frenetic peace

thanks to Tia for the tip - as she said on her facebook, I love the take on selective scriptural literalism.

For the most part, the study conducted on 2,512 adults simply confirms what most of us know already: people use all this new technology to get in touch with their family and friends; for example, people call each person in their circle of closes friends on 195 days in a year, but they also see each of them face to face 210 days in a year. Same goes for Facebook () and MySpace (), as 71% of users have listed at least one member of their core network of friends as a friend on one of these services.

Here’s the fun part: internet users are far more likely (45%) to visit a café or a coffee shop than people who don’t use the internet. And not only that; the myth that frequent internet users hang out mostly at home is also busted, as people have started using it many public spaces, such as libraries, bars, coffee shops, restaurants and the like.

The full report is a very interesting read; you can find it here.

…what we knew all along.

Outlaw Preachers 1: Grace Bombs and Shotgun Evangelism

with Khad Young, Nadia Bolz-Weber, Brian Yarbrough, Nar Martinez, Connie Waters, Angela Harms, and Vince Anderson

Wherein we discuss ending Christian euphemisms, Biblical idolators, the Bible as the fourth person of the trinity, dropping the grace bomb, Anchor Church versus shotgun evangelism, and the Radical Love Project versus adventures in missing the point.

it is unfortunate for gays and the rest of us that the government has been invited to make a judgment on people’s private sexual behavior. It isn’t the government’s business, so long as the behavior is not abusive to others. The government should support “domestic partnerships” which gives the same legal protections to bachelor brothers or widowed sisters or friends or partners living together as if married. Justice for all is the government’s business (Berry, The Way of Ignorance, p. 145)

oh how I love Norah Jones.

I am of two minds on the “gay marriage issue”. On one hand, I feel that if two hetero consenting adults want to get married and commit to one another in the eyes of the state, then two homosexual consenting adults should be able to. And as it stands right now, marriage is not just a sacrament or a personal commitment, it’s a legal thing.

On the other hand, I feel that marriage shouldn’t be something the government is involved in at all. I’m inclined to suggest that GLBTQ folks and their allies would be better served in fighting to change that whole arrangement completely so that the state gets out of the marriage business all together. That way, the only thing the state would recognize would be partnerships protecting a family’s legal rights in areas such as medical decisions, insurance, etc. but “marriage” would not be defined or sanctioned by the state.

Because we all know we need another “macho Jesus” resource for “leaders” (aka MEN) *sigh* it’s never gonna end is it? And seriously, man cave online? “manswers”? Am I the only one who is a bit weirded out by all this? Oh, and the Asian stereotyping is a whole other discussion (apparently no one learned from the Rickshaw Rally debacle)

The purpose of TransFORM is to bring together men and women who are on the verge of starting new communities (i.e., community catalysts) or are already cultivating new communities and to give them the encouragement and resources they need to get started and be sustainable.

First event - East Coast Gathering http://www.transformnetwork.org/events/transform-east-coast-gathering

endorsements http://www.transformnetwork.org/page/endorsements-1

Interesting little column. I don’t like much of Calvinism - new or otherwise…just sayin’.

But Andrew Jones has a more gracious and balanced perspective than I so I’ll share with you his pov.