Law Religion Culture Review

Book Review: The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins.

2008-07-13T15:36:00.001-07:00

I have just completed a trilogy.

Not C.S. Lewis' "Space" or Narnia trilogies. Nor the Lord of the Rings trilogy.

I have read the so-called "New Atheist Trilogy," comprised of g-D is Not Great by Christopher Hitchens, The End of Faith by Sam Harris and now The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins.

Although the books contain many similarities and cross-reference themselves, each brings a different emphasis borne of the distinct backgrounds of the authors.

Dawkins brings the perspective of a biologist; Hitchens shows his status as a man of letters; and Harris incorporates his philosophical background.

Dawkins, however, marries at least two backgrounds better than the others, although Hitchens touches on all three. Dawkins especially demonstrates his knowledge of science and letters. However, Dawkins isn't especially skilled at rhetoric or argument because he overargues and thereby shows weaknesses in his polemic.

A hallmark of modern atheistic argument is to claim that they are governed by the evidence. They assert that they cannot make a "leap of faith" because they need hard evidence to be convinced. Dawkins abandons this position when he turns the argument on its head by ridiculing those who aren't convinced of macroevolution because of interspecies gaps in the evolutionary chain or record as "gap worshippers." "The creationists' love affair with 'gaps' in the fossil record symbolizes their whole gap theology." (p. 127.) Given the gap in the record, isn't it more like an atheistic or agnostic to demand proof, any proof, of a bridge in this gap? At bottom, then, both sides are making some leaps in filling in gaps. Therefore, atheists or agnostics are unentitled to seize the ground of claiming they are only following the evidence.

Dawkins' book brought to mind a trial strategy. When an attorney makes promises during opening statement, he or she better deliver. The failure to do so can crater that advocate's credibility before the jury. It's very effective to quote those promises and then demonstrate they remain unfulfilled in the closing argument.

Dawkins' introduction offers that opportunity. Dawkins makes high claims at the outset. For example, "Perhaps you have been taught that philosophers and theologians have put forward good reasons to believe in God. If you think that, you might enjoy Chapter 3 on 'Arguments for God's existence'-the arguments turn out to be spectacularly weak." (p. 2.) Regarding the next chapter, Dawkins promises: "I hope you will gain enlightenment from Chapter 4 on 'Why there almost certainly is no God'." (p. 2.)

Accordingly, Dawkins essentially assures he will demolish the arguments for God's existence and go further to establish "there [is] almost certainly ... no God." He sets the bar high. And then he doesn't deliver. While he does discredit some of the weaker arguments that have been posited for God's existence, such as St. Anselm's ontological argument (pp. 80-83), he fails to disprove that God could have created the universe. In my mind, this is one of the linchpins of the debate (the other is what to make of Jesus). Everything else--such as whether religion has been perverted--is window dressing.

And his effort to deliver constituted the core of this book. Thereafter, the book tapers off with related, but essentially tangential, excursions about whether religion constitutes child abuse or leads to other abuses. (See, e.g., Chapters 8 and 9.)

An aspect of modern atheistic literature is to call those claim to be governed by scripture to account for not reading it or understanding it. This criticism could just have likely been leveled within the church but it is amusing to read it from those outside of it. Dawkins too proffers this critique, but to his credit, he goes further. He underscores the literary value of the Bible, and encourages nonbelievers to read it. (pp. 340-44.) "[A]n atheistic world-view provides no justification for cutting the Bible, and other sacred books, out of our education." (p. 344.)

Dawkins' book provides a perspective that any critical thinker--especially those with a Christian world-view--needs to read and process. Unchallenged, naive belief does no service to the Church.

Cognitive Dissonance.

2008-07-06T14:49:00.001-07:00

That someone stole a church's trailer isn't funny.

The pastor's response is.

"To the people who stole our trailer:

First let me say, God loves you. Second let me say we forgive you. We really don’t want to forgive you, but God says we should so we do. Third of all I want you to know that I think you are scum bags. I think you are lowlife degenerates who need a good butt kicking. Matter of fact I feel so strongly about the fact that you need a good butt kicking that I am volunteering to do it. I hope you believe in God because you should get on your knees and cry out to Him like never before because if we find you, I can promise we will kick the crap out of you. It won’t be pretty, it won’t be over quickly, and it will be very painful. I know that doesn’t sound very nice but I feel pretty strongly that is what you need.

I am curious what kind of lowlife you must be? Trust me, I have been around some pretty low ones before but never one that would be so low as to steal from a church. I understand you probably need some crack or something like that but stealing from a church would scare me. It would scare me more once I realized which church I stole it from. We are probably the only church you have ever heard of that will honestly break your legs once you are found.

Let me say again that we DO forgive you. But there are still consequences for your sin and your consequence will be toting a butt kicking. It is obvious you aren’t very smart so let me give you some advice. Get that trailer out of the county QUICK. As soon as I hit publish on this blog post a church of about 1000 crazy people will know that our black, children’s trailer has been stolen and I can promise they will be on the lookout for it. You would much rather me find you then one of them.

Best Wishes,

Gary Lamb

Lead Pastor, Revolution Church"

via: http://www.garylamb.org/2008/07/03/trailer-stolen/

Technology Review: Nike+iPod Sports Kit.

2008-07-01T06:21:00.000-07:00

Athletic shoes and portable music are runners' best friends.

Hence, it makes sense that they join forces in the form of Nike and Apple's Nike+iPod Sports Kit. The Kit consists of two pieces, an accelerometer (sometimes called a "pebble") that is placed in the shoe to record times and distances, and a receiver that plugs into the iPod Nano and receives information from the accelerometer.

1. Cost. At sub-$30, the Kit packs a lot of bang for the buck. It can elevate an iPod Nano into a sophisticated workout tool. However, the special Nike+ shoes--with the bed carved out of the sole--must be purchased separately, and seem to be priced about $20 more than regular Nike running shoes. Some have reported modifying other brands to hold the accelerometer, but the Nike+ shoes are specially designed for this purpose and promise the necessary snug fit.

2. Conveniences. This device converts what many already have--an iPod Nano--into a multifaceted runner's tool. In addition to incorporating music into the workouts, the Nano now displays visual information about the workouts (e.g. miles run and time elapsed) and provides human voice feedback. For example, when a personal best is achieved, prerecorded congratulations play through the ear buds from such luminaries as Paula Radcliffe and Lance Armstrong. Information about workouts can be transferred from the Nano to one's computer as well as a website to track progress and compare to others'.

3. Critiques. My only critique is a slight variation in workout distances reported. For instance, one of my routes is a 4-mile lap. Since the distance should be the same for each run of this same 4-mile route, when the total reported for this route varies, it causes concern. However, because the variations are minor, and I'm not training for the Olympics, I'm not overly troubled by the discrepancies.

Book Review: Day of Reckoning by Patrick J. Buchanan.

2008-06-29T07:49:00.000-07:00

Patrick J. Buchanan sounds the alarm in Day of Reckoning. A sample: "The fuse is lit and is burning towards the dynamite." (p. 240).

He has been sounding the alarm for at least his last four books with St. Martin's Press.

In fact, these books sound remarkably similar, and I think passages have been repurposed from his earlier writings. For example, Buchanan's line about the 9/11 attack occurring "over here because we were over there" I'm sure I've read before. (p. 250.)

Sounding the alarm can be useful and sometimes salvific. See Paul Revere.

Sounding the alarm repeatedly can become, well, alarmist.

Categorization here will ultimately depend on how history unfolds.

In Day of Reckoning, Buchanan returns to familiar themes. He (again) warns about immigration, "free trade," interventionist foreign policy, entangling alliances, and rampant pluralism. He argues these singularly and collectively are "deconstructing America." He suggests a national suicide. (p. 235.)

George W. Bush receives much of Buchanan's blame: "George Bush seems fated to go down in history like Wilson, a failed and tragic figure. After the 9-11 attack, he tried to do the right thing for the right reason. But between September 11 and his axis-of-evil speech in 2002, he embraced an ideology based on a misreading of reality and an ignorance of history. It drove him into the greatest blunder of presidency--and denied him the sight to see his way back home." (p. 99-100.) Buchanan isn't Monday-morning-quarterbacking. From the right, he has been ardently criticizing Bush's Iraq policy for many years.

In this sense, Buchahan is more aligned with Sen. Obama than almost all Washington politicians in the Republican party. This fact brings to mind Secretary Robert Reich's humorous comment to Patrick Buchanan when they were both on a cable talk show: "Pat, you're so right, you're left."

I suspect Buchanan is writing another book as I write this. Perhaps a slip, Buchanan dated his acknowledgments as "October, 2008." (p. 266.) Since Day of Reckoning was published in late 2007, and I read those words long before October, 2008, either he meant 2007, or he provided the acknowledgments section for his next book.

Institutional Modesty.

2008-06-26T23:52:00.000-07:00

At 6-45 over the past six seasons, Duke's football program is about as bad as its basketball team is good.

Duke recently won a lawsuit by losing.

The background: Duke and Louisville entered into a contract for the two schools to meet in four football contests. After a 40-3 blowout loss in 2002, Duke canceled the series, and Louisville sued.

The ruling: Franklin Circuit Court Phillip J. Shepherd agreed with Duke that any Division I opponent would be an improvement over the woebegone Blue Devils. “At oral argument, Duke (with a candor perhaps more attributable to good legal strategy than to institutional modesty) persuasively asserted that this is a threshold that could not be any lower," the judge ruled. "Duke’s argument on this point cannot be reasonably disputed by Louisville." Case dismissed.

Via: http://www.wral.com/sports/story/3080763/

Movie/DVD Review: The Great Debaters.

2008-06-25T17:01:00.000-07:00

Beliefnet.com came up with a list of what they call the "Most Powerful Christians in Hollywood."

http://www.beliefnet.com/gallery/hollywoodchristians.html

Right behind Mel Gibson, Denzel Washington graced the litany. Mr. Washington has been developing an impressive body of work, which he has characterized as his "ministry."

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/227/story_22778_1.html

Some might be surprised by Mr. Washington's inclusion in this list given the raw nature of some of his filmic work. Taking a closer look, however, his movies often point to basic morality at the very least, and sometimes, to religiously sophisticated, if not overly Christian themes, such as atonement, propitiation and salvation.

For example, my bro Jonathan Acuff at the oft-hilarious site, http://stuffchristianslike.net/, has unpacked the deeply religious or Christian themes lurking in Mr. Washington's Man on Fire. Find his insightful analysis here: http://stufffchristianslike.blogspot.com/2008/04/183-movie-passion-of-christ.html

In this review, Mr. Acuff intriguingly and perhaps counter-intuitively posits that Man on Fire exceeds even The Passion of the Christ in evangelistic potential.

This lengthy introduction sets the table for The Great Debaters. This film carries strong moral principles centered around basically standing up for what is right--even at great personal cost.

As the title suggests, it presents a true story about an African-American debate team that went into Harvard to compete... and, well, you figure out the rest. I find fault with this movie, however, because it was not necessary to demonize (just about) every white person in the film.

Moreover, the film suggests, erroneously, that speaking more loudly somehow translates into speaking more eloquently. In one particularly disturbing scene, one contestant essentially screamed her speech--on the verge of tears. Despite this bellicose delivery, one significant line--that has been echoed in the current Presidential campaign--resonates well: "The time for justice is always right now." Indeed.

Despite its flaws, it's worth a viewing on cable or DVD.

The Great Debaters garners a "B."

Randy Pausch: The Lecture After The Last Lecture.

2008-06-05T22:14:00.001-07:00

For those who enjoyed my review of Dr. Randy Pausch's The Last Lecture (see May 5, 2008, post), here is a short video of his commencement address to the May, 2008, graduates of Carnegie Mellon:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATiyfX1I45I

As Shakepeare wrote in Hamlet, "Brevity is the soul of wit," Dr. Pauch wittily emphasizes only a few points:

1. Express gratitude;
2. Find and follow passion;
3. Live well, without regret;
4. Elevate relationships over things; and
5. Love, defined by putting another's happiness over your own.

Book Review: Dreams from My Father by Barack Obama.

2008-06-04T06:47:00.000-07:00

A nagging question occupied my reading of Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance by Barack Obama.

Did he or didn't he?

Did Barack Obama know he later would run for President when he wrote this book (originally published in 1995)?

On the one hand, candidate books penned while running for President tend to be far more obtuse or opaque. Nothing salient is revealed, and accordingly, essentially no one reads them. Lending credence to this view that he was not contemplating running for the nation's highest office when he wrote Dreams, Mr. Obama allows in the preface to the 2004 edition:

"For the first time in many years, I've pulled out a copy and read a few chapters to see how much my voice may have changed over time. I confess to wincing every so often at a poorly chosen word, a mangled sentence, an expression of emotion that seems indulgent or overly practiced. I have the urge to cut the book by fifty pages or so, possessed as I am with a keener appreciation for brevity." (p. ix; emphasis supplied.)

On the other hand, this book holds back from directly exposing the world to Mr. Obama's thought-processes, especially in a political realm. He repeatedly places the most controversial statements in the dialogue of another, so often that it can't be accidental. Additionally, he stops short from admitting his thoughts. For example, when asked why he did community organizing, he simply alluded to having his reasons. (e.g., p. 179.)

As a result, I'm sure this book was written with high political aspirations in mind. Nevertheless, it makes for an intriguing read especially in light of the unusual route Mr. Obama has taken to the precipice of the Presidency. For example, he talks about growing up in Hawaii, living in Indonesia, working in Chicago and visiting Kenya. He doesn't speak much about his law studies or practice, but I found the following excerpt illuminating about his legal philosophy:

"The study of law can be disappointing at times, a matter of applying narrow rules and arcane procedure to an uncooperative reality; a sort of glorified accounting that served to regulate the affairs of those who have power--and that serves to regulate the affairs of those who have power--and all that too often seeks to explain, to those who do not, the ultimate wisdom and justness of their condition." (p. 437.)

I've been surprised that his political opponents have not delved into this book more. I predict that these "fifty pages or so" that Mr. Obama wants to excise will receive even greater attention in the general election. In fact, watch Republicans strip-mine this text and perhaps even more so the sound recording, where one can hear the potential President tossing off expletives. Too, there are portions related to Rev. Jeremiah Wright of Trinity United Church of Christ, which indicate that Mr. Obama was aware of his race-baiting ways as far back as at least the book's 1995 publication.

For example, Mr. Obama writes that upon meeting Rev. Wright, he told Mr. Obama: "'We don't buy into these false divisions here. It's not about income, Barack. Cops don't check my bank account when they pull me over and make me spread-eagle against the car. These miseducated brothers, like that sociologist at the University of Chicago, talking about "the declining significance of race." Now, what country is he living in?'" (p. 283.)

Rev. Wright continued: "Life's not safe for a black man in this country, Barack. Never has been. Probably never will be." (p. 284.)

In Dreams, Mr. Obama endorses the Church's "Black Value System," which included a "commitment to God, who will give us the strength to give up prayerful passivism and become Black Christian activists, soldiers for Black Freedom and the dignity of all humankind." Mr. Obama describes the list as "sensible." (p. 284.)

This is the rare exception to candidate books. Written over a decade before running for President, it's interesting, well-written and unconventional. Anyone with a passing interest in this election should add this book to his or her reading list immediately.

Three Ss of Jury Persuasion.

2008-06-01T22:42:00.000-07:00

In Change the Way You See Yourself (2008), Kathryn D. Cramer and Hank Wasiak posit three basic assets of communication:

1. Substance - WHAT you say (i.e. content);

2. Sizzle - HOW you engage people (e.g., tone, volume, pacing, etc.) and HOW your craft it (e.g., stories, metaphors, analogies);

3. Soul - WHO you are (e.g., passions, aspirations, and values) and WHY your message is important to you.

They argue that "Sizzle" and "Soul" account for 93% of why an audience remembers and believes what has been said.

I couldn't help but think this observation has direct relevance to a trial attorney addressing a jury. I think one of the most important factors for trial attorneys is developing credibility with the decision-makers. I suspect credibility would probably fall largely, if not exclusively, under "Soul."

In witnessing many trial attorneys over the years, I think the predilection is to emphasize "Substance," by dryly working through the law (or arcane rules) and the evidence, with heavy doses of legalese and tedium. However, according to the authors, this factor carries the least weight. Probably true.

via Pastor Scott Hodge:
http://scotthodge.typepad.com/scott/2008/05/substance-sizzle-soul.html

Rules of Evidence: Tools of Truth?

2008-05-28T06:42:00.000-07:00

Many, if not most, of our society's most contentious disputes are resolved in court.

Accordingly, some have advanced the theory that rules of evidence should be used to test the reliability of the Gospel accounts.

I'll reserve a critique of this approach for the purposes of brevity; nevertheless, the following provides an overview of the approach first posited by Harvard Law Professor Simon Greenleaf.

1. Analyzing the Gospel Accounts through Rules of Evidence.

In 1874, Professor Greenleaf argued in the Testimony of the Evangelists that the testimony of the gospel writers should be tested according to the same tests to which other evidence is subjected in courts. This general approach was followed in a more recent book, Faith on Trial: An Attorney Analyzes The Evidence For The Death And Resurrection Of Jesus (1999) by attorney Patricia Binnings Ewen.

2. Hearsay Exclusionary Rule and Its Exceptions.

Under the rules of evidence for "out of court statements," which is generally known as "hearsay," there are numerous exceptions allowing for their admissibility on the theory that the underlying circumstances carry the necessary indicia of trustworthiness to make the declarant's statement sufficiently reliable as substantive proof. (People v. Cudjo, 6 Cal.4th 585, 608 [25 Cal.Rptr.2d 390, 404] (1993).)

In the case of Jesus' sayings as recorded in the Gospels, we are potentially dealing with what is known as "hearsay on hearsay" or "double hearsay." This is so because Jesus' statements could be considered one layer of hearsay, and its recordation by others in the written Gospels could be deemed another layer of hearsay.

However, this layering does not necessarily make the evidence inadmissible. (Cal.Ev.Code Section 1201, F.R.E. 805. See People v. Collup (1946) 27 Cal.2d 829, 834 [167 P.2d 714]; People v. Lew, 68 Cal.2d 774, 778 [69 Cal.Rptr. 102] (1968); In re George G., 68 Cal.App.3d 146, 155 [137 Cal.Rptr. 201] (1977); People v. Perez, 83 Cal.App.3d 718, 727, 730 [148 Cal.Rptr. 90] (1978).)

A. Declarations Against Interest.

There are numerous exceptions to the hearsay rule which would allow for the admissibility of "statements" bearing the mark of trustworthiness. One such exception is declarations against interest--pecuniary, penal or proprietary. (Cal.Ev.Code §1230; F.R.E. 804(b)(3).)

The rationale for this exception is that a reasonable person in similar circumstances would not make a disserving statement unless he or she believed it to be true. (People v. Frierson, 53 Cal.3d 730, 745 [280 Cal.Rptr. 440, 448] (1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 944 (1992).)

For example, any statement that Jesus made that might be deemed blasphemous by the authorities of His time, such as the "I am" saying in the Gospel of John, would be against his penal interest. It could expose him to jail or worse (as it ultimately did).

B. Ancient Texts.

Then turning to the documents recording such a statement, the Gospels, the law specifically excepts from the hearsay rule ancient texts, where they are 20 (California Rule) or 30 (Federal Rule) years old, and the statements therein have been generally acted upon as true by persons having an interest in the matter. (Cal.Ev.Code Sections 1331 and 1341, F.R.E. 803(16).) Similarly, the statements could be deemed declarations against the interests of the Gospel writers, given the persecution of the times. Accordingly, there are exceptions for each layer of potential hearsay, and such testimony would be deemed admissible evidence.

C. Prior Consistent Statements.

Prior consistent statements also are carved out of the hearsay rule. (Cal.Ev.Code Section 1236, F.R.E. 801(d)(1)(B).) It does not require a certain volume of prior statements, or a balancing of all statements to form a consensus, but simply rather that the prior statement is consistent with a statement that is being attacked. The reasoning underpinning this exception is that "it is not realistic to expect a jury [or fact-finder] to understand that it cannot believe (the) witness was telling the truth on a former occasion even those it believes that the same story given" at a later time is true. (Cal.Ev.Code Section 1236, Comment.)

D. Present Sense Impressions.

The law allows "present sense impressions" to overcome the hearsay exclusion. (Cal.Ev.Code Section 1241, F.R.E. 803(1).) These are statements made while the declarant was engaged in that conduct which is being described. (Cal.Ev.Code Section 1241(b).) The rationale for this exception is that the contemporaneous nexus between the event and the statement would likely undermine deliberate misrepresentation or fabrication. (F.R.E. 803(1), Adv. Comm. Notes.)

As described in the Evangelists' records, many of Jesus' statements pertained to events, such as healings, while he was engaged in the event. The fact that they made have been summarized does not affect its admissibility under the hearsay rule.

E. Excited Utterances.

Similarly, "excited utterances" constitute another exception to the hearsay rule. (Cal.Ev.Code Section 1240.) These, however, require a "startling event" and that the statement was made under the stress of the startling event. The trustworthiness of such a statement arises from the fact that the declarant did not have an opportunity for reflection or intentional fabrication. (Cal.Ev.Code Section 1240, Comment; People v. Anthony O., 5 Cal.App.4th 428, 435-36 [6 Cal.Rptr.2d 794, 798] (1992), Box v. California Date Growers Assn., 57 Cal. App. 3d 266, 272 [129 Cal.Rptr. 146, 150].) Jesus' statements during the Passion would fall under such an exception, including the crucial statements on the cross, such as "It is finished." Such statements on the cross might also fall under the "dying declaration" exception if it could be argued they relate to the "cause and circumstances" of the death. (Cal.Ev.Code Section 1242, F.R.E. 804(b)(2). See People v. Gatson, 60 Cal.App.4th 1020, 1025-26, 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 729, 731 (1998); People v. Smith, 214 Cal.App.3d 904, 910-11 [263 Cal.Rptr. 155, 158-59] (1989).)

3. Conclusion.

In sum, hearsay is generally excluded from evidence in trials in the United States because it is deemed unreliable. Certain exceptions have been carved out because they are deemed sufficiently reliable to override the concerns with hearsay testimony. The foregoing exceptions have been employed with respect to the gospel accounts in an effort to argue for their reliability.

(Note: a substantially similar version of this post was originally published on January 19, 2005; it is being bumped to aid further citation, as it has been linked to various apologetic sites).

(Update: see July 26, 2006, post for a specific application of the rules of evidence approach to certain of Jesus' sayings recorded in the Gospel accounts here:
http://lawreligionculturereview.blogspot.com/2006/07/major-annoucement-part-vi.html)

Technology Review: Amazon's Kindle.

2008-05-24T06:17:00.001-07:00

Late last year, Amazon launched an e-book reader named "Kindle." They call it a "Wireless Reading Device."

An early-adopter, I received one in January (as there was about a month-long backlog at the time). After several months of use, I offer the following review organized according to Cost, Conveniences and Critiques.

1. Cost. At $399, the Kindle isn't cheap. However, if one is a heavy book-purchaser, the savings would eventually pay for it. For example, say a physical book costs $19.99. Since Kindle books cost no more than $9.99 through Amazon, one would save $10 on each book. Obviously then, about 40 books into the process, it would pay for itself.

2. Conveniences. Books can be ordered from the Kindle itself or online. The downloads consume all of a minute or so. No more waiting for the smiling-face cardboard box to arrive. Amazon doesn't charge for the download time or wireless access, just the book itself (again, no more than $9.99). Kindle offers excellent portability. You can tote along the equivalent of 200 books at the weight of 10.3 ounces. Say you were planning on reading a few books on vacation, this feature makes it especially suited to airline or other travel. Because it is an e-book reader, you can enjoy other conveniences that paper books do not offer. For examples, you can (a) manipulate the font size to larger or smaller text; (b) bookmark and annotate pages for later review; (c) search terms in the text; and (d) look up words via the built-in dictionary, among other things.

3. Critiques. Pagination isn't the same as paper books. Instead, the Kindle offers "locations," which are not convenient for citation. Amazon's founder, Jeff Bezos, sent me a personal (ok, not so individualized) greeting with the Kindle in which he stated: "Our top design objective was for Kindle to disappear in your hands...." While I generally laud Kindle (see paragraph 2 above), I wouldn't characterize this as a hallmark of the device. Because the sides are filled with page turning buttons, it's far too easy to inadvertently turn the page simply by grasping it. Thus, it's not disappearing in your hands; you have to be very mindful how you are holding it. Finally, Kindle doesn't offer the range of books that Amazon otherwise offers. For instance, Justice Antonin Scalia and Bryan Garner have just produced a book called Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges, which was featured on a recent 60 Minutes show. However, as of this writing about a month after Making Your Case's release, it's not available on Kindle. This unavailability is more common with older books.

Adventure Review: Maui, 2008.

2008-05-19T06:34:00.000-07:00

The best part about travel is meeting people.

On my recent adventure to Maui, I met five worthy of mention: Steve, Sonny, Lance, Joe and a television news reporter.

1. Steve. Steve led an ATV tour to a rain forest high on the Haleakala volcano. After encountering bone jarring terrain, feral pigs, and red mud splayed onto my face, we took a brief break to drink in the vista and hydration. Taking this opportunity, I inquired about Steve. Steve's path to Hawaii involved many twists and turns, like the trail we just conquered. Steve graduated from the University of Texas at Austin, majoring in the rather staid discipline of accounting. He started in the family's accounting business. He quickly realized it was not for him. With the pendulum swinging in an entirely different direction, Steve undertook two completely different activities. First, he became a tattoo artist, indulging his passion for drawing and color. Second, he starred in motorcycle stunt videos. Nearly costing his life, a tragic accident stopped his bike stunts. As a result, he moved to Maui, where he lives with his wife and children on the side of a mountain with stunning ocean views. He now repairs heavy machinery Monday through Thursday. He begins his weekends early on Fridays by taking people on ATVs onto the mountain-an obvious homage to his earlier motorcycle riding days.

2. Sonny. Sonny waits tables at Kimo's restaurant in Lahaina. By the way, Kimo's is part of the restaurant group (http://tsrestaurants.com/) that operates fine eateries such as Duke's, Leilani's and Hula Grill, among others. Sonny told me he and five other guys from West Covina left California shortly after their high school graduation for a surfing trip. They never returned. They all have lived on the island for over a decade; all are raising families there. Alternating his time between his family, surfing, and waiting tables, his only interruption is his mainland parents who squat for nine months out of every year at his abode.

3. Lance. Lance reminded me of Robert Kiyosaki. He's a true entrepreneur. Frustrated with the lack of quality "mixed plate" restaurants, he opened a local restaurant in Kahului. He readily admitted that he had no experience cooking or even running a restaurant. Nevertheless, he had plenty of experience eating--especially "mixed plate" also known as "lunch plate" meals, and knew what they should look and taste like. He reported (bragged?) that despite his age (nearing 50 years), he had never dated a woman older than 30. And even more remarkably claimed he hadn't planned it that way--it just somehow happened to him. Lance couldn't have been more generous--he comp'ed everything as well as regaled me with hilarious stories.

4. Joe. The dean of sports talk radio in Los Angeles, Joe McDonnell currently helms a nightly show on KLAC (570 am --the Lakers flagship). Recognizing him from his intermittent television appearances, I introduced myself. He couldn't have been more gracious. He introduced me to his wife, as they were celebrating their first wedding anniversary. He also invited me to call into his talk show and identify myself as the guy he met in Maui. I haven't yet taken him up on the offer to become a quasi-celebrity, but shortly after this meeting I did appear on television.

5. Television News Reporter. I capped off this adventure by appearing on television throughout the Hawaiian islands. Having booked my airfare on Aloha Airlines, I discovered in Maui that my return flight would not be happening, since the air carrier went out of business between the time of my arrival and scheduled departure from Hawaii. I was asked how I scored a free return flight on Hawaiian Airlines.

None of this could have been expected the moment I stepped onto Maui.

As Phil Keoghan says, no opportunity (was) wasted.
(See: http://lawreligionculturereview.blogspot.com/2008/02/adventure-review-travel-and-adventure.html)

Book Review: The End of Faith by Sam Harris.

2008-05-16T23:22:00.000-07:00

The key to understanding this book is found in the closing acknowledgements.

Author Sam Harris crucially admits: "I began writing this book on September 12, 2001." (p. 323.)

This short sentence lucidly reveals Harris' impetus. Accordingly, his attack on religion arises out out of his disdain for the beliefs (and practice) of those who attacked his country a day earlier. Yet he expands his focus to include just about all people of "faith" whether or not they hold the same views or have engaged (or threaten to engage) in similar conduct. "If religious war is ever to become unthinkable for us, in the way that slavery and cannibalism seem poised to, it will be a matter of our having dispensed with the dogma of faith." (p. 225.)

Harris inconsistently reserves from his indictment, however, some religious people: Jains (p. 148 ["A rise in Jainism would endanger no one."], Buddhists (pp. 216-17) and mystics (p. 221), and in so doing, undermines his sweeping conclusion that all "faith" or religion should be eradicated--i.e. his desired "end of faith." (p. 221 and book's title.)

Curiously, Harris largely deals with the "secondary effects" of religion or its perversions--the existence of which fail to undermine truth in its unadulterated state. The End of Faith discusses "faith," or more accurately, religion on the margins. Christopher Hitchens' g-d Is Not Great (2007) at least recognized the foundation of deistic belief--the origins of humanity--must be addressed. Hitchens aims his most blistering rhetoric at the "intelligent design" crowd (and oddly Mel Gibson). Otherwise, all rantings against religion will eventually encounter the proverbial elephant in the room. In other words, how did the elephant get there? If God created the elephant, then no amount of wishful thinking will justify living without a belief in the Creator. Instead, Harris seems content to relitigate the Inquisition (p. 79-88, 99, 106-07, 242-45, 258), as if that ancient perversion (or others) has any relevance to the question of whether Jesus rose from the dead or any of the other core tenants of orthodox Christianity.

Harris diverts even further from his thesis when he launches a lengthy tangent about whether torture or violence is justified (e.g., pp. 192-203). What this political or philosophical discussion has to do with disproving religion is anyone's guess.

Harris provides some useful insight for religious folk. His observation could just as easily be located in devotional literature: "Your beliefs define your vision of the world; they dictate your behavior; they determine your emotional responses to other human beings." (p. 12.) Harris however never grapples with the converse--what results from not believing in anything? I doubt such pathologies would support Harris' Godless or faith-free prescription.

The book illuminates the current debate about religion's role. Believers would do well to participate in the conversation and this book represents one of the key, recent voices in it.

What's the Deal?

2008-05-10T23:38:00.000-07:00

I recently handled a real estate case which I characterized as "an effort to turn an American dream into a living nightmare."

A young family wanted to buy a house in 1996. However, they were not able to qualify for the loan on their own. Their real estate agent told them that she had a "cousin" who would co-sign the loan for them to help them out, but that he wouldn't acquire any rights or interest in the house. He would receive a nominal fee for his services. And of course she would get her commission.

What the real estate agent didn't mention to them was that the third party was not her cousin; that this stranger would actually be placed on title as a co-owner of their family home; and that co-owners can force the sale of a property without the consent of the other owners.

After contributing nothing towards the down payment, any mortgage payments, property taxes, insurance or repairs for almost ten years, this third party filed a lawsuit to force the sale of the property and to seek his share as a one-third owner.

I took this gentleman's deposition last year. I asked him why he didn't make any payments on the property whatsoever over the past decade. He said “it wasn't part of the deal.” So I followed up with a seemingly innocuous, but potentially devastating, question: What was the deal? He said that my clients were to pay him $10,000 for his agreement to sign onto the loan many years ago. Asking him if and when he demanded payment, he said he had demanded payment in 1997, and that they failed to pay him. So, now he wanted to enforce his rights as a co-owner.

Not so fast. This claimant's deposition testimony undermined his own case. At best, his claim was for breach of an oral contract for $10,000, for which the statute of limitations had long since run. We got the interloper off the title and had the real estate agent and her broker pay for us to clean up the mess.

Book Review: The Last Lecture.

2008-05-05T06:11:00.000-07:00

Randy Pausch has much to live for.

He's a well-respected and loved computer science professor at Carnegie Mellon with three young children. He's considered a pioneering expert in virtual reality. In fact, he wrote a section on it in the World Book encyclopedia.

However, forty-something Randy Pausch learned he only had months to live.

During this closing window, Dr. Pausch decided to thrive. He delivered a "Last Lecture," at Carnegie Mellon, which has been immortalized on the internet:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5700431505846055184

He reprised it with a much shorter (and more subdued) version on Oprah Winfrey's show here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8577255250907450469

In addition, he wrote a book also entitled, The Last Lecture, with Jeffrey Zaslow. The book largely tracks the lecture, although Dr. Pausch provides insight into his process and priorities in doing the speech.

He reveals: "Under the ruse of giving an academic lecture, I was trying to put myself in a bottle that would one day wash up on the beach for my children."

During a recent interview, he painted a beautiful but haunting metaphor. He said that he knows his family is going to go over a cliff (when he dies), but that he has time to furiously make nets. This lecture and book were part of the nets he's constructing.

In the process, Dr. Pausch contributes mightily to all viewers and readers who have the benefit of experiencing his wise words. In his dying, he educates the living how to live and ultimately to die.

The book and lecture are generally framed around how he achieved his childhood dreams. But he admits enabling others' dreams is the most gratifying.

Dr. Pausch handles his impending death with remarkable grace. Moreover, through his life and The Last Lecture he leaves an encouraging legacy to all.

Movie Review: August Rush.

2008-04-26T23:57:00.000-07:00

Some movies are lyrical. Their dialogue approaches the poetic, so little else needs to be added for dramatic effect.

Some are musical; where words really get in the way. The soundtrack lifts the movie into another storytelling dimension and forms its core.

Although not a musical, August Rush fits into the later category. In fact, words are almost surplusage in this film. The film involves an improbable, if not fantastic, plot. Keri Russell plays a classical musician who was separated from her son at his birth. Jonathan Rhys Meyers plays a rock musician who was also separated from the same son; he also lost contact with Ms. Russell's character. A musical prodigy, the orphaned boy comes under the spell of a shady character played by Robin Williams, who exploits his gifts as a street performer.

Music provides the bridge for the family to reconcile. The final climatic scene, involving a classical concert, has to be experienced to be believed. Keep tissues handy. The music creates and envelops it. It's hard to imagine this scene would have even approach the same impact without sound.

I had little hopes for this movie when it started. In fact, it was chosen for me as the entertainment on a flight to Hawaii. Even the headphones were free.

The movie took some time to build to its crescendo, but having witnessed it in all its musical glory, I felt better for the experience.

Movie/DVD Review: Atonement.

2008-04-18T21:56:00.000-07:00

While some have compared Atonement to The English Patient in tone, tempo, temperament and time, I found director Joe Wright and writer Christopher Hampton's Atonement surprisingly underivative, despite their obvious parallels. It took the British romantic drama template and added fresh twists.

The unexpected, unconventional ending did not necessarily make it gratifying. Given the main character's search for atonement, however, this nonHollywood-type conclusion underscored even more poignantly humanity's oft hapless zeal for resolution or atonement.

Elegently written, acted and lensed, the film will never be confused with Norbit or its ilk.

Sword Play, Part II.

2008-04-16T18:33:00.000-07:00

Before long, I began to notice my neophyte opponent was replicating all of my actions in trial.

When I stood, he stood.

When I sat, he sat.

Testing the extent of the copying, I decided to begin my opening statement with an arcane and unduly formal introduction: "May it please the court."

Sure enough, he started his opening statement with precisely the same language.

I just hoped he would parrot my request that the judgment be entered in favor of my client.

Sword Play.

2008-04-11T06:18:00.000-07:00

At the outset of trial this week, opposing counsel said he had an annoucement.

He declared, "My law school professor said that I should tell the court that this is my first trial. So, please bear with me when I make mistakes. Please do not hold my client responsible for my errors; I take the blame for them."

The judge responded: "You are already falling on your sword?"

I couldn't imagine what his client thought.

Book Review: The Party of the First Part: The Curious World of Legalese (2007).

2008-04-05T00:15:00.000-07:00

The Party of the First Part: The Curious World of Legalese contains many topics in search of a unifying theme.

Author Adam Freedman trots out "legalese" as an organizing principle, but it doesn't really encompass what this book covers.

It's partly:

1. An etymology text--exploring the derivations of certain legal words;

2. A primer on basic legal concepts--a sort of how-to manual for laypeople;

3. A polemic for Freedman's political agenda;

4. A collection of hilarious lawsuit anecdotes;

5. A discussion of the plain language versus precision debate circulating in legal circles;

6. A forecast of the legal future;

7. A memorialization of Freedman's evidently putative (or frustrated) stand-up routine; and

8. A handbook for pellucid legal writing.

Positively, there is probably something for everyone here. Negatively, its lack of clear categorization bespeaks aimlessness.

Sometimes excerpts cross multiple categories. "Criminal codes suffer from an ancient prejudice: the idea that each individual law, with all its conditions and exceptions, must be packed into a single sentence. The logic behind this practice is that a sentence is a 'self-contained unit,' and therefore one cannot with any confidence modify one sentence with another sentence. As a matter of English composition, the notion expressed in the preceding sentence is absurd, as this sentence demonstrates." (pp. 116-17.) This quote could fairly exemplify categories 5, 7 and 8, and perhaps others.

Freedman continues his comic commentary: "One California penal statute consists of a single sentence of 150 words.... The whole problem with criminal law, one might say, is that the sentences are too long." (p. 117.) Cue rim-shot.

I credit Freedman for demystifying the bane of many bar examinees: "The Rule Against Perpetuities." "The Rule of Perpetuities arose to ensure that title to property will vest absolutely at some definite point, so that the heirs will be free to sell it. According to the Rule, you may not leave property in limbo for longer than the perpetuities period, an amount of time that is measured by the lifetime of a real person identified in your will (referred to as a life in being) plus twenty-one years." (p. 162; bolding in original.) Freedman does a nice job explaining this arcane doctrine over three-and-a-half pages. However, one wonders why.

In all, the book builds a strong case for plain legal writing. Along the way, Freedman's wit is displayed with equal vigor. Not a bad combination.

Preview of Coming Attractions.

2008-04-04T22:54:00.000-07:00

1. Book Review: God's Problem by Bart D. Ehrman;

2. Book Review: The Party of the First Part: The Curious World of Legalese by Adam Freedman;

3. Movie/DVD Review: Atonement;

4. Movie/DVD Review: August Rush;

5. Movie/DVD Review: The Great Debaters;

6. Adventure Review: Maui, 2008; and

7. Technology Review: Amazon Kindle and Nike+ipod.

Movie/DVD Review: Idiocracy.

2008-03-26T11:45:00.000-07:00

Marshall McLuhan famously observed, "The medium is the message."

For Idiocracy, however, the message is the movie. The message even eclipses the star-power of its lead, Luke Wilson. Director and screenwriter Mike Judge is the man behind this message, as he was the genius behind the hilarious and underrated probe of American cubicle culture, Office Space (not to be confused with tv's "The Office").

In short, Idiocracy projects what society would look like in 500 years when its devolves into rank unintelligence. According to Judge, characteristics of an idiot culture include:

1. Coarsening of entertainment (scatology is the order of the day);

2. Corporatization of society;

3. Consumerization of people;

4. Commercialization of the professions (especially medicine);

5. Fast-foodification of nutrition;

6. Simplification of language (monosyllabic grunts or profanity abound); and most interestingly,

7. Corruption of the legal system. Judge observes that the protagonist's attorney got his degree from a Costco, and when it came time to argue for his client, he actually argued against his own client. The judge's rulings seemed authoritative because the judge knew how to string together lofty sounding words, but actually taken together they made no sense.

While the execution leaves something to be desired and some excesses should have been excised, Idiocracy's powerful message is inescapable. Although it's set 500 years in the future, this movie does what the best futuristic films should do: cogently comment on the present.

Book Review: The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell.

2008-03-14T11:53:00.000-07:00

Incremental adjustments can yield cataclysmic changes.

That's the message of Malcolm Gladwell's The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference.

It's a hopeful message.

"Look at the world around you. It may seem like an immovable, implacable place. It is not. With the slightest push--in just the right place--it can be tipped." (p. 259.)

Determining how and where to make the "slightest push" is not self-evident, however.

Gladwell advances the polemic by exploring three components of tipping points, which he concludes are mostly driven by people, not ideas. "Ideas...spread just like viruses do." (p. 7.)

First, Gladwell therefore focuses on the viral transmitters. He categorizes them as: Salesmen, Connectors and Mavens. These are the few, key people who can unleash an epidemic. You obviously want to get these folks involved in making change.

Second, Gladwell explores what he calls, "The Stickiness Factor." This pertains to the message or idea itself. "We all want to believe that the key to making an impact on someone lies with the inherent quality of the ideas we present. But in none of the cases did anyone substantially alter the content of what they were saying. Instead, they tipped the message by tinkering, on the margin, with the presentation of their ideas..." (p. 131.) Gladwell continues: "There is a simple way to package information that, under the right circumstances, can make it irresistible. All you have to do is find it." (p. 132.)

Third, the author addresses "The Power of Context." This pertains to altering "specific and relatively small elements in the environment" to serve as tipping points. (p. 167.) In one intriguing example, Gladwell discusses how the New York City subway system's severe crime problem was tipped by an aggressive campaign to eradicate graffiti, an ostensibly minor manifestation. (pp. 142-43.)

The book provides some generic tools about how major change is implemented. However, it's up to the reader to apply them to a particular scenario. Since Gladwell essentially concedes (in fact, argues) the power of context, his general suggestions cannot be applied without a maven-like knowledge of the particular context(s) in which change is sought as well as connections to key individuals.

That's the domain of the most crucial change-agent, who curiously gets short-shrift in Gladwell's text: the leader.

Book Review: Save Me From Myself by Brian Welch.

2008-03-10T23:28:00.000-07:00

Brian Welch's Save Me From Myself is not a typical celebrity conversion story.

Unfortunately, many celebrity conversion tales seem like marketing gimmicks. They either seem designed to wring a few dollars out of a fading celebrity or to "go Christian" to enhance marketability without any downside.

By contrast, Welch lost everything to "get saved." And he gained everything. This raw, emotional book records this dual-directional transformation.

Lead guitarist for one of the world's biggest hard-rock bands, Korn, Welch converted to Christianity and quit the group in 2005--probably at the peak of its powers. He literally left millions of dollars on the table. He even told his lawyers to drop an "audit" into his partnership share. And he walked away. I can't identify a single modern person who rejected so much fame and fortune to follow Christ. If you can, please enlighten me in the comments.

What did Welch gain? As the title implies, everything--it saved his life. Welch could not pull himself out of the death spiral his life had become. Powerless on his own to stop the drug addiction, depression, avarice and anger wrecking his life, he turned (back) to God. An emotional man, Welch said he felt God's "liquid love" enveloping him and overpowering his life's pathologies.

Second, as a single dad, it restored his relationship with his young daughter, who was five at the time. Welch stopped the touring and actively engaged in her life.

Mercifully eschewing triumphalism, Welch also records the struggles of his nascent faith. He doesn't gloss over his troubles and even describes some doctrinal confusion, such as how to deal with speaking in tongues. In that regard, Welch seems to embrace a "signs and wonders" brand of Christianity, where he records what God has literally spoken to him, spiritual dreams and their interpretations, demonic conflicts and prophetic words.

Nevertheless, Welch's earnestness comes off the pages. Welch yearns for an authentic, active faith, and he has seemingly dedicated himself to its practice. Shortly after his conversion, he went to Israel and was baptized in the Jordan River. He has studied the Bible voraciously even though he admits he couldn't understand much of it--at least at first. He was mentored by pastors and other mature believers. He made amends to those he wronged and those who wronged him. He went to India and established an orphanage. He has donated sizable amounts to churches and charities. In so doing, he said he freed himself from dependence on money and established dependence on God.

Interestingly, a secular publisher published this conversion book. Its intended audience accordingly is probably not Christians. There are contextual uses of profanity that might surprise. Some of the touring stories, while not sensationalized, might offend some. If anything, these anecdotes deglamorized the rocker lifestyle, and he didn't dwell on them. I suspect he judiciously edited many out.

Admittedly not a writer, Welch concedes his only prior experience with writing was school papers to get his teachers and parents off his case. (Yes, Welch hailed from an intact family.) Nevertheless, the text's basic style lends to its credibility, authenticity and readability.

Welch has penned a remarkably intriguing book. Save Me From Myself's lack of convention and contrivance makes it a potent combination for believers and unbelievers alike.

Book Review: I Am America (And So Can You!).

2008-03-05T23:25:00.000-08:00

There's a reason The Colbert Report is a half-hour.

More than 30 minutes induces fatigue.

Reading Stephen Colbert's I Am America (And So Can You!) takes a page from the television show's satirical set-up and plays its single note over many chapters.

After a chapter or two, I was wishing for the end-credits. For those not familar with the television show, Colbert assumes the posture of a smug conservative blowhard for the purpose of lampooning him. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to deduce Colbert's character is based (almost entirely) on Bill O'Reilly. The purported autobiographical references sprinkled in I Am America essentially point in a singular direction: Irish-Catholic, Ivy-League-educated political pontificator on cable television. Wonder who that is.

There are some kernels of comedy to digest. Example: "Now, you might ask yourself, if by yourself you mean me, 'Stephen, if you don't like books, why did you write one?' You just asked yourself a trick question. I didn't write it. I dictated it. I shouted it into a tape recorder over the Columbus Day weekend, then handed it to my agent and said, 'Sell this.' He's the one who turned it into a book. It's his funeral."

Another: "And talk about hypocrisy! In 1952, the Supreme Court made another 'ruling.' This time, it was that movies were protected by the First Amendment! That's right, just four years after they criminalized Hollywood's free market, they upheld Hollywood's free speech! Which is it, Supreme Court? Are 'free things' good or bad? I thought rulings were for kings!" (Emphasis in original.)

Another: "There are some who claim that DNA is an instruction manual for all living cells. But if IKEA has taught me anything, it's that I don't need instructions. My coffee table works just fine, provided I remember to attach the counterweights."

Finally, and perhaps my favorite because it perfectly encapsulates Colbert's character's smugness and also his affected approach to revealed truth: "You're lucky to have this book as your one and only scripture. Every word of it is the revealed Truth, so interpret it literally. Including the typos. I put those in here for a reason--a mysterious reason that I know, but you don't. It should give you great comfort that I will tell you the reason after you die. I promise." (Emphasis in original.)

Colbert's book covers myriad subjects, including religion, sports, education, movies, media, race, class, science, and immigration. Despite the variety, the monotonous tone overpowers the topics and leaves a singular impression. We get it; you're making fun of the bloviator by bloviating.

One can only tolerate so much. The small, digestible bites of The Colbert Report go a long way.