One may only hope:
Israel recorded almost 3,000 new coronavirus cases for the second day in a row, according to data released Wednesday, as the infection rate continued to climb and senior Health Ministry officials were reportedly weighing a switch to a policy of reaching herd immunity through mass infection.
I'm so very busy this week, but I will resume normal posting in the new year. I think that's when I'll take the final decision on moving this blog. Please stay tuned!
I have long been considering a switch to WordPress for a number of reasons, but now as it is so far and I have made an account there I'm still having my doubts. May be, it's just laziness, lol. Still, I'd like to know your experiences with this platform. Would it make blogging and interaction easier? What would you prefer, this blog staying as it is now, or a WordPress one?
Your opinion is much appreciated!
I'm planning to move my blog to WordPress. Probably after Christmas. I will post redirect link on this site and keep it up for some time, so don't worry!
Do I understand correctly that some people have trouble with posting comments on this site? What is the problem exactly?
If there is, it's certainly not because of anything I've done and I'm not sure how to fix it. I have been wondering about moving my blog to Wordpress lately, thoughts?
That's what we are getting tomorrow. Because you know Omicron is sooo very dangerous, especially for 70+ with overweight, though nobody apparently died from it yet, well, except in the UK there was someone who died with it, but they aren't in lockdown yet, but we have to, because reasons.
Thank you, Woodstock generation, you are keeping us hostage for 2 years already...
Shall I really go there? You bet I will:)
We've been reading out of the OT, namely about eating of the holy things (meat) in Leviticus. The priest's daughter who is a childless divorced or widowed woman who returned to he father's house is allowed to eat it, but a married daughter isn't.
This passage made me think about two things. First, many men, contrary to their protestations, support feminism because real patriarchy means a huge financial and otherwise responsibility for their womenfolk. If you had a misfortune to get a childless widowed daughter she would return to your house and you'd be expected to take care of her until death do us part, or until she marries again, and if father died the responsibility would go to her brothers and even male cousins, as it was the case here in Europe not so long ago.
And second, OT allowed divorce. And then by analogy, it also allowed polygamy. Of course, we as Christians should all hopefully agree that the ideal is one man one woman for life, as described in Genesis. Yet, there is also a difference between what the society deems an ideal and what this society tolerates.
Now Jesus Christ expressly calls divorce adultery except for fornication, and St Paul adds desertion, too. The only thing he says about polygamy though is that any man in church authority should be a husband of one wife. Polygamy is obviously not ideal, it's stressed once again, but there is no severe prohibition given against it, either.
In fact, early church tolerated both divorce and polygamy to a certain degree, just as most priests were married (Eastern Orthodox prohibited polygamy later on, but always allowed their priests to marry, and divorce for adultery for either spouse).
Here I'm going to open a big can of worms. I know that some of my readers are Catholics and I have respect for their faith, nevertheless I'm a convinced Protestant myself and I do think that modern pedestalisation of women and even feminism and other issues has its roots in some of the things the Catholic Church invented out of the blue, which were never in the Bible.
Under their doctrine of no divorce whatsoever, a man could have a wife who had slept with the whole town and he couldn't get rid of her, at least, officially (and honour killings fell out of fashion in many European countries somewhere around the time of the Renaissance). If he was lucky, he could get a divorce of table and bed, i.e. legal separation, which at least allowed him not to acknowledge any bastards she would produce, but he couldn't get remarried and have legal children, and having a legal heir was often very important in this period.
But he could take a mistress or go to a wh*rehouse or sleep with all the maidservants and the church authorities wouldn't say a peep.
Kinda not logical, don't you think?
In fact, many wealthy men used to have many mistresses (and still do) and sired lots of illegitimate kids as well. And as we all probably know, the Catholic stance on divorce was one of the reasons behind the European aristocracy's support of the Reformation which legalised divorce for adultery and abandonement but not polygamy, though some Protestant leaders pointed out it wasn't really prohibited by the Scriptures.
In Catholic France before the revolution, the punishment for bigamy was death by beheading. Yet prostitution and all sorts of fornication were tolerated, before and after. You couldn't sell your daughter to be a concubine of a rich man, but you could sell her to a br*thel and it was fine. (described in the classic literature abundantly). BTW, if we believe writers such as Honore de Balzac some of these girls were like 10 years old.
Our society was pretty selective in tolerating s8xual sins, it seems. Now please understand me correctly, I'm not suggesting men should all start taking many wives. In fact, many men nowadays can't even support one and send her to work while they search for the work-life balance and suffer burnouts from having to work the whole of 36 hours a week (by some reason, girls continue to marry these losers), but the fact is, that some sort of official contract, may be with lesser rights, but with financial obligations towards the 2nd wife and her offspring in combination with restrictions on extramarital s8x would probably be an improvement on serial monogamy, mistresses and prostitution.
Which is still happening, btw. I once watched a British TV program about life of aristocrats. Some or other lord separated from his wife who had given him legal heirs, but they weren't officialy divorced, they just lived in different countries. He lived together with a woman 30 years his junior whom he called his wifelet. He told the reporter he had had many "wifelets" throughout the years.
I have a feeling he is not the only one...
Christian society the way we know it is nearly totally destroyed in all the Western countries. Victorian times or 1950s aren't coming back. If and when the revival happens, it's up to us to build something new. So the question is, should we turn to some OT things, yes or no?
So he painted the grips and finally installed them:
He is very content with the result...
as a pescatarian.
People seem to always like to know what someone eats, so here comes:)
Breakfast:
Teff porridge made with semi-skimmed milk mixed with full fat chocolate milk which I still have left from our St Nicholas party, fruit, a rye crispbread with butter and cheese (rye, water, salt) and hot water with a slice of lemon and half teaspoon of honey.
Teff grain is supposed to be very good for you, it's gluten free, high protein etc
but it's also pricey. I bought in on sale, otherwise I'd just eat rolled oats, 50c for 500g:) As chocolate milk is very sweet, I didn't need to add sugar or any other sweetener.
Lunch was nothing fancy:
Cucumber and toasted bread, one slice with hummus and processed cheddar (hummus was on sale, too; 50% off), the other one with butter and fish roe paste from IKEA:
Strictly speaking it's not really a health food, but I do like it very much:) Plus some water, as you can see. After lunch I also drank a cup of cacao (cacao powder, water and a splash of full fat milk), but no sugar since I still have some chocolates left from St. Nicholas, see above:
I figured out I deserve them since normally I'd eat one sandwich with something sweet, like apple butter, which is very popular over here. It's high in iron, too, so recommended for vegetarians.
Finally, dinner:
Parboiled brown rice, with a stir-fry of marinated shrimp, onion, bell pepper and tomatoes; plus avocado and chili sauce (love this, too).
And dessert:
plain 3.2% yogurt with flax seed and 1 tsp jam.
Well, that's about it. I also drank tea in between, with a bit of honey/molasses. Tomorrow will be my vegetarian day, so I'm planning to eat walnuts for dinner. What about you?
What my husband got from my parents for his birthday:
New sights and grip for his Beretta. He is very happy:)
with the current madness:
But nanny statism wins every time:
UK Health Secretary Sajid Javid’s says the country has secured an additional 114 million vaccine doses for 2022 and 2023 to “buy time” and that everyone over the age of 18 will be offered one by the end of January.
Dr. Mike Ryan, head of the WHO’s emergencies program, questioned the logic behind this decision.
“Right now, there is no evidence that I’m aware of that would suggest that boosting the entire population would necessarily provide any greater protection for otherwise healthy individuals against hospitalization and death,” he said.
In a DailyMail discussion someone said he'd gladly take a booster shot every week if it prevented him from dying. Well, I have news for him (her?) and others like that. You can take a booster every day and YOU WILL STILL DIE. You aren't immortal, whatever lies you choose to believe. Seriously, Westerners have become pathetic.
The problem with many of those who are against the corona restrictions is the confirmation bias, they think that the silent majority agree with them or are just an innocent victim of brainwashing. The truth is, however, that the majority either don't care of downright agree with the government policies, as proven by the recent Swiss referendum.
Yet, the referendum also brought to light an interesting fact: the group who overwhelmingly voted for corona passports are 65+. Yes, we do have a boomer problem in our society, as the majority of the young people voted against the pass.
When I say "boomer" I don' mean it in the strict definition of the word, btw, but the fact is that the average age in Europe is about 50, and it will only get higher, so that soon a common flu will cause lockdowns and extreme measures.
And here secularism comes into picture. Many of those people and their families are terrified by the idea of dying any time soon, and they somehow have bought into the idea that they are entitled to live to 100 and that the government should ensure it happens.
Now please don't misunderstand me, the elderly deserve good care and there is nothing wrong with living long, especially if you manage to stay healthy. But let's be realistic: someone in his mid80s is on the death's door and no amount of temper tantrums is going to change the fact that humans are mortal. We all will die one day. Make peace with God, accept this fact and just move on.
Yet when I read Twitter discussions, folks will say things like: "my father of 83 had a right to live longer, but due to selfish antivaxxers spreading infections he died from corona". Not an exact quote. mind you, but someone did say it.
You see, religion, even a non-Christian one, usually teaches you humility, while secularism teaches you entitlement. So now we have to vaccinate little kids because otherwise a Grandma of 87 may die, and that's a great tragedy for humanity.
A funny thing is, there is a theory supported by the Scriptures that human beings should on average live to 120, however, I don't think that the way to long life goes through mandatory jabs, medications and surgeries. Many of the diseases people suffer from in old age, like diabetes type 2, were years in the making and are often preventable, yet the secular morals teach you that your actions should have no consequences.
Someone else should pay the bill. That's why it's OK to punish non-vaccinated, but it's not OK to discuss obesity, for instance.
The current division in society about the ways to fight pandemic goes along both class and age lines. It's young vs old and technocrats/office workers against mostly blue collar workers.
We'll see how it ends, but my bet is on the young and productive.
P.S. The root of the problem is not that people on average live longer, it's that they live unhealthier longer. 40 years ago most would die after their 2nd heart attack, now they have like 8 bypasses. Modern medical care doesn't heal people, it gives them a quick fix and then the virus comes and here you have it.
