I grew up in a conservative Wesleyan church and I always considered the Baptist's as allies on issues in thought and theology. However, over the past few years, I have been extremely disappointed in those of the Baptist denomination that I have interacted with in real life.

First, let me begin with the incident that is bringing on this whole tirade. This past weekend, I attended a basketball tournament that my younger brother was playing in. In the first game, he played a certain Baptist Bible school at a neutral site. The majority of their fans, first of all, inappropriately placed themselves directly behind my brother's team's bench. It's usually customary, at a neutral site, to sit behind your own team's bench and support them, rather than place yourself behind the other's team bench in order to heckle and ridicule them. These fans were UNBELIEVABLE. Continually heckling the referee's and my brother's team with phrase's such as "Jesus hate's you," "You're not going to heaven," etc. You get the drift of what they were saying. It was out of control. About the time they started yelling for their team to physically "punch him and knock him out of the game", in reference to my brother, I had had enough. I turned around and simply said, "Shut up." No yelling, just instructing them on what was appropriate. I was then proposed with an option of stepping outside and fighting, not with just one, but "all 25 of us." I left it at that, but the fans then mocked me and my family whenever we would supportively cheer for our own team. At this point, let me just say that I have been to many sporting events throughout my life and never heard as offensive of comments as were coming from the students and parents associated with this school. If I were a non-Christian sitting in the midst of these fans, I would have maybe been turned off to the gospel forever. Why would I want to be one of them? Most people without Christ are better behaved and more respectful than them. They can't even show respect to their fellow Christians (my brother plays for a Christian College) or for their own religion. Why would someone want anything to do with that? I know I wouldn't. This is from the same group of fans that, when I played against this particular school, cheered when one of my teammates was knocked unconcious by a vicious and purposeful elbow to the temple. They also once got in a fight with the fans of a rival school. The arrogance and hate in these people is literally sickening to me, and I hope they don't represent Baptist's in general, though this is a school where their minister's and leaders are trained! To their credit, 2 young women did come up and apologize after the game for their fans and students behavior.

The other incident that recently got me fired up about the baptist's is when my wife and I recently tried out a Baptist church in the new city we moved to. On our first Sunday there, I was confronted in regards to the way I was dressed. Now, I have attended church my whole life, and I dress nicely out of respect for God and for the church itself, so I was not inappropriately dressed by any means. However, this was a very traditional church, and they wanted the men to wear slacks and ties, "if at all possible." Now, again, what if I was not a Christian and was so offended by their lack of acceptance that I never stepped foot in a church again? I guarantee that this happens. I wanted to call the man a "Pharisee" to his face and tell him that he was a perfect example of a "white-washed tombstone."

So, are there any Baptist's out there who would care to offer a brief defense of their denomination??!!?? I know that there are good people in the denomination and I have just ran into the bad ones of the bunch, but it has definitely painted a negative portrait of them in my mind in general, and this is unfortunate.

Here is a classic Calvin and Hobbes strip in which, through Calvin's duplicating of himself, Bill Watterson (the author) really gives us some insight into what typically happens to a new idea in science.

Frame 1: The validity of the idea is called into question, as is the "rightness" of it. No one likes to change the status quo. Hobbes provides this to Calvin with his simple question.

Frame 2: Calvin gives the typical knee-jerk reaction, accusing the accuser of inhibiting scientific progress, which no one wants to be accused of, thus convincing the other their idea is worth merit for the sole reason that it is "advancement."

Frame 3: The usual response, from Hobbes, that no one wants to be the one that prevents scientific progress, so they guess they'll just go along with it.

Frame 4: The new theory is proved correct...and it went "Boink!" This is the best part of the cartoon to me. A new theory comes along, (take for example, the Big Bang theory), there is a huge debate about it's validity, the ethical/moral implications, the experiment's are run to test the hypothesis, and it turns out to work! The Big Bang model (the Duplicator in the cartoon) works! But wait...it went "Boink?" To me, this a play on the fact that once this big, new, life-changing theory becomes established, it turns out that to most people, it just went "Boink." That is, it didn't really change anything. The huge NON-impact it had on most people was more of a surprise then the fact that it turned out to be right. And thus the world moves on. (only now, with 2 Calvin's.) And don't ignore the little argument going on over the true genius of the idea...another jab at the scientific world.

Ok, so I probably overanalyzed this, but I find it hilarious. :)

Bill Snyder, head football coach at Kansas State University, (one of my alma mater's) just announced his retirement this past week. He has been there for 17 years, and, unless you've been under a rock, you know that he was the orchestrater of the Greatest Turnaround in College Football History. Now, they may sound like a pretty bold statement, but it is true. I grew up in the Manhattan, KS, area, and I remember being about 6 and just walking into KSU games at halftime without a ticket and sitting wherever I wanted. Those days are gone. He took a program that was on the brink of getting the boot from the Big 8 conference and moved into the elite in the country, having won the Big 12 in 2003, and going to 11 straight bowl games, 2 of them BCS games.

His impact on the team is measurable. The impact he has had on the community has been IMmeasurable. I can't tell you how many hotels went up around town to compensate for every one coming into town on for the weekend games. Or all of the money that was spent by those people. Or how the budget of the entire university increased because of the football revenue, and then skyrocketed because of the alumni pride in the program, which led to a huge increase in donations to not only athletic programs, but also academic. Buildings have been built on campus. Businesses have been started because of the success of the program. Manhattan's economy has been turned around in the past 10-15 years, and, to be completely honest, Bill Snyder is a big part of the reason why.

Now, with all that said, I am really looking forward to a new coach. We will miss Snyder and appreciate all that he has done. But it is time for some new, young blood that will get things rolling again after 2 consecutive sub-par seasons. There is a large, young nucleus of talented players still there with plenty of potential.

It's looking like we will be stealing our new coach back from Oklahoma. (Their entire staff defected from KSU after the 98 season) Offensive Coordinator Chuck Long and Defensive Coordinator Brent Venables seem to be the early frontrunners for the job. Venables is a great, young coach. Long is more established and is a great offensive mind. To hear Bob Stoops talk, it sounds like he would rather lose Venables, so that makes me want Long more. Either way, we'll get a great coach and hopefully be back to our winning ways!!

Here's an interesting topic-Embryo Adoption. I became aware of this just a few weeks ago during an episode of CSI in which a woman who was killed had a baby whose DNA did not match her's, and they could not figure out why, until they searched her medical records and discovered that she had adopted an embryo. I then ran into the topic again in the course of researching a project for a presentation I am giving in an anatomy class on infertility.

With all the talk about embryonic stem cells and whether it is ethical to destroy the embryo's for research, or whether they are people and it amounts to murder, etc. etc., adoption of these embryos appears to be an alternative that results in life. Well, some of the time. Only about 2/3 of the embryos survived thawing. Only 10 of these in the study resulted in successful pregnancies, and that was out of the several hundred that survived the thaw. Where do they come from? Well, every time a couple undergoes in vitro fertilization, there are many embryos made and if the couple conceives, the leftover ones remain frozen. There is a push now for people to donate these leftover embryos for adoption by other couples who are also having fertility issues. Most people, when asked, agreed that this was a good idea. In practice, however, the results are much lower, with only about 10% of couples actually donating their leftover embryos, which otherwise would sit frozen until they were no longer viable, and then would be discarded. Why don't people do it? Because it's hard to picture your biological child being raised in a different family, that's why. Because your children would have a biological brother or sister out there that they didn't even know about. These are the main reasons that people don't do it, and I have to admit that they are good ones. I don't think I'd be able to do it either.

This leads to another interesting & related point. Most conservatives are against the aforementioned embryonic stem cell research. Have any of these same people undergone in vitro fertilization? It seems that they would be in an interesting situation where they would be creating embryos, from which there would most likely be leftovers. If they are leftover, they will just be frozen and never used, and eventually tossed when they are no longer viable. So, if they are going to die anyways, why not use them for stem cell research? And if not, how can you have them created, yet not use them and let them "die" from unuse. Their destiny would be the same if they were used for research. I don't really don't know what would be right. Embryonic adoption would be their only option that would keep their beliefs aligned. I'm not sure where I stand on this whole topic....Let me know what you think!

I came across this article today that describes a new pickup truck, designed by GM and made for the army, which runs solely on hydrogen fuel cells. The emission from it? Water an heat. Nothing harmful to the environment, no gasoline used...when can I buy one.

First of all, it got me thinking about the high cost of gasoline, and how long would it be before we have legitimate alternatives to it. From the article, it sounds like within the next decade their might be Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars available. Plus, you have the growing class of Hybrids and electric cars, and gasoline may soon be a thing of the past. Goodbye Middle East. We don't need you and all of your problems any more. Hello extra money in my pocket, as I won't be filling up for $40 every other week (if I'm lucky.). I hope that by the time I am in my 50's or 60's, I'll be able to look back and tell all the young whippersnappers about how I remember the days when we used gasoline, and how we fought wars over oil, and risked the health of the environment for it.

Secondly, it got me thinking about the health of the environment in general, and how that relates to Christians. Now, I am no "tree-hugger", and I'll call them out when I see them. But why is it the "liberals" who are always fighting to protect the environment? As Christians, we believe that God gave us rule over His creation. Do we treat it as such? I don't think so. The more I thought about, the more I can't figure out why there hasn't been a large Christian movement that wants to preserve the environment and animals. There is a difference between using what God has given us for our benefit, and destroying it and being wasteful. I think there a lots of Christians who don't even care that we are, in many ways, destroying it. Well, maybe there is a movement and I'm just not aware of it. I know I was never taught to be too concerned about the environment, and I was raised in a conservative Christian home. I think that there are many who have the same story. We see the environmentalists as "those wacky lefties" who love nature more than themselves. But not all of them are like the folks at PETA. This is something that we could join forces on and really make some positive changes. Maybe we save some species from extinction. Maybe we clean up the air. Maybe we keep the rain forest around (is it really being destroyed as they would have us believe?). Maybe we take a little better care of the Creation that God has given us dominion over?