I’ll be there. Will you?

(Thanks to Top Shelf for the heads up)

Has been launched!

Enjoy!

The Anchoress has the scoop.

(Thanks to Jay C. for the heads up)

Details here.

Update: Turnabout is fair play.

Who are y’all putting on notice?

Sorry for the light posting of late, folks. I’ve been swamped at work. I was in Charlotte from Sunday evening until Tuesday afternoon, and I just finished (and filed) a 30-page application for interlocutory appeal (which is essentially a brief asking for permission to appeal). My guess (and hope) is that the Court of Appeals will grant the application, but you never know. The percentage of applications actually granted by the COA is fairly low.

Anyway, I hope to resume regular posting tomorrow.

In the meantime, feel free to use this post as an open thread for any and all topics y’all care to discuss (or wish we would post about).

Professor Joe Knippenberg of Oglethorpe University gets to the root of Georgetown’s decision to bar evangelical student ministries from participating as affiliate groups on campus:

There’s the root of Georgetown’s conflict with its erstwhile evangelical affiliates. It demands that everyone subscribe wholeheartedly to a thoroughgoingly pluralistic vision and suspects that the evangelicals don’t.

But that’s apparently not good enough for the authorities at Georgetown, who seem to want everyone to love pluralism with all their hearts, souls, and minds. Of course, if everyone affirms pluralism in this way, what you really end up with is a kind of deep uniformity, not genuine pluralism at all. Yes, there are differences, but everyone regards them as accidental and superficial, not worth shouting about, let alone (perish the thought!) fighting over.  

Yesterday, the Fourth Circuit held that in a GOP challenge to Virginia’s open primary law, the Plaintiffs had standing and the claim was ripe.  The GOP is arguing that the open primary violates rights to free association inasmuch as Dem voters could throw votes to a candidate who does not reflect the goals of the GOP membership.

The Richmond Times Dispatch has this article, and I have a case summary up at the SCAL Blog. 

Because 2006 is the centenary of his birth, the English poet  John Betjeman has gotten a spot of attention recently, including this link-rich John Derbyshire essay for NRO.  There’s also lots of audio available on this BBC Radio 4 webpage.

It happens every once in a while. You discover something that is really special, that should be incredibly successful, but unaccountably, isn’t. A very well read friend made me aware of the fiction of Lars Walker. He writes mostly about Vikings during the period when Christianity contended with pagan religions, but he also has a contemporary novel (which happens to deal with Viking lore!).

I cannot give a high enough recommendation to Lars Walker’s The Year of the Warrior. I had to wait for it, but it was completely worth the wait. The narrator of the story is a young Irishman taken captive to sell as a slave by Vikings. They give him a tonsure to make him look like a priest so he’ll fetch a higher price. A newly converted Viking nobleman buys him because he needs a priest for his village. The Irishman decides to play the part of the priest in order to survive and the action flows from there.

Wonderful historical saga. Interesting insights about the Christian faith and its relationship to political power. Some beautiful battle sequences, too. Fully developed characters. Worth reading in every way.

So why the lack of bestseller status? I have a guess. The Lars Walker novels are published by Baen, which really specializes in sword and sorcery/science fiction. The covers of the Walker books have that look to them, but they are actually much deeper. I think the normal Baen reader is disappointed by the lack of standard genre stuff when they buy the book. But you, dear reader, will not be disappointed. You shall be blessed.

Yours truly turned 25 today. What I’m most excited about is that my car insurance rate will decease.

Wait, I’m giddy about insurance? I must be getting old…

Mama’s don’t let your babies grow up to go to Mercer University. William Underwood became the interim president at Baylor University after Robert Sloan was forced to resign. The first thing he did was fire David Jeffrey (the Christianity Today/First Things favorite whom I once asked for his favorite novel and he replied, “In what language?”) as Provost, which was heady stuff for an interim executive.

After it became clear he wouldn’t get the Baylor gig on a permanent basis, Underwood accepted the top job at Mercer University in Macon. I missed his inaugural, but an unkind person emailed me his fall convocation address and frankly, it caused me to lose sleep, not because it disturbed my own embrace of the Christian faith, but because there were young people there to hear it.

Without my J.D. and Ph.D. work, I would have bought a lot of the bullhockey for sale in the speech.

Underwood opens with the usual story of the warfare between science and religion in which religion receives its comeuppance. Afterwards, good religionists can only hold their beliefs lightly. See, because that whole Galileo thing has shown up the ignorance of the church for all time.

I checked Underwood’s footnotes to the speech in which he credits a 2006 book that relies on A.D. White’s famous polemic against science from the late 19th century. Of course, let’s not trouble ourselves with the fact that reputable historians of science say the presentation of the relationship between science and religion as warfare is a dishonest one made for political advantage (See Ronald Numbers and David Lindberg on this score).

But Underwood isn’t a scholar, he’s a lawyer (sorry guys) and he’s presenting his client’s case, not the whole truth. How else do you make sense of his statement that the Galileo affair wasn’t resolved until 300 years later, when man walked on the moon? Good heavens, man, Copernicus preceded Galileo!

I look forward to a Christmas speech or a spring talk in which Underwood offers up the insights he’s gained from several evenings with The Da Vinci Code on the nightstand. Should be illuminating.

One more thing. Want to know who Jesus was according to Underwood? A “freethinker.” “Hmmmm. What’s the right expression here? Let me think. Son of God, Savior, I Am, freethinker. Definitely freethinker!”

It seems that the South Carolina Supreme Court and General Assembly are in a fight over who controls expert testimony in the state’s courts.  The General Assembly has amended professional licensing statutes to prohibit physicians and engineers who are not licensed in South Carolina from offering expert testimony.  Such is considered “the practice of medicine” or “the practice of engineering” and thus cannot be undertaken without a valid state license.
Well, with no actual case or controversy before it, the South Carolina Supreme Court suspended the statutory amendments regarding the practice of medicine:

The South Carolina Constitution vests this Court with the authority to make rules governing the administration of the unified South Carolina court system.  S.C. Const. art V, § 4.  In order to prevent a significant impairment to this Court’s duty to properly administer the judicial power of South Carolina, and pursuant to Article V, Section 4’s authority, we hereby temporarily delay judicial enforcement of Act 385 insofar as the Act requires a physician to obtain a license to practice medicine in South Carolina before offering expert medical testimony in a South Carolina administrative or court proceeding.
While we remain respectful of the General Assembly’s voice in matters of practice and procedure in South Carolina’s courts, this Court cannot allow the administration of justice to be substantially impaired.  We are confident, however, that when the General Assembly provides further clarity on this matter, the changes that result will reflect careful consideration and deliberation; will consider and account for the scope of the court’s existing rules and the need for efficient and orderly court administration; and will be subjected to close scrutiny in the Judiciary Committees of both the South Carolina Senate and the House of Representatives.

The Court acted in similar fashion yesterday when it considered a trial court’s exclusion of an engineering expert because he was not licensed in state.  According to the court,  “Without clear indication from the Legislature that the 2000 amendment was, in fact, intended specifically to limit Rule 702 in this way, we decline to adopt that interpretation.”
We’ll see if the General Assembly tucks its tail on this one, or if it is ready for a fight with the Courts. 

See also SCAL Blog and WISTV.com.

With Ernesto having now been downgraded to tropical storm status, we have reached the eve of the first anniversary of Katrina’s landfall with no hurricanes having hit the continental United States in 2006. This despite predictions from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and from the leading hurricane researchers at Colorado State University that this season would be “very active”. For instance, in their December 6, 2005 prediction, the Colorado State University team wrote

We foresee another very active Atlantic basin tropical cyclone season in 2006. However, we do not expect to see as many landfalling major hurricanes in the United States as we have experienced in 2004 and 2005.

On May 31, 2006, the day before the official June 1st commencement of the hurricane season, the CSU researchers reiterated their prediction:

We continue to foresee another very active Atlantic basin tropical cyclone season in 2006. Landfall probabilities for the 2006 hurricane season are well above their long-period averages.

In NOAA’s May 22, 2006 press release, the agency forecast that

“For the 2006 north Atlantic hurricane season, NOAA is predicting 13 to 16 named storms, with eight to 10 becoming hurricanes, of which four to six could become ‘major’ hurricanes of Category 3 strength or higher,” added retired Navy Vice Adm. Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Ph.D., undersecretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator.

On average, the north Atlantic hurricane season produces 11 named storms, with six becoming hurricanes, including two major hurricanes. In 2005, the Atlantic hurricane season contained a record 28 storms, including 15 hurricanes. Seven of these hurricanes were considered “major,” of which a record four hit the United States. “Although NOAA is not forecasting a repeat of last year’s season, the potential for hurricanes striking the U.S. is high,” added Lautenbacher.

As this entry at Wikipedia describes, both the CSU and the NOAA teams have lowered their preseason estimates. And I am aware that we are are relatively early in the hurricane season, and that this post could prove to be dramatically wrong. Blogger Brendan Loy, for example, points us to this August 16 post from hurricane expert Dr. Jeff Masters, who in turn writes

Peak hurricane season starts about August 18 and runs through October 18. The worst part of hurricane season is in front of us, and I do anticipate that conditions will get active. Witness 1998, when only one named storm occurred prior to August 19, and 10 named storms and 7 hurricanes formed by the end of September. A similar pattern of activity occurred in 2000, with only two named storm by this date, and a season total of 15 named storms. So, those of you who doubt NOAA and Dr. Gray’s predictions of 15 named storms this season need to put your skepticism on hold.

But I am willing to risk the embarrassment of premature evaluation to say the following:

If the relatively non-politicized corps of hurricane researchers couldn’t get the 2006 hurricane season right just days before it began, then why are we supposed to believe that the uber-politicized cadre of so-called climate experts are correct about the existence and/or impact of global warming years and decades from now?

[As a pre-emptive strike against those who might claim that I am conflating weather with climate, please examine the linked May 31 document from CSU, which states, "Our research team has shown that a sizable portion of the year-to-year variability of Atlantic tropical cyclone (TC) activity can be hindcast with skill exceeding climatology." Also note that the NOAA press release expressly says that, "The north Atlantic hurricane seasonal outlook is a product of NOAA's Climate Prediction Center, National Hurricane Center and Hurricane Research Division."]

…and a VLOG to prove it. I guess you could put this in the category of things to do in seminary when you’re bored. These are not your parents’ Bible stories and you need not be a theology student to get a chuckle out of this site. One of the creative contributors to the VLOG, Paul Hannum, died this month at age 45 from surgical complications. If you’re new to The Real Old Testament, drop in here for an overview.

At The American Conservative, Heather Mac Donald laments the rhetoric of the religious conservative. The link will take you to the complete article. There’s much there to chew on. In part, she says….

Skeptical conservatives—one of the Right’s less celebrated subcultures—are conservatives because of their skepticism, not in spite of it. They ground their ideas in rational thinking and (nonreligious) moral argument. And the conservative movement is crippling itself by leaning too heavily on religion to the exclusion of these temperamentally compatible allies.

Conservative atheists and agnostics support traditional American values. They believe in personal responsibility, self-reliance, and deferred gratification as the bedrock virtues of a prosperous society. They view marriage between a man and a woman as the surest way to raise stable, law-abiding children. They deplore the encroachments of the welfare state on matters best left to private effort. ….

Nonbelievers look elsewhere for a sense of order, valuing the rule of law for its transparency to all rational minds and debating Supreme Court decisions without reverting to mystical precepts or “natural law.” It is perfectly possible to revere the Founding Fathers and their monumental accomplishment without celebrating, say, “Washington’s God.” Skeptical conservatives even believe themselves to be good citizens, a possibility denied by Richard John Neuhaus in a 1991 article. …

What Heather is calling “skeptical” sounds more like secular conservatism to me. If current cultural trends continue, the religious conservatives will be the subculture within the movement and she’ll no longer have that issue to wring her hands over. For the sake of this discussion, I suppose it all depends on where you think moral authority comes from.

Update: There’s some interesting chatter on this topic at Right Reason.

According to this website, the movie will finally hit theaters on September 22.  I’m looking forward to it, as the cast appears stellar, but more importantly to see how true it sticks to the book.  I only hope the range of emotions I experienced while reading the book are replicated in the film.

The good folks over at Touchstone Magazine reproduce a letter from Georgetown University Chaplain’s Office to the Affiliated Ministries (evangelicals, including InterVarsity).  Here are the crucial paragraphs:

As a result of our new direction for the upcoming academic year, we have decided to not renew any covenant agreements with any of the Affiliated Ministries. This will become effective immediately. As any previous covenant agreements ended with the 2005-2006 academic, your ministries will no longer be allowed to hold any activity or presence (i.e. bible studies, retreats with Georgetown students, Mid-week worship services, fellowship events, move-in assistance, SAC Fair, etc.) on campus. As well, there will be no Affiliated Ministry presence or participation at our annual Campus Ministry Open House held at the end of August.

Additionally, all websites linking your ministries to a presence at Georgetown University will need to be modified to reflect the terminated relationship. Your ministries are not to publicize in any literature, media, advertisement, etc. that Georgetown University is or will be an active ministry site for your ministry/church/denomination.

While we realize this comes as a great disappointment, please know that we are moving forward with this decision only after much dialogue with the Lord. We have enjoyed working with your ministries in various capacities over the years and will always keep your ministry in our prayers.

If true, it’s appalling.  Any information on why they decided to do this would be quite welcome.

This is pretty cool. Muchas gracias to the kind soul who penned the entry.

And no, it wasn’t me.

Oh, I don’t know.

Sometimes it’s the little things.

Congratulations to the Columbus, Georgia, team on becoming the Little League U.S. Champions today.  The team plays Japan for the world championship tomorrow at 3:30.

WaPo headline:  Iran Opens Heavy-Water Nuclear Reactor.

This is too funny.

The next Ice Age is coming! Help me, Al Gore! Help me!

Too hot.

Too cold.

Make up your damn minds, people.

Because the Culture of Death crowd is never satisfied with just killing some babies.

The Weekly Standard has a nice profile piece on my main man, Senator Sam Brownback. Here’s a taste:

The senator says he will decide whether to run for president before the elections this fall and then announce his decision soon afterwards. Right now he gets one to two percent in surveys of Republican voters. His candidacy would have to be considered a long shot. But it would satisfy certain threshold tests.

Brownback, who will turn 50 in September, has executive and legislative experience, and is well versed on national security issues. Thoughtful and well respected in both parties, he is politically shrewd and a proven vote getter. Of importance especially to Republican primary voters, he is a committed tax cutter and free trader. He has supported the war on terrorism and championed the cause of human rights and democracy abroad. Outspoken in behalf of the need to appoint judicial conservatives, he was one of the first Republican senators to question the merits of the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers. Few Republican politicians are as close as Brownback is to leading religious conservatives, a key part of the Republican coalition. Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council, says of Brownback, “Many have the right voting records, but he has leadership.” It’s not a stretch to think that the Kansas Republican could appeal to conservative voters in the nearby Iowa caucuses, which will kick off the 2008 primary season.

. . . . 

Brownback’s voting record contains almost no surprises. “Yes,” to impeach President Clinton, outlaw partial birth abortion, phase out the estate and gift taxes, authorize permanent trade relations with China, approve the Bush tax cuts, permit oil and gas development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, authorize the use of military force against Iraq, approve the Medicare prescription drug benefit, and confirm John Roberts and Sam Alito. But “No,” to enact McCain-Feingold, the campaign finance law, extend the ban on the sale and possession of assault weapons, and restrict deployment of a national missile defense system.

Brownback has spent much of his time in the Senate on life and family issues. Besides opposing Roe v. Wade, he has sponsored the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act, the Prenatally Diagnosed Conditions Awareness Act, and the Human Cloning Prohibition Act . . . . Brownback also has supported the constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between a man and a woman and thus ban “same-sex marriage.”

Brownback probably keeps track of issues of concern to social conservatives more keenly than any other senator. He runs the weekly meetings of the Values Action Team, attended by representatives of 30 to 40 organizations, including the Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, Eagle Forum, Christian Coalition, National Right to Life, Prison Fellowship, and the American Center for Law and Justice. Brownback meets with no other group so regularly, nor is it possible to find many causes advanced by social conservatives that he hasn’t supported. Brownback’s deep interest in the social issues agenda was evident when I asked him what his big idea will be if he runs for president: “Mine is going to be to rebuild the culture and the family.”

Along with that, he is an ardent humanitarian. Brownback has concentrated on the difficult situations in Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan, Uganda, the Congo, Pakistan, Ukraine, China, North Korea, and Vietnam. Arguably no senator has done more to press for human rights and democracy, or to confront the spread of deadly disease, such as malaria, which kills roughly 800,000 children in Africa every year. He has made a habit in this arena of cosponsoring laws with Democrats, teaming up, for example, with Evan Bayh on the Iran Democracy Act, Ted Kennedy on the North Korea Human Rights Act, and the late Paul Wellstone on the Trafficking in Victims Protection Act. According to his close friend and colleague Jim DeMint of South Carolina, Brownback knows that “if you get a few Democrats to work with you, you have a much better chance of getting something done.”

It’s like raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaain on your wedding day.

Who has finally had “enough.”

But the question for those seeking the GOP-presidential nomination isn’t whether they can do well in Cali, it’s whether they can court Southerners. And I just don’t see Romney carrying a single Southern state. He’s too squishy on pro-life issues; and then there’s the Mormon question. I cannot tell you how many Christian conservatives have already told me that they will not vote for a Mormon under any circumstances.

Me? As I’ve noted before, I consider Mormons to be a strong ally in the “Culture war,” and I appreciate (and respect) their efforts in this regard. My beef with Romney has nothing to do with his faith, and everything to do with the weak-kneed stances he takes on the “Culture of Life” issues I care most about.

That having been said, Romney and his supporters are kidding themselves if they don’t think his affiliation with the Mormon Church is an issue. It is. And frankly, I don’t see how Romney will be able to overcome this (mostly) “silent” opposition. Indeed, Romney’s candidacy reminds me of my fraternity days. Every year during rush, there was usually one guy that the vast majority of brothers really liked, but who would inexplicably get black balled despite the fact that no one spoke out against him during the meeting. That’s what I see happening to Romney, even if he does well in fundraising and in the early primaries. In short, when the South Carolina primary rolls around, I strongly suspect that Romney’s presidential run will be all but over.

According to Forbes, our “drunkest cities” are as follows:

1. Milwaukee

2.Minneapolis-St. Paul

3. Columbus, Ohio

4. Boston

5. Austin, Texas

6. Chicago

7. Cleveland

8. Pittsburgh

9. Philadelphia and Providence, R.I., in a tie

My guess is if you did the rankings on a football Saturday, Athens, Georgia would be tops.  Just my observation as a visiting fan. 

According to this Pew poll (as reported in the NYT), the percentage of Americans who think the GOP is “friendly” to religion fell from 55 to 47 percent, with drops especially noticeable among white evangelicals and Catholics.  It’s just speculation, but it seems likely that the drop comes from a frustration that the GOP is happy to have religious conservatives’ votes, but doesn’t really want to press their issues.  (No doubt, the “Plan-B” thing won’t help).

The drop in Catholic attitudes should be especially worrisome to GOP Presidential contenders, who need churchgoing Catholics to win states in the Midwest.