Korea -- interesting and "exciting"

I found an interesting book in the nightstand in my hotel. The Teaching of Buddha. Parallel English and Japanese texts (it's from a Japanese Buddhist society). Thing Gideon's Bible, but Buddhist. I find this amusing in a good way.

Getting to Korea was suitably boring. I was offered a promotional code that allowed me to use the WiFi on the Delta flight to Atlanta for free. I used the time to read my daily comics list and to burn my adventures in Kingdom of LoafingLoathing. The flight to Korea was occupied with reading most of Storm From the Shadows.

Meanwhile, getting anything actually done here is delayed for a presently unknown time due to someone going on TDY and not telling anyone else so the paperwork processing they do could get done by someone else. Until that paperwork gets processed, I can't get into the ID system here which prevents me from actually getting work done. That then means dealing with hotel accomodations in Seoul which may get quaint and picturesque. Hopefully we get a better handle on this Monday. *sigh* At least I'm cooling my heels on the Seoul per diem and not the Daegu per diem rate.

I'm going off the the local rapier practice this afternoon, so there's something to do.

Interesting article relevant to same-sex marriage

Thank you, cvirtue for mentioning this in FaceBook.

http://colfaxrecord.com/detail/91429.html presents a very interesting look at Christian history as it relates to same-sex unions. Formal named ceremonies for the unions are cited with dates ranging from 11th to 14th century, at the least. Other evidence is cited dating back farther. The article does not provide footnotes nor a bibliography, but many of the specific claims seem to provide enough information to identify the source material. To my eyes, it has the ring of being an honest report.

Taking the article at face value, the bottom line is that those who claim that the Christian concept of marriage has invariantly been one man and one woman always and ever are flat wrong. There's no way to sugar coat the conclusion. Now, that errancy is probably not willful ignorance so much as simple ignorance. I'd love to see this get wider coverage.

If you object to same-sex marriage, claiming a historical Christian basis for that objection holds no water. You need to come up with different arguments. It's not enough to simply say (as one articulate(?) witness at a hearing in DC said) "I object. I object. I object." (that following citing "If anyone has any reason why these people should not be joined in wedlock, let them speak now"). The prefatory remark implies that an actual reason will be elucidated.
(In the example above, the person actually uttered "I aject I aject I aject" -- rather inarticulate, but in character with the ranting tone of her "discourse")