Scientists have discovered water that has been trapped in rock for more than a billion years. The water might contain microbes that evolved independently from the surface world, and it’s a finding that gives new hope to the search for life on other planets.

via Water Trapped For 1.5 Billion Years Could Hold Ancient Life : NPR.

Gotta love science, folks. The headline caught my attention due to the hidden water beneath the surface. Guess when the fountains of the deep broke up, this water was the only water left.

Wait, that doesn’t make sense. That was 6000 years ago according to some Irish dude, not 1.5 million years ago according to scientific fact. Not that there is a shred of evidence of a world wide flood 6000 years ago.

And, on another topic, science is awesome. Recently, we’ve seen some decent breakthroughs in the search for life here and out there. Maybe one day, we will find life among the stars before our species is gone.

Related articles

• Ancient Water (poodyheads.wordpress.com)
• Billion-year-old water found in Ontario could reveal clues about ancient life (metronews.ca)

“Nothing dissolves the bonds between the people and their government like the arrogance of power here in Washington, and that’s what the American people are seeing today from the Obama administration — remarkable arrogance,” Boehner, R-Ohio, said.

So, because we are seeing, in his words, arrogance, the bonds are now dissolved? The last time such language was used was 1861. You know, when the “Union is dissolved.”

This is the same Speaker who said yesterday he didn’t care about anything else, just figuring out who was going to go to jail.

The emails and Benghazi are coming undone — they are a GOP talking point that doesn’t have a basis in reality. The IRS “scandal” doesn’t reach to the President, but took place under a Bush-era appointee. The same president who lied to the world and took us into a war.

Do we really want to see the answers to the questions before us? No. The GOP wants to see the President hanging from a noose. They have their mind made up, now they have to find the facts to support their death sentence.

Lovely…

Admiral Marcus

I promise that this is as spoiler-free as possible. Given that you can find the spoilers nearly anywhere you look, I do not feel the necessity to avoid this; however, my focus is not so much on the storyline, but some of the aural aspects of the movie.

By now, you will know the movie involves a character from Space Seed. In that episode, the crew of the Enterprise discover a derelict from the late 20th century. In this capsule is a war criminal who was genetically engineered to be a superman. Note the terminology. In the late 1960′s, this term, especially when speaking about modifying humans (selective breeding) would have been associated easily enough with the Nazis. I wanted the episode last night, but was caught unaware by a discussion Kirk, Spock, and Scotty were having involving the good things about Khan. Oh, we can admire his qualities without liking him, Kirk tells Spock.

Much to the chagrin of those who would see Space Seed as anti-Empire, the episode rather should be taken as a condemnation of science without ethics, of the glorification of war criminals, and perhaps in some way of the actions taken by the United States after World War II, when the U.S. brought German and Japanese scientists to our shores to work for us in advancing our programs against the Soviet Union — because savagery was needed rather than pure intellect.  Of course, this could just be projection from my view, although we know the original Trek involved contentious issues of the day.

J.J. Abrams is quoted has saying he would rather have the philosophical aspects of Star Trek removed, making room for fans of the series to mix it up with new fans unfamiliar with canonical lore. The 2009 movie seemed to do just that. There is the basic philosophy of Kirk, the rule breaking hero, of course. But this is a character trait I guess, and not the usual philosophy we expect from Star Trek. As much as purists decried Deep Space Nine with its war and other apparent anti-Roddenberry aspects, this too had a subtle but sustained philosophy mixed with some heavy theology.

Star Trek Into Darkness does not live up to Abrams’ goal of removing philosophy from the canon. Indeed, this movie is a giant, well-played, directed, and beautifully shot philosophical treatise on Empire — specifically, the American Empire of early 21st century Earth. We encounter familiar characters — Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld — as well as drone strikes, invasions into sovereign territories to retrieve terrorists, and the win-at-all-costs plaguing American war efforts since Lincoln. Remember, Lincoln promised to a General that he’d gladly sacrifice the Republic to save the Union. We have sacrificed our civil liberties to same us from a threat we have had a hand in creating. These very real, very earthly matters, make up the plot lines of this enterprise.

There are the usual Trek features — the dashing Captain (waking up with two feline-race women), a nearly naked woman, death, peril, and humor. But, there is this tangible storyline reminiscent of the 1960′s show. We have lost our way and become the Empire we fight against. There is a line, buried in there somewhere — weren’t we meant to be explorers? And there is this promise of a five year mission, to explore deep space. But somehow, Starfleet has forgotten this. These visions of the mission of Starfleet have been put on hold. Perhaps this is Abrams’ guilt shining through, but it is clear that Starfleet has become nothing but deceit, sabotage, and intrigue. There is no loyalty. No vision. No hope. Only the need to arm ourselves against what else may be out there. This movie tackles these current trends in our domestic and foreign policy rather well, and all within Aristotle’s mimetic theatre.

Over all, I was impressed. I was moved. I clapped and I believe, much to the chagrin of my son, may have shouted yippee a time or two. I may have even clouded up when something got in my eyes. It was cathartic. This movie is classic Trek, I believe, and modern Trek. Unfortunately, Trek doesn’t work well as a series of movies. We need a series like the 1960′s, where our society and culture are challenged. Where our beliefs are mocked and then rescued. When our crimes today are exposed safely three centuries from now. I hope we will see another series, but I doubt it. Until then, we will take what we can get and hope that each successive movie is directed against us in some way, to challenge us.

If you miss the chance to see the movie, you will regret it.

Related articles

• Star Trek: Into Darkness (sexy, sexy Starfleet) (nothollywoodbutjollygood.wordpress.com)
• Movie review: ‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ (hispanicbusiness.com)
• Star Trek: Into Darkness – Review (fourpointreview.com)
• Star Trek Into Darkness with Light Moralising and No Spoilers (survivorpress.wordpress.com)

I confess — I’ve been labeled an Empire Critic. I am not, at least I do not think I am. However, what I see in Scripture is a diatribe against Empire. We open in Genesis 1 with a counter to the Babylonian creation myth, which is in of itself a counter to the Babylonian Empire. Isaiah is against Empire. Jeremiah too. Deuteronomy three. I see Mark (a book not treated in this current volume) as a direct challenge to Empire, although I see little of the challenge in Matthew and Luke, and barely anything, if anything, in John. Revelation, of course, has always played a role of anti-Empire.

But I am not an Empire Critic in that every time Jesus is mentioned as Lord, I see it as a challenge to Caesar. Indeed, I think the confession of Jesus is Lord would allow for later authors to use it as a challenge to Caesar, regardless if it was first uttered in such a way. Further, there were other, more direct challenges to the early /an/Christian community than Rome, such as what to do with a crucified Messiah, how to act in the Synagogue, and the continuity with Moses. So, no, I do not see every word in the New Testament as dripping with anti-imperialist rhetoric. Although, I still think Jesus was the anti-imperial bandit, or rather, crucified as such.

I’ve read the forward and the introduction thus far, finding it somewhat interesting. Andy Crouch’s introduction, until he maintains that there is no anti-empire rhetoric (13–4), serves well the reminder of Empire present even in biblical translation and commentary. Following this is the editors’ introduction, suggesting that Empire Criticism is a North American response to the Bush Presidency.

What if it is? What if we see more clearly now the imperial slander in the New Testament because of the imperial presidency? Of course, we may that much more shallow if we allow the person sitting on the throne of government to dictate biblical interpretation. I mean, if that is the case, then we are truly pro-empire, aren’t we?

As with most hermeneutics, we do tend to more far to one side the swinging pendulum. So, as an avowed non-Empire critic, I look forward to this book.

My one concern is that the leading proponents of Empire Criticism — Warren Carter, Richard Horsley — are mentioned in the book, but never given a chance to respond. This is not the style of the book, to be sure, but I would like to see such a response.

Time will tell…

Related articles

• McKnight & Modica (eds.), “Jesus is Lord, Caesar is Not” (clrforum.org)
• Jesus Is Lord : The Greatest Christian Lie? (randyboswell.com)

Here are some other facts. Of the 300 targeted groups, 75 were Tea Party. Not, Party, as in Political Party. Others were Democrats. If you look at the process, I have to agree with Scott Hodge of the non-partisan Tax Foundation when he said, speaking yesterday on Morning Briefing, that there is no crime, but at the most, some boundaries may have been stretched. Further, there is no connection established to the White House, unlike the last President. The problem is, is that we do profile expected problems. Duh.

Now, the Justice Department will investigate… unlike last President.

If you actually believe this is a scnadal, I pity you. The real scandal is how much you are ready to see this President fall.

Good luck, America.

Related articles

• IRS Tea Party Scandal: White House Did Not Drive Investigation, Inspector General Says (huffingtonpost.com)
• Two IRS scandals hit Washington: One you’ve heard of, one you haven’t (tv.msnbc.com)
• The IRS, the tea party and money in politics (kansascity.com)
• How IRS Review of U.S. Nonprofits Erupted Into Scandal (bloomberg.com)
• Obama Allies See Lax Scandal Response Imperiling Agenda – Bloomberg (bloomberg.com)

The current trend in Lucanian scholarship began with Frederick Ahl’s aptly named Lucan: An Introduction. Other names are now added to the list of Lucanian scholars — and now, Nicola Hömke and Christiane Reitz, the editors of this volume are included, along with those in the volume, as a must read for any Lucanian student. Hömke and Reitz have assembled a collection of essays based on papers given at a 2007 conference. Each author presents a specific topic, without rejoinder, nor a central point of the volume. Simply, the essays are all regarding Lucan, but without a focus unifying the whole. And this is acceptable, as there are other books focused on one aspect of Lucan. Here, we are invited to attend the conference even today, where we may hear different angles on our favorite Latin epicist.

The first essay, by Frederick Ahl, examines Lucan’s reception by the first imperial chair of rhetoric in Rome, Quintilian. Lucan is mentioned by name once in the educator’s handbook, but given a prominent place — a rather puzzling incident given Quintilian’s purposed style. Ahl attempts dig deep into Quintilian’s reasoning, suggesting a rather unique goal, although some may see this as more Ahl than Lucan. I would agree with Ahl, myself, but given the length of the essay, it is not difficult to see why Ahl might face criticism for his suggestion. As always, having Ahl in the book raises the merit of such volumes. Ahl’s essay alone examines Lucan’s reception.

I have feebly attempted to divide the rest of the essays into three rough categories, with such division accompanied by a recognizable violence. Ambühl, Fantham, De Moura and Hömke respectively examine Lucan’s rhetorical aesthetics. While Ambühl explores the use of Greek tragedy (via Iliupersis) in Lucan, a form of imtatio, Fantham explores the rhetoric of Caesar’s engagement via speeches throughout the poem. Hömke focuses on Scaeva’s aristeia. Death, speech, and preserved texts figure heavily in Lucan, as exemplified by scholars and scholarship not mentioned in these articles (such as Shadi Bartsch who is mentioned once — p122). This is not to say the essays are too lacking in engagement to find worth, indeed, the opposite, but an engagement with other scholars would have helped, especially in Hömke’s case.

Lowe and Wiener fit forcefully into a category of outside impulses. Lowe has Lucan replace Caesar with Libya via personification of the Caesarian attributes. The role Africa plays in Lucan is a wonderful discussion taking place among Lucanian scholars, but Lowe condenses it rather succinctly to suggest various different Libyas and what they might mean for the Poet. Here, we see the separation between the poem and history and given the essayists hypothesis of the “why.” Wiener, instead of Africa or other geographical oddities, examines Stoicism in Bellum Civili. She sees more stoicism in Lucan than most — than I — and attempts to defend her position. Here again, engagement with other viewpoints may have helped the essay along. Wiener does not engage with Behr who I feel offers more of a realistic viewpoint on Lucan’s Stoicism. This is not to say Wiener is amiss, but I feel her emphasis is misplaced and thus does not allow the full rhetorical flair Lucan flexes to shine forth.

Finally, Sannicandro, Bexley and Dinter leave us with the essays under the nearly impossible category of image. Sannicandro explores the role Caesar’s daughter plays in the poem. Like Ambühl, Sannicandro utilizes Euripides’ tragedy as a comparison, focusing on Jocasta. After Ahl, this essay is perhaps the most rewarding of the volume. Bexley compares Medusa and Cato, following Narducci. The final essay recounts in graphic detail the role the unlimbered body parts play in the poem and the powerful image these represent.

This volume represents a well-done collection of scholars and their work on the present study of Lucan, the classicist’s most underrated epicist. Each essay contains valuable insight and research into the reception of the poem that is not be missed.

For a review by Paul Roche, see here.

The IRS inspector general will release an audit sometime this week, but congressional aides gave several media outlets a draft of the audit. According to the document, IRS employees in the Cincinnati office used several troublesome phrases to single out 501(c)4 applicants for review — including, at various points between 2010 and May 2012, groups that “criticize how the country is being run,” aim to educate Americans “on the Constitution and Bill of Rights,” and lobby to “make America a better place to live.”

In order to avoid paying taxes under section 501(c)4 of the tax code, groups are supposed to have “social welfare” as their primary goal. And while advocating for issues and legislation can be a secondary goal, outright politicking is forbidden, especially for individual candidates. After the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in January 2010 allowed 501(c)4 groups to raise unlimited amounts of money, the IRS was flooded with applications.

via How big is the IRS scandal? – The Week.

This article (above) is about the most non-partisan, least fear-mongering one I can find.

Here’s the deal — a lot of hands are in this one. Bush appointees, Obama appointees. Congress. Decade-old reorganization. Stuff like that. But, more. SCOTUS with their citizen’s united decision. What happened? Read the article.

So, you have groups with the sole purpose to not pay taxes, to violate laws regarding the first amendment, and you expect the Government not to keep an eye on them?

Why now?

We want the Government to watch out for every dark-skinned person (dark, and I mean just this side of Chickasaw County, Mississippi) person, but the very people telling you they want to “take their country back” and they respect no laws expect the Constitution (not that they have clue as to what that means)… these people you want to go free?

Not to mention, the IRS under the previous administration investigate liberal groups.

No — ideology should not be the driving factor in investigation…but read the article.

Now, we are four days into this. Don’t make up your minds. Because if you do, it is likely no amount of facts will sway you.

Good luck, America.

Related articles

• The Monday Long Read: Why the IRS scrutiny of conservative groups is less nefarious – and more necessary – than you think (americangladiators.wordpress.com)
• Wonkbook: The good reasons for the IRS’s dumb mistake (washingtonpost.com)
• Tea Party Complaints of IRS Audits is Just Gaming the System (crooksandliars.com)

Benson, Bruce Ellis, and James Smith. Liturgy as a Way of Life: Embodying the Arts in Christian Worship. Baker Academic, 2013.

Bruce Ellis Benson has not improvised this book, which may or may not be an ironic way to introduce a volume dedicated to improvising our liturgical response to the divine. Instead, he is meticulously designed a pattern to plead the soul of the reader with his message of a freeing-type of liturgical responses.

The chapters are rich in modern concepts of art, philosophy, and deconstruction but presented to the reader who needs the barest of introductions to these issues. His introit covers the Call and Response hermeneutic of life, wherein the author envisions all of life (and thus worship) set to a familiar pattern, giving us a foundation for later exploration. Chapter two discusses the deconstruction of the philosophies of art (or discourse) pushing us away from understanding, appreciating, and participating in liturgy. Kant plays a role here. But, so does the effort of society at large to feel better about it self more than it should. His discussion on the elevation of Shakespeare, Opera, and even Bob Dylan from popular culture to a perceived refinement only for use, properly, by the elite is perhaps one of the more important aspects of the book, taking up only two pages of it (66-7). Here, we learn about the hostile takeover of art, and thus improvisation, as if art is something only enjoyed as it is presented, rather than enjoyed by participation. And of course, who can really enjoy art anyway? These chapters lay the groundwork for the author’s premise, that “art is central to who we are as human beings (69).” Once he has deconstructed the viewpoints hiding this from us, the author is now ready to move to reconstructing a proper paradigm.

Chapter three opens with one of the most richly rewarding, ornately worded, discourses on Creation and the various Creation theologies I’ve seen in recent books. Creation theology is not unrelated to our views on art; do not read this section too hastily. While Benson only seeks to use this as a theological foundation for the argument of improvisation, these five pages (71-6) are the philosophical premise of the entire book. What is creation? What does it mean to create? The answers given later began to become clear here. This chapter is followed by two more, moving the reader through the courses of understanding our proper responses in moving past theories of art, and the usefulness of art, and seeing liturgy as something more than just for itself, and indeed, some more than just for God or others, but to a theology of becoming, wherein we become the liturgical art.

Coming from a fundamentalist background, where liturgy was discarded, where the hint of a high church was derided, and then moving to a church that included liturgical dancing, I had some transition issues. Even now, I do not always fully value such maneuvers — maybe because I(‘m) Kant(ian). Sorry for the pun. Benson provides value for the liturgical dances, the stances, and the lances of words, prayers, and incense. He takes post-modern culture, values, and philosophy, and sets forth easily enough something new, but not from nothing — because something cannot come from nothing. Indeed, he bases liturgy on Jazz, something he is intimately familiar with, and moves it into an artful discourse, or perhaps a discourse on art. Regardless, this book tackles the (lack of) philosophy of liturgy with issues of appreciation and copyrights and argues convincingly for a more complete view, and view moving us past simply utilitarian uses to a more holistic approach.

emblem of the Papacy: Triple tiara and keys Français : emblème pontifical Italiano: emblema del Papato Português: Emblema papal. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Again, following with the theme from the last post.

Got me to thunkin’. Revelation 17.9 says the city on seven hills is the bad city. The new Babylon. Who cares that Scripture already defines who/what the new Babylon is? I mean, clearly Scripture wasn’t written for them, but for us. Dullards.

So, as I search for the city on seven hills, we must first consider the Roman Catholic Church.

Rome itself had reached seven hills by the time John was writing, but since this book wasn’t meant for John’s Christians, but really for us, we can’t allow that the city of Rome is what John meant.

So, the likely example many Protestants since Luther throw out is the Roman Catholic Church.

But, I was disappointed.

See, the Roman Catholic Church, ruled from Vatican City, doesn’t sit on seven hills. It sits on one. Namely, Vatican Hill.

One hill.

Gosh dang it all to heckfire and back and then back to heckfire.

Oh well, back to Richmond.

Related articles

• The truth about the Roman Catholic Religion (peoplesbrain.wordpress.com)
• Pope Francis gives the Catholic Church hundreds of new saints (syndicatednewsservices.com)
• Roman Catholic Church to ‘take over secular schools’ on academy programme (schoolsimprovement.net)
• Madre Laura named Colombia’s first saint (miamiherald.com)

Official seal of City of Richmond – That’s the great whore right there

“Here is the mind which has wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman sits” – Rev. 17.9

This comes from two sources. First, we are reading through Revelation in Sunday School class; the other, this verse was mentioned via my Facebook wall on Saturday night.

Is Rome, i.e., the Roman Catholic Church, the only the city sitting on seven hills? Well, no.

Richmond, Virginia is as well. Further, there was a time called itself the New Rome. So, there you go.

Richmond, Virginia is clearly the city John envisions when he writes 17.9.

Clearly.

Related articles

• Prophecy: Revelation – The Seventh Angel (someonewholovesjesus.wordpress.com)
• The prophecies of the New Testament and their fulfillment (correctunderstandingofshinchonji.wordpress.com)
• Prophecy: Revelation – New Babylon, The Beast of Idolatry (someonewholovesjesus.wordpress.com)
• Rise of the One World Religion (vineoflife.net)
• Two Popes (wordsofrevelation.wordpress.com)

Did you notice how specific Outler’s understanding of the role of experience is for John Wesley? It is not just any experience that a person has. It is not experience with a person and whether you find them to be a good or decent person. In fact, Outler almost always modifies the word experience with “Christian.” And it is not just any “Christian experience,” it is the particular Christian experience “of the assurance of one’s sins forgiven.”

via Experience in the so-called “Wesleyan Quadrilateral” | Vital Piety

Saw this posted via DW on Fb.

Often, I run into people using experience in the pentecostal sense. Who knew they could be wrong?

Anyway, the entire article is well worth the read!

Share with all of your friends

When this hits, expect weekly reflections.

Say this at Wal-Mart today in Charleston, WV

What doe the driver want us to know? First, the driver believes in mocking environmental stewardship… takes Genesis 2-3 as science…

Mocks others, suggesting that they are easily bound for hell…

And doesn’t get the sarcasm of the last bumpersticker.

Thoughts?

Christianity is being frozen out of the American public square. It is time for a THAW! This is a call to teens across America to “join us” at Reach America to bring Christ back to America!

Anyone else find it completely ironic the comments are disabled for the video?

This is about privilege. Note the one minority in the film, but beyond that, check out the parts where people are upset for getting picked on.

Also, the stuff at the beginning, yeah, pants on fire lies. The pledge issue – yeah… My kids will no say the pledge and the pledge wasn’t said until a Socialist wrote it anyway.

And yes, the Church used to be the center of the community  — well, smaller, hegemonic communities. maybe they still are in some parts. This wasn’t law, this wasn’t rule, this was due to social situations.

Watch the language, but this post deconstructs the out and out lies of this video.

There are SO MANY LIES IN THIS VIDEO IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO WATCH WITHOUT NEEDING TO TAKE A SHOWER.

Related articles

• The Thaw (patheos.com)

Turkey is investigating an alleged plot to assassinate Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, spiritual leader of the world’s Orthodox Christians, and has stepped up security around the patriarchate in Istanbul, his spokesman said on Friday.

via Plot To Kill Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew Uncovered By Turkey.

That is the news from Turkey. God keep and bless the Patriarch.

Yes, now we have an ISBN for the second book. The first one is heading to Kindle soon!

Thanks to all of you who have made this possible.

And please, buy the books. I need to buy more books.

Seriously, tho… You can pretty well find all you need to know about these books by following the category, Publications.

This has nothing to do with the article, but it is the truth #fact #goodacrerules

We know little about Jesus’ personal life. The four canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) provide few details — and they say nothing about his life between adolescence and early adulthood…..Because there are so many gaps in Jesus’ biography it is not surprising that pundits can spin almost any story about his personal life with shreds of “evidence” to support their views.

Bernard Starr: Was Jesus Gay? Unlikely. Married? Maybe. Both? Possibly.

He goes on to write about the speculation Jesus was gay. After all, Peter was explicitly stated to be married, that “begs the question about the others,” right? He concludes it is “not likely” Jesus was gay, but it doesn’t matter.

Of course, his first mistake besides raising such idle speculation to that of serious discussion is to assume the Gospels are biographical glimpses. They aren’t, of course.

Starr has written other articles I have a problem with, but I guess it comes down to the fact that Starr is not a biblical scholar, but a psychologist.

Ugh.

As you may have heard, a flood recently swept through Crossway’s headquarters. About two feet of water poured into our 32 first-floor offices due to unrelenting rains. The damage was extensive and repairs and rebuilding will take five or six months. You can see the damage here in thisvideo.

More important, however, is the impact this could have on major ministry projects that we have planned.

via An Urgent Message from Our President | Crossway.

Find out how at the link.

Fox News Channel (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Megyn Kelly admitted Fox had been taking commercial breaks only when Dems were talking in Benghazi hearing. Now cut out during GOP comments

— Amanda Terkel (@aterkel) May 8, 2013

I don’t need to make a habit of reporting every time Fox News plainly tells you it makes a habit of hiding real news from you.

But, it does make for some fun, and quick posts.

Related articles

• Megyn Kelly of Fox News Fame Renews Contract With News Channel (webpronews.com)

I have just received word from Oxford that Professor Emeritus Geza Vermes died this morning after the recurrence of an illness

via PaleoJudaica.com: 05/05/2013 – 05/12/2013.

Read the announcement at Jim Davila’s blog.

Inside Cover Page from 1909 Abercrombie & Fitch Catalog, their first catalog (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

‘In every school there are the cool and popular kids, and then there are the not-so-cool kids,’ he explained candidly.

‘We go after the cool kids. We go after the attractive all-American kid with a great attitude and a lot of friends. A lot of people don’t belong [in our clothes], and they can’t belong. Are we exclusionary? Absolutely.’

He argues that ostracizing some customers, by using sex and six-packs to sell clothes, leaves his loyal customers wanting more.

‘Those companies that are in trouble are trying to target everybody: young, old, fat, skinny. But then you become totally vanilla. You don’t alienate anybody, but you don’t excite anybody, either,’ he said. (here)

This is Jeffries’ attitude and suddenly, people are getting really upset. Why? Because how dare Jeffries tell you what we already knew… businesses market on an exclusionary principle. He is creating an image he wants to sell too, and has every right to do so. And why shouldn’t he have that right? He is an American entrepreneur. This is capitalism. This is how companies make money. Why should we force him to change marketing emphasis just to meet our demands? I do not like Pepsi products — should they be forced to taste more like Coke for me to like them?

I agree — the image he is presenting is one that is damaging to men and women alike. It is the image that you do not matter unless you look like a model, unless you have money, unless you are widely popular. But, he is a businessman selling to the image we have allowed to be created and an image we will feed. Why criticize him for that which we have created? The image that the person’s value is only as good as the person looks. Personally, I hope he goes out of business, but I do not care about criticizing him and begging him to change his business strategy to make me feel good. Instead, I’m going to teach my children that their self-worth is not bound up in the way they look or the money they have, or the friends they keep and that they should respect the images of others — and guess what, they will not shop at A&F.

But, you know… People are really up set about a guy and his remarks about not wanting to sell to poor, unpopular, lower class uglies. I guess with all of this rage, they have missed the nearly 700 dead Bangladeshis or the fact that he is making the second highest ratio of CEO-to-employee salary in the U.S or the fact A&F burns unsold clothes rather than donate them or sell them at reduced costs. The Bangladeshis were garment workers, by the way, working to fill the orders of American consumers for cheap goods.

I don’t know… something about these two stories (Bangladesh and A&F) seem connected… What do you think?

Related articles

• Abercrombie & Fitch Gives A Statement of a LIFETIME…. Mike Jeffries, CEO, hates Fat Chicks. (idollmagazine.wordpress.com)
• Not That I’ve Ever Shopped At Abercrombie & Fitch Before But Certainly Never Will Now (weightymatters.ca)