Back in the day, I bought the computer game Lemmings. I’m not sure I ever finished it, and I doubt it would run on my computer today, but should I ever have too much time on my hands and a nostalgia for days gone by, here’s where to start over: DHTML Lemmings.
…equals one bar of chocolate
…equals five handfuls of peanuts
…equals 1.2 liters of Coke
…equals two bottles of beer
…equals nine potatoes
…equals two heaped plates of noodles
…equals three (Swiss-sized) strawberry baskets
Of course, that’s energy equivalents, not enjoyment equivalents. But I thought I’d mention it anyway.
He doesn’t swallow the orange in this video, and hasn’t done it since the first attempt at eating orange, but watch for yourself how he lays into that blood orange with zest! (For those who don’t understand Swiss German, when I speak, I’m asking him if he wants to eat an orange.)
It’s getting harder to find time to upload stuff (and, in the case of the video camera, to even get data off the gadget). But, finally, here are more photos. The username and password remain the same – ask me if you’re unfamiliar with them.
I wrote about the initiative to make the Swiss gun laws more restrictive under the headings Swiss Guns Do Kill People and More on Guns and People Dying. The votes have been counted, and the result is a surprisingly strong No. It’s probably partly due to several measures already having been implemented ahead of the vote, and to a very clear No in rural areas.
Of course, even with a Yes the title of this post would have held true…
We’re studying the Sermon on the Mount at Bible Study these days, and the verses on murder we looked at two weeks ago have stuck a little longer than usual. Here’s what Jesus said (v. 21-26):
“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
“Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to them; then come and offer your gift.
“Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still together on the way, or your adversary may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.â€
Now, I usually think of myself as someone who doesn’t get angry often or easily, but that’s only as long as inanimate objects do what I want them to. That includes cars, and by implication the person steering it. We’ve been doing a bit of driving lately, mostly back and forth to Luzern, and I think I’m getting better, but I still excoriate drivers that don’t drive according to my standards. I still treat them with contempt and disdain, and then end up having to apologize to Janet wo patiently endures because she knows I know she disapproves.
And with good reason, according to the above passage. Although Jesus talks about being angry at a brother or sister, I don’t think he’s condoning anger at someone who isn’t, and even if he was, I’d have no way of knowing if the driver was a brother or not. Besides, as Janet pointed out, even if the driver did do something stupid, the disdain in my voice will teach those in the car with me that I heap scorn and contempt on those who fail. It is not enough to say I want my children to be able to talk to me about everything, nor is it enough to honestly desire that and be ready to gently and lovingly answer their questions. If I teach them by yelling at cars that I have no patience for incompetence or failure, I will teach them to be afraid of talking to me whenever they have been (or believe themselves to have been) incompetent or failures.
I’m late, but I’m glad I’m learning this now, and I hope I can get it under control before Joseph understands what I’m doing.
I don’t know when I wrote it, nor with what in mind. The pen has partly faded, so instead of saving a scrap of paper, I’ll record it here. It seems to have no title, either – it’ll be fine without.
I feel a fool, for I should know
The truth of love without a show
Of fervor, when it’s far away.
I feel a fool, for I should trust
The staying power of love, not just
Its most immediate display.
I feel a fool, for since my birth
My maker has affirmed my worth,
And yet I doubt his love for me.
So if this fool, this fool you love,
In weakness craves a show thereof,
You’re in the best of company.
For those who have 27 minutes of time to spare with nothing better to do, here’s my latest (and last) BCF sermon on 1. Peter 2:4-10. If anyone takes those 27 minutes to listen to it, I’d appreciate if you also took five to tell me what you think and what I could have improved and where I was unclear.
And if you think it’s terrible, well, I won’t be preaching again in a long time…
I wrote about how Swiss guns kill people a few days back, and have since received additional information I found interesting enough to post. Both graphs come from a leaflet the socialist party sent out with the intention of getting people to vote for tougher gun regulation. While they are quite fuzzy about what happens to current gun owners, which I dislike, the graphs seem pretty clear.
The grey bar shows the percentage of households with a gun, and the red bar the percentage of suicides with firearms (as opposed to other methods). There does seem to at least be a correlation between gun permeation and firearms suicide rate. However, Japan shows that a low firearms suicide rate doesn’t necessarily mean a low suicide rate.
Here we have (in black, left scale) the head count of the Swiss army, and (in red, right scale) the number of deaths by firearms in Switzerland, from 1995 to 2008. It shows a correlation between the number of soldiers (and hence the number of rifles in active use) and the number of deaths by firearms. Before 2004, it was fairly easy to keep the weapon upon leaving the army; it was made harder after that. Because many kept their firearms upon leaving the military, the drop in weapons available in Swiss households was not nearly as sharp as the drop in enrolment.
Any thoughts?
