members of his staff are currently under criminal investigation and have been removed from their positions. All that aside, he's just kinda old and creepy.
But, for some reason, the First Presidency of our church decided to invite him to speak at the recent commencement ceremony at BYU.
This, naturally, caused quite the uproar. Students have been pretty upset that the church would invite someone who's so obviously connected to one party to come to such an important event. This girl I know (I can't remember her name right now but she was in my ward and would come to church with this amazing Something-About-Mary gelled hair every week) actually organized a sort of counter-commencement at UVSC for all the students who would rather hear speeches from the Green Party's Ralph Nader and other, less-important Democrats. Ashley Sanders! That's her name. Anyway, everyone's been asking me, "So, what's your opinion on this whole Dick Cheney thing?"
So here it is:
Probably not the best PR move by the church. Then again, who really cares who's speaking at some university's commencement? Does anyone at BYU know who's speaking at anyone else's commencement? Does anyone outside of BYU know about Dick Cheney's coming? I doubt it.
Also, protests? Really? When did those ever work? I mean like since the Boston Tea Party. And I'm only making that an exception because it's famous, not because I know whether it worked or not. For all I know it just pissed off the Brits and then the Indian-clad colonists had to pay for all that tea they ruined. Not to mention the townspeople then had to throw a LOT of lemon and sugar into their harbor the next morning. But see, this is what I don't get. To me it seems that the intent of the protest is simply to annoy The Man to the point where he acquiesces. Good plan, except that it only ends up making The Man upset, which prompts him to stand his ground even more obdurately than before (Mrs. Stevens would be so proud of the way I'm using all of my 11th grade vocab words in this paragraph). And today's protesters (at least the protest organizers) are aware of this. So the real object of the protest is not change or dialogue. It's just attention. It's the toddler who's learned that crying sometimes gets him what he wants not because it's what Mom thinks he needs, or even because Mom is tired of hearing his cries, but rather because Mom doesn't like the way all the other Moms are looking at her. It seems a very unethical way of going about social change. Coming at the problem from the rear.
Also, Dick Cheney is not Vice President of the Republicans. He's Vice President of the United States. It's not like you get to just not recognize a President you didn't vote for. This isn't Mexico. Yes, he's a Republican, but he didn't come here in the name of the GOP. He came here in the name of the Presidency of this fine nation. I doubt his speech had anything to do with keeping the illegal immigrants out or how Utah is the best state because it's the only one that has a law that explicitly allows students to carry concealed weapons on public college campuses (I'm not making this up). Just as I'm pretty sure the speech by Darth Vader or whatever his name is was not about legalizing gay marijuana (I decided partway through typing those two ideas just now that I would make them just one idea for simplicity's sake). I imagine both speeches were just the same recycled boilerplate: "You are the future...blah blah blah...worked hard to get here...make a difference in the world...smartest and best generation...crap crap crap." Just like my high school graduation, except without everyone quoting Semisonic's "Closing Time."
My point is this: a graduation ceremony is one time that should definitely not be divided by bipartisan politics. If it had been Rush Limbaugh or Michael Moore, I would probably have been right there supporting the protesters. But it wasn't. It was the Vice President, and I think we can show some respect, even if we don't agree with his politics or his age or his hunting practices. Ashley Sanders and the others who helped her in her "celebration of alternatives" really missed the boat, in my opinion. This day should have been about the students, and the future and making a difference in the world, and all that crap--not about whether we agree with everything that the speaker might have said or done or voted for in any other situation. I hope that next time something like this occurs, people can just swallow their pride and stop trying to cause headaches for the administration. That's all I have to say about that.
But, for some reason, the First Presidency of our church decided to invite him to speak at the recent commencement ceremony at BYU.
This, naturally, caused quite the uproar. Students have been pretty upset that the church would invite someone who's so obviously connected to one party to come to such an important event. This girl I know (I can't remember her name right now but she was in my ward and would come to church with this amazing Something-About-Mary gelled hair every week) actually organized a sort of counter-commencement at UVSC for all the students who would rather hear speeches from the Green Party's Ralph Nader and other, less-important Democrats. Ashley Sanders! That's her name. Anyway, everyone's been asking me, "So, what's your opinion on this whole Dick Cheney thing?"
So here it is:
Probably not the best PR move by the church. Then again, who really cares who's speaking at some university's commencement? Does anyone at BYU know who's speaking at anyone else's commencement? Does anyone outside of BYU know about Dick Cheney's coming? I doubt it.
Also, protests? Really? When did those ever work? I mean like since the Boston Tea Party. And I'm only making that an exception because it's famous, not because I know whether it worked or not. For all I know it just pissed off the Brits and then the Indian-clad colonists had to pay for all that tea they ruined. Not to mention the townspeople then had to throw a LOT of lemon and sugar into their harbor the next morning. But see, this is what I don't get. To me it seems that the intent of the protest is simply to annoy The Man to the point where he acquiesces. Good plan, except that it only ends up making The Man upset, which prompts him to stand his ground even more obdurately than before (Mrs. Stevens would be so proud of the way I'm using all of my 11th grade vocab words in this paragraph). And today's protesters (at least the protest organizers) are aware of this. So the real object of the protest is not change or dialogue. It's just attention. It's the toddler who's learned that crying sometimes gets him what he wants not because it's what Mom thinks he needs, or even because Mom is tired of hearing his cries, but rather because Mom doesn't like the way all the other Moms are looking at her. It seems a very unethical way of going about social change. Coming at the problem from the rear.
Also, Dick Cheney is not Vice President of the Republicans. He's Vice President of the United States. It's not like you get to just not recognize a President you didn't vote for. This isn't Mexico. Yes, he's a Republican, but he didn't come here in the name of the GOP. He came here in the name of the Presidency of this fine nation. I doubt his speech had anything to do with keeping the illegal immigrants out or how Utah is the best state because it's the only one that has a law that explicitly allows students to carry concealed weapons on public college campuses (I'm not making this up). Just as I'm pretty sure the speech by Darth Vader or whatever his name is was not about legalizing gay marijuana (I decided partway through typing those two ideas just now that I would make them just one idea for simplicity's sake). I imagine both speeches were just the same recycled boilerplate: "You are the future...blah blah blah...worked hard to get here...make a difference in the world...smartest and best generation...crap crap crap." Just like my high school graduation, except without everyone quoting Semisonic's "Closing Time."
My point is this: a graduation ceremony is one time that should definitely not be divided by bipartisan politics. If it had been Rush Limbaugh or Michael Moore, I would probably have been right there supporting the protesters. But it wasn't. It was the Vice President, and I think we can show some respect, even if we don't agree with his politics or his age or his hunting practices. Ashley Sanders and the others who helped her in her "celebration of alternatives" really missed the boat, in my opinion. This day should have been about the students, and the future and making a difference in the world, and all that crap--not about whether we agree with everything that the speaker might have said or done or voted for in any other situation. I hope that next time something like this occurs, people can just swallow their pride and stop trying to cause headaches for the administration. That's all I have to say about that.
Sunday, April 15, 2007
Poet and Vanity, at Least, Return
You're probably expecting me to say something about how I haven't posted in forever, so I'm not going to. Or maybe you think I'm going to say something about how we got the BYU Honor Code changed earlier this week, but enough people have already been talking about that, and it would just lead to a bunch of fags leaving comments on my blog, and this blog isn't for those people. So instead I'll make my first entry on the new computer I recently bought about what happened to me this morning. Which is that Dulcinea (she doesn't want me calling her Carrot any more) woke me up with a phone call saying that her roommate was having a wedding luncheon in an hour and she needed a love poem. And since I really don't like anyone else's poetry but my own, and also since my only happy love poem to date is from the perspective of an unattractive black woman, I decided to just write a new one. After sleeping for another forty minutes, that is.
I think my mind is actually sharper when I'm tired. But maybe it's actually that the part of my mind that detects sharpness is duller when I'm tired. Either way, I sent a poem to the wedding luncheon. I think it's pretty good, though unpolished, and apparently the bride and groom agreed. One thing you must keep in mind is that the couple, though loveable, is pretty nerdy. The groom is a physics T.A., and the wife is a relief society president, so this one was for them.
Gravity
There is a Force
That permeates the Universe
And keeps order.
We call it Gravity, though it is known by another name,
This force that keeps two heavenly bodies hurling together through the blackness of space.
And so I revolve around you, and you around me,
And both of us around the Sun,
Year after year.
They (the scientists) say
That just maybe the moon was formed from matter taken from inside the earth,
Pulled like a rib to form earth's own companion.
I do not claim that anything inside of me could have created you;
If so, that rib was my best quality before it was lifted out.
You run my tides, and guide my seasons,
And in the darkest night of winter,
After the evenings and the fall,
When the Sun has hidden his warm face,
You are the lesser light to rule my night
And keep me in your glowing embrace 'til break of day.
If we could eavesdrop on atoms,
Observe the smallest molecule of matter,
We would see that this Force runs every bit,
For deep within the sun,
Hydrogen atoms run on the same principle,
One proton and one electron, forever locked in holy orbit,
Until one bright and glorious day
When the two finally come to rest together,
Matter is transformed into pure light,
The light of the Sun, a million nuclear blasts,
Which extend out into the Universe,
Or right here to our backyard,
Falling gently on our apple tree, entering its leaves, and making it grow.
And as we watch the years go by, the moon traveling around the earth, the earth around the sun,
The snow and blossoms and fruit returning and falling away,
We remember that in such a garden, with such a fruit,
Was love first made possible on this otherwise barren rock of a planet,
Where there had been no fall, no falling at all,
And beneath such a tree, with such an apple, a man first discovered this invisible force that keeps the Universe moving around,
And keeps us together, falling into each other.
Down this gravity well, forever falling in love.
Ok, aside from that I just noticed that I don't like anyone else's summary of the changes to the Honor Code, so here is the old, problematic section:
Homosexual behavior or advocacy
Brigham Young University will respond to student behavior rather than to feelings or orientation. Students can be enrolled at the University and remain in good Honor Code standing if they maintain a current ecclesiastical endorsement and conduct their lives in a manner consistent with gospel principles and the Honor Code. Advocacy of a homosexual lifestyle (whether implied or explicit) or any behaviors that indicate homosexual conduct, including those not sexual in nature, are inappropriate and violate the Honor Code.
Violations of the Honor Code may result in actions up to and including separation from the University.
And here is the new one that replaced it:
How's that for starting blogging again, huh?
I think my mind is actually sharper when I'm tired. But maybe it's actually that the part of my mind that detects sharpness is duller when I'm tired. Either way, I sent a poem to the wedding luncheon. I think it's pretty good, though unpolished, and apparently the bride and groom agreed. One thing you must keep in mind is that the couple, though loveable, is pretty nerdy. The groom is a physics T.A., and the wife is a relief society president, so this one was for them.
Gravity
There is a Force
That permeates the Universe
And keeps order.
We call it Gravity, though it is known by another name,
This force that keeps two heavenly bodies hurling together through the blackness of space.
And so I revolve around you, and you around me,
And both of us around the Sun,
Year after year.
They (the scientists) say
That just maybe the moon was formed from matter taken from inside the earth,
Pulled like a rib to form earth's own companion.
I do not claim that anything inside of me could have created you;
If so, that rib was my best quality before it was lifted out.
You run my tides, and guide my seasons,
And in the darkest night of winter,
After the evenings and the fall,
When the Sun has hidden his warm face,
You are the lesser light to rule my night
And keep me in your glowing embrace 'til break of day.
If we could eavesdrop on atoms,
Observe the smallest molecule of matter,
We would see that this Force runs every bit,
For deep within the sun,
Hydrogen atoms run on the same principle,
One proton and one electron, forever locked in holy orbit,
Until one bright and glorious day
When the two finally come to rest together,
Matter is transformed into pure light,
The light of the Sun, a million nuclear blasts,
Which extend out into the Universe,
Or right here to our backyard,
Falling gently on our apple tree, entering its leaves, and making it grow.
And as we watch the years go by, the moon traveling around the earth, the earth around the sun,
The snow and blossoms and fruit returning and falling away,
We remember that in such a garden, with such a fruit,
Was love first made possible on this otherwise barren rock of a planet,
Where there had been no fall, no falling at all,
And beneath such a tree, with such an apple, a man first discovered this invisible force that keeps the Universe moving around,
And keeps us together, falling into each other.
Down this gravity well, forever falling in love.
Ok, aside from that I just noticed that I don't like anyone else's summary of the changes to the Honor Code, so here is the old, problematic section:
Homosexual behavior or advocacy
Brigham Young University will respond to student behavior rather than to feelings or orientation. Students can be enrolled at the University and remain in good Honor Code standing if they maintain a current ecclesiastical endorsement and conduct their lives in a manner consistent with gospel principles and the Honor Code. Advocacy of a homosexual lifestyle (whether implied or explicit) or any behaviors that indicate homosexual conduct, including those not sexual in nature, are inappropriate and violate the Honor Code.
Violations of the Honor Code may result in actions up to and including separation from the University.
And here is the new one that replaced it:
I think that's pretty great. We were part of the change. Which probably means my time here in Provo has come to an end.Homosexual behavior or advocacy
Brigham Young University will respond to homosexual behavior rather than to feelings or orientation and welcomes as full members of the university community all whose behavior meets university standards. Members of the university community can remain in good Honor Code standing if they conduct their lives in a manner consistent with gospel principles and the Honor Code.One's stated sexual orientation is not an Honor Code issue. However, the Honor Code requires all members of the university community to manifest a strict commitment to the law of chastity. Homosexual behavior or advocacy of homosexual behavior are inappropriate and violate the Honor Code. Homosexual behavior includes not only sexual relations between members of the same sex, but all forms of physical intimacy that give expression to homosexual feelings. Advocacy includes seeking to influence others to engage in homosexual behavior or promoting homosexual relations as being morally acceptable.
Violations of the Honor Code may result in actions up to and including separation from the University.
How's that for starting blogging again, huh?
Friday, April 21, 2006
Revolt
Protest seems to be the word on everyone's lips these days. Sometimes it even feels like I'm in a real college town, what with all the demonstrations and campaigns going on around here.
My co-worker Keri, frustrated by the oppressive system we have at work for who gets to wait on which tables, complained aloud and announced her plan to bring about change when she gasped, "Why don't I ever make any tips? I am REVOLTING!"
I told her she'd just answered her own question. I don't think she caught the joke.
My friend Hero, also in the spirit of social reform, performed a small demonstration against the Malt Shop on University Avenue recently. He told the girl that he wanted the Wednesday student two-for-one special and asked for a shake and a root beer freeze. She sent the order back and then charged him almost eight dollars.
"Eight dollars! I asked for the two-for-one deal!"
"well, you can't get the two-for-one deal with the freeze. Only shakes," said the bovine employee, repeating the price through a mouthful of cud.
Well, Hero is the sort of being whose whole night can be ruined by one single interaction with an imbecile. This girl could have told him that he couldn't get the discount on the freeze before sending the order through. She also refused to cancel it. So he paid for the shake and the freeze, and when they came, he dumped half his shake on the carpet in protest. Then he said "whoops," stepped in the mess, and marched out of there. It was funny.
Meanwhile, real and actually organized protests have abounded recently.
One involved unattractive vegetarians standing on the street corner right in front of the restaurant at which I work, making out in their underwear and telling people to avoid meat, and handing out tracts with pertinent quotes about animals and their souls and brains from such leading spiritual and scientific leaders as Paul McCartney and Pamela Anderson. As I've said before, I think there must be some sort of animal by-product in soap, because Vegans always seem to need a shower. These ones had a mattress out there and had adopted the slogan, "Vegetarians make better lovers." If anything, having mostly-naked people dancing about in front of our store only increased our business that day, and I made sure to suggest the steak enchiladas or the beef chimichanga to every customer I got. I sold tons.
Then there were some whose causes I respected a little more.
The first surrounded a controversy over BYU's firing of a man named Todd. If you live in the Provo bubble, you have probably heard whispers of this story. The reason I am retelling it now is that I have a little bit of ironic personal involvement in this story.
Todd was a grown-up who worked for the BYUSSR, more legitimately known as the BYUSA. He had a number of job responsibilities, one of which had something to do with BYUSA "elections." Over the course of his years at BYUSA, Todd noticed some unsettling glitches in the operation of the BYUSA electorate machine. So he decided to write a letter in the Daily Universe which decried the entire process, pointing out that an anonymous cadre of randomly selected students were put in charge of disqualifying candidates, a power which he inferred had been used unfairly by members of the group to aid their friends.
Certainly the letter was timely; this past election was once again riddled with scandal as students were disqualified for getting photocopies of campaign papers run off with a discount at a private copying center rather than at whatever the committee deemed to be "market price," whatever that means (there is a rule in the election procedures that students need to spend their campaign funds only on items they purchase at "market price"). The discount they received was actually available to all the other candidates. It was time for somebody to speak up, and Todd was our man. He mailed out that letter to the DU.
So they fired him. That's right, BYU fired Todd for publicly calling into question practices of the organization for which he worked. They offered him hush money, saying that if he would agree to not disclose the reason for which he was fired, they would continue to give him health insurance and other benefits for a grace period. Todd, always one to stand against censure and the man, refused the offer and sent off another letter to the Daily Universe. Soon a full-scale real protest was in full swing, with students duct-taping their mouths symbolically.
Well, I see some interesting parallels between myself and this Todd fellow....
***FLASHBACK ABOUT A YEAR***
Once upon a time there was a small community of smurfs that lived somewhere in the woods of Belgium in stone houses that looked like mushrooms to the untrained eye. Further into the wood, they had a computer, and it was attached to the internet, and the smurfs found a BYU website called the Hundred Hour Board, where BYU students could anonymously and cleverly answer people's questions about anything and everything. They applied to write for the Board, and were accepted, and in the time during which our story takes place, they had been writing for the Board for several months, and it was their raison d’être. Then one day a dark oppressive shadow loomed over their idyllic little forest. BYUSA decided to censor the Hundred Hour Board. The poor little smurfs ran for shelter, but they were too late. Soon all was black in their forest. Were they defeated? No. They made a last-ditch effort to battle the forces of the evil bureaucracy, answering questions just as they always had. One day a question came in about how to improve race relations on campus. The smurfs pulled out all the stops, giving an informative yet amusing answer, citing examples shared with them by real minorities attending BYU. Before that answer could ever post, however, it caught the attention of one of BYUSA's cronies, who was floating around in the smoggy cloud overhead. He sent the smurfs a letter, demanding that they remove any evidence of actual instances of racism on campus. The smurfs refused, and used the last of their energy to respond angrily (although cleanly) to this unreasonable letter. But they were too late. The next time they tried to visit the computer, it had been slashed to pieces by BYUSA, and they were never able to log in on the computer again.
So you see, I can totally relate to Todd's little predicament. But if you grease the machine for long enough, Todd, eventually it'll slip and cut you.
Also I should mention that this Todd fellow is the selfsame troll who was censoring the Board, and who kicked me off. So while I admire the fact that you finally grew a backbone and tried to take a stand against the monster, I still have to chuckle at the irony of the giant monster swallowing you up after you helped feed it until it grew big enough to eat you too. Hahaha, Todd. Seriously, that's what you get, especially when you mess with THIS smurf.
I'm not still bitter about it, I swear.
Later that same week, there was another on-campus protest, led by a group called Soulforce. Soulforce was a group of thirty-two gays and lesbians who decided to rent a bus and tour religious and military universities to help stop "religious oppression" of homosexuals, as they put it. Their leaders said at a rally the night before the protests began that BYU was the "crowned jewel" of the tour.
I didn't attend any of the on-campus events, but I came near the protests at the park. I couldn't hear much that was being said because the rumble of the generator they used to power the microphone was louder than the microphone itself.
Soulforce's points were many. They cited the numbers of gay Mormon teen suicides (a BYU student named Matt even took the mic and testified about his own failed suicide attempts), said that BYU students are uneducated about and intolerant of homosexuals, and basically just complained a lot. They said that their surveys showed that more than ninety percent of BYU students said they wouldn't want a homosexual as a roommate. I'm skeptical, to say the least.
Your name: Smurf
1) Would you rather have roommates who are gay or straight?
a) gay ___
b) straight _x_
2) Would you be ok with a lesbian roommate?
a) yes ___
b) no _x_
See? Even I don't pass the test. It's all in the way you word it. And I present as evidence to the contrary Asmond, BAWB, Toasteroven, Gravy, and the Snake, all of whom willingly entered roommate situations with gay kids and/or were staunch defenders of them afterward.
At any rate, I had several beefs with Soulforce's message.
1: "Religious oppression of homosexuals?" I'm doubly offended. I don't appreciate three dozen hippies coming to my school to tell me that I'm at once oppressor and oppressed.
2: The use of Gandhi's and Martin Luther King Jr.'s countenances in their logo. I don't care if they DID have permission from relatives of the two men. This was a cause that a Hindu and a southern reverend would NEVER have been behind. In the words of Alecia, my sassy black manager, upon her hearing about the logo, "Oh HEEEEELL no!" That's just plain offensive.
3: The issues presented were for the most part issues from years past. Today's political climate with regard to homosexuals is one of tolerance at worst, even here in conservative Utah. The head lesbian was a minister for some religion and proudly claimed to have been excommunicated thrice, eventually leaving the church altogether and taking up residence with her former visiting teacher. She delivered an angry speech, much like those presented by other alumni, about how horrible it was to attend BYU. The problem was that she was speaking to a bunch of students who currently attend BYU and were having trouble seeing any of the problems she mentioned.
4: The idea of the homosexuals blaming religion for the suicides. It just pisses me off. The problem isn't solely with either side. The problem is the imagined chasm between the two sides, with poor youths feeling trapped with a foot on either side. Religion and homosexual tendencies are not naturally at odds. For years, churches painted the picture thus, but our church has come a very long way in the manner in which its leaders deal with those who experience same-sex attraction. We are aware that feelings of incongruousness between a religion believed to be true and an immutable sexual desire believed to be false can cause great psychological trauma to our young people. But just when our little bubble community seems to be taking steps to find middle ground, the other camp pulls away even more vehemently, and those chasm-straddlers are going to find themselves falling to one side or the other or down into the blackness. We need to be closing the gap from BOTH sides.
5: They weren't friendly. Tell them you're a closeted homosexual fighting to keep your sexual identity under wraps until just barely after graduation, and they'll welcome you with open arms and offer you the drinks they're serving in the corner. But stand with the small peaceful counter-protest (as I did) and suddenly you'll find an angry middle-aged redhead in a pantsuit storming toward you and unsavorily unplugging your music. Many of the lesbians from the bus decided to smoke on campus, or march around distributing fliers and otherwise breaking the protest rules set forth by the university. The smoking thing particularly got my goat, since not only is it a BYU rule that one cannot smoke on campus, but it is also against the state laws of Utah to smoke within a hundred feet of a public building. When students (such as my roommate Asmond) kindly asked the lesbians to refrain from smoking in front of their workplace, the lesbians took it as an affront on their message and their sexual identity and refused to either extinguish their cigarettes or move along.
The counter-protest was kinda weak, really. There was an insane hispanic woman with two people I can only assume were her own progeny, shouting "Shame on you" louder than the speakers AND the generator. "Let me tell jew something jew don't know," she said to me, advancing until she would have been right in my face had she been a foot taller. I let her, but she only told me things I already knew or that I still don't believe, like the idea that the gay movement is secretly being run by politicians and filmmakers who aren't actually gay themselves but rather hope to make a buck off the whole idea. Then there was a guy whose wife and daughter were playing on the playground while he distributed his own manifesto to the classy tunes of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir under a banner that read "You want your freedom of expression; please allow us ours." Then there was me, standing silently in the cold with my arms crossed, the ever non-partisan participant.
Why was I standing with the counter-protest? I just wanted someone to know that Soulforce does not speak for me. I don't think I'm a radical. I don't imagine for one second that I'm typical. But I like to think I am reasonable, at least. I didn't appreciate Soulforce's rhetoric. I didn't like their tying depression and suicide to homosexuality. I especially didn't appreciate that they purported to represent me. AND accuse me. As Wiggle so often repeats, "You don't KNOW me."
My old friend LLama was the one person whose actions that day receive a full endorsement from me. He was out there distributing lists of resources for people who are trying to deal with homosexuality in a positive church context. Way to be, LLama.
So, the point is that BYU seems to be at least taking a step forward by allowing these protests on campus, right? Especially after the American Association of University Professors put us on its list of censured schools in 1997 after a female professor was allegedly fired for being pro-choice and feminist.
But wait, by some coincidence(?), the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities happened to be visiting our school that same week that the protests were being graciously (and uncharacteristically) allowed on campus. This is the organization that every ten years decides whether BYU should maintain its accreditation status. So the question remains, is BYU actually becoming a more progressive school, or is it just trying to save face for the man?
Amid all this chaos, the Mexicans are enojados. It seems they feel they are under-appreciated. I'll agree with that. On May first, there is to be a nation-wide walk-out for all trabajadores of hispanic descent. In other words, the Mexican restaurant where I work is going to have an absolute dearth of cooks and dish washers that day. The owners are considering making Alecia cook fajitas and serving everything on paper plates all day. I guess Alecia is the next closest thing we have to Mexican after the real Mexicans and the Chileans and Salvadorians and all.
Now here's where it gets interesting for me. Norma and the other cooks and dish washers have told me that I'd better not come to work that day. After all, I am one quarter Mexican, and would be doing my old abuelita great dishonor by coming to work on that day. If our restaurant weren't situated exactly in the heart of downtown, I might just ignore their invitation. And also if it didn't have huge glass windows that look right out onto the street where the main demonstrations will be going on. And if the cooks hadn't been whispering about how they fully expect things to turn quickly into a riot.
And really, I do respect their cause, and my grandmother, and all. The last thing I want to be is a scab. So not only am I moderately interested in their cause, and medium terrified of the prospect of a thousand illegal immigrants hopped up on tequila coming at me with whatever the Mexican equivalent of pitchforks and torches is while I'm at work, and extremely excited about the idea of a totally good excuse to not show up for work for a whole day, but I also am relieved when I check my calendar and realize that the whole thing is moot because I have Mondays off anyway. I think I'll go have me some all-you-can-eat fajitas that day, as long as Alecia's cooking.
So there you have it, folks. Three major protests going on, all of which really relate to me (after all, I am a BYUSA-censored, homosexual, Mormon who is descended from illegal Mexican immigrants), and yet while I feel passionately about each of those subjects, I just can't find myself getting behind any of those causes.
You want to know the cause I CAN get behind? Protesting Panda Express. Seriously, Gravy and I always talked about marching in front of that store with signs that say "Don't believe their lies!" and "Panda Express is chicken" and distributing PETA-esque pamphlets that explain that there is no actual panda meat in ANY Panda Express products. I can't believe the number of people who still eat there, seemingly unaware of the flagrant false advertising. I hope Vero will be back in town on May first, because I am off work that day, and I'd bet she would help me with my movement. And that day is perfect, because there won't be any workers there to come out and stop us. Because after all, not only is their panda secretly just chicken, but their Chinamen are secretly just Mexicans.
My co-worker Keri, frustrated by the oppressive system we have at work for who gets to wait on which tables, complained aloud and announced her plan to bring about change when she gasped, "Why don't I ever make any tips? I am REVOLTING!"
I told her she'd just answered her own question. I don't think she caught the joke.
My friend Hero, also in the spirit of social reform, performed a small demonstration against the Malt Shop on University Avenue recently. He told the girl that he wanted the Wednesday student two-for-one special and asked for a shake and a root beer freeze. She sent the order back and then charged him almost eight dollars.
"Eight dollars! I asked for the two-for-one deal!"
"well, you can't get the two-for-one deal with the freeze. Only shakes," said the bovine employee, repeating the price through a mouthful of cud.
Well, Hero is the sort of being whose whole night can be ruined by one single interaction with an imbecile. This girl could have told him that he couldn't get the discount on the freeze before sending the order through. She also refused to cancel it. So he paid for the shake and the freeze, and when they came, he dumped half his shake on the carpet in protest. Then he said "whoops," stepped in the mess, and marched out of there. It was funny.
Meanwhile, real and actually organized protests have abounded recently.
One involved unattractive vegetarians standing on the street corner right in front of the restaurant at which I work, making out in their underwear and telling people to avoid meat, and handing out tracts with pertinent quotes about animals and their souls and brains from such leading spiritual and scientific leaders as Paul McCartney and Pamela Anderson. As I've said before, I think there must be some sort of animal by-product in soap, because Vegans always seem to need a shower. These ones had a mattress out there and had adopted the slogan, "Vegetarians make better lovers." If anything, having mostly-naked people dancing about in front of our store only increased our business that day, and I made sure to suggest the steak enchiladas or the beef chimichanga to every customer I got. I sold tons.
Then there were some whose causes I respected a little more.
The first surrounded a controversy over BYU's firing of a man named Todd. If you live in the Provo bubble, you have probably heard whispers of this story. The reason I am retelling it now is that I have a little bit of ironic personal involvement in this story.
Todd was a grown-up who worked for the BYUSSR, more legitimately known as the BYUSA. He had a number of job responsibilities, one of which had something to do with BYUSA "elections." Over the course of his years at BYUSA, Todd noticed some unsettling glitches in the operation of the BYUSA electorate machine. So he decided to write a letter in the Daily Universe which decried the entire process, pointing out that an anonymous cadre of randomly selected students were put in charge of disqualifying candidates, a power which he inferred had been used unfairly by members of the group to aid their friends.
Certainly the letter was timely; this past election was once again riddled with scandal as students were disqualified for getting photocopies of campaign papers run off with a discount at a private copying center rather than at whatever the committee deemed to be "market price," whatever that means (there is a rule in the election procedures that students need to spend their campaign funds only on items they purchase at "market price"). The discount they received was actually available to all the other candidates. It was time for somebody to speak up, and Todd was our man. He mailed out that letter to the DU.
So they fired him. That's right, BYU fired Todd for publicly calling into question practices of the organization for which he worked. They offered him hush money, saying that if he would agree to not disclose the reason for which he was fired, they would continue to give him health insurance and other benefits for a grace period. Todd, always one to stand against censure and the man, refused the offer and sent off another letter to the Daily Universe. Soon a full-scale real protest was in full swing, with students duct-taping their mouths symbolically.
Well, I see some interesting parallels between myself and this Todd fellow....
***FLASHBACK ABOUT A YEAR***
Once upon a time there was a small community of smurfs that lived somewhere in the woods of Belgium in stone houses that looked like mushrooms to the untrained eye. Further into the wood, they had a computer, and it was attached to the internet, and the smurfs found a BYU website called the Hundred Hour Board, where BYU students could anonymously and cleverly answer people's questions about anything and everything. They applied to write for the Board, and were accepted, and in the time during which our story takes place, they had been writing for the Board for several months, and it was their raison d’être. Then one day a dark oppressive shadow loomed over their idyllic little forest. BYUSA decided to censor the Hundred Hour Board. The poor little smurfs ran for shelter, but they were too late. Soon all was black in their forest. Were they defeated? No. They made a last-ditch effort to battle the forces of the evil bureaucracy, answering questions just as they always had. One day a question came in about how to improve race relations on campus. The smurfs pulled out all the stops, giving an informative yet amusing answer, citing examples shared with them by real minorities attending BYU. Before that answer could ever post, however, it caught the attention of one of BYUSA's cronies, who was floating around in the smoggy cloud overhead. He sent the smurfs a letter, demanding that they remove any evidence of actual instances of racism on campus. The smurfs refused, and used the last of their energy to respond angrily (although cleanly) to this unreasonable letter. But they were too late. The next time they tried to visit the computer, it had been slashed to pieces by BYUSA, and they were never able to log in on the computer again.
So you see, I can totally relate to Todd's little predicament. But if you grease the machine for long enough, Todd, eventually it'll slip and cut you.
Also I should mention that this Todd fellow is the selfsame troll who was censoring the Board, and who kicked me off. So while I admire the fact that you finally grew a backbone and tried to take a stand against the monster, I still have to chuckle at the irony of the giant monster swallowing you up after you helped feed it until it grew big enough to eat you too. Hahaha, Todd. Seriously, that's what you get, especially when you mess with THIS smurf.
I'm not still bitter about it, I swear.
Later that same week, there was another on-campus protest, led by a group called Soulforce. Soulforce was a group of thirty-two gays and lesbians who decided to rent a bus and tour religious and military universities to help stop "religious oppression" of homosexuals, as they put it. Their leaders said at a rally the night before the protests began that BYU was the "crowned jewel" of the tour.
I didn't attend any of the on-campus events, but I came near the protests at the park. I couldn't hear much that was being said because the rumble of the generator they used to power the microphone was louder than the microphone itself.
Soulforce's points were many. They cited the numbers of gay Mormon teen suicides (a BYU student named Matt even took the mic and testified about his own failed suicide attempts), said that BYU students are uneducated about and intolerant of homosexuals, and basically just complained a lot. They said that their surveys showed that more than ninety percent of BYU students said they wouldn't want a homosexual as a roommate. I'm skeptical, to say the least.
Your name: Smurf
1) Would you rather have roommates who are gay or straight?
a) gay ___
b) straight _x_
2) Would you be ok with a lesbian roommate?
a) yes ___
b) no _x_
See? Even I don't pass the test. It's all in the way you word it. And I present as evidence to the contrary Asmond, BAWB, Toasteroven, Gravy, and the Snake, all of whom willingly entered roommate situations with gay kids and/or were staunch defenders of them afterward.
At any rate, I had several beefs with Soulforce's message.
1: "Religious oppression of homosexuals?" I'm doubly offended. I don't appreciate three dozen hippies coming to my school to tell me that I'm at once oppressor and oppressed.
2: The use of Gandhi's and Martin Luther King Jr.'s countenances in their logo. I don't care if they DID have permission from relatives of the two men. This was a cause that a Hindu and a southern reverend would NEVER have been behind. In the words of Alecia, my sassy black manager, upon her hearing about the logo, "Oh HEEEEELL no!" That's just plain offensive.
3: The issues presented were for the most part issues from years past. Today's political climate with regard to homosexuals is one of tolerance at worst, even here in conservative Utah. The head lesbian was a minister for some religion and proudly claimed to have been excommunicated thrice, eventually leaving the church altogether and taking up residence with her former visiting teacher. She delivered an angry speech, much like those presented by other alumni, about how horrible it was to attend BYU. The problem was that she was speaking to a bunch of students who currently attend BYU and were having trouble seeing any of the problems she mentioned.
4: The idea of the homosexuals blaming religion for the suicides. It just pisses me off. The problem isn't solely with either side. The problem is the imagined chasm between the two sides, with poor youths feeling trapped with a foot on either side. Religion and homosexual tendencies are not naturally at odds. For years, churches painted the picture thus, but our church has come a very long way in the manner in which its leaders deal with those who experience same-sex attraction. We are aware that feelings of incongruousness between a religion believed to be true and an immutable sexual desire believed to be false can cause great psychological trauma to our young people. But just when our little bubble community seems to be taking steps to find middle ground, the other camp pulls away even more vehemently, and those chasm-straddlers are going to find themselves falling to one side or the other or down into the blackness. We need to be closing the gap from BOTH sides.
5: They weren't friendly. Tell them you're a closeted homosexual fighting to keep your sexual identity under wraps until just barely after graduation, and they'll welcome you with open arms and offer you the drinks they're serving in the corner. But stand with the small peaceful counter-protest (as I did) and suddenly you'll find an angry middle-aged redhead in a pantsuit storming toward you and unsavorily unplugging your music. Many of the lesbians from the bus decided to smoke on campus, or march around distributing fliers and otherwise breaking the protest rules set forth by the university. The smoking thing particularly got my goat, since not only is it a BYU rule that one cannot smoke on campus, but it is also against the state laws of Utah to smoke within a hundred feet of a public building. When students (such as my roommate Asmond) kindly asked the lesbians to refrain from smoking in front of their workplace, the lesbians took it as an affront on their message and their sexual identity and refused to either extinguish their cigarettes or move along.
The counter-protest was kinda weak, really. There was an insane hispanic woman with two people I can only assume were her own progeny, shouting "Shame on you" louder than the speakers AND the generator. "Let me tell jew something jew don't know," she said to me, advancing until she would have been right in my face had she been a foot taller. I let her, but she only told me things I already knew or that I still don't believe, like the idea that the gay movement is secretly being run by politicians and filmmakers who aren't actually gay themselves but rather hope to make a buck off the whole idea. Then there was a guy whose wife and daughter were playing on the playground while he distributed his own manifesto to the classy tunes of the Mormon Tabernacle Choir under a banner that read "You want your freedom of expression; please allow us ours." Then there was me, standing silently in the cold with my arms crossed, the ever non-partisan participant.
Why was I standing with the counter-protest? I just wanted someone to know that Soulforce does not speak for me. I don't think I'm a radical. I don't imagine for one second that I'm typical. But I like to think I am reasonable, at least. I didn't appreciate Soulforce's rhetoric. I didn't like their tying depression and suicide to homosexuality. I especially didn't appreciate that they purported to represent me. AND accuse me. As Wiggle so often repeats, "You don't KNOW me."
My old friend LLama was the one person whose actions that day receive a full endorsement from me. He was out there distributing lists of resources for people who are trying to deal with homosexuality in a positive church context. Way to be, LLama.
So, the point is that BYU seems to be at least taking a step forward by allowing these protests on campus, right? Especially after the American Association of University Professors put us on its list of censured schools in 1997 after a female professor was allegedly fired for being pro-choice and feminist.
But wait, by some coincidence(?), the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities happened to be visiting our school that same week that the protests were being graciously (and uncharacteristically) allowed on campus. This is the organization that every ten years decides whether BYU should maintain its accreditation status. So the question remains, is BYU actually becoming a more progressive school, or is it just trying to save face for the man?
Amid all this chaos, the Mexicans are enojados. It seems they feel they are under-appreciated. I'll agree with that. On May first, there is to be a nation-wide walk-out for all trabajadores of hispanic descent. In other words, the Mexican restaurant where I work is going to have an absolute dearth of cooks and dish washers that day. The owners are considering making Alecia cook fajitas and serving everything on paper plates all day. I guess Alecia is the next closest thing we have to Mexican after the real Mexicans and the Chileans and Salvadorians and all.
Now here's where it gets interesting for me. Norma and the other cooks and dish washers have told me that I'd better not come to work that day. After all, I am one quarter Mexican, and would be doing my old abuelita great dishonor by coming to work on that day. If our restaurant weren't situated exactly in the heart of downtown, I might just ignore their invitation. And also if it didn't have huge glass windows that look right out onto the street where the main demonstrations will be going on. And if the cooks hadn't been whispering about how they fully expect things to turn quickly into a riot.
And really, I do respect their cause, and my grandmother, and all. The last thing I want to be is a scab. So not only am I moderately interested in their cause, and medium terrified of the prospect of a thousand illegal immigrants hopped up on tequila coming at me with whatever the Mexican equivalent of pitchforks and torches is while I'm at work, and extremely excited about the idea of a totally good excuse to not show up for work for a whole day, but I also am relieved when I check my calendar and realize that the whole thing is moot because I have Mondays off anyway. I think I'll go have me some all-you-can-eat fajitas that day, as long as Alecia's cooking.
So there you have it, folks. Three major protests going on, all of which really relate to me (after all, I am a BYUSA-censored, homosexual, Mormon who is descended from illegal Mexican immigrants), and yet while I feel passionately about each of those subjects, I just can't find myself getting behind any of those causes.
You want to know the cause I CAN get behind? Protesting Panda Express. Seriously, Gravy and I always talked about marching in front of that store with signs that say "Don't believe their lies!" and "Panda Express is chicken" and distributing PETA-esque pamphlets that explain that there is no actual panda meat in ANY Panda Express products. I can't believe the number of people who still eat there, seemingly unaware of the flagrant false advertising. I hope Vero will be back in town on May first, because I am off work that day, and I'd bet she would help me with my movement. And that day is perfect, because there won't be any workers there to come out and stop us. Because after all, not only is their panda secretly just chicken, but their Chinamen are secretly just Mexicans.
Saturday, October 29, 2005
Campus Deer Problem
Here's a letter to the editor from the Daily Universe from the other day:
Campus Deer Problem
Some time ago I was walking home from campus in the middle of the day. Classes were in session. which eliminated foot traffic near the MARB, where I was walking. All of a sudden I heard a loud noise behind me.
There was not even time to look back before a deer bolted past me, about a foot away. This scared the living daylights out of me. I could have been seriously injured. BYU needs to take the problem of deer on campus seriously before someone gets hurt.
JASON WRIGHT
Orem
Well, here's the letter I just sent in response:
I am a deer. Some time ago I was foraging for sustenance near the MARB while classes were in session. I decided to cross the nearby road. As I was crossing I heard a shocking noise to my left.
There was scarcely time to get all the way across before a whiny freshman turned and yelled at me, about a foot away. This scared the living daylight out of me. I should have seriously injured him. Imagine my chagrine when a copy of the Daily Universe comes fluttering up to me in the wind while I'm eating the leaves off some shrubs the other day, and it opens up to a letter from that very student, complaining about my presence in his university. Well, I decided to write a letter complaining about his university's presence in my wilderness. Honestly, that kid probably clapped when Bambi's mom got killed. We deer have been very tolerant of you humans' presence here in our valley, and all we ask is a little respect in return. BYU seriously needs to take the problem of whiny, nature-hating humans on campus seriously before some deer gets seriously hurt. Seriously.
JOHN DOE
(SNAPPY SMURF)
Napa, California
Also, friends, be sure to check out Buh's new extra hilarious blog.
Campus Deer Problem
Some time ago I was walking home from campus in the middle of the day. Classes were in session. which eliminated foot traffic near the MARB, where I was walking. All of a sudden I heard a loud noise behind me.
There was not even time to look back before a deer bolted past me, about a foot away. This scared the living daylights out of me. I could have been seriously injured. BYU needs to take the problem of deer on campus seriously before someone gets hurt.
JASON WRIGHT
Orem
Well, here's the letter I just sent in response:
I am a deer. Some time ago I was foraging for sustenance near the MARB while classes were in session. I decided to cross the nearby road. As I was crossing I heard a shocking noise to my left.
There was scarcely time to get all the way across before a whiny freshman turned and yelled at me, about a foot away. This scared the living daylight out of me. I should have seriously injured him. Imagine my chagrine when a copy of the Daily Universe comes fluttering up to me in the wind while I'm eating the leaves off some shrubs the other day, and it opens up to a letter from that very student, complaining about my presence in his university. Well, I decided to write a letter complaining about his university's presence in my wilderness. Honestly, that kid probably clapped when Bambi's mom got killed. We deer have been very tolerant of you humans' presence here in our valley, and all we ask is a little respect in return. BYU seriously needs to take the problem of whiny, nature-hating humans on campus seriously before some deer gets seriously hurt. Seriously.
JOHN DOE
(SNAPPY SMURF)
Napa, California
Also, friends, be sure to check out Buh's new extra hilarious blog.
Wednesday, May 04, 2005
A Few Things.
Here are some vignettes from my recent experiences.
Sunday night a ton of us decided to go to a bonfire in Diamond Fork Canyon. We met at Betty's house. Then we had to make a few stops and we were to meet at a Chevron station in Spanish Fork or some place. Betty's car wasn't at the Chevron when we pulled in, but Rachel's was. Rachel informed us that Betty was arrested on the way for speeding. We waited around for a very long time for them to bail her out ($207!), and by the time she got there, we decided to just go home. Sorry, Betty.
Pinetree decided he wanted to still make the s'mores when we got back from our hour and a half in the Chevron parking lot, so he and the Blagmeister used the rose-scented Saint candle Eleka and I had bought to bless our Mexican food a few days ago. In the words of one who was there, "These s'mores taste like the virgin Guadalupe."
I waited on a table of four grown-up men from the BYU faculty the other day. They were all adorned in their BYU faculty jackets and shirts. When I approached the table, I heard them talking about breast implants and laughing uproariously. During the course of the meal, their sophomoric conversation included laughter about their farts, semen, and getting their penes (which they lovingly called their "weezers") stuck in things. I was really nonplused. As they left, I noticed the backs of their shirts. "BYU Athletics Department." Ooooohhhh. Duh.
Sunday night a ton of us decided to go to a bonfire in Diamond Fork Canyon. We met at Betty's house. Then we had to make a few stops and we were to meet at a Chevron station in Spanish Fork or some place. Betty's car wasn't at the Chevron when we pulled in, but Rachel's was. Rachel informed us that Betty was arrested on the way for speeding. We waited around for a very long time for them to bail her out ($207!), and by the time she got there, we decided to just go home. Sorry, Betty.
Pinetree decided he wanted to still make the s'mores when we got back from our hour and a half in the Chevron parking lot, so he and the Blagmeister used the rose-scented Saint candle Eleka and I had bought to bless our Mexican food a few days ago. In the words of one who was there, "These s'mores taste like the virgin Guadalupe."
I waited on a table of four grown-up men from the BYU faculty the other day. They were all adorned in their BYU faculty jackets and shirts. When I approached the table, I heard them talking about breast implants and laughing uproariously. During the course of the meal, their sophomoric conversation included laughter about their farts, semen, and getting their penes (which they lovingly called their "weezers") stuck in things. I was really nonplused. As they left, I noticed the backs of their shirts. "BYU Athletics Department." Ooooohhhh. Duh.
Sunday, May 01, 2005
The Archives are Back!!!!!!
While I don't have much time to write anything here, I thought I'd just post some of my favorites of my answers from my stint on the Hundred Hour Board, in case I ever get locked out again. Read them is you will. Here goes:
QDear 100 Hour Board,
If the animals from South America had a "rumble" with the animals from Africa... which group of animals would win, and why?
- Betting on the piranhas' team
ADear Bettin',
South America. They've got Hungry hungry hippos. (I think). Actually, maybe that's Africa.... Hmmm. Well, either way, I'm putting my money on the Hippos. On a side note, I've seen bacteria and microscopic worms from South America that've sent people to their death beds. If their single cell organisms can do that, just imagine what an entire herd of hippos could do. On a second, and final side note (everyone breathes a sigh of relief), I have no idea why the sudden fixation with hippos. I mean really, could an animal be less intimidating? Oh well. That's my answer, and I'm sticking to it.
-Thor
ADear Better,
I say let's break this down. We'll pit South American animals against their nearest African counterparts. South America will appear first in each match so you can tell which side they're representing.
The llama vs. the camel: The camel totally wins this one. It can pack a lot more, and it's bigger and faster and smarter. The llama might have an easier time getting into Heaven, though.
The jaguar vs. the lion: Africa wins again. The lion is king of the jungle, even though it lives primarily in the pride lands. Jaguars actually live in the jungle, but they're not even like dukes or anything.
The capybara vs. the hippopotamus (which is actually from Africa, Thor): Hmm, the world's largest rodent vs. a relative of the pig that can.... Well, just look at this article:
A French zoo director was crushed to death on 1 November by a hippopotamus in a rut. Jean Ducuing was cycling around the park in Pessac, near Bordeaux, when Komir, a seven-year-old male hippo, charged through an electrified fence after an employee driving a tractor stopped to distribute food. M Ducing, aged in his 60s, had trained Komir. Posters for the zoo feature a picture of Komir with M Ducing's head in his mouth. AFP - 2 November; International Herald tribune - 3 November
Or this one (my new favorite thing ever, though very sad if I stop to think about it), attributed to the Melbourn Herald Sun, July 16, 1999:“A dwarf nicknamed Od has died in a circus accident in northern Thailand. According to the Pattaya Mail, he 'bounced sideways from a trampoline and was swallowed by a yawning hippopotamus' which was waiting to appear in the next act. Vets on the scene said Hilda the Hippo 'had a gag reflex that automatically caused her to swallow.' The vet said it was the first time the hefty vegetarian had ever eaten a circus performer. Unfortunately, the 1,000-plus spectators continued to applaud widely until common-sense dictated that there had been a tragic mistake.”
The caiman vs. the crocodile: Well, you never heard the prophet warn against spiritual caimans, did you?
The howler monkey vs. the gorilla: One keeps you up all night. The other DESTROYS you. In sign language.
The piranha vs. the African lungfish: This is a draw. The piranha would win in an all-out fight, but if the Amazon ever dried up, the lungfish would win. And when the rainy season began again, he'd crawl out of the muck and be all, “Boo-yeah” to the dried up corpse of the piranha.
The tapir vs. the elephant: They both have flexible snouts, but one weighs 10,000 pounds. And it's not the tapir.
The great anteater vs. the aardvark: Ok, the great anteater takes this one, just for being great. But wait, here comes the other half of the aardvark's tag team: the pangolin! And the pangolin wins just for being the only mammal with scales, and for being able to roll up into a defensive ball!
The spider monkey vs. the chimpanzee: The chimp can use tools, and is the primate closest in its genetic makeup to man (after woman). Plus, it's up to five times stronger than man. I'm actually kinda scared of them myself.
The rhea vs. the ostrich: The ostrich is way more ginormous than the rhea. Plus, its eggs are extremely more valuable. The ostrich could just sell some of its precious eggs and go buy some wicked awesome artillery with the money. As the ostrich roasts the rhea with his sweet flame-thrower, he says in his best Schwarzenegger voice, “you were born a rhea; now you're gonna die a rhea!”
The puma vs. the fossa (Madagascar is technically part of Africa, I think): The fossa jumps about in the trees like it's nothing. I bet they'd eat a puma for lunch. And wash him down with a panther or cougar or something.
The tarantula vs. those scary African sand crabs from “Winged Migration”: They both eat birds. They both give me nightmares. I'd say the tarantula is more poisonous, plus he can blind the crab by flinging spiky hairs off his back with his hind legs, and then maybe the stupid crab will try to rub his eyes and stab them out with those nasty horrifying pinchers.
The mosquito vs. the tsetse fly: Tsetse sounds pretty bad, but I think Malaria is worse. Gotta go with the Mosquito.
The peccary vs. the warthog: They seem like the same animal to me. But the peccary is uglier, and so maybe the warthog would run away or something.
The cavy vs. the meerkat: The meerkat has a better problem-free philosophy, and is much more intelligent-looking than the cavy, which is really just a South American version of a Guinea Pig.
The poison dart frog vs. the killer bee: The froggy here has more poison in him. It takes a whole posse of bees to kill a man, but only the poison from one frog. True, the bee can fly away, but I bet the frog will use his elastic tongue to catch him back anyway and give him a scolding or thrashing!
The sloth vs. anything, pretty much. I hate the sloth. It's the worst animal. And don't go saying it's a special creation of God. 'Cause then why is it one of the cardinal sins? The thing is so slow, algae grows on it, giving it its grimy green fur. And its fingernails give me the heebie-jeebies like none other. Worst animal ever! But let's just pair him off with, say, the cheetah, just for the fun of it. I think I can say, "enough said." And I think I can say it several times.
The guanaco vs. the giraffe: Ok, so let's say all of a sudden I'm a giraffe. And let's say I have to fight this stupid woolly alpaca thing, and I'm realizing, neither of us has any claws or horns or weapons of any kind. But I can run fast. So what I do is I run around and eat all the leaves off the bottoms of the trees. Then when they're all gone, I can feast upon the upper leaves while guano boy dies of starvation. Hey, all's fair in love and war and fictional epic animal battles.
The burro vs. the zebra: If you look closely, you'll see that these are exactly the same animal. Except one's dressed nicer, so he'll do better in job interviews and things. Plus, the zebra knows how to work the crowd, and he has street smarts. You can either go with the zebra and his zany Fruit Stripe gum, or with the burro and his gloomy Colombia House coffee. Zebra, all the way.
The toucan vs. the hornbill: The hornbill could probably spear that fruity toucan and all three of his lame little nephews with that special spearing horn on his nose. “Just follow THIS, Sammy!”
The anaconda vs. the asp: One killed Cleopatra. The other tried to get Jennifer Lopez, but didn't quite make it. Still, though, for sheer girth, I'm going to give this one to the anaconda. The asp is deadly, but nobody ever made a movie (terrible or otherwise) about it.I think that's about it.
You can do with the wildebeest whatever you'd like. Maybe he's held in Africa's reserve as a secret weapon. After all, they killed Mufasa. Oh, and I was going to pair up the rhinoceros with the triceratops, but then I realized that's a dinosaur, not a South American animal. Still, I would pay good money to see that fight, man.
The final tally is South America 6 : Africa 16 (plus the wildebeest, and oh, yeah, the hyena! duh!). Africa wins, hands down. Glad you asked.
--Wild
QDear 100 Hour Board,
So I have noticed that there are quite a few people here on campus that are democrats. It suprised me when I found out that there is actually a democrat club on campus. So here is my quesion. I don't want to start a political debate, i just want to see this from a church democrats point of view. The church is against abortion, and also against homosexuality. They strongly take their stance in those positions. But the political democrat side is pro abortion and wants more rights for homosexuals. So how does someone who is a church member that is a democrat justify the differences between their political beliefs and church beliefs? I just don't understand how someone could hear a general authority talk about how bad homosexuality is, and then go vote for someone that contridicts that.
- Political Wonderer
ADear Political Wonderer,
That's a valid question. I am not a Democrat, but I dated one seriously for a while, and so I understand a lot of their views that are misconstrued by others. There are several points to consider here.
First, there is no "Gospel Party" or "Mormon Party." Every party out there has policies that in some way conflict with someone's take on the gospel. The Democratic Party's line is one of "pro-Choice" (to use their own term for it), and they are interested in protecting the rights of gay (again, their word, not mine) Americans. These are positions that at first glance seem contrary to the gospel. They may indeed be, but in a moment I'll show you where a lot of this thinking comes from.
The question with homosexuality for a Mormon Democrat is not whether those practices are wrong (we all agree that they are), but whether the government should step in and legislate about it, and whether the people are being protected from discrimination. And don't try to say right away that they shouldn't. I'm pretty far to the right (maybe not quite as much as the Captain), and even I can see that discrimination in one area of a person's life based on a private area is wrong. The gospel stance on how we treat people with same-sex attraction is that we "love the sinner." That does not include preventing them from having certain jobs, nor harming them in any way. Many people will throw out the JST of Matthew 18:9 and say that we are to remove our offending brethren. These scriptures (in my opinion) are evidently about people who are abusive, particularly toward children (as evidences by the context of the chapter). Here is a long passage from Elder Dallin H. Oaks' talk entitled "Same Gender Attraction":
"In a conference address on this same subject, President Gordon B. Hinckley said: 'I desire now to say with emphasis that our concern for the bitter fruit of sin is coupled with Christlike sympathy for its victims, innocent or culpable. We advocate the example of the Lord, who condemned the sin, yet loved the sinner. We should reach out with kindness and comfort to the afflicted, ministering to their needs and assisting them with their problems.'
"Despite such invitations and assurances, the Church and its members continue to experience misunderstandings about our positions on these matters. Last fall in an interview with a television reporter, one of our Church officials was asked, 'What is being done in the Church to try to stop the atmosphere of hate towards homosexuals?' Nine years ago, during a television interview on this subject, I was questioned about reports that the Church taught or implied 'that these people are somehow pariahs … and these people hate themselves and that this is an attitude brought forth by the Church.'
"More significantly, we also receive such questions from faithful members. A recent letter is illustrative:"
'Another concern we have is the way in which our sons and daughters are classified as people who practice deviant and lascivious behavior. Perhaps some do, but most do not. These young men and women want only to survive, have a spiritual life, and stay close to their families and the Church. It is especially damaging when these negative references are spoken from the pulpit. We believe such talks only create more depression and a tremendous amount of guilt, shame, and lack of self-worth, which they have endured throughout their entire lives. There is sometimes a real lack of the pure love of Christ expressed to help them through their ordeals. We will all appreciate anything you can do to help with the plight of these much misunderstood children of our Father in Heaven. If some of the General Authorities could express more sensitivity to this problem, it would surely help to avoid suicides and schisms that are caused within families. Many simply cannot tolerate the fact that Church members judge them as "evil people," and they, therefore, find solace in gay-oriented lifestyles.'
"These communications surely show the need for improvement in our communications with brothers and sisters who are struggling with problems—all types of problems. Each member of Christ’s church has a clear-cut doctrinal responsibility to show forth love and to extend help and understanding. Sinners, as well as those who are struggling to resist inappropriate feelings, are not people to be cast out but people to be loved and helped (see 3 Ne. 18:22-23, 30, 32). At the same time, Church leaders and members cannot avoid their responsibility to teach correct principles and righteous behavior (on all subjects), even if this causes discomfort to some.
"Church leaders are sometimes asked whether there is any place in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for persons with homosexual or lesbian susceptibilities or feelings. Of course there is. The degree of difficulty and the pattern necessary to forgo behavior and to control thoughts will be different with different individuals, but the message of hope and the hand of fellowship offered by the Church is the same for all who strive.
"I tried to describe the crucial distinctions in my answer to the television reporter who implied that the Church taught that 'these people are somehow pariahs.' I said:
"'The person that’s working [to resist] those tendencies ought not to feel himself to be a pariah. Now, quite a different thing is sexual relations outside of marriage. A person engaging in that kind of behavior should well feel guilt. They should well feel themselves estranged from God, who has given commandments against that kind of behavior. It’s not surprising to me that they would feel estranged from their church. What surprises me is that they would feel that the Church can revoke God’s commandments. … To the woman taken in adultery (which is a pretty good precedent for us), … [the Savior] was merciful and loving … , but he said, ‘Go thy way and sin no more.’ He loved the sinner; he condemned the sin. I think the Church does the same thing, imperfectly perhaps, but that’s what we teach our members: love the sinner, condemn the sin."
The most faithful Democratic Mormon is not trying to say that the church (ie. God) needs to change its stance on homosexuality. That person is often trying to say that the church (ie. the members) does. My aforementioned ex-girlfriend, by the way, participated in the Oakland, CA (or was it San Jose?) chapter of MESJ (pronounced "Message," though I was always telling her she should move to have the pronunciation officially changed to "Massage"), and she told me that the issue of same-sex attraction actually came up in a meeting, but the group decided not to touch that issue because it was one on which the various members of the group were split.
That's probably enough on that matter. On to the abortion issue: I am definitely not qualified to speak on this issue, but it has been my experience that most Mormon Democrats (hereafter referred to as Mormocrats for the sake of convenience and humor) are decidedly anti-abortion. This does not mean, however, that they necessarily are in favor of laws that prohibit abortion.
Now, obviously abortion is a vile and disgusting commission of the worst possible of acts against the (arguably) most innocent of victims. Before I go any further with this, let me reiterate that I am merely trying to defend the opinions of others, and I do not herein claim to maintain these positions in my own personal politics, so please do not yell at me. Anyway, the real issue that lies at the center of this matter is not whether a certain thing is against the commandments of the gospel, but whether it's the government's responsibility to step in. This can be seen as a matter of agency.
I've heard two theories about Satan's plan. We'll call them theory "L" and theory "R" (which stand for "left" and "right," in case you missed it). Theory "L" is that Satan was trying to force everyone to be righteous. An obvious way we could combat such a move from Satan would be to only worry about our own righteousness, and let others decide for themselves. Theory "R" is that Satan would make sure everyone was righteous by taking away the consequences of sin. This is the sort of thing you hear about from liberals--the idea that crime can be reduced by legalizing marijuana, for example. That may be an effective way to prevent crime, but it is not an effective way to prevent people from smoking marijuana. This is the same issue for many Mormocrats. They understand that abortion is against the commandments. They often just don't think that it should be against the law, as that limits a person's agency. Another argument they'll use is that during times when abortion was illegal, abortions still happened, but in unsafe conditions by people who were not doctors, thus putting the mother's life in danger as well. Those babies were not saved, and in those cases the mothers were often lost, too.
For the final thread in the tapestry of this answer, we'll have to assume (merely for the sake of illustration) that you're a Republican (which I also am not). To turn your questions around on you, the political Republican side is pro-tobacco and seems to largely ignore the commandments we've been given along with our responsiblity as stewards of the earth (see Doctrine and Covenants 59:18-20. Then think about McDonald's and Walmart and the effect these uber-corporations have on the land and its resources). So how does someone who is a church member that is a Republican justify the differences between their political beliefs and church beliefs? I think the answer to that question is the same as the answer to yours.
The Democratic Party does a seemingly better job that the Republican Party of a) keeping the commandments about caring for the poor, b) preaching the equality spoken of in Mosiah 27:3, and c) renouncing war (Doctrine and Covenants 98:16), as well as other matters that have been mentioned already, or that can be found by checking out http://www.gomakecontact.com/mesj/about-us/mission.html. I am going to send a copy of this to their contact e-mail to see if they feel it does the issue justice.
And that's all I have to say about that. Wow. Sorry I got carried away.
--Soapbox of Lies
CDear 100 Hour Board,
Sorry Uffish, I do have gmail otherwise I would thank you directly. You still rock though, and so does Skippy. Oh, and now BHM rocks too. Whoever BHM is. Anyone who likes granola people rocks.
- kesstacular
ADear bunnicula,
I like people granola. Do I rock?
--A cannibal
QDear 100 Hour Board,
I caught this Preying Mantis today and as it walked it would take a few steps, snatch at the air, and hop 3 inches. Take a few steps snatch at the air, hop forward three inches... So I put in a tree and it sort of continued in this pattern--climbing a bit and reaching out for leaves, etc. So I'm wondering exactly how much of a preying mantis' brain is instinct and how much is intellect. Preying manti are cool!
- Deb Robbins
ADear Deb,
Well, insects are strange things. The best argument I found on the instinct vs. intellect thing was actually on some Islaamic studies website. Check out the idea: colonies of ants and bees have an advanced society with complex inner workings that we humans could never hope to achieve. However, those communities are probably exactly like communities of ants from thousands of years ago. Humans, on the other hand, have had various ages (e.g. The Bronze Age or the Nuclear Age). We advance ourselves, and that sets us apart from the insects. Yes, maybe they have fascinating systems, but there's never a time when an insct says to itself, "Hey! I have a better idea on how to do this stuff." According to most modern scientists, insects are creatures of instinct, and not intellect. They're still cool, though. Have you noticed that mantises look a lot like aliens?
Oh, and Brainy Smurf wanted me to mention one more thing. "Mantis" comes from the Greek word for prophet or diviner. Greek suffixes seem to confuse people when it comes to pluralization. So here are some basic rules and then some examples of times when they're commonly misused: If a word from the Greek ends in "us," it is changed to an "i" to make it plural. If it ends in "is," it changes to "es." If it ends in "um," it changes to "a." Examples: axis=axes, focus=foci, agendum=agenda. Got it? Now the proper pluralization of mantis is "mantises," or if you want to sound cool and educated (which you obviously do), "mantes" (pronounced MAN-teez). You can indeed use the "i" at the end of cacti and octupi. "cactuses," "cactus," and "octopuses" are all correct alternative plural spellings of those words, too. Note that those words both have Greek roots. Walrus, which comes from Scandanavian roots, is not ever correctly rendered "walri." Use "walrus" or "walruses" instead.
--Wild
QDear 100 Hour Board,
What do you think about Descartes message, "I think therefore I am"? Do you think that he knew who he was before he said this or do you think that he thinks? Speaking of thinking, what do you think about the Thinker? Do you think the guy that posed for that got tired? Because, hello, I mean wouldn't you? And Tom Selleck in those 80's shorts and I love the Island Hopper uniforms. Love Yourself!
- Love me like you love Cows
ADear Love you from a distance,
We do appreciate when you split up unrelated questions into separate posts."Cogito ergo sum" is a great philosophy in my opinion. I have many wannabe friends who say things just to sound all nihilistic and ethereal. So the whole Descartes thing comes in handy when they say stuff like, "How do we even know if any of us exists (well, they say "exist," but I can't bring myself to consciously type bad grammar)?" To me, "I think, therefore I am" is the perfect counter to this. Obviously you exist if you're able to wonder if you do. Something is doing the wondering. The Thinker always makes me think of Dobie Gillis. I think that would be a cool name for a kid, but I bet everyone would think I got it from "Dobby" (a.k.a. Wannabe Gollum) of Harry Potter fame. The Thinker, though, is pretty neat. Statues can tell us a lot about ancient cultures. The Thinker tells me that back in the day before T.V. Guide or Uncle John's bathroom reader, they used to just sit there and think. What a neat concept! I don't think anyone had to pose for too long. The rest of your question doesn't really seem to be a question, so I'm not going to touch it.
--Brainy
QDear 100 Hour Board,
It seems the new athletic building has come complete with it’s own strawberry patch. Are there any policies (rules) on (against) students (me) picking (eating) the berries? Are there any other edible fruits growing on campus?
Many thanks,
A hungry student
ADear (esteemed) hungry (homeless) student (drifter),
The school (university) doesn't (does not) have (maintain) any policy (rule) against (precluding) the consumption (and subsequent digestion) of the strawberries (which are not actually berries). Students (you) can (may) eat (devour) the strawberries (not berries), but take heed (precaution): Physical Facilities (the Grounds crew) sprays (drenches) the soil (glorified word for dirt) with pesticides and herbicides (various poisons). Eat (ingest) them (the strawberries) if you (hungry student) will (want), but wash (rinse) them (the strawberries) before (prior to) doing so (eating them [the strawberries]). Thanks (grammercy) to Valerie (that's her real name) in the Physical Facilities (grounds) office (place of work).
--Greedy (covetous)
p.s. (postscript) You (hungry student) had better (should) get there (arrive) before (prior to) I (Greedy Smurf) do (get there).
And don't ever write like that again (please).
CDear S.K.,
i have seen the modern-day prophet playing cards at macey's by the checkout counters. however, i haven't been there in a while, so no guarantees.-
peanut
ADear all,Oh boy! It's punctuation time! Today's lesson: the hyphen (I promise I'm not making fun, but I thought this sentence was too funny to pass up).
We use a hyphen to connect an adjective to a noun when they're both being used to describe a noun. For example, when describing the prophet (noun), we call him "modern-day." The adjective "modern" is linked by a hyphen to the noun "day."
We don't do the same thing when the noun comes first. For example, we say "brick red house." To descibe a house that is the color of bricks. No hyphen. If we want to describe a house made of red bricks, though, we would call it a "red-brick" house. Or if we want to describe a red house made of bricks (maybe brown bricks painted red?) we would say "red brick house," since the red and brick aren't connected.
We hyphenate two nouns, as well, when they are describing another noun. Thus, "He has a dog-day mentality," or "That's a nice ice-cream-man mustache."
The reason I bring this up here is because this sentence is missing a hyphen, so it's saying something Peanut probably never intended. See? Peanut saw the modern-day prophet playing cards at Macey's. "Modern-day" is describing "prophet," whereas "modern-day-prophet" should be describing cards. It just makes it sound like Peanut saw President Hinckley playing poker at Macey's. Funny, huh? Oh, nevermind. I think I'm probably alone on this one....
--Brainy
QDear 100 Hour Board,
What do you do if someone threatens to scare you so badly you'll wet yourself? Is there any way to prepare yourself other then going to the bathroom previous to the time when you think you'll be scared?
- Wetless and Waiting
ADear waiting,
Depends.
--Jokey
QDear 100 Hour Board,
Why do they say that it is not a good idea to eat "jack" rabbits when hunting? In other words, cottontail rabbits are considered okay to eat but the "jack" aren't. What's the deal? Can I eat one? What might happen?
Curious
ADear Curious,
Jack rabbits are actually hares. There is a high level of superstition surrounding hares. It has been believed that witches transmogrify themselves into hares. Hares also have longer legs and tend to run faster (70 km/hr!) and be more active, so the meat is tougher and stringier. Stick to rabbits if you must eat a lagomorph.
--Wild
ADear Curious,
Hunters aren't the only ones who don't eat hares. Have you ever gotten a hare in your soup? What do you do? You send it back.
--Jokey
QDear 100 Hour Board,
Why do the word spelled B-R-E-A-K and the word spelled S-P-E-A-K not rhyme?
--Kitty the Badger
ADear Kitty the Badger,
I hope this post isn't lost on you. It's been seen that our language can be tough to sort through, though. I'm in danger of anger when I wonder or ponder about how easily "laughter" becomes "slaughter." So, do not despair when the good food of language is full of worms, or storms of linguistic trickery blow (and how!); keep in mind that the wind and rain go away, and again you'll feast on breast of beast that's better (but close) to those whose descriptions you'll ever read (or have read). My point is this: we English speakers are rule-breakers, and have come home to an accord about how a word is said, so "plaid" and "raid" are friends (not fiends) and you can bear to hear that there's no thought of a drought, that we're far from war and from harm and we're warm, and that "worm" is the norm.
--Poet (with help from his imaginary fiends, Darren and Warren)
Well, I haven't even delved into the confessor's stuff. I just searched for brainy, jokey, and poet so far. I'm sure I'll have plenty more that I want to keep for posterity's sake. Thanks for indulging me.
QDear 100 Hour Board,
If the animals from South America had a "rumble" with the animals from Africa... which group of animals would win, and why?
- Betting on the piranhas' team
ADear Bettin',
South America. They've got Hungry hungry hippos. (I think). Actually, maybe that's Africa.... Hmmm. Well, either way, I'm putting my money on the Hippos. On a side note, I've seen bacteria and microscopic worms from South America that've sent people to their death beds. If their single cell organisms can do that, just imagine what an entire herd of hippos could do. On a second, and final side note (everyone breathes a sigh of relief), I have no idea why the sudden fixation with hippos. I mean really, could an animal be less intimidating? Oh well. That's my answer, and I'm sticking to it.
-Thor
ADear Better,
I say let's break this down. We'll pit South American animals against their nearest African counterparts. South America will appear first in each match so you can tell which side they're representing.
The llama vs. the camel: The camel totally wins this one. It can pack a lot more, and it's bigger and faster and smarter. The llama might have an easier time getting into Heaven, though.
The jaguar vs. the lion: Africa wins again. The lion is king of the jungle, even though it lives primarily in the pride lands. Jaguars actually live in the jungle, but they're not even like dukes or anything.
The capybara vs. the hippopotamus (which is actually from Africa, Thor): Hmm, the world's largest rodent vs. a relative of the pig that can.... Well, just look at this article:
A French zoo director was crushed to death on 1 November by a hippopotamus in a rut. Jean Ducuing was cycling around the park in Pessac, near Bordeaux, when Komir, a seven-year-old male hippo, charged through an electrified fence after an employee driving a tractor stopped to distribute food. M Ducing, aged in his 60s, had trained Komir. Posters for the zoo feature a picture of Komir with M Ducing's head in his mouth. AFP - 2 November; International Herald tribune - 3 November
Or this one (my new favorite thing ever, though very sad if I stop to think about it), attributed to the Melbourn Herald Sun, July 16, 1999:“A dwarf nicknamed Od has died in a circus accident in northern Thailand. According to the Pattaya Mail, he 'bounced sideways from a trampoline and was swallowed by a yawning hippopotamus' which was waiting to appear in the next act. Vets on the scene said Hilda the Hippo 'had a gag reflex that automatically caused her to swallow.' The vet said it was the first time the hefty vegetarian had ever eaten a circus performer. Unfortunately, the 1,000-plus spectators continued to applaud widely until common-sense dictated that there had been a tragic mistake.”
The caiman vs. the crocodile: Well, you never heard the prophet warn against spiritual caimans, did you?
The howler monkey vs. the gorilla: One keeps you up all night. The other DESTROYS you. In sign language.
The piranha vs. the African lungfish: This is a draw. The piranha would win in an all-out fight, but if the Amazon ever dried up, the lungfish would win. And when the rainy season began again, he'd crawl out of the muck and be all, “Boo-yeah” to the dried up corpse of the piranha.
The tapir vs. the elephant: They both have flexible snouts, but one weighs 10,000 pounds. And it's not the tapir.
The great anteater vs. the aardvark: Ok, the great anteater takes this one, just for being great. But wait, here comes the other half of the aardvark's tag team: the pangolin! And the pangolin wins just for being the only mammal with scales, and for being able to roll up into a defensive ball!
The spider monkey vs. the chimpanzee: The chimp can use tools, and is the primate closest in its genetic makeup to man (after woman). Plus, it's up to five times stronger than man. I'm actually kinda scared of them myself.
The rhea vs. the ostrich: The ostrich is way more ginormous than the rhea. Plus, its eggs are extremely more valuable. The ostrich could just sell some of its precious eggs and go buy some wicked awesome artillery with the money. As the ostrich roasts the rhea with his sweet flame-thrower, he says in his best Schwarzenegger voice, “you were born a rhea; now you're gonna die a rhea!”
The puma vs. the fossa (Madagascar is technically part of Africa, I think): The fossa jumps about in the trees like it's nothing. I bet they'd eat a puma for lunch. And wash him down with a panther or cougar or something.
The tarantula vs. those scary African sand crabs from “Winged Migration”: They both eat birds. They both give me nightmares. I'd say the tarantula is more poisonous, plus he can blind the crab by flinging spiky hairs off his back with his hind legs, and then maybe the stupid crab will try to rub his eyes and stab them out with those nasty horrifying pinchers.
The mosquito vs. the tsetse fly: Tsetse sounds pretty bad, but I think Malaria is worse. Gotta go with the Mosquito.
The peccary vs. the warthog: They seem like the same animal to me. But the peccary is uglier, and so maybe the warthog would run away or something.
The cavy vs. the meerkat: The meerkat has a better problem-free philosophy, and is much more intelligent-looking than the cavy, which is really just a South American version of a Guinea Pig.
The poison dart frog vs. the killer bee: The froggy here has more poison in him. It takes a whole posse of bees to kill a man, but only the poison from one frog. True, the bee can fly away, but I bet the frog will use his elastic tongue to catch him back anyway and give him a scolding or thrashing!
The sloth vs. anything, pretty much. I hate the sloth. It's the worst animal. And don't go saying it's a special creation of God. 'Cause then why is it one of the cardinal sins? The thing is so slow, algae grows on it, giving it its grimy green fur. And its fingernails give me the heebie-jeebies like none other. Worst animal ever! But let's just pair him off with, say, the cheetah, just for the fun of it. I think I can say, "enough said." And I think I can say it several times.
The guanaco vs. the giraffe: Ok, so let's say all of a sudden I'm a giraffe. And let's say I have to fight this stupid woolly alpaca thing, and I'm realizing, neither of us has any claws or horns or weapons of any kind. But I can run fast. So what I do is I run around and eat all the leaves off the bottoms of the trees. Then when they're all gone, I can feast upon the upper leaves while guano boy dies of starvation. Hey, all's fair in love and war and fictional epic animal battles.
The burro vs. the zebra: If you look closely, you'll see that these are exactly the same animal. Except one's dressed nicer, so he'll do better in job interviews and things. Plus, the zebra knows how to work the crowd, and he has street smarts. You can either go with the zebra and his zany Fruit Stripe gum, or with the burro and his gloomy Colombia House coffee. Zebra, all the way.
The toucan vs. the hornbill: The hornbill could probably spear that fruity toucan and all three of his lame little nephews with that special spearing horn on his nose. “Just follow THIS, Sammy!”
The anaconda vs. the asp: One killed Cleopatra. The other tried to get Jennifer Lopez, but didn't quite make it. Still, though, for sheer girth, I'm going to give this one to the anaconda. The asp is deadly, but nobody ever made a movie (terrible or otherwise) about it.I think that's about it.
You can do with the wildebeest whatever you'd like. Maybe he's held in Africa's reserve as a secret weapon. After all, they killed Mufasa. Oh, and I was going to pair up the rhinoceros with the triceratops, but then I realized that's a dinosaur, not a South American animal. Still, I would pay good money to see that fight, man.
The final tally is South America 6 : Africa 16 (plus the wildebeest, and oh, yeah, the hyena! duh!). Africa wins, hands down. Glad you asked.
--Wild
QDear 100 Hour Board,
So I have noticed that there are quite a few people here on campus that are democrats. It suprised me when I found out that there is actually a democrat club on campus. So here is my quesion. I don't want to start a political debate, i just want to see this from a church democrats point of view. The church is against abortion, and also against homosexuality. They strongly take their stance in those positions. But the political democrat side is pro abortion and wants more rights for homosexuals. So how does someone who is a church member that is a democrat justify the differences between their political beliefs and church beliefs? I just don't understand how someone could hear a general authority talk about how bad homosexuality is, and then go vote for someone that contridicts that.
- Political Wonderer
ADear Political Wonderer,
That's a valid question. I am not a Democrat, but I dated one seriously for a while, and so I understand a lot of their views that are misconstrued by others. There are several points to consider here.
First, there is no "Gospel Party" or "Mormon Party." Every party out there has policies that in some way conflict with someone's take on the gospel. The Democratic Party's line is one of "pro-Choice" (to use their own term for it), and they are interested in protecting the rights of gay (again, their word, not mine) Americans. These are positions that at first glance seem contrary to the gospel. They may indeed be, but in a moment I'll show you where a lot of this thinking comes from.
The question with homosexuality for a Mormon Democrat is not whether those practices are wrong (we all agree that they are), but whether the government should step in and legislate about it, and whether the people are being protected from discrimination. And don't try to say right away that they shouldn't. I'm pretty far to the right (maybe not quite as much as the Captain), and even I can see that discrimination in one area of a person's life based on a private area is wrong. The gospel stance on how we treat people with same-sex attraction is that we "love the sinner." That does not include preventing them from having certain jobs, nor harming them in any way. Many people will throw out the JST of Matthew 18:9 and say that we are to remove our offending brethren. These scriptures (in my opinion) are evidently about people who are abusive, particularly toward children (as evidences by the context of the chapter). Here is a long passage from Elder Dallin H. Oaks' talk entitled "Same Gender Attraction":
"In a conference address on this same subject, President Gordon B. Hinckley said: 'I desire now to say with emphasis that our concern for the bitter fruit of sin is coupled with Christlike sympathy for its victims, innocent or culpable. We advocate the example of the Lord, who condemned the sin, yet loved the sinner. We should reach out with kindness and comfort to the afflicted, ministering to their needs and assisting them with their problems.'
"Despite such invitations and assurances, the Church and its members continue to experience misunderstandings about our positions on these matters. Last fall in an interview with a television reporter, one of our Church officials was asked, 'What is being done in the Church to try to stop the atmosphere of hate towards homosexuals?' Nine years ago, during a television interview on this subject, I was questioned about reports that the Church taught or implied 'that these people are somehow pariahs … and these people hate themselves and that this is an attitude brought forth by the Church.'
"More significantly, we also receive such questions from faithful members. A recent letter is illustrative:"
'Another concern we have is the way in which our sons and daughters are classified as people who practice deviant and lascivious behavior. Perhaps some do, but most do not. These young men and women want only to survive, have a spiritual life, and stay close to their families and the Church. It is especially damaging when these negative references are spoken from the pulpit. We believe such talks only create more depression and a tremendous amount of guilt, shame, and lack of self-worth, which they have endured throughout their entire lives. There is sometimes a real lack of the pure love of Christ expressed to help them through their ordeals. We will all appreciate anything you can do to help with the plight of these much misunderstood children of our Father in Heaven. If some of the General Authorities could express more sensitivity to this problem, it would surely help to avoid suicides and schisms that are caused within families. Many simply cannot tolerate the fact that Church members judge them as "evil people," and they, therefore, find solace in gay-oriented lifestyles.'
"These communications surely show the need for improvement in our communications with brothers and sisters who are struggling with problems—all types of problems. Each member of Christ’s church has a clear-cut doctrinal responsibility to show forth love and to extend help and understanding. Sinners, as well as those who are struggling to resist inappropriate feelings, are not people to be cast out but people to be loved and helped (see 3 Ne. 18:22-23, 30, 32). At the same time, Church leaders and members cannot avoid their responsibility to teach correct principles and righteous behavior (on all subjects), even if this causes discomfort to some.
"Church leaders are sometimes asked whether there is any place in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for persons with homosexual or lesbian susceptibilities or feelings. Of course there is. The degree of difficulty and the pattern necessary to forgo behavior and to control thoughts will be different with different individuals, but the message of hope and the hand of fellowship offered by the Church is the same for all who strive.
"I tried to describe the crucial distinctions in my answer to the television reporter who implied that the Church taught that 'these people are somehow pariahs.' I said:
"'The person that’s working [to resist] those tendencies ought not to feel himself to be a pariah. Now, quite a different thing is sexual relations outside of marriage. A person engaging in that kind of behavior should well feel guilt. They should well feel themselves estranged from God, who has given commandments against that kind of behavior. It’s not surprising to me that they would feel estranged from their church. What surprises me is that they would feel that the Church can revoke God’s commandments. … To the woman taken in adultery (which is a pretty good precedent for us), … [the Savior] was merciful and loving … , but he said, ‘Go thy way and sin no more.’ He loved the sinner; he condemned the sin. I think the Church does the same thing, imperfectly perhaps, but that’s what we teach our members: love the sinner, condemn the sin."
The most faithful Democratic Mormon is not trying to say that the church (ie. God) needs to change its stance on homosexuality. That person is often trying to say that the church (ie. the members) does. My aforementioned ex-girlfriend, by the way, participated in the Oakland, CA (or was it San Jose?) chapter of MESJ (pronounced "Message," though I was always telling her she should move to have the pronunciation officially changed to "Massage"), and she told me that the issue of same-sex attraction actually came up in a meeting, but the group decided not to touch that issue because it was one on which the various members of the group were split.
That's probably enough on that matter. On to the abortion issue: I am definitely not qualified to speak on this issue, but it has been my experience that most Mormon Democrats (hereafter referred to as Mormocrats for the sake of convenience and humor) are decidedly anti-abortion. This does not mean, however, that they necessarily are in favor of laws that prohibit abortion.
Now, obviously abortion is a vile and disgusting commission of the worst possible of acts against the (arguably) most innocent of victims. Before I go any further with this, let me reiterate that I am merely trying to defend the opinions of others, and I do not herein claim to maintain these positions in my own personal politics, so please do not yell at me. Anyway, the real issue that lies at the center of this matter is not whether a certain thing is against the commandments of the gospel, but whether it's the government's responsibility to step in. This can be seen as a matter of agency.
I've heard two theories about Satan's plan. We'll call them theory "L" and theory "R" (which stand for "left" and "right," in case you missed it). Theory "L" is that Satan was trying to force everyone to be righteous. An obvious way we could combat such a move from Satan would be to only worry about our own righteousness, and let others decide for themselves. Theory "R" is that Satan would make sure everyone was righteous by taking away the consequences of sin. This is the sort of thing you hear about from liberals--the idea that crime can be reduced by legalizing marijuana, for example. That may be an effective way to prevent crime, but it is not an effective way to prevent people from smoking marijuana. This is the same issue for many Mormocrats. They understand that abortion is against the commandments. They often just don't think that it should be against the law, as that limits a person's agency. Another argument they'll use is that during times when abortion was illegal, abortions still happened, but in unsafe conditions by people who were not doctors, thus putting the mother's life in danger as well. Those babies were not saved, and in those cases the mothers were often lost, too.
For the final thread in the tapestry of this answer, we'll have to assume (merely for the sake of illustration) that you're a Republican (which I also am not). To turn your questions around on you, the political Republican side is pro-tobacco and seems to largely ignore the commandments we've been given along with our responsiblity as stewards of the earth (see Doctrine and Covenants 59:18-20. Then think about McDonald's and Walmart and the effect these uber-corporations have on the land and its resources). So how does someone who is a church member that is a Republican justify the differences between their political beliefs and church beliefs? I think the answer to that question is the same as the answer to yours.
The Democratic Party does a seemingly better job that the Republican Party of a) keeping the commandments about caring for the poor, b) preaching the equality spoken of in Mosiah 27:3, and c) renouncing war (Doctrine and Covenants 98:16), as well as other matters that have been mentioned already, or that can be found by checking out http://www.gomakecontact.com/mesj/about-us/mission.html. I am going to send a copy of this to their contact e-mail to see if they feel it does the issue justice.
And that's all I have to say about that. Wow. Sorry I got carried away.
--Soapbox of Lies
CDear 100 Hour Board,
Sorry Uffish, I do have gmail otherwise I would thank you directly. You still rock though, and so does Skippy. Oh, and now BHM rocks too. Whoever BHM is. Anyone who likes granola people rocks.
- kesstacular
ADear bunnicula,
I like people granola. Do I rock?
--A cannibal
QDear 100 Hour Board,
I caught this Preying Mantis today and as it walked it would take a few steps, snatch at the air, and hop 3 inches. Take a few steps snatch at the air, hop forward three inches... So I put in a tree and it sort of continued in this pattern--climbing a bit and reaching out for leaves, etc. So I'm wondering exactly how much of a preying mantis' brain is instinct and how much is intellect. Preying manti are cool!
- Deb Robbins
ADear Deb,
Well, insects are strange things. The best argument I found on the instinct vs. intellect thing was actually on some Islaamic studies website. Check out the idea: colonies of ants and bees have an advanced society with complex inner workings that we humans could never hope to achieve. However, those communities are probably exactly like communities of ants from thousands of years ago. Humans, on the other hand, have had various ages (e.g. The Bronze Age or the Nuclear Age). We advance ourselves, and that sets us apart from the insects. Yes, maybe they have fascinating systems, but there's never a time when an insct says to itself, "Hey! I have a better idea on how to do this stuff." According to most modern scientists, insects are creatures of instinct, and not intellect. They're still cool, though. Have you noticed that mantises look a lot like aliens?
Oh, and Brainy Smurf wanted me to mention one more thing. "Mantis" comes from the Greek word for prophet or diviner. Greek suffixes seem to confuse people when it comes to pluralization. So here are some basic rules and then some examples of times when they're commonly misused: If a word from the Greek ends in "us," it is changed to an "i" to make it plural. If it ends in "is," it changes to "es." If it ends in "um," it changes to "a." Examples: axis=axes, focus=foci, agendum=agenda. Got it? Now the proper pluralization of mantis is "mantises," or if you want to sound cool and educated (which you obviously do), "mantes" (pronounced MAN-teez). You can indeed use the "i" at the end of cacti and octupi. "cactuses," "cactus," and "octopuses" are all correct alternative plural spellings of those words, too. Note that those words both have Greek roots. Walrus, which comes from Scandanavian roots, is not ever correctly rendered "walri." Use "walrus" or "walruses" instead.
--Wild
QDear 100 Hour Board,
What do you think about Descartes message, "I think therefore I am"? Do you think that he knew who he was before he said this or do you think that he thinks? Speaking of thinking, what do you think about the Thinker? Do you think the guy that posed for that got tired? Because, hello, I mean wouldn't you? And Tom Selleck in those 80's shorts and I love the Island Hopper uniforms. Love Yourself!
- Love me like you love Cows
ADear Love you from a distance,
We do appreciate when you split up unrelated questions into separate posts."Cogito ergo sum" is a great philosophy in my opinion. I have many wannabe friends who say things just to sound all nihilistic and ethereal. So the whole Descartes thing comes in handy when they say stuff like, "How do we even know if any of us exists (well, they say "exist," but I can't bring myself to consciously type bad grammar)?" To me, "I think, therefore I am" is the perfect counter to this. Obviously you exist if you're able to wonder if you do. Something is doing the wondering. The Thinker always makes me think of Dobie Gillis. I think that would be a cool name for a kid, but I bet everyone would think I got it from "Dobby" (a.k.a. Wannabe Gollum) of Harry Potter fame. The Thinker, though, is pretty neat. Statues can tell us a lot about ancient cultures. The Thinker tells me that back in the day before T.V. Guide or Uncle John's bathroom reader, they used to just sit there and think. What a neat concept! I don't think anyone had to pose for too long. The rest of your question doesn't really seem to be a question, so I'm not going to touch it.
--Brainy
QDear 100 Hour Board,
It seems the new athletic building has come complete with it’s own strawberry patch. Are there any policies (rules) on (against) students (me) picking (eating) the berries? Are there any other edible fruits growing on campus?
Many thanks,
A hungry student
ADear (esteemed) hungry (homeless) student (drifter),
The school (university) doesn't (does not) have (maintain) any policy (rule) against (precluding) the consumption (and subsequent digestion) of the strawberries (which are not actually berries). Students (you) can (may) eat (devour) the strawberries (not berries), but take heed (precaution): Physical Facilities (the Grounds crew) sprays (drenches) the soil (glorified word for dirt) with pesticides and herbicides (various poisons). Eat (ingest) them (the strawberries) if you (hungry student) will (want), but wash (rinse) them (the strawberries) before (prior to) doing so (eating them [the strawberries]). Thanks (grammercy) to Valerie (that's her real name) in the Physical Facilities (grounds) office (place of work).
--Greedy (covetous)
p.s. (postscript) You (hungry student) had better (should) get there (arrive) before (prior to) I (Greedy Smurf) do (get there).
And don't ever write like that again (please).
CDear S.K.,
i have seen the modern-day prophet playing cards at macey's by the checkout counters. however, i haven't been there in a while, so no guarantees.-
peanut
ADear all,Oh boy! It's punctuation time! Today's lesson: the hyphen (I promise I'm not making fun, but I thought this sentence was too funny to pass up).
We use a hyphen to connect an adjective to a noun when they're both being used to describe a noun. For example, when describing the prophet (noun), we call him "modern-day." The adjective "modern" is linked by a hyphen to the noun "day."
We don't do the same thing when the noun comes first. For example, we say "brick red house." To descibe a house that is the color of bricks. No hyphen. If we want to describe a house made of red bricks, though, we would call it a "red-brick" house. Or if we want to describe a red house made of bricks (maybe brown bricks painted red?) we would say "red brick house," since the red and brick aren't connected.
We hyphenate two nouns, as well, when they are describing another noun. Thus, "He has a dog-day mentality," or "That's a nice ice-cream-man mustache."
The reason I bring this up here is because this sentence is missing a hyphen, so it's saying something Peanut probably never intended. See? Peanut saw the modern-day prophet playing cards at Macey's. "Modern-day" is describing "prophet," whereas "modern-day-prophet" should be describing cards. It just makes it sound like Peanut saw President Hinckley playing poker at Macey's. Funny, huh? Oh, nevermind. I think I'm probably alone on this one....
--Brainy
QDear 100 Hour Board,
What do you do if someone threatens to scare you so badly you'll wet yourself? Is there any way to prepare yourself other then going to the bathroom previous to the time when you think you'll be scared?
- Wetless and Waiting
ADear waiting,
Depends.
--Jokey
QDear 100 Hour Board,
Why do they say that it is not a good idea to eat "jack" rabbits when hunting? In other words, cottontail rabbits are considered okay to eat but the "jack" aren't. What's the deal? Can I eat one? What might happen?
Curious
ADear Curious,
Jack rabbits are actually hares. There is a high level of superstition surrounding hares. It has been believed that witches transmogrify themselves into hares. Hares also have longer legs and tend to run faster (70 km/hr!) and be more active, so the meat is tougher and stringier. Stick to rabbits if you must eat a lagomorph.
--Wild
ADear Curious,
Hunters aren't the only ones who don't eat hares. Have you ever gotten a hare in your soup? What do you do? You send it back.
--Jokey
QDear 100 Hour Board,
Why do the word spelled B-R-E-A-K and the word spelled S-P-E-A-K not rhyme?
--Kitty the Badger
ADear Kitty the Badger,
I hope this post isn't lost on you. It's been seen that our language can be tough to sort through, though. I'm in danger of anger when I wonder or ponder about how easily "laughter" becomes "slaughter." So, do not despair when the good food of language is full of worms, or storms of linguistic trickery blow (and how!); keep in mind that the wind and rain go away, and again you'll feast on breast of beast that's better (but close) to those whose descriptions you'll ever read (or have read). My point is this: we English speakers are rule-breakers, and have come home to an accord about how a word is said, so "plaid" and "raid" are friends (not fiends) and you can bear to hear that there's no thought of a drought, that we're far from war and from harm and we're warm, and that "worm" is the norm.
--Poet (with help from his imaginary fiends, Darren and Warren)
Well, I haven't even delved into the confessor's stuff. I just searched for brainy, jokey, and poet so far. I'm sure I'll have plenty more that I want to keep for posterity's sake. Thanks for indulging me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
