The Economist provides an elegant introduction into the overlapping views of Mary, the mother of Jesus, within Christianity and Islam, as colored by Judaism. She is metaphor, intercessor and human.
In some respects, Muslim beliefs about Mary—the most honoured woman in Islam, and the only one to have an entire chapter named after her in the Koran—seem to be quite close to those of the Roman Catholics. The Islamic tradition holds that Jesus and his mother are the only two human souls who were not touched by Satan at birth.
In other respects, the Muslim understanding of Mary seems close to that of the eastern Christians. Both cherish the story of Mary's childhood in a place of supreme holiness that had hitherto been a bastion of male priests. ...
... Margaret Barker, a Hebrew scholar and prolific writer on religious history['s] latest book, The Great High Priest, is a collection of densely woven arguments about the continuity between Judaism and early Christian practices. It touches on at least two interlocking themes: the sex of divinity, and the locus of holiness.
Her argument is that much of the poetry celebrating Mary comes from the “wisdom tradition” within Judaism, which draws upon feminine language to depict wisdom. Further, Barker and others point to textual evidence that both masculine and feminine aspects of the deity were worshipped distinctively before the fall of the first Temple. Indeed that strand of belief in the divinity as both male and female may be linked to the story that tells of Mary, as a child, was permitted in the holy of holies.
... Muslims, like eastern Christians, believe that Mary's mother was expecting a child who would perform unique services to God, and was therefore surprised when her baby turned out to be a girl. Christians and Muslims will never agree on the nature of Mary's child: was he God incarnate, who experienced death and rose again, or a uniquely inspired prophet who did not die but ascended to heaven? Yet Christians and Muslims alike can see in Mary an affirmation that there is no limit to the holiness, or proximity to God, that any human, whether male or female, can attain. Surely that is reason enough, for people of any faith, to feel reverence for history's foremost Jewish mother.
These are only extracts of one of several arguments within the article, worth reading. Worth pondering over how people have thought of humanity and divinity. I'm also looking forward to the letters in response.
Archaeologists studying a Neolithic site in modern-day Turkey have tentatively concluded that some form of sexual equality probably existed in the settlement, known as Çatalhöyük ("chah-tahl-HU-yook")— [which] grew to about 8,000 people and 2,000 houses. Crammed within 26 acres, roughly the size of 24 football fields.
. Evidence marshalled included no burial practices, or food consumption was distinctive to one gender. Nor were the wear and tear on bones suggestive of highly specialized or segregated labor.
Ad Rem and I enjoy bad movies, or more to the point we enjoy laughing at bad movies. (AdRem and another incisive commentator salvaged (savaged?) Matrix Revolutions for me.) The next on the list is Hidalgo, and among many puzzling questions is whether paint mustangs—Hidalgo for example—exist: And the research says: Ok, Mustangs can come in any color including paint, but that is fairly rare.
Your very own Ann Coulter action figure. If the doll is realistic, the cause of her crankiness is self-evident: she must be hungry all the time. (Thanks RB!)
As a follow up to a little thrill of having missed an earthquake, here are maps of seismic activity in your neighborhood courtesy of the US Geological Survey: US national maps showing earthquake ground motions that have a specified probability of being exceeded in 50 years.
Robert Cringely on why high-tech voting solutions are dastardly: they'll profit a few (these aren't cheap systems), ease the ability to disenfranchising many voters, and all to solve problems easily resolved by, ta-da, paper:
And there's the big problem—the people running the elections aren't actually running them. Vendors are doing that. Election officials don't know how their equipment works and won't know if it works wrong.
This is lunacy.
And it is also patronage. There is a lot of money in replacing all those machines, and that money is going primarily to the usual suspects. Remember that every public crisis in America is an opportunity for someone to make money.
...
My model for smart voting is Canada. The Canadians are watching our election problems and laughing their butts off. They think we are crazy, and they are right.
Forget touch screens and electronic voting. In Canadian Federal elections, two barely-paid representatives of each party, known as “scrutineers,” are present all day at the voting place. If there are more political parties, there are more scrutineers. To vote, you write an “X”with a pencil in a one centimeter circle beside the candidate's name, fold the ballot up and stuff it into a box. Later, the scrutineers AND ANY VOTER WHO WANTS TO WATCH all sit at a table for about half an hour and count every ballot, keeping a tally for each candidate. If the counts agree at the end of the process, the results are phoned-in and everyone goes home. If they don't, you do it again. Fairness is achieved by balanced self-interest, not by technology. The population of Canada is about the same as California, so the elections are of comparable scale. In the last Canadian Federal election the entire vote was counted in four hours. Why does it take us 30 days or more? ....
Ad Rem points out another repeal of blue laws in Massachusetts to honor the 70th anniversary of the end of Prohibition. From the Christian Science Monitor:
Most blue laws—which included bans on Sunday travel, hair-cutting, and sweeping the house—had waned by the time of the American Revolution.
But those on alcohol, and those setting aside Sunday as a day of rest, gained prominence in temperance movements throughout the 19th century, says Peter Drummey, librarian at the Massachusetts Historical Society. Many remained intact even after the 21st amendment ended Prohibition in 1933, giving states control of alcohol laws.
Blue laws can be just silly though. Long ago I faced the choice of “forcing poor mothers” to work on Sundays if, heaven forfend, Missouri voters repealed its blue laws. Nevermind the ridiculousness of the actual law. Grocery stores were banned from selling their wine and beer on Sundays even as they sold everything else, while the convoluted law permitted bars with carryout licenses to sell wine and beer on Sundays. And Anheuser Busch could sell tickets intended to be exchanged for a glass of its beer at Sunday events. As long as you didn't buy the alcohol directly, it was legal. Frankly, I say good riddance to a silly law. After all no one is forcing us to shop on Sundays.
I learned last night the earth shook, rattled, and rolled. Who knew? My second earthquake, and the second I've missed.
According to Washington Post, the voting machine industry wants to engage in discussions arguing:
that their systems are safe, have yet to put forward any proposals on addressing the concerns. But under the umbrella leadership of the Information Technology Association of America, the industry hopes to foster conversation that includes security experts, academics, local elections officials, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the federal agency overseeing technical standards.
It doesn't look like a serious response to legitimate criticisms of these voting machines.