Some of the regular crew wasn't around at our Church services. I suspect a weekend voyage to a monastery. Plans were in the works for an all-male retreat. Due to the weather and other events, half the group backed out at the last minute and the trip was canceled. I suspect that one of my more gung-ho friends decided to make the trip anyway and took a couple of others that may not have been on the original list. Of course, I could be wrong.

Service was very nice. The opening sentence of our priest's homily haunts me. He threw out the idea that a parent can only be as happy as his or her unhappiest child. I find this an interesting idea. If one adopts a modernist understanding of happiness, the idea he put forth is probably not true. If you take a more classical view or more holistic view of the nature of humanity, it's a wakeup call.

After the liturgy, while we had an open discussion while the wee (and not so wee) tykes finished up Sunday school, he brought up the belated news of Antony Flew's conversion to theism at the intellectual level. I held my tongue but afterwards I explained a bit of the controversy surrounding these affairs. Once home I emailed him a link to the NY Times article The Turning of an Atheist which I think covers the brouhaha fairly well. In a lot of ways it's a sad story. And, regrettably, the Christians involved don't come off as being the guys in white hats.

I'm more than a bit disturbed by the tendency towards intellectual dishonesty by large swaths of the intelligent design movement. I don't think everyone involved is a charlatan and some of the folks involved do make a rigorous case for their beliefs. But more than a few people disingenuously use the theory as nothing more than a front to get god talk into public schools and other secular spheres. Aside from their intellectual dishonesty and lack of rigor giving Christianity a bad name, I don't think that presenting an argument for something akin to the Aristotelean first cause moves anyone any closer to Christianity.

Coffee hour came and went. We went home. My wife took a nap while I alternated between working on my Latin homework, fixing dinner, finishing up my essay on modernism and writing a letter to my grandmother. Just after my wife woke up, Dorian stopped by and we feasted on cabbage and ground beef, green beans and toasted cashews, and cheesy bread. After dinner, we watched a couple episodes of Millenium on DVD.

The other interesting thing that happened over the weekend was the news broke about Clinton going postal over Obama's allegedly misleading mailings on her stance on NAFTA and health care. On Friday, my wife received a mailing from Clinton's campaign saying the same thing about Obama with regards to NAFTA as the Obama campaign is supposedly saying about Clinton. Consequently, I thought Clinton's shrill pissing and moaning was pretty funny. She certainly seems intent on shooting herself in the foot. I think maybe her advisers need to read up on the latest research with regards to the results of negative campaigning and the typical perception of shrill women. I think a calm and collected approach could have been devastatingly effective for her but she chose the loud and angry approach. Sucks to be her. Her angry mode is going to get the same response with the general public as Dean's infamous scream in the 2004 primaries.

And now I needs seize the day.