Another One?

Are more men killing their pregnant girlfriends or wives? Fort Worth Police have arrested Stephen Dale Barbee, the father of Lisa Underwood's unborn baby suspecting that he murdered Lisa, her son, and their unborn baby. I guess this is another way that sex can kill.

If stories are really "equipment for living" as Robert McKee says in Story, do people with problems see a news story that relates to their situation, then replicate the behavior?

What does the National Organization for Women have to say about the issue? Killing pregnant women is an extremely violent act. Women being murdered because they chose to carry their children is a new take on the abortion choice issue, isn't it? Will feminists avoid speaking of this because of the obvious connection between abortion and unborn child killings?

I wonder also if we are seeing the result of how Americans have valued life (Or not) for the past thirty years. It would be difficult to explain the difference in how we value the life of this unborn child, an aborted child at the same term time, or a child killed the day after she was born. #1 & #3 are the most valuable lives and not legal to end. The life of #2 is not as valuable and is legal to end.

Allowing humans to judge which lives are viable and which aren't has indeed opened Pandora's box. Some people have trouble discerning such minor differences.

In Defense of Computers

Although not a direct redefinition of societal values, I am surprised by the number of "computer glitches" we've had in the Denver area lately. Last week a computer glitch (CG) might have exposed people's private info, opening them up to identity theft.

Yesterday, our local news reported two more. United Airlines had a CG which caused problems with their flight schedules. Colorado's DNA computer system got the blame for the worst CG. Sex criminal, Brent Brents, could have been caught and jailed last fall, preventing him from allegedly committing the latest string of assaults.

I confess a bias about the term "computer glitch" because of my years of work in the industry, but what does CG really mean? A computer glitch is technically a fault or defect in the machine or system. I'll also admit that there are problems associated with servers running Microsoft products, but they are mostly security issues and large systems don't usually run on MS products. My guess is that most of these CG's were not computer glitches at all, but human error.

If you're dialing a cell phone and "rear end" another car, is it the cell phone's fault? We have seen this blaming of objects before. In news stories, it has been implied that guns leapt off tables and into a criminal's hand, killing an innocent person. We don't want to ever blame people, do we? What if it hurts their self esteem? Companies can also save their reputations by hiding behind glitches. The implied message is, "Not our fault."

Seriously, I can name just a few reasons other than computer glitches that might have caused these problems: People overlooked inputting data, improper training, or systems were not connected properly to other systems. For the record, I suspect that for the most part, people were really the cause of most of these problems. This issue won't a part of my word crusade, but just wanted to make you aware.

Oops, Wrong "One"

As I read today's entertainment headlines, I was thrilled to learn that the actress, Jessica Alba was "done sleeping around in Hollywood." For at least five seconds, I was sure her life had changed by finding a love relationship with God.

Yep, sure enough the article continued with the words, "But now. . .she thinks she's found 'the one." Yes, Praise the Almighty!

Except, the name of "the one" is not Jesus, but Cash Warren. Oops, wrong "one." Wishing Jennifer and Mr. Warren great happiness with a great hope she also knows or will find "the one" I know.

Our hearts hunger with the need to "love God," even if we don't know the source.

Redefining "Felo-de-se"

I just heard the sad news of Hunter S. Thompson's suicide. This "counter-culture" writer whose popularity soared in the early 70's lived near Aspen. Please note that the subject of this posting is "the way" in which the tragedy was reported, not the event itself. I extend my deepest sympathy to his family, friends, and fans.

If you're a regular reader of my blog, you already know I'm interested in how the media uses indirect or odd word choices to report the news. They often surmise the reason behind the story. Such opinions used to be labeled as "editorial comment." My premise is such journalistic deviations affect the meaning or at least the connotations of certain words which lead to our redefining some "societal values ."

Perhaps the horror of suicide or felo-de-se caused tonight's news anchors to default to indirect phrasing, like "fatally shooting himself," "self-inflicted gunshot wound," or "shot himself fatally." Honestly, when I first heard the report, it took me about ten seconds to understand it.

Why do professional journalists use such indirect language? What happened to concise descriptions? Perhaps the news writers were trying to show respect, felt heartache, or were simply feeling perplexed. Don't most people want the life Hunter gave up? Ironically, Mr. Thompson had a Hemmingway-ish reputation. Why do men known for their cultural courage, give up on life? The story is perplexing.

Enough about "why" reporters indirectly described the event. What is the linguistic, and ultimately the "everyday" impact on the acceptance of suicide? The euthanasia issue looms and "taking your own life" will certainly be a part of the debate. How wide spread is the watering down of this violent act?

I did a quick Internet search for several indirect phrases meaning "suicide" such as, "fatally shot himself" and found hundreds of instances. Has the language for suicide really changed? I looked up "suicide" in a 1990 Thesaurus. Synonyms such as "self-destruction" and "self-murder" are listed. "Fatally self- shooting" or like phrases were not listed. However, a 2005 search of the same Thesaurus' online version only returned the word "suicide" once, as a sublisting of mercy killing: assisted suicide. Pretty interesting, huh?

Christians need to be aware of the social redefinition of suicide. We tend to permit softer descriptions out of respect for family and friends. I agree with such considerations, however, we also need to consider that connotations change when the language changes.

Let's be sensitive to those whose world's have been rocked by suicide through no fault of their own, but let's not allow more friendly descriptions of self-killing into our language.

Killing For Love?

The Associated Press reported that the Colorado couple was 83 years old. Investigators said the probable motive for this murder-suicide was "medical problems." Oxygen tanks and prescription drugs were found at the scene. What a relief to know that there was a good reason.

The buzz words which appeared in the last line of the article brought me back to Reality. The detective suggested that the situation might have been some kind of "mercy killing."

"Mercy killing?" A more appropriate, but less gallant word choice is "mercy murder." Oops, they found her in the yard. Doesn't sound like she was in on the deal, does it? Perhaps the couple had just returned from seeing Clint Eastwood's latest film, Million Dollar Baby where killing because of love was the right thing to do.

Mark my words. We need to watch out for this deceptive word pair. "Mercy killing" is a Christian oxymoron. It's like describing someone as having "virtuous adultery." The kingdom of darkness is using people to repeat this sweet phrase over and over again until we get used to the idea. We're being rained on with the concept that sometimes the loving thing to do is kill.

I know what happened to me. When I realized the murder-suicide story was about an 83-year-old couple, I thought of my dear, departed grandparents. What would have motivated Grandpa to kill Grandma, then turn the gun on himself? The answer is he would have never done this.

We should be asking: "Why did the man who promised to protect her, kill her?" "Did he think his vow 'until death' meant by his own hand?" "How many households in Colorado with 83 year old occupants have prescription drugs and oxygen tanks in them?" (The answer for those who live at lower altitudes is "a whole lot of them" and most don't kill over it.)

While it could be argued that God Himself "killed for love," He also had the power to bring about a resurrection. As far as I know none of us have that spiritual gift.

I Corinthians 13 says a lot about love, but never mentions killing. Verses 6-7 in the NIV says "Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres." And if a person you love wants to die, the most merciful thing you can do is kill him. (I added that last sentence to show how ridiculous the concept sounds following God's words on love.)

Please, let's train our minds to stop and question when we hear the words "mercy killing." There really is no such thing.