On my honour
I promise that I will do my best
To do my duty to God and the Queen
To help other people at all times,
And to carry out the spirit of the Scout Law.

The man I am today owes a debt to my life in Scouting.  I can build a fire, make a camp, cook a meal from whole ingredients. I can sew, lash, and build with tools. I am passionate about getting involved and being of service to my community.I am a better leader, a better peer, and a better citizen.  I am a responsible steward of the environment.  When I go on a walk with my children, I can name trees and plants, rocks and minerals, animals and insects- I can show them how nature impacts us and how we impact nature. I am a better Dad, a better husband, and a better man because of scouting.

The idea that skills are important, that people are important, that passion is important- lie at the heart of Scouts from Beavers to Rovers and beyond.

When I was a Scout, I thought I could change the world.  We were told we could change the world.  We were taught how to change the world.  My troop collected newspaper and glass bottles before our community established a recycling program.  We planted trees, collected trash, gave our time to food banks, the elderly, and community organizations.  We were told that it was our duty not just to leave nature better than we found it but to leave our world better than we found it.

Scouts is about camping and hiking, yes- but it is really about more than that- it is about giving kids the skills they need to succeed in life, and building within themselves the passion to always “do your best”.

So when it came time to find activities that might interest my own children, I could think of no better fit than Scouting.  My kids love it.  My oldest son has met a group of kids he really meshes with, who share his interests and goals.  My second son is better behaved, more attentive, and shows palpable pride in the things he has realized he is capable of doing independently.  Scouts has been good to me, good to my family, and has strengthened the relationship between me and my boys.  It is no surprise, then, that when I was asked to be a leader of my son’s Cub Pack, I was excited and honored at the opportunity.  The leaders I work with are great- seasoned veterans of scouting who have been helpful and patient with me as I slowly immerse myself back into the program.

As a child, I grew up in a somewhat religious family.  My dad bought a business when I was quite young that prevented us from going to church with any regularity, but God was certainly an ever-present assumption in our family culture.  For this reason,  in my seven some-odd years in scouting from Beavers to Scouts, I paid nary a mind to the religious language and culture present in the program.  It was no more religious than my home, my public school, or my baseball team.

The Problem With the Promise

When I first picked up my Cub Book and welcome package, I was set aback by how tied to religion scouting really is.  God has a mention in every promise at every level of scouting.  The promise is not just an aside to the scouting program, but something children are required to memorize.  It is the “vision statement” of every young Beaver, Cub and Scout.  My children memorized this promise dutifully, as did I- but for my oldest son and myself it is a promise that we have no intent to keep.  My twelve year old son doesn’t believe in God, and neither do I.

Whether or not God has a place in Scouting and whether He deserves a mention in the Scouting promise is not a question of tradition.  Scouts is traditionally a male-only organization.  I have four girls in my Cub Pack, my son has two girls in his Scout Troop.  Scouts was at one point a traditionally Christian-focused organization, and they now welcome Buddhists and Baptists, Sikhs and Seventh Day Adventists, Hindus, Quakers and every faith from Anglicans to Zoroastrians.  A Scout today would find much wrong with the 1908 founding book “Scouting for Boys”, starting with the title itself.

Before investiture, I had the opportunity at a leader’s meeting to broach this subject with a few of the other leaders in my Pack.  At a leaders meeting, I gingerly brought up the subject and was told by my Akela that he saw no issue with refusing membership to a child or adult who refused to make The Promise.  Scouts, according to him, is an organization that takes faith seriously.  I immediately dropped the subject.

Badges of Honour

Later that evening, I went to the Scouts Canada website.  Scouts invites children and leaders to achieve a “Religion in Life” badge- a badge that has different requirements for several different faith systems.  There is no “Humanist” equivalent.  There is, of course, no reason someone “needs” to get this badge- nor is it to my knowledge a necessary prerequisite to achieving other badges or awards.  I suppose that one could argue that this should hardly be a problem; that if you want a swimming badge you learn how to swim, if you want a first aid badge, you learn first aid, if you want a religion in life badge you learn to love God.

I take issue with this for the same reason that Scouts has expanded the scope of the Religion in Life badge in the past- it necessarily excludes people of a certain philosophy. This changed with the inclusion of the many faiths in which one can receive this award. Given that such a badge exists, if metaphysical philosophy is a skill worth valuing and teaching, then either there are common attributes that can be learned regardless of specific philosophies or there is one singular “right way” to learn the skill.  I don’t think you can argue that a Sikh and a Baptist have mastered a skill that is unavailable to an atheist without admitting there is something fundamentally wrong with a non-theist metaphysical philosophy.  In essence you are saying that Sikhism, Christianity and Buddhism are right, and Secular Humanism is wrong.

There is a badge designed to bypass this issue, known as the Spirituality Award.  It is designed to be an exclusive replacement to the “Religion in Life” badge for children who are “not a member of a specific faith”.  The name and description of the badge make at minimum deistic faith an assumption, and separating the badge from the religiously themed badges again seems to be a subtle measure of exclusion.  The problem is not the accommodation Scouts Canada has obviously made to include people who are non-practicing, it’s the method of accommodation.  It is as if they erected a ten person tent with the purpose of housing the whole troop-finding that they have an eleventh member- and building an outshelter instead of a bigger tent.  The problem is that the tent is too small to fulfill the spirit of it’s purpose- the answer is not to build an extra tent- or to try and jam an extra person into the tent you already have.

Do Your Best

Scouts, at the heart and soul of the program, is about responsibility.  It is being accountable to the resources we use, and paying that forward.  Responsibility for our environment. Responsibility to our peers.  Responsibilities to our families.  Responsibility to our communities.

To be responsible to our community is to be inclusive.  This is the spirit of community in the first place.  It is celebrating those things that make us peers in spite of those things that make us individuals.  What lesson do we seek to teach our children by systemically excluding and marginalizing people who share the same goals, aspirations, and dreams as the rest?  Humanists are saying the same things- giving the same time- working toward the same goals.  They are using a different language, but they are speaking the same words.

I was taught as a Scout that that I could change my community for the better.  I was told to help other people at all times.  I was taught to do my best.  When I look at a Promise that seeks to be exclusive, an organization intolerant of different paths to the same goals- as the person Scouts has taught me to be- I want to do something to change it.  I want to do my best.  I want to work within the organization to make it better.  I feel, as it stands, powerless to change a system that has taught me that I have the power to change things.  I have been told that I am not welcome as I am- that my son is not welcome as he is.  For the sake of my children and for the sake of an otherwise enriching program, I’ve chosen to thus far bite my tongue and accept it.

  I am, in spite of the lessons of community I learned as a scout, reciting a promise that is exclusionary because I believe deeply in the promise of an organization I believe is inclusive.  In the process I have made myself a reluctant hypocrite.  

Here is my Scouting Promise:

On my honour,I promise that I will do my best,to do my duty to my world, my community and humankind, to help other people at all times, and carry out the spirit of the Scout Law.

That should be the universal Scout Promise.  That is the spirit of Scouting.

Do your best.  It is the motto of the Cub Scout, it is the ultimate promise of the Scout.  I was taught through Scouting that I can do better.  As an organization, as a community, as stewards of the communities we seek to improve- we are not doing our best.  We can do better.

Contrary to what some MLM advocates will tell you- there are serious differences between the structure of their business model and other business models.  I have read more than once over the last few days- leading up to this post on TNI- that “every business is a MLM business”.³ This is absurd.  There are certain attributes that define an MLM company, and many of them are entirely unique to the MLM business model.  Before I go on to discuss Noni, and TNI specifically, I would like to first explain the differences between Multi-Level Marketing and traditionally based business models.  This is important when discussing the impressive claims made by TNI and their independent contractors- and will help people interested in TNI and other MLM businesses to weigh the facts against the hype.

1. MLM companies have a relatively small infrastructure of corporate employees.  There are hundreds or thousands (or even hundreds of thousands) of independent contractors who are expected to sell the end product.
2. Perhaps the single most definitive characteristic is that MLM companies depend on their independent contractors to expand their distribution network.  I’m not aware of many non-MLM models that compensate an independent contractor for recruiting people to do the exact same job.
3. MLM companies create a pay structure that rewards both end-user sales as well as the end-user sales of the contractors who have been recruited by the independent contractor.
4. MLM’s almost always requires the contractor to purchase the product with their own money and rarely to never compensate the contractor for surplus product.
5. Many MLM’s require the prospective contractor to attend or complete a training program that is paid for by the contractor, is non refundable, and required regardless of previous education.
6. There is no guarantee of success or income.  Contractors are compensated by commission only, and the company at no time assumes any risk in either recruiting, training, or compensating employees.

Here is a list, from a well respected site on MLM, of the five criteria that make an MLM unique (the first four criteria are shared by every business that is colloquially called a “Pyramid Scheme” ):

1. Recruiting of participants is unlimited in an endless chain of empowered and motivated recruiters recruiting recruiters – ad infinitum.

2. Advancement in a hierarchy of multiple levels of “distributors” is achieved by recruitment, rather than by appointment.

3.”Pay to play” requirements are satisfied by ongoing “incentivized purchases**.”

4. Company payout per sale for the person actually selling the product is less than the total of all upline participants , creating inadequate incentive to retail and excessive incentive to recruit – and an extreme concentration of income at the top.

5. The company pays commissions and/or bonuses to more than five levels of “distributors.”

** purchase requirements may be disguised investments in a product-based pyramid scheme, or a clever system of laundering pyramid investments in the form of product purchases. Few make sufficient commissions to cover the cost of these expenses, to say nothing of significant operating expenses necessary to conduct a successful recruitment campaign.

Each of these criterion-save criteria #1- in and of themselves, are not poor business practice.  There is nothing by nature inherently wrong with MLM businesses,  other than the fact that they assume little to no risk in recruiting or maintaining their human capital.  That is an enviable position for most corporations- the risk is almost entirely borne by contractors and not by the corporation proper.  This important fact leads to the number one thing anybody involved in an MLM structure should know: It makes no difference how successful the parent company is.  You could be working for a multi-billion dollar MLM- the largest MLM in the world even- and you will still most likely fail.  You will pack up your business having lost more than you made- or not made enough to survive- with almost 100% certainty.  Am I exaggerating?  Let me say it again boldly with a link to a very plain explanation of your odds of success:

It makes no difference how successful the parent company is.  You could be working for a multi-billion dollar MLM- the largest MLM in the world even- and you will still most likely fail.  You will pack up your business having lost more than you made- or not made enough to survive- with almost 100% certainty.

Extensive research shows that the odds of making money in Multi-Level Marketing are worse than winning money gambling in Las Vegas.⁴  99% of recruits fail.  That figure is actually cautiously optimistic, and people who work with MLM contractors- people with a vested interest in making those odds seem better- admit similar statistics.⁵

These statistics certainly point to the conclusion that the overall success of the parent company- and the anecdotal successes of the 1% of contractors who are financially rewarded for their efforts- are neither indicative of the quality of the product offered or the likelihood of personal success as a contractor.  Virtually every MLM company can boast tidy profits.  Every MLM can point to people who have made a boatload of money as independent contractors.  Neither of these statistics mean anything.

It should be noted that any company that can boast billions of dollars in gross sales ought to have a better than 50% success rate for independent distributors- otherwise the odds that gross sales lead to a better income opportunity are moot.

It should also bear reminding that the bulk of the money that MLMs claim as income is borne by the investment of thousands of failed distributors and not from the mass market success of their product.⁶  If it is true that thousands of downline distributors drop out every year, then certainly the money they invested in product and marketing tools is counted as income by the parent company.  I don’t think anyone should be impressed with 2 billion dollars in gross sales if the bulk of the product is consumed or stockpiled by the distributor- and this seems to be overwhelmingly the case with MLM products.

More to the point, what is most important to the success of a contractor, and what is the best guarantee of potential success, is the statistics of Point Of Sale (POS) transactions- and this is what is so worrisome for people interested in MLM opportunities.  My background in commissioned sales and understanding of economics tells me that their will be a correlation between POS transactions and the retention rate of distributors in a commissioned workplace.  It stands to reason that a product that is easy to sell will have a better than average amount of successful distributors, while a product that is difficult to sell will have a high turnover rate among distributors.  This is true regardless of the gross sales of the parent company- since they count their sales to distributors as “gross sales” when the product has yet to actually be sold.

Any person considering a MLM business opportunity ought to consider the claims of gross sales of the company against the actual number of people they know to be currently using the product who are not distributors themselves.

It stands to reason that your income potential is ultimately tied to the end-user demand for the product.  If the only people who are consuming the product are themselves distributors, there is zero demand for the product, and you will find that creating stable downlines is impossible- especially if monthly minimum orders and expeses exceed the normal consumption habits of a single family- a situation all too common in MLM contracts.⁷   In order to be successful as an MLM distributor the end product must be highly liquid (It must be quite easy to sell at or near the cost of purchase- preferably at the suggested premium).  Even if you are successful at creating downlines, you will constantly be facing an uphill battle for downline stability if your team is unable to market the hard product at a net gain.
You might honestly believe that you can ” be the 1%”, but what are the odds that a good portion of your downline will, too?

Being Competitive

Most if not all MLM products are not positioned competitively in the open market.  This stands to reason- as a potential infinite upline of commissioned distributors means that the distribution costs are potentially infinite.  As such, many Multi-Level Marketing products are sold at a large premium compared to their mass market competition.⁸

Many MLM companies, including TNI, claim that their products are superior in quality to their mass market alternatives.  They claim to have “patented technology” or “scientific evaluations” that prove that their product outperforms all competitors at a given function.  In the case of TNI, they specifically claim that they hold “52 scientifically validated patents”⁹- which is to say that they hold patents for processes that do what they say.  This does not indicate that they do better than other processes- only that they are effective.  A scientifically vindicated patent merely means that, for example, if the patent is for increasing the shelf-life of Noni juice- then the technology increases the shelf-life of Noni juice.  Not that it does so better than other methods- merely that it does what it says.   Similarly, the scientific evaluations usually do not make any mention of a comparison to other products- but merely speak to the specific effectiveness of their product.  TNI claims to “back their claims with science”, which in a roundabout way they do- though the results are ambiguous, not very impressive, and in some cases founded on unscientific protocols.¹⁰ In a bubble, the findings seem impressive- when viewed beside other studies, they seem positively boring. See my post on Tahitian Noni for examples.

This is not to say that the products marketed by Multi-Level Marketing companies are useless.  Many are beneficial, do some of what they say they do, and are quality products.  When I can purchase a virtually identical product at a fraction of the price- quality is not the issue. Value is.  I see no reason to believe that most MLM products are a good value next to their mass market alternatives- and no reason to believe that they ought to be.

Value statements ought to be based on hard value to the end user.  Claims like “Has a two year shelf life” mean nothing if products are easily sold and consumed quickly.  “Has twice as much ingredient X” means nothing if the product is four times as expensive.¹¹  “180 studies into the efficacy of Tahitian Noni” mean nothing if other products have the same or similar ingredients.  Value is quantifiable- if anyone bothers to quantify it.

Conclusion

Morinda (TNI) either is a Multi-Level Marketing company, or it is not.  If it is- and research shows it is- then any claims about gross sales, company income, and distributor success are moot.  As with all other MLMs, better than 99% of all participants fail to realize any income.  Could you imagine working for a company that gave you not just a 1% chance of  being successful, but a 1% chance of actually not losing money?

Evidence from research show that tax preparers, in almost 100% harmony, have never seen someone claim to profit from MLM during a tax year.¹²  Morinda gives no indication that they are any different in this respect.  Hopefully this helps to dispel the idea that TNI offers income potential to new recruits.

I will leave it to distributors of Morinda products to dispel any misconceptions I have- but it appears almost impossible given the business structure of TNI to profit in any significant way given the meager sales figures and commission as a distributor with no downline.  If this is the case, then it becomes an impossible business model for the majority of participants.  If a downline is necessary to make a livelihood, then the perpetual recruitment of downline participants creates more distributors fighting for market share.  Sales decrease on a per representative basis.  Downlines become even more important.  The distributor to consumer ratio increases.  The company profits enormously from the investment of those who were destined to failure from the beginning.  This continues ad infinitum.  In other words, the company model makes it irresistibly beneficial to the parent company and the early recruiters- and literally theft to those who enter late.   This is the cycle that makes any claims about the profitability of a company less than impressive- but literally depressing.

The profits Morinda claims every year have less to do with Noni and more to do with broken financial dreams.  Making a tidy profit has nothing to do with a good product- it has to do with selling the pipe dream of easy money to thousands of rubes every year.  So can anyone honestly call a company like this “reputable”?

My detractors will almost certainly point to the product itself- and its purported benefits- as the most positive thing about Morinda(TNI).  Certainly, they would say, a product as healthy and beneficial as Noni Juice outweighs the failure of a few unmotivated distributors.  See my in-depth review of M. citriflora (aka Noni) as a health food for my response.  If you want a distillation of my findings, here you go:

Tahitian Noni is an overpriced health supplement that is no better for you than other fruits that are available at a fraction of the cost.  The scientific studies used to support it are either unconvincing, underwhelming, unextraordinary, or unfounded. 

The claim that Tahitian Noni is a valuable product would be akin to me selling you 100% pure cranberry  juice for $150/litre.  I’m benefiting my wallet more than your health.¹³

I’m sure that others will bring up the fact that Morinda is a great company when compared to other MLMs, or are better than the industry standard.  After all, they might say, how bad can a company be if it has a B+ rating (though is not registered) with the Better Business Bureau(BBB)?¹⁴ Doesn’t this give a company some legitimacy?  There are certain things that must be remembered when looking at the BBB rankings.  First, BBB complaints are primarily filed by end-user customers, not employees and contractors.  There are specific limitations to the scope of the BBB.

That said, I welcome those people interested in investigating the claim that Morinda is a better than average company to look at the following two tables.  The first compares TNI to other distributors of health and beauty products in Utah by complaints lodged over a three year period.  You might note that TNI is the only company out of the nine companies listed that has any complaints to the BBB.

What is that you say?  That isn’t good enough?  What if I took that statistic and plugged it into the statistics for Multi-Level Marketing firms in Utah?  Based on this comparison, Morinda sits in the bottom 11 out of 59 companies.  Hardly a glowing endorsement when you are well into the bottom 25% of a group of notoriously faulty businesses.

Since Tahitian Noni International (Morinda) profits do not seem to indicate the quality of the product they sell, or the potential for someone to be successful as a contractor, their profits say little if anything about the company generally- other than the owners are wealthy on the backs of thousands of hopeful Americans.  There seems to be no reason to think that Morinda is a better choice for someone looking to invest in MLM. They have a worse than average reputation as both a Health and Beauty company and as a Multi-Level Marketing firm.  The claims they make about their product do not live up to claims made by representatives, testimonials, and contractors.  What benefit is offered by their product can be offered by grocery store products at a fraction of the price.¹⁵

I find it hard to understand how anyone would endorse either TNI as a company or Tahitian Noni as a product.  Given these facts, it is clear that a certain level of ignorance or self-deception is necessary in order to say anything wholly positive about Morinda or their claims and products.

References
1.Study of Ten Major MLMs and Amway/Quixtar Show Huge Consumer Losses and Pyramid Recruitment

2.Shocking MLM Statistics

3.Google “Every business is an mlm” or “every business mlm” or “all businesses are mlm”

4.Shocking MLM Statistics. Ibid.

5. Tahitian Noni Scam? You Deserve The TRUTH

6. The 10 Big Lies of Multi-Level Marketing

7. The Truth About MLM: 5 Red Flags of a Recruitment-Driven MLM

8. The Truth About MLM: High Prices Of MLM Products

9. The $250,000 Bioactive Beverage Challenge- TNI International

10. Noni Nonsense: Miracle Juice or Scam in a Bottle

11. Or more expensive- See Getting Skeptical About Woo Juice Part 3: M. citriflora (Noni)-Better For Your Body Than Your Wallet

12. Tax Professionals Know Who Profits From MLM

13. This claim is discussed in Part 3 of my series.  (TNI claims that iridoids are the “Primary Bioactive”, and I can find no claim made of iridoids that separates them from similar “bioactives”, other than bioavailability after processing.  Specifically, antioxidants meet every single claim made of iridoids, are better researched, and are available in more foods at a far lower price.

14. Better Business Bureau -Rating, comparisons valid as of Sept. 14th, 2011.  Complaints can be compared by industry in the same State (Utah).  Morinda is registered as a Health and Beauty Distributor (but flagged as an MLM)-Comparison of MLMs is accomplished by plugging complaints and business size into the comparison of Utah-based MLMs on the BBB website.

15. For example, 100% Cranberry Juice (unsweetened) is available in the “Whole Foods” section of my local grocer for $4.99/L- if Noni was comparably priced based on benefit analysis, it would cost $3.75 per bottle of  Tahitian Noni Original 750ml.

I took a few months off from blogging partially because  I took a new job that limited my time to write proper posts (I spend several hours crafting an average post- this fact likely surprises several of you who feel I talk out my ass most of the time), and partially because blogging started to feel like actual work.  I spent two weeks combing through multi-level marketing resources and woo-filled new age nutritional sites trying to hobble together a well crafted response to Neil’s ridiculous noni juice claims.  I still haven’t published those posts yet, but I will publish one this week.  I do this to myself at least once a year, where I take on a subject that bores me to submission.  (See last years astrology debacle)

So anyhow, this post is just to announce that:

1. I’m still here, and now employed at a job that pays me twice as much as before.  I expect that now that I’m officially upper-middle class by income standards- I’ll immediately become a conservative or libertarian obsessed with hoarding my hard earned money.  Fairness was all fine and dandy, but the world looks different on the other side of the counter at the Soup Kitchen folks- so don’t come crying for a full bowl cuz I’ll beat you with the ladle.
2. I should be able to post at least twice a week.  This will be, for some, a stark improvement over my previous few months of a post whenever the fuck I felt like it.  For others, this will be not often enough- and to you I say “live with it”.  To still others, this will be of no consequence at all- either because they don’t read my blog or they just click on a post and assume without reading it what I was going to say.
3. For those who know me, my wife is doing great and our new daughter is due to arrive some time in December. Her name will be Geneva Belle, and we are planning to use a midwife for the first time because you don’t have any continuity between the OB you visit and the one who delivers the baby in the city we live in. Plus the OB we have is a douche. A midwife will be a big improvement for me over driving 2 hours to a small town hospital so that the doctor my wife likes can birth our child. Seriously.  We did that 3 times already.

So welcome back.  Thanks for your patience.  I’ll try not to disappoint.

Drawing Lines on Religion-Based Discrimination

The Chicago Tribune reports that a gay couple is suing two bed and breakfasts for refusing to rent facilities to them for a civil union ceremony.

The Beall Mansion in Alton told the Wathens via email that it “will just be doing traditional weddings.” The owner of the Timber Creek Bed and Breakfast in Paxton wrote in an email to the couple: “We will never host same-sex civil unions. We will never host same-sex weddings even if they become legal in Illinois. We believe homosexuality is wrong and unnatural based on what the Bible says about it. If that is discrimination, I guess we unfortunately discriminate.”
Here’s the legal situation:

The couple filed a complaint with the Illinois Department of Human Rights, which investigated and found “substantial evidence” that a civil rights violation had been committed.

The August finding allows the Wathens 90 days to file a complaint with the state Human Rights Commission or take civil action in Circuit Court. The Wathens’ attorney, Betty Tsamis of Chicago, told the Tribune that her clients have chosen the latter path and will file lawsuits against both businesses as early as next week.

This action, should it proceed, could bring to the courtroom a debate over the boundary lines between religious freedom and discrimination in Illinois.

Read the rest of the post here.

I’m unsure how I feel about this.  I think there is a difference between an “Event”, like a wedding, ceremony, convention or meeting- and just being a person who happens to offend someone elses sensibilities.

I think that business owners should not be able to discriminate who stays in a hotel room, or who they serve in their restaurant.  I think holding an event at their premises is a different thing altogether.  At the same time,  I think turning away customers who want to hold a wedding- just because you don’t agree with the relationship- is stupid.  Though as I mentioned in the comments, I would like to have the right as a business owner to turn away certain groups for events I did not agree with.

Any thoughts on this?  John? Jeremy? Darwin?

Others?

I would like to point out that I have more than a few readers who hold political views in diametric opposition to Jack’s vision- and each and every one of those people had the courtesy to let my post stand as a testament to someone they knew I respected deeply.  I might have even tolerated a right wing diatribe about how my “pinko socialist” hero was plotting to ruin Modern Western Civilization.  Jack would have liked that.  Being accused of being “unrealistic”, “utopian”, and “socialist” would have made him proud.

Meet The Troll

Enter Neil C. Reinhardt- a professional atheist troll who spouts pathetic and misguided conspiracy theories because people don’t believe that he has stumbled across a MLM (Multi Level Marketing- aka Pyramid scheme) product that cures every single ailment known to man.  He rails against “skeptics” for not making the effort to credulously accept that his “miracle tropical beverage”  can cure any and every known disease and symptom.  Skepticism is to be lauded until it bumps heads with his faith in fruit juice. Fruit juice that apparently tastes like licking testicle sweat off of a turd. (That is how you know it works- why else would people ingest such foul tasting swill?)

Neil apparently thinks that a very personal post about a very personal subject is the perfect place to insert his delusional ramblings about how the medical establishment are covering up the cure-all effects of ingesting and topically applying the fruit juice equivalent of equine effluent.  Apparently I’m to assume that his 15 year foray into faith-healing is supposed to make me run out and buy his snake oil.  Here is the blathering, disjointed ramblings deposited in the comment section of my post:

What makes me both Sad & MAD is if the Lame Stream Media is not in some kind of a conspiracy between them Doctors and Drug companies, he may still be alive!  IF you know another way to discribe how a “Natural Healing Miracle” which very effectively treats and/or cures over 90 different injuries and illnesses both on the insides and the outsides of our bodies is NOT widely known?

For FIFTEEN YEARS i have been drinking daily & when needed, using topically. what I consider to be a true MIRACLE!  (And it is a “Junior Miracle” when this Agnostic Atheist Activist calls any thing a “miracle.”)  For some FOURTEEN Years I have tried over and over again to get some news organization do the necessary in-depth research to verify what is so good it even after 15 years,  AMAZES ME!

There are some 300 brands out there, this is not a ad, it is VALUABLE information.  It is the juice of a fruit grown in the tropics all around the world and thus has many names. The one it is most known as NONI JUICE!  I am 76, started drinking it when I was 62 and I have NOT had any of the typical Aches and Pains of age since! Still do not need eye glasses, no more sore muscles or any Flu. Better Sleep and Dreams, STOPS the pain of burns when it is applied!

And, drinking Noni Juice will decrease a persons desire to smoke to where they have NO Desire left!   My experience is that it is around 80% as effective as morphine for pain and it BOOSTS our immune systems OVER  150%!!  So can someone give me a good reason WHY something which many MILLIONS KNOW what I have said about it is true is NOT as well known as I sumit somthing this great should be?  I believe if every person did know all about the really fantastic things Noni Juice does, the Drug companies would lose MANY TRILLIONS of Dollars!

I’ve decided that rather than just deleting his comment and writing it off as just a socially inept faux pas by a crotchety old man on the verge of dementia, I would take the time to give his post the proper skeptical treatment it deserves.  Let’s begin, shall we?

What makes me both Sad & MAD is if the Lame Stream Media is not in some kind of a conspiracy between them Doctors and Drug companies, he may still be alive!

First thing is first- If you want someone to take you seriously, don’t call the media the “Lame Stream Media”, that’s so five years ago.  

There is no conspiracy between the media, doctors and drug companies.  If a natural product is proven to have real medical benefit, drug companies will formulate and patent drugs using it as a main ingredient and in the process line their pockets with billions more dollars.  Maybe they will argue that the FDA or other regulatory agency should consider the natural product questionable for consumption (see Stevia)- then I might see a conspiracy.  As it stands, drug companies are only too happy to harness the power of miracle drugs- for better or for worse.

Doctors have to be careful how they present products to patients.  Unlike you, Neil, they have professional licenses that prevent them from just making shit up.  They actually have to be forthright and honest about what the proven effects of products are, they can’t just shout in ALL CAPS that it is fan-fucking-tastic!!!  My doctor, for instance, suggested once that I take St. John’s Wort- and rightly described it as a mild anti-depressant. 

As for the “Lame Stream Media”, rest assured that there are plenty of woo peddlers out there- and the LSM is only too happy to oblige them.  Just because none of them have shouted from the rooftops in support of your brand of horseshit does not mean it will never happen.  Rest assured, some pathetic research lackey at a major network will be rushed for a segment for the evening newscast and stumble across your “miracle-piss” one of these days.

Can I ask you this you credulous half-witted ass-hat: What cancer did Jack Layton die of?  Do you even know?  What makes you think that fruit juice could have averted his death?  We will get to the specifics of this claim in my follow up post.

IF you know another way to discribe how a “Natural Healing Miracle” which very effectively treats and/or cures over 90 different injuries and illnesses both on the insides and the outsides of our bodies is NOT widely known?

Does your fruit juice cause you to lose the ability to form proper sentence structure, Neil?  Should we put that on the warning label?  Specifically, which of the 90 different ailments did Jack suffer from?  I call bullshit.

For FIFTEEN YEARS i have been drinking daily & when needed, using topically. what I consider to be a true MIRACLE!  (And it is a “Junior Miracle” when this Agnostic Atheist Activist calls any thing a “miracle.”)  For some FOURTEEN Years I have tried over and over again to get some news organization do the necessary in-depth research to verify what is so good it even after 15 years,  AMAZES ME!

Srsly? FIFTEEN years?  Holy mother of God incarnate!  I would have just been like “Oh, tl;dr, who gives a flying…” but since you put it in ALL MOTHERFUCKING CAPS like that, it totally seems amazing!! I’ve gone 15 years before with no major health issues, but FIFTEEN YEARS- shit, that is like the same amount of time-but better- cause you shouted it in ALL CAPS!!!

I’m getting a little verklempt….talk amongst yourselves, I’ll give you a topic. Neil C. Reinhardt is neither agnostic nor an activist…..discuss.

There are some 300 brands out there, this is not a ad, it is VALUABLE information.  It is the juice of a fruit grown in the tropics all around the world and thus has many names. The one it is most known as NONI JUICE!  I am 76, started drinking it when I was 62 and I have NOT had any of the typical Aches and Pains of age since! Still do not need eye glasses, no more sore muscles or any Flu. Better Sleep and Dreams, STOPS the pain of burns when it is applied!

And, drinking Noni Juice will decrease a persons desire to smoke to where they have NO Desire left!   My experience is that it is around 80% as effective as morphine for pain and it BOOSTS our immune systems OVER  150%!!

I’m glad, Neil, that this is not an ad- because if it was- it would be the equivalent of parking a sausage cart outside a PETA convention.  VALUABLE, when spelled in ALL-CAPS, must have a different meaning than “valuable”- since one can hardly call the information you offer even “somewhat helpful”.

I’ going to, for the sake of fairness, investigate your claims about the tropical swill known as Noni Juice.  You do want us “skeptics” to be “skeptical”, right?  To not just brush aside a claim but honestly and forthrightly investigate it, correct?  Or are you saying that people should be rightly skeptical of some things, like Gods, but ignorantly credulous whenever you cough out a personal anecdote? My next post will cover this in more depth, but let’s have an overview, shall we?

Noni Juice- The Slightly Useful Juice From A Mildly Useful Fruit

Noni (M. citrifolia) is a tropical tree related to the coffee plant.  The tree bears fruit all year round with a disgustingly foul odor while ripening.  It is affectionately known to locals as “cheese fruit” or “vomit fruit” since the fruit smells vaguely like a teenager’s unwashed socks after drunkenly stumbling through the puke stained hallways of a week-long house party.  Sounds tasty already!

Turns out, the fruit is primarily considered a famine food, used by people only when they are so hungry that they would eat just about anything- one step below eating half rotten rat carcasses but one step above drinking goat urine.   Some cultures use the fruit as a staple food, and almost all cultures in M. citrifolia’s indigenous range use it for the purposes of traditional medicine.  I intend to write a follow up post that discusses this at more depth.

Neil says that noni juice is a cure all for various ailments that he has never experienced since sacrificing his taste buds to woo.  What he doesn’t tell you is that he is a very active senior- someone who has various other reasons not to expect poor health.  Noni is just the woo that gets the false positive.  Let’s look at his laundry list of claims:

• No aches and pains of age- Physically active seniors do not experience “aches and pains” in either degree or frequency as compared with sedentary seniors.  Unless you can offer several comparative studies or have a parallel universe twin who does everything else the same save drink Woo Juice, this claim means nothing.
• Still do not need eye glasses- Yeah…about that- my 83 year old grandfather had smoked since he was 8 years old and had subsisted on a diet of fast food for roughly 20 years.  He died last spring, but he never needed glasses.  His eyesight was sharper than mine, 50 years his junior.  Does that mean that Big Macs- or Big Macs combined with Marlboros- are the key to great eyesight?
• No more sore muscles- Again, regular exercise acclimatizes muscles to regular strain.  I played football for 6 years and had few if any muscle aches, but when I got a desk job I was in pain from carrying my toddler.  When I started exercising regularly again, my muscle pain stopped, and I can now take a two and a half hour hike with my now seven year old son on my shoulders and not feel a thing.
• No flu- Anecdotally, my grandmother (84 years young) has not had the flu in 25 years.  She doesn’t drink noni juice- though she does drink brandy infused with garlic every morning.  I bet that tastes better than your vomit-fruit smoothies.
• Stops the pain of burns- Yeah, water does that too.  I consider the covalent bond of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom to be a “Junior miracle”….next.
• Reduces desire to smoke- So does brushing one’s teeth.  At least that tastes good and prevents cavities.
• Your experience as a morphine substitute-  Here is where it gets interesting, because you said earlier that you have been in top shape since taking Magic Woo Juice, yet you have direct experience using it as a painkiller?  Orly?
• Boosts Immune System- This is classic woo code for “It does something, but I don’t want to get specific”.  If you did get sick, then you would have been sicker.  If you get sick often, you would have been sick oftener.  It is a phrase that means absolutely nothing. 150% implies that you have data to back this up.  Do explain….

So can someone give me a good reason WHY something which many MILLIONS KNOW what I have said about it is true is NOT as well known as I sumit somthing this great should be?  I believe if every person did know all about the really fantastic things Noni Juice does, the Drug companies would lose MANY TRILLIONS of Dollars!

I can give you a good reason Neil.  Because your claims are anecdotal and not backed by any reputable research or science.  What studies have been done on Vomit-Fruit Juice have shown it to be not much better than placebo in treating various illnesses.  It is a scam, one that you believe because you invested you hard earned money in.   But I’m a generous guy.  I’m about to give your swill the treatment it deserves. My next post will be a compilation of all the unfounded claims and scientific information I can gather on your unpalatable Magic Woo Swill.  I’ll make it my life’s work to get my post on noni juice to page one on a Google search.

You, Neil C. Reinhardt, are a credulous asshole troll, and you barked up the wrong fucking tree.

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world.

-Jack Layton, In his last letter to Canadians.

Yesterday morning Canada lost a great voice for social justice.

Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada, died surrounded by friends and family- not of the prostate cancer he very publicly battled over the past few years- but of a new cancer that he was diagnosed with just one month ago.

Jack’s legacy can not be overstated.  His tireless work during his 30 years in public office of fighting for the poor and homeless- first as a Toronto City Councillor and later as an MP and Leader of the NDP harken back to the days when politicians were guided into politics out of principled idealism to make Canada better for Canadians.  In an age where politicians seem to care about staying the course, Jack asked us to abandon the well worn trail and search together for a better path.  He sought public office not just to win but to be a voice for those most affected by policies and most disaffected by politics.

Jack laboured his entire career for those who needed a voice the most.  He was an advocate for Aboriginal issues, and helped craft the Government letter of apology for the horrors of residential schools.  He was instrumental in starting the White Ribbon Campaign in response to the Montreal Massacre in 1991- raising awareness of violence against women.  He offered up his home as equity to keep the campaign running, and its first headquarters was the bedroom of Jack’s son, Micheal, now a Toronto city Councillor himself.   He was instrumental in putting Toronto at the forefront of AIDS activism, becoming one of the greatest political champions of the issue. He lobbied Council for a Gay and Lesbian Pride Day in Toronto as early as 1989. His advocacy in Parliament of Same-sex Marriage is no doubt the reason Canadians today can boast of our strides in social equity.

In Toronto, Jack fought and won the battle to make the city one of the most accessible in North America for cyclists.  His commitment to the simple ways we can help the environment will have a lasting impact in Toronto in particular and Canada as a whole.  He was one of the architects behind the Toronto Atmospheric Fund, which diverted monies from the sale of City land toward green initiatives.  His legacy includes wind power initiatives in Toronto, and Enwave, an environmentally sustainable energy company half owned by the City of Toronto- a company that uses Deep Lake Water Cooling to air condition highrises in the city center.

I think that, in politics as in life, we need to be guided by an ideal and govern in reality.

Perhaps the most important thing Jack did was show Canadians that we could be a community of equals, people who work together and for each other; that we could be a country proud of how we treat each other- that social justice and equity were not Utopian pipe dreams, but responsible and attainable goals.  He convinced enough of us that we could do good to make his party the official opposition in the last election.  He did this with a party that was, when he took the helm in 2003, a marginalized socialist labour party that was a perennial also-ran in the Federal landscape.  Who knows what he could have accomplished if his life were not cut short.

The last week or two, I had been mulling over writing a post about what I want to see in my political leaders in response to some of the talk with Americans about the upcoming 2012 elections.  I think if I had have thought long and hard about it, I would have told them to look up Jack Layton.  I think that, in politics as in life, we need to be guided by an ideal and govern in reality.  Jack did this better than anyone, and he made both look possible.  There is always an ideal- a society that exemplifies all those things that are best in humanity- but the real world doesn’t always make it simple or practical to get there.  When you look back at a career that spans almost my entire lifetime, Jack never sacrificed his vision- he never lost sight of Shangri-La.  He was always moving in the direction of Better- always inching toward the best city- the best Country- he could give his fellow Canadians.  Yes, there were realities.  Yes, there were stumbling blocks.  It would be so easy to just lose sight of where you are going and settle for what you have.  The great leaders get it.  They see the reality and ask how they can shape it, they see the stumbling block and ask how they might remove it.

  An Ideologue goes charging blind headlong toward the precipice, a Politician tries to keep us happy on our own side, a Leader asks how we might bridge the gap.  Jack was a leader. 

Here is to you, Jack.

Here is to Heroes, those whose spirit transcends mortality.
Here is to Leaders, those whose determination brings us together.

Jack Layton: July 18 1950- August 22 2011

Here is to Visionaries, those whose eyes are fixed on a better tomorrow.
Here is to Great Men, those whose ranks have lost another.
My Hero. A Leader, a Visionary, a Great Man,
history can do you no justice- it is up to us-
to make our future a testament to your life,
to your vision, to your spirit.
Here, my friends, is to Heroes,
and a man who saw a Hero in us all.
I’ll miss you Jack.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of analogy.  I use analogies with great frequency, they are integral to my communication style.  The question is- Why do we use analogies at all?  I use them for clarity-to show the extension of my logic or the logic of others onto similar circumstances that might help elucidate my position (or theirs) on an issue.  But what happens when analogies go wrong?  There is no such thing as a perfect analogy, but some are definitely worse than others.

Sometimes analogies betray the reason why we can’t reasonably discuss a topic…..

Whether intentional or not, the analogies that I am encountering to argue against my position on abortion are misleading.  I say intentional or not because I am unsure whether they are crafted to purposely leave aside the point I’m driving at or if they betray the fact that the person I am speaking with has no real understanding of the topic at hand.

There is no other topic that I can think of that has as many interrelated interests and nuances, as many divergent definitions and concepts as abortion.  As such, this is not a discussion that lends itself to analogy- there simply are no analogies that suffice.  Yet the battlefield is littered with them, and each side feels they have won on the contingency of their analogy.  Each one feels they have won by exposing the fault of the opposing analogy.  Ultimately, what gets lost is a real understanding of the issue at hand.

Let’s start with the most common analogy I have encountered thus far. Spousal abuse.  The analogy goes that spousal abuse is wrong, we all agree to this.  I agree(though many pro-choice advocates do not ) that abortion is inherently wrong.  So why do I support laws that make spousal abuse illegal and not laws that make abortion illegal?

Let’s begin on those points I think are obvious enough.  We have (at least in Canada, perhaps America takes a more “the act is illegal, what more do you want?” approach) an entire infrastructure surrounding the protection of women from abuse.  We have Women’s Shelters, we have support networks, we have financial support, we have child services, we have legal protections- an entire network that takes away the most pressing concerns for a woman contemplating leaving their husband and reporting abuse.  As John Barron points out, we do this because women are worthy of being protected.  So why do we not offer infrastructure to take away the most pressing concerns of a pregnant woman contemplating abortion?  Are those children not worthy of being protected?  Are they only worthy enough of laws that protect society from perceived culpability in the immoral act- but not laws and policies that proactively seek to protect the victim?  Why the double standard?

So why not support both laws preventing abortion in tandem with policies designed to reduce the incidence of them?

Well, there is the matter of where the spousal abuse analogy falls apart.  Does an abusive husband’s abuse constitute some competing moral good?  Well, not that I am aware.  Does a woman’s choice to abort constitute a competing moral good?  If we value control over her body, true social equity with men, and personal liberty- then yes.  So our comparison falls apart unless we entirely set aside the unique issues that face a pregnant woman.  I don’t really care if you decide to value “the primacy of life” over these other considerations- so long as you acknowledge that there are other moral considerations.

If you realize that they exist, then perhaps you might begin by guaranteeing the financial and medical stability of the other human life involved, as well as the one you hold so dear.  Perhaps you might like to make laws that give some similar burden on the other 50% of the DNA donated at conception (and I mean meaningful, not just “yes, yes, he needs to give a token child support payment”).   That would be a good start.  If we did these things, I’m still not convinced that abortion should be illegal- but I can concede that I would find reasonable limitations on abortions more palatable.

So my offer is this:  Give me one worthwhile analogy that exposes the fault of my pro-choice stand.  Give me good reason to doubt that I’m holding to a reasonable position.  Every time you give me an analogy that ignores the bulk of the reasons to protect the right to choose at the expense of the very good reason to deny it, you tell me that you are either not listening or don’t understand…or worse still- you are committed to disingenuous dialogue.

Perhaps it is that me and my beautiful wife are going to be welcoming another member to our already large family this December (#5- if you’re counting)-lately I have been really getting annoyed with the tone of the debate over abortion.  There are the “pro-life” people- forever calling people who disagree “anti-life”, “pro-abortion”, “abortion advocates”, and the like.  There are those on the “pro-choice” side forever bringing up abortion clinic bombings as though every “pro-lifer” is a domestic terrorist- or the constant and droning use of the term misogynist at the drop of a hat.

There are words flying across both sides of the fence that make any reasonable treatment of the topic impossible.  It boils down to two very important and very reasonable positions.  On the one hand, we have the pro-choice camp who believe women need to have ultimate control over their bodies and be given the same opportunities as men.  This seems quite reasonable.  On the other side of the fence lies a group of people who believe in the primacy of existence- that once you create life there is no return policy.  Quite reasonable as well.  Both miss the point when boiled down to this kind of generalization.  Both miss the point when staring down the opposing position.

As  a Pro-Choice advocate, I am most familiar with what frustrates me when trying to explain my

This Graphic: Kind of True....Not Very Helpful.

position to people who have a laundry list of preconceptions, misleading talking points and bad logic regarding what it means to be an “abortion advocate”.  I know some Pro-Life people, and I can sympathize with their feeling that they are generalized and marginalized as well.  This post is meant as a treatment of what frustrates me most when discussing abortion- how I feel that my position is mistreated and misunderstood by the Pro-Life camp.  They surely feel the same, and I’m happy to make room for that conversation as well.

Conversation stopper #1:”You are anti-life”

I am not oblivious to the human cost of abortion.  I do not objectify human lives.  I am a father to four young children.  I have a fifth miracle on the way.  I cannot look into my children’s eyes, or stare at the ultrasound picture hanging on my fridge, or touch my beautiful wife’s bulging belly without being reminded that a pregnancy is a human being.  It is a unique and special person waiting to meet the world.  I don’t diminish the value of that miracle. It is the reason this debate is so rightfully charged with emotion.  We are talking about a human life- a life that deserves to be realized.  I cannot stress this enough- I know what is at stake, and I know that if others saw a pregnancy through the eyes of a loving parent, abortion would be much less common practice.

I also know the sacrifices I happily made to make those four lives a reality, and will continue to make in the future.  I know the sacrifices my wife made- greater than my own- physically, mentally, and financially to bring our children into this world.  Parenthood is not without its costs, but it is a job with infinite rewards.  I value each of those lives I have been entrusted with completely.  I am far from anti-life.

Conversation Stopper #2: “You only care about a woman’s right to murder her fetus.”

Being pro-choice does not mean that I only want women to have the choice to abort or not abort.  Being pro-choice means valuing the ability to make choices.  It means advocating for policies that make the choice to carry a child to term easy, realistic, and reasonable.  We are talking about a choice- with abortion- with the ultimate consequence.  We are talking about a choice- to bring a child into the world- with a mountain of costs: physical, mental, financial, social, emotional.  If we assume, as I do, that most if not all women are cognizant of the gravity of the choice that faces them, the best way to make the choice clear is to give them a sense that there are few reasons not to choose life.

For women contemplating putting a child up for adoption, making financial and social resources available is key.  The cost of prenatal vitamins, medical check-ups, ultrasounds, nutrition, time off work, and delivery can make adoption an unrealistic choice for an expectant woman.  Add to this the additional health effects of pregnancy and the emotional burden of carrying a child, and choosing to carry a child to term only to put that child up for adoption can seem like a choice akin to climbing Mount Everest on your hands or on your elbows.  Neither less painful, reasonable, or daunting.  This is no simple choice.

For a young woman planning her future around a University degree, giving real choice means having a support network at her disposal.  Flexible class schedules, blended campus and distance education, institutional daycare, and government financial assistance would turn a choice between two futures of lost potential into a reasonable choice to bring a life into this world.  As it stands, the demands of higher education on finances and time make pregnancy and parenthood a sacrifice of lifelong proportions.  This is not a simple choice.

For people living paycheck to paycheck, one unbudgeted expense away from no electricity, bankruptcy, or homelessness- an unexpected pregnancy is impossible and irresponsible to manage.  We are giving these people an impossibly difficult choice.

If we truly value life, if we want to impart on people how much society values a human life- we

This Caption: Also Kind of True.....Also Not Very Helpful

should be willing to attach real value to that potential life.  The pro-life movement could drastically reduce the amount of women choosing abortion simply by committing ideologically to the true meaning of its creed- that human life has infinite value.  It could, in a sense, put an end to the idea of “pro-choice”- it could truly and irreparably take the concept of choice away from pregnant women by making the choice so easy as to be absurd.  Like choosing between having your fingernails pulled out or having a manicure.

Conversation Stopper #3: “You don’t believe there are any bad reasons to have an abortion.”

To an average Pro-Life advocate, Pro-Choice means that you think abortion is reasonable under almost all circumstances.  This is absolutely absurd.  To almost every pro-choice person I know there are very few circumstances that we would consider “good reasons” to have an abortion.  Most of us would never consider abortion an option for ourselves.  If any of my friends approached me for counsel about having an abortion you can be damn sure I would give them a million good reasons to keep a child- at the very least carry the pregnancy to term.

From a moral standpoint, abortion is not a morally ambiguous act.  It is inherently a moral wrong.  As such, there are no “good reasons” and “bad reasons” to have an abortion.  There are reasons all right- each one loaded with a powder keg of negative consequences.

What we need to ask is are there invalid reasons to have an abortion.  The answer to that question is a bit more nuanced and difficult than simply “good reasons” and “bad reasons”.   Are  there reasons we might consider “invalid”- ones that show that it is wrong to give someone the choice to govern their reproductive system?
If you are asking me if it might be alright for our society to limit abortions to a set amount of “good reasons” and refuse for “bad reasons”- quite honestly- I have to begrudgingly say “No.”

I don’t make that statement lightly, and I am not oblivious to how callous the ramifications are- but I stand by it nonetheless. The reasons women choose to have an abortion, “good” or “bad” as they might be- are valid in the context of their lives.  There are real financial, physical, and emotional responsibilities that accompany pregnancy and parenthood.  For better or for worse, we live in a society that almost makes the choice for the potential mother.  We lack the will and the resources to give women the ability to choose adoption, or choose to become unexpected parents- but some of us feel it entirely reasonable to take the one choice that we do give women away.

I’m not standing here prepared to argue that abortion is a victimless act- my personal beliefs are clear on this issue.  I cannot stare at the ultrasound picture on my fridge right now and say in good conscience that I don’t value the life that my wife and I are bringing into this world- or that I don’t see that little person as being human.  This is not an easy stand for me to take.  This is why I get so angry when “pro-life” people argue from ignorance and assume that I and others are heartless assholes who flippantly devalue human life without any care at all.  It is decidedly not the case with me, and certainly not for many others either.

The way to stop women from making “bad choices” is education.  It is taking the time and resources to prepare them to be healthy sexually active adults.  It is making birth control inexpensive and accessible, and teaching people to use it.  It is proactively targeting money and resources to give women more choices when they are faced with an impossible decision.  It is meaning it when we say we are “pro-life”- making that word mean more than just “until you come out of the womb”.

I’m not telling you that we can end abortion.  I’m telling you that we can take away many of the “bad reasons”, the bulk of the objections- and give women a real choice.

I’m saying we can all be Pro-Life, and all be Pro-Choice.

From What Is Clearly Seen…..

When I was a boy, my mother used to read “Bible Stories For Children” to me at bedtime.  The second story in the book was about Adam, Eve, and a talking snake.  It was a watered down but engaging version of the story of “The Fall” from Genesis 3.   When you are a child, you don’t worry yourself with talking snakes, or eternal curses.  What I took away from it is four simple things:

1. When you are given an order, even if it seems stupid and unreasonable, you may not fully understand the reason why it was commanded, or the consequences
   

   She obviously grabbed the wrong "low-hanging fruit"

   of disregarding it.

2. Peer pressure can get you in trouble.
3. If a snake starts talking to you, you should really just walk it off.
4. God should have made the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil bear walnuts instead of fruit, at least then it would have made it difficult to eat.  Or at the very least mangoes, because they taste like crap.

As I got older, and started becoming active in church, I learned that other people had interpreted the story entirely different from myself.  There were a few new lessons that I guess I was supposed to garner from Genesis 3.

1. Women ruin everything.  They are incorrigible.  Men are the head of the household because just look what happens when you let women get their way.
2. I am born evil.  Adam passed his evil homunculus down to every succeeding generation, making me and my progeny forever culpable from conception for displeasing God.  Way to go, Jackass!

Here’s the thing though.  I read that story in my storybook and in my bible.  I just was not seeing it at all.   So I read it again.  Still not seeing it.  I asked someone else.  They said “Ahh, read Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15, and it will all make sense.”  So I ran to my bible, thinking I had finally got the key that was going to unlock this whole issue.  I read Romans.  Then 1Corinthians.  Then Romans again.  Then I thought, “really?”.

I’m looking at the text, and I’m not seeing man as having a “curse of Adam”, or being born sinful, or depraved. I think there is something instructive about the comparison between the two, or else why would Paul draw the comparison.  Something is being taught here, I just want to examine what that is.   Let’s go verse by verse (All passages in red are from NKJ Version):

¹² Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned

Sin entered the world.  It was not passed down, it was a reality of being cast out of a place where there was no inevitable capacity for sin.  Death came into the world as a result of “sin”, and I think this is a hint of what we are supposed to get out of the passage.  I’m going to come back to this passage in a minute, because the last three words are the strongest case that can be made for original sin, but I want to put them in perspective.

¹³ (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

I’m going to say that this verse makes an elegant case against “Evil Infants”.  I’ll let you folks discuss this.

¹⁴ Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

So sin could not be imbued on those who did not have the law, yet sin existed, and death, before the laws of God were passed to Moses.  Also important: Adam is a

"Why is a Saviour like a Sinner? I don't know either..."

contrasting parallel to Jesus….

¹⁵ But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many.

Here is where we get into what makes them different.  I’m going to argue that either “by one man’s offense many died” is a gross understatement, or that “the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many” was a gross overstatement.  Either that or they are not parallel.  OR….sin is not automatic but the result of a choice (granted a forced one) just as grace is the result of a choice.

¹⁶ And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification.

More differences.  The offense resulted in condemnation, the free gift was the borne of a need to wash the slate clean.  Check.

¹⁷ For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.)

So death reigned because of a transgression, and we can beat that death through the gift of Jesus. Got it.

¹⁸ Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.

Whoa.  Just as the judgement (remember, we are talking about something that was thrust upon us by a single act) came to all men, the free gift came to all men. Is “all” the same as “all” in this verse?  So my question is this:  Is the similarity that these acts are applied unconditionally to all people?  Is the similarity that they were both available to all people?  There needs to be a similarity, or else our foundational foreshadowing from v.14 means nothing, not to mention the whole analogy.

¹⁹ For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.

Here is that “many” being entirely different from “many” again.  Is it the same many?  Or is it a different kind of many?  Shouldn’t it read “For as by one man’s disobedience all were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience some will be made righteous?

²⁰ Moreover the law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace abounded much more, ²¹ so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

So the law kept track of transgressions, made them “evil”….if you will.  Right. Sin abounded, and grace abounded much more (because, of course the ratio of sin:grace is not 1:1), and just as (but obviously not quite the same as) sin reigned in death, grace might reign through righteousness.

I’m telling you that there are really only three little words in Romans 5 that we can use to justify Original Sin: because all sinned.(v.12)

So That We Are Without Excuse…

I want to take this opportunity to first tell you why I read that passage differently, and then go through the steps to get there.  First, I approached this text with a fixed and unwavering belief that salvation through Jesus is a choice we are given, it is not forced upon us by virtue of being born after the crucifixion.  So when I read that passage, I’m looking to make parallels that fit my understanding of the gift of salvation. 

So when I read Romans 5, I was contrasting two similar actions; one that condemned us to sin, the other that brought us righteousness.  I walked in with the assumption that if salvation is a choice, then our sin must be a choice as well.  Since the passage does not claim that the difference is one of choice, and since it rhetorically implies the opposite- that these two actions are mirrored by each other- I have to read that they are the same in this important respect.

So I made my own explanation of what Paul meant in Romans 5, just as  Augustine had done when he postulated Original Sin:

Adam was cast out of the Garden into a world of sin.  Sin was brought into the world by his transgression, yes.  It was not written on him and his seed.  God cast them out of a world where sin was not necessary into a world where sin was inevitable.  How was sin created?  God created economics!  Read Genesis 3.  Pay attention to the fact that God explicitly says that in order to breed, you will feel pain.  In order to feed yourself, you will need to work the land.  In other words, in order to survive, you will have to make hard choices.  You will have to do something you don’t want to do in order to get what you need.  In order to live, you will need to make trade offs.  This is the “curse of Adam”….in order to live, you must die- in order to survive, you must trespass- in order to thrive, something must suffer.  We are all sinners because we exist in a place where our choices necessitate sin.

When I think of  “original sin” like this, Romans 5 makes sense.  We do all sin.  We can’t help it.  Not because we have a sinful nature, not because we are depraved, but because we live in a world of economics- a world of trade offs.  The actions of Adam left us with nothing but bad choices.  The actions of Jesus leave us with a righteous, purely moral choice.  They are perfectly parallel.

Could I make my case stronger? Sure.

What is a transgression?  Well, one way is to define it as a breach of a law or command, a “sin”.  Since Romans 5 says that sin existed with no law or command, maybe we should investigate what other meanings “transgression” has.  Like to go beyond a boundary or limit.  If we assume that Paul was correct, that transgressions could exist with no law, then we have to assume that sin was inherent because of natural boundaries and limits.  That may sound like “fun with words”, but transgressing a finite boundary or limit seems to imply exactly what I am talking about.

In the process of putting this post together, I tried to anticipate the resistance to my argument.  I knew “all have sinned” would come up, and I was preparing to contrast the “all” in the case of Adam with the “all” in the case of Jesus. (v.18)  I knew that someone would bring up the condition explicit in verse 18 of “the free gift came to all men”, but in Young’s literal-as well as other versions-it is not there:

¹⁸So, then, as through one offence to all men [it is] to condemnation, so also through one declaration of `Righteous’ [it is] to all men to justification of life;  (Young’s Literal)

This makes my case all the more pressing.  If Original Sin is understood as being borne not of action but of birthright, and as the bible says in Romans 5:14 that Adam is a foreshadowing of what was to come, then it follows that by birthright we are justified to salvation.  You can’t have your cake and eat it too.  If by original sin we are born depraved, then by salvation we are born forgiven.  Either “all” means “all” or it doesn’t,”many” means “many”, or it doesn’t.  But if “all” means that all are born into a world where we can choose to never sin-but it is impossible in practice-then all can also mean that each of us is born into a world where we can choose to

"Maintain eye contact.....for the love of Me- Maintain eye contact..."

let Jesus carry the burden of our sins- the impossible is made possible.  If you believe in Original Sin(in the sense that Adam’s sin was written on you from conception)- and you believe that Paul was teaching us something of value in Romans 5, if you believe that (as Paul says unambiguously) Adams transgression was a foreshadowing of the saving gift of salvation, if you believe all these things then you have to believe in universal salvation.   I don’t see how you can accept one without the other.

With my conception, you can believe in heaven and hell, salvation through faith alone, that Jesus is a choice you make and not a birthright.  Heck, you could even believe in universal salvation still if you want to.

Let’s take my conception of “original sin” and contrast it with the traditional understanding by plugging them into 1Cor. 15:

Me:    ²⁰ But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. ²¹ For since by man(sin became a necessary choice and with it) came death, by Man also(salvation became a choice and with it) came the resurrection of the dead. ²² For as in Adam all die (as a result of their inevitable choices), even so in Christ all shall be made alive(as a result of the choice to accept grace). ²³ But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

Traditional Original Sin: ²⁰ But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. ²¹ For since by man (sin became our birthright and with it) came death, by Man also(salvation became a choice? and with it) came the resurrection of the dead. ²² For as in Adam all die (as a result of their birthright), even so in Christ all shall be made alive(as a result of the choice to accept grace). ²³ But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.

When I plug my understanding of “original sin” into 1 Corinthians 15, we are left with a perfectly parallel story, where we will choose sin by necessity of living and we will choose Jesus in order to have eternal life.  If you believe in Orthodox Original Sin, we are left with a disjointed comparison, where we are damned by birthright but saved by a choice;  where “all” is not equal to “all”, where in order for me to believe the very heart of the doctrine-that all die by the inward stain of Adam’s transgression- I must by rights believe that all shall be made alive in Christ in a way that is worthy of comparison.

Most pointedly, my case is made by a plain reading of the text.  If you read Genesis 3, there is no mention that Adam had any curse on his seed, other than that their relationship with the world had changed: that there would be consequences to each action from then on.  There is no mention that man was to be born with an inborn stain, but an outward struggle.

In regards to Romans 5, a plain reading impels us to believe that just as through Adam our relationship with the world has changed, so too through Christ our relationship to the world has changed yet again.  If we are born into a world where sin is assured, then by the same choices that create our sin we can make a choice that absolves it.

It boggles my mind that a doctrine that has spawned terms never found in the bible, “original sin”, “sinful nature”,” total depravity”: how ideas that impel us to assume the absolute worst of mankind- that babies are evil, that someone has sinned from conception…..that all these ideas are the result of two passages- just nine words in the bible.  How, from a plain reading, do you get from “As in Adam, all die” to total depravity, from “because all sinned” to babies are evil?

There is no good reason to accept Original Sin as the Orthodox doctrine is established.

There have definitely been some changes around here in the last year, and I hope that there will be many more years of changes for this evolving blog of mine.   Here is a list of some of the things that have changed since June 2010…..

My Blogroll:   This was the first major addition to this blog, and has been updated several times since it first appeared.  If you want some idea of who I am following daily on the internet, this is the place to go.  My newest additions are Oscar, of Some Musician, and K. Syrah, of Shoes Never Worn; both recently graduated to my daily rounds.  Both are fantastic writers and both deserve as many new readers as I can give them.

Heterosexuals For Same Sex Equity(HSSE):  My sidebar hosts a link to HSSEs website.  This is a Toronto based organization that was co-founded by one of my good friends.  If you want information, or wish to order their “Straight, Not Narrow” swag, the site is a click away.

Planet Atheism, and by virtue, an RSS feed:  Thank Dan (Camels With Hammers) for this one.  I was added to Planet Atheism in November, and had to install an RSS feed to join.  I’m not sure if anyone else uses my RSS, but it’s there if you need it.

A New Contributor:  ZQTX, who I met through John Barron Jr., accepted my offer to be a guest contributor from time to time around here. The first post ever on Misplaced Grace that was not authored by me appeared on May 11th, and I hope that his contribution helps to keep the conversation going around here.

The Best Christian Blog Ever….Seriously:  Meet John Shore.  Here is why you probably counted him out before you read one word authored by him…..1) He is a Christian, and founder of Thru-Way Christians  2) He is a contributor to the Huffington Post

Those two things alone would normally guarantee that I was not going to like him.  Here’s the thing.  He is a gifted writer; I wish I had a fraction of his talent.  He takes what Christians tell us their faith is about, and actually demonstrates it in a way that makes sense.  Best yet, I so far agree with 99% of everything he says (save that nagging Jesus is God incarnate thingy,oh, and that there is a God to be incarnate….. and a few other minor quibbles).  I’m sure this was not an endorsement he was looking for, but I recommend him highly.  As does Dan Savage.

John should be required reading for every person, Christian and not-so-Christian alike.

Christian Friends of This Blog: You know, there is more to blogging than just a community of people who slap you on the back and tell you how great you are.  I spend a lot of time around here coming down on Christianity, and I’d like to show that there is a side to that faith that is inquisitive, revolutionary, and reasonable.  There are Christians who are trying to make a difference.  This is a list of Christians that for one reason or another, have impressed me enough to make me want to give them free advertizing.  In order, with an explanation they are:

Julie Ferwerda:  Over the last few months, Julie and I have become fast friends.  She is a published Christian author whose next book, Raising Hell: Christianity’s Most Controversial Doctrine Put Under Fire, I helped to edit.  Her commentary is smart, well supported, and entertaining.

Dan Trabue (Through The Woods): Dan is an Anabaptist and Christian blogger.  I really like his voice and consider him as good a representation of progressive Christianity as I have found anywhere.  His views are controversial in Christian circles, and that is why I find myself agreeing with so much of what he says.  He is not afraid to be castigated and disowned by his fellow Christians, and often is.

John Barron Jr.:  I don’t agree with John very often.  O.K., like almost never.  His views are Evangelical Orthodox, and there is not much for me to love about that.  John is different in some ways though.  He publishes dissenting comments.  He addresses those comments logically.  He doesn’t often quote the bible, and prefers to use reason to sway opinions.  If I am going to recommend someone who represents the Christianity that is so familiar to all of us, and represents it reasonably well, this is him.

Blogging is really about conversations.  It is about throwing your ideas out for others to see and hopefully starting a dialogue that helps to better form the way we view and understand our world.  My blog is a year old, and hopefully in its infancy it has helped to forward this goal.  Hopefully by the time Misplaced Grace is celebrating another year, it will have evolved enough to warrant another post full of changes.

I want to thank all my regulars, even Dan the Atheist Debunker, for helping me to keep the conversation going.