On a non-gaming note...

[pyrephox]

I'm doing pretty well, personally. I picked up 'Princep's Fury' and a special treat: my Waldenbooks had /one/ copy of the Phoenix Wright Ace Attorney Casebook, the first one. So I snagged it. There's one somewhat serious story in there, but the others are mostly funny vignettes about...well, mostly about how Phoenix is the only sane man in the asylum. :D They're set after the third game, but their status as canon is dubious.

I am...largely happy. Of course, this isn't unusual. I seem to be a very even keeled person, emotionally. My default state is 'content', even when maybe I shouldn't be. On the down side, this tends to make me the opposite of ambitious and a bit of a procrastinator. Not enough anxiety. On the other hand, I usually feel good about the world and the people in it. Even my occasional bouts of self-loathing are rather amiable. So, yay for me, I guess.

I do wish to do more creative work, though. My biggest problem with that is that I feed off of reaction from consumers. Although a lot of stories, games, etc, run through my head, I only really feel the need to write them down when I have an audience in mind. This is not good. It's very external, and so at the whim of others. I need to fix that.

Bonus Edit!

"Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal, rather than religion-specific, values. It requires that their proposals be subject to argument, and amenable to reason. I may be opposed to abortion for religious reasons [this is only an example; he's pro-choice], but if I seek to pass a law banning the practice, I cannot simply point to the teachings of my church or evoke God's will. I have to explain why abortion violates some principle that is accessible to people of all faiths, including those with no faith at all.

Now this is going to be difficult for some who believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, as many evangelicals do. But in a pluralistic democracy, we have no choice. Politics depends on our ability to persuade each other of common aims based on a common reality. It involves the compromise, the art of what's possible. At some fundamental level, religion does not allow for compromise. It's the art of the impossible. If God has spoken, then followers are expected to live up to God's edicts, regardless of the consequences. To base one's life on such uncompromising commitments may be sublime, but to base our policy making on such commitments would be a dangerous thing. And if you doubt that, let me give you an example.

We all know the story of Abraham and Isaac. Abraham is ordered by God to offer up his only son, and without argument, he takes Isaac to the mountaintop, binds him to an altar, and raises his knife, prepared to act as God has commanded.

Of course, in the end God sends down an angel to intercede at the very last minute, and Abraham passes God's test of devotion.

But it's fair to say that if any of us leaving this church saw Abraham on a roof of a building raising his knife, we would, at the very least, call the police and expect the Department of Children and Family Services to take Isaac away from Abraham. We would do so because we do not hear what Abraham hears, do not see what Abraham sees, true as those experiences may be. So the best we can do is act in accordance with those things that we all see, and that we all hear, be it common laws or basic reason."

THIS. This, this, this.

Comments

[solaas.livejournal.com]

Amen!

[brianh]

It's so nice to hear someone in the public view say some of the things that have been in my heart (and rants) for a long time. It's nice to feel... represented by my representative government, I guess. :)

I make my choices about my life based, in part, on my faith. My choice of politics has something to do with that too-- but only in the broadest sense. My policies, always, have to deal with the realm of the human. I know there's a lot of discussion about what the "Render unto Ceasar" quote means, but-- Eh. Fundamentalism is fanaticism is irrational, no matter what you clothe it in, I guess.

[pyrephox.livejournal.com]

I think it would be an odd person of faith who did /not/ make choices in their life based on their faith. I mean, that's what religious conviction IS.

And I don't, inherently, consider irrationality to be a bad thing. A lot of the best things humans have done in this world have been utterly irrational, based on nothing but a dream or a belief. Politics, ideally, should be...mostly rational, but not entirely. One needs space for the heart.

[brianh]

Hmm. There's probably a word for irrational, blind, and dangerous, but I'm too tired to remember.

[pyrephox.livejournal.com]

Fanatical? Seems to work well.

[brianh]

Also, I found Princep's Fury to be both awesome and frustrating. :P Especially both of the endings.

[pyrephox.livejournal.com]

I very much enjoyed it. Seeing Tavi get worked around was pretty satisfying (as much as I like the boy), and now I even have started to like whatsherface, the watercrafter. Isana! This is the book where she really started to come into her own, I think.

[cpip.livejournal.com]

At some fundamental level, religion does not allow for compromise. It's the art of the impossible. If God has spoken, then followers are expected to live up to God's edicts, regardless of the consequences.

This. Because when the day is done -- if you truly believe that God has said "This is wrong," and you permit it out of a devotion to a different ideal... well, there's an excellent quote from Pratchett about religion and sacrifice --

If I thought there was some god who really did care two hoots about people, who watched 'em like a father and cared for 'em like a mother...well, you wouldn't catch me sayin' things like 'there are two sides to every question' and 'we must respect other people's beliefs.' You wouldn't find me just being gen'rally nice in the hope that it'd all turn out right in the end, not if that flame was burning in me like an unforgivin' sword. And I did say burnin', Mister Oats, 'cos that's what it'd be. You say that you people don't burn folk and sacrifice people anymore, but that's what true faith would mean, y'see? Sacrificin' your own life, one day at a time, to the flame, declarin' the truth of it, workin' for it, breathin' the soul of it. That's religion. Anything else is just...is just bein' nice. And a way of keepin' in touch with the neighbors.

It's why I have a generally lower opinion of folks who believe that you can or should reconcile faith with political life.

[pyrephox.livejournal.com]

Pretty much. And this, I admit, both scares and fascinates me. I've never had the capacity for that kind of...faith. Not in anything, really, but especially not in religion. People who do have that kind of faith are very scary.

But then, they SHOULD be. Being around a truly devout person is about as comfortable as sitting a foot away from the bonfire. They get things done, but usually burn out quickly, and often take quite a few others with them.

[cpip.livejournal.com]

...This is going to inspire me to a post that's probably going to irritate some folks. Hm.

[amethystjade.livejournal.com]

Squee for using biblical reference.

Also, glad you're feeling good. :)