Cultural commentary on issues related to life, liberty and the pursuit of God
You are currently browsing the archive for the Technology category.
“[That] surveys show Facebook being cited more and more in divorce cases should make spouses think twice before ‘friending’ someone of the opposite sex, experts say.”
I would think we Christians could embrace the solutions and common-sense precautions offered in this piece.
The Family Research Council has produced a superb primer on Ella, the so-called “morning-after pill” that could cause a skyrocketing in chemical abortions. It begins:
As we previously reported, on August 13th the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) quietly announced approval of a new prescription abortion drug called “ella,” allowing Watson Pharmaceuticals to market this drug in the U.S. as an “emergency contraceptive” (EC). While proponents of ella claim that it is more effective than the so-called “morning-after-pill,” Plan B, ella can also function as an abortion drug (more like RU-486) [emphasis added].
Ella is similar in its chemical make-up to RU-486 and therefore can destroy an implanted embryo, in addition to other such effects as preventing fertilization or preventing implantation. Until now, the FDA has drawn the line between EC and abortion based on whether a drug prevents or ends an established pregnancy. Therefore, approving ella as an EC even under its own definition of an abortifacient is doubly misleading.
Due to the FDA’s approval of “ella” as an EC, pharmacists may believe they must cover ella as a prescription drug. However, many pharmacists do not know about the dangers of this drug or that it functions like an abortifacient. Many pharmacies may not know ella can cause an abortion, and need to be aware of these concerns before they begin stocking this abortion drug.
This morning after our church’s Men’s Prayer Breakfast, Brian asked me if I had a phone that could take a picture of the board on which the various prayer requests were written. I’m a professional geek, so of course I did! :P I took the picture and emailed it to him right there. Once he got to his desk, he emailed me, thanking me for the picture, which prompted this email exchange:
Brian: Thanks for taking a picture of this morning’s requests.
Me: Modern technology in church life saves the day! ;)
Brian: Touche! If only the early church had had iPhones and Androids to go with their intercessory prayer and apostolic evangelism and martyrdom…
Me: “Just got back from Macednai. Pual wuz right. Gentiles clean. That’ll teach me 2 doubt. LOLZ!”
Once this computer fad wanes, I’ll answer my calling as a comedian…
The other month, we lauded Steve Jobs for taking a stand against pornography. Today, I tip my hat to Google for this step in the right direction:
“When you’re searching on Google, we think you should have the choice to keep adult content out of your search results. That’s why we developed SafeSearch, a feature that lets you filter sexually explicit web sites and images from your search results. While no filter is 100% accurate, SafeSearch helps you avoid content you may prefer not to see or would rather your children did not stumble across. We think it works pretty well, but we’re always looking for ways to improve the feature.”
“ICANN has approved XXX as a top-level domain,” reports PC World. The secular magazine gets it pretty close to right when they say: “The adult entertainment industry will soon have its own glaringly obvious domain, but unfortunately that doesn’t necessarily mean that dot-COM domains will suddenly be porn-free.”
They add, “However, porn sites will be like dolphins. All dolphins are whales, but not all whales are dolphins. Dolphins are a subset of the larger whale family. Similarly, all XXX sites will be porn, but not all porn sites will be XXX. Many porn sites have a long and established presence as a dot-COM domain and will not simply abandon that.”
We rue ICAN’s decision, and in a blog post last Spring, warned this moment would come.
“A new Baptist Press article explores why citizens should not extend a new place in this World Wide Web for pornographers, explaining how it would among other things:
(a) create a more legitimate platform for an illegitimate cause,
(b) create a cultural Trojan horse, and
(c) pad pornographers pockets.
It says in part:
“A former U.S. Department of Justice employee is urging people to speak out against the proposed formation of an Internet domain exclusively for pornographic websites.
“Until May 10, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is accepting input from the public on whether to establish the domain, marking the third time the idea has been considered.
“Patrick Trueman, a former chief of the Justice Department’s child exploitation and obscenity section, said the .xxx domain would not clean up the .com domain by requiring all pornographers to move to .xxx.
‘The .com domain is a cash cow for pornographers and they are not leaving it,” Trueman wrote in comments submitted to ICANN. “ICANN has no enforcement powers to make them leave and thus clean up .com. Pornographers would simply expand to .xxx and maintain their current .com sites, perhaps doubling the number of porn sites and doubling their menace to society.’”
Read the rest here.
I wish to add my voice to “a conservative group that monitors the entertainment industry [now] applauding Apple CEO Steve Jobs for his pledge to keep porn applications off the iPhone.”
“Jobs took a stance against porn when the iPhone was released in 2007 and has reiterated that stance at least three times during the past month while also taking a dig at a competitor, Google’s Android phone.”
Read more here.
You may recall the Quote of the Day from earlier this month in which John Piper made an argument against social media like Facebook and Twitter which he then refutes, saying “These media tend to shorten attention spans, weaken discursive reasoning, lure people away from Scripture and prayer, disembody relationships, feed the fires of narcissism, cater to the craving for attention, fill the world with drivel, shrink the soul’s capacity for greatness, and make us second-handers who comment on life when we ought to be living it.”
A new article from American Conservative magazine, “Brevity Is the Soul of Twit,” presents a nice counter to Piper’s straw man argument.
It’s trendy to lament Twitter’s vacuity. But might 140 characters be just the right space for “the clear, the brief, the bold”? With the Internet awash in too many syllables, Twitter could cut through the clutter, if only its authors brought sufficient wit.”
Who’s right? Is Twitter a destructive force or constructive? Probably a little bit of both.
Read the rest here.
“These media tend to shorten attention spans, weaken discursive reasoning, lure people away from Scripture and prayer, disembody relationships, feed the fires of narcissism, cater to the craving for attention, fill the world with drivel, shrink the soul’s capacity for greatness, and make us second-handers who comment on life when we ought to be living it.”
-John Piper making an argument against social media like Facebook and Twitter which he then refutes, explaining why he tweets
Just a quick technical update. Today I set up a twitter account for our blog here. At the very least, when a blog entry is posted, a link will be tweeted. There’s an outside chance we’ll post some manual tweets. To follow us, go here. That is all.