Sucked In

This article is fascinating because it describes almost exactly what happened to MacKenzie. It turns out that plenty of other women thought they were to mature and sophisticated for "Twilight," only to succumb to the dark side:

"Twilight" came for the tweens, then for the moms of tweens, then for the co-workers who started wearing those ridiculous Team Jacob shirts, and the resisters said nothing, because they thought "Twilight" could not come for them. They were too literary. They didn't do vampires. They were feminists.

Then something happened: the release of the "Twilight" movie, which last year introduced $384 million worth of audience members to Kristen Stewart as mortal Bella and Pattinson as lust incarnate.

I know MacKenzie didn't oppose the books for the feminist reasons of some people quoted in the article. I don't know if the book caused her to "notice in that first week of reading that I was feeling things I hadn't been able to feel in a long time." But it's interesting to know that this sequence of events happened to enough people to warrant a Washington Post article.

Uhm, I'm not sure what the post should be called but it does mention vomiting.

Well, I don't have anything great to say so I'll just talk about me. That's really what a blog is all about anyway right?

I'm doing better. But it's a two steps forward, one step back kinda deal. Two weeks ago I started feeling better, we made it to church, I was able to eat dinner, but then bam, Tues-Friday were yucky again. Friday night I finally made Craig go get my nausea medicine and we found out that it doesn't really help me. If I'm really feeling bad, I can take it and within 10 minutes it will completely knock me out and I won't be awake again for at least three hours. Which technically means I go three hours without being sick but as soon as I wake up, I feel bad again. Except now I am sick and disoriented. Which is really bad if you eat a popsicle before you go to sleep then wake up and start throwing up red liquid. Within a minute or two you will remember that it is just popsicle juice and you are not actually throwing up internal organs but those first few seconds will really get your heart going. I realize that story is a bit gross, but I think it is funny too and what is the point of all this vomiting if I don't even get to tell a few funny stories...besides the baby and all.

But since we got the medicine, I've only used it twice and have still managed to go from throwing up 1-2X/day to 1-2X/week. It's been a few good days then a few bad days. You can probably tell because there are a few days when I post, and then nothing. But the periods of bad days are getting shorter with the good days getting longer so I just need to be patient. I would probably be doing better if I would just give up the idea that I can do anything remotely fun. It's not that I'm fighting a super-preggo philosophy anymore. I'm not going to lie, I did at the beginning and was genuinely frustrated that I could no longer keep the house even remotely clean or put something on the table but with time I have learned to let things go and Craig has done a great job of learning what I think "needs" to be done (i.e. the things that I start to get panicky over) and doing them.

Now I'm just bored and feeling the effects of being social withdrawn. Saturday morning I didn't feel great but I was determine not to miss my scheduled hang out time with Fallon so I drank a lot of water, ate a good snack and took some Tylenol. And once I was out, I did feel pretty good. But I think I overdid it since I spent the next 48 hours feeling awful. When I say I "overdid it", we spent time at a new baby boutique in town, picked up a book from Barnes and Noble and sat at chick-fil-a talking and drinking lemonade. She's pregnant too so it's not like we were running a marathon. But even that was too much. Is it too much to ask to have a few hours to spend catching up with a friend, or having enough energy to play a board game in the evening with Craig! Apparently so.

I know that I will probably be feeling back to my old self, or as close as I'm going to get, within another week or two but it's getting hard. I did find an encouraging site. Conversion Diary linked to Philosopher Mom's post about being Open to life and when I found there, it was actually about her hyperemesis gravidarum pregnancy. At first it was a bit depressing because when I'm sick, all I can write are long rambling whiney posts like this one while she writes insightful articles on the value of life, but I got over myself and found some information on her site useful. I had always though HG was only prolonged intense morning sickness so it didn't apply to me, at least not yet, but that is not entirely accurate. The "HelpHer" site she linked to had really good information and while I seem to be borderline between extreme morning sickness and mild HG, I found their articles, especially the ones on coping and emotional issue very encouraging. I just wish I had found this site a month or two ago.

Red Light Cameras Not Gone Yet

I reported recently that the city in which I reside held an election in which voters chose to have the city's red light cameras taken down. As one might have predicted, certain people in town, who claim to have no connection to the local pro-camera political action committee, or the company that operates the cameras, filed a lawsuit to keep the cameras in place. Their claim centers on the legal difference between a "referendum" and an "initiative." While they may have a semi-legitimate argument, this is clearly nothing more than an attempt to subvert the will of the people.

However, we must give credit to the city manager who, although he supported the cameras, as far as I can tell, has even more support for the voice of the people:

"Should the judge rule that the election is invalid and that the red light cameras should stay, I will recommend to the College Station City Council that we immediately inform American Traffic Solutions that we are giving them the required 60-day notice that we are canceling our contract and the cameras will be turned off," Brown said.

That is quite honorable, and we can only hope that, if the lawsuit succeeds, the city council will heed his suggestion. A majority of the council apparently agrees with this idea. First, though, we'll have to see how eager the judge is to overturn an election on what some might call a mere technicality.

Did God really say...

We finally made it back to church last week, for the first time in at least a month. I had really been missing it and even an hour before was contemplating skipping again but just made up my mind to feel better and go. So I did. In general, I am sad that our church is more casual, I like getting dressed up on Sundays and treating it like the special occasion that it is, but this time, it was really nice just to be able to pull on a pair of jeans and a sweater and head out. It was also nice knowing that I wasn't going to get any glares when I had to pull out a granola bar half way through the sermon. I guess laid back churches do have their advantages. And I'm so glad I made it, not just to see people who must have thought I was dying but also because the sermon really struck me.

It was the end of a series on "Stupid human tricks" and talked about how we rationalize our sinful behavior and convince ourselves that God's truth is not His truth or that we are somehow the exception to the rule. The minister started by walking us through the first time that happened, way back in Genesis, when the serpent got Eve rationalizing with his not-so-innocent question "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" The correct answer is no, that isn't what God said. The serpent took just enough of God's word that Eve was drawn in but twisted it so that it was no longer the truth. I don't think any of us would be convinced if a serpent tried to get us to eat any fruit, but I do hear ask the same type of questions often and many times I see myself or fellow Christians falling for it.

At this point, I would like to say it was just the world that was asking those questions, but it isn't. This past Sunday, I unfortunately did not feel up to attending church but I did feel up to one of my new favorite "I'm too sick to get off the couch" activities - listing to Mark Driscoll sermons. I picked one on the emergent church, basically because I didn't really know much about them other than the guys tend to wear skinny jeans which probably isn't part of their official doctrine.

Anyway, Mark starts talking about the good and bad of the different types of emergent churches and how so many of them are asking the "Did God really say..." type questions and refusing to answer them. Really, he used that same phrase. It's been everywhere lately. That got me thinking even more, the problem doesn't come with the questions. The problem comes when we refuse to let God's word answer it. To try and philosophize or theorize our own answers instead of turning to His word for His truth. So I thought I would share a few of the questions I have been "hearing" lately and what I think the Bible really has to say about them:

• Does God really say that women should cover their whole bodies and be ashamed of who they are?

No! God made the female form to be beautiful and visually appealing, but most of that appeal is meant for one specific person to see, not the whole world. A woman's body isn't meant to be selfishly or carelessly flaunted, used as a tool to manipulate, or to be considered the source of her worth. True modesty values the complete woman, including her body.

• Does God really say that we should be hateful and mean towards homosexuals?

No! God doesn't want us to be hateful towards anyone but to show love. But He does say that homosexual behavior is sinful and encouraging someone in sinful behavior is not loving.

• Does God really say that women should be doormats for their husbands, with no opinions or self-esteem? That they are inferior in their ability to understand the gospel or to be used by Him?

No! God does not want His followers, men or women, to be weak-minded. Jesus considered Mary's sitting as His feet to learn a good thing. Even Paul (yes, Paul, the supposed woman hater of the Bible) praised Timothy's mother and grandmother for helping instill in Timothy his amazing faith as well as many other women for their work in evangelizing. But God has laid out specific roles for women in both church and family structure and when we are obedient to those commands, He can use us in amazing ways to further His kingdom and bring glory to
God. That is the thing about submission, it isn't weak, it's hard work that often takes a great deal of faith and it doesn't bring glory to a women, it brings glory to her Savior.

Are there any others that come to your mind?

The Wall Fell Down

On Monday night I was able to celebrate the fall of the Berlin Wall in style with former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and President George H.W. Bush. Rice gave a speech to cap off a day full of festivities. In her remarks, she highlighted the roles played by Bush, West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, and Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev in the events of 20 years ago. I was very impressed with Rice. She spoke well and displayed great command of a variety of foreign policy issues during the Q & A.

Much was made during the day about how Bush refused to openly gloat when the Berlin Wall fell, to "dance on the wall" as he put it. He received criticism in the press at the time for not seeming excited, but he knew there was plenty of work still to be done (e.g. German unification), and he didn't want to put Gorbachev in a bad political position at home by rubbing it in that the West had won. This restraint helped ensure the smooth unification of Germany within NATO less than a year later, and helped ensure the USSR didn't resort to violence to maintain its grip on power.

The story of how the Wall actually came down is interesting:

The intention was to announce the changes [to travel rules] overnight and phase in the new rules the next morning. Instead one of the Politburo members, Guenter Schabowski, blurted out the plans during a televised press conference - and compounded his error by adding the new rules would come into force "immediately".

Upon hearing this, East Germans went to the Wall in droves. The border guards, unsure of how to respond, eventually stood aside and let people pass through. This courageous, humane choice, the opposite of that made by Chinese soldiers five months previously in Tiananmen Square, but similar to that made by the Romanian army one month later, ensured that freedom would prevail and the wall would crumble.

In a world where so many are still oppressed, the events of 1989 provide hope. The fall of the Soviet Union was not expected by anyone. As pessimistic as we might feel about conditions in China, Iran, Burma, or North Korea today, we can maintain hope (and dictators must remain fearful) that seismic shifts could occur at any moment.