Saturday, May 01, 2004
All I've got to say is that it's way too early for the whole family to be up on a Saturday morning. I got up to let the dog out back this morning, and she decided that it was her responsibility to inspect the neighborhood for gophers and raccoons and such. I went outside calling for her, and that brought my wife down to go looking for her (the dog actually comes for her - imagine that). My daughter woke up with the calling and whistling in the front yard under her window. So here the three of us are, hoping not to wake up the fourth - when we here his door open, and my son comes downstairs ready for cartoons. Woo hoo, 7:30a on a Saturday morning. If I'm up, might as well be typing.
There are logical problems with this debate, besides the illogical problem of bringing in Ben Affleck. First of all, if the minimum wage is raised from $5.15 to $7.00, there's a potential for folks to get fired. Where a business might employ two people at the lower rate, it now can't afford to keep one of them at the higher rate. It's not better for the one who's let go, and it's not much better for the one who is now left to do twice the work. Then there's the jobs that are outsourced overseas, which is already a problem. You don't have to pay one person $7/hour if you can hire four people @ $2/hour somewhere else. And my last beef with this - the assumption that people making minimum wage cannot work their way or educate themselves into higher paying positions. One consequence of $5/hour being "too low" is that a person should be motivated to climb the ladder. The system isn't designed for a welfare family of four to live off one person's McDonald's wages. But if the parents make more than that, now the teenagers in the house can start there and begin to understand work and profit and such... But that's more thought than I should've put into something involving Ben Affleck this early in the morning.
I'm not SBC anymore, am I? Whew. To me, the worst thing the popuation could do is remove itself from the debate and from the structure. Instead of spending time with the children and getting to know what's going on at school, there are now advocates for Christians pulling out of public schools and doing it themselves. Last I heard, Disneyland was still doing okay without SBC support, and I don't see why this wouldn't be any different. Instead of pulling out, why not prepare our kids for school? Why not teach them morality at home in a way that lets them lead others at school? I know schools are doing a poor job of teaching morality, but the way it stands, I'd rather do that part one-on-one with my own kids rather than letting someone I don't know try to teach them right and wrong. Keeping them in public school is as much of the training and testing process as any, and if they come out of the experience poorly it's as much my fault as anyone else.
Some of this issue is probably why I've been having the email conversation I mentioned a few days ago. The other person is involved at his Methodist church, and they've been discussing these issues. I'm not here to bash anyone, but it's not "bashing" to say sin is sin, to agree with scripture that homosexuality is an aberration of what was intended in Creation. We sell grace short when we allow people to fill positions of leadership while still openly embracing a contrary lifestyle.