Wow! No mincing of words there. Such a contrast to today's politically correct and ultra-sensitive approach to the subject. Sure, advocacy of breastfeeding is finally making a comeback, but still, you would never hear anyone say, "Mother's milk is the only safe food...". Today, it's always, "mother's milk is the best..." Hmmm...
(HT: TulipGirl)
Following Jon's lead, here's a map of the western part of downtown FW from 1876. 1010 Broad is across Broadway from block 32.
Birth Matters link
Plugging for my sister-in-law. With C-section rates skyrocketing, VBACs at local hospitals under assault, and homebirth midwives in Indiana being prosecuted, this work is more important than ever.
Wish we could be there, Tia!
That's Leo Morris of anti-designation fame. Nevertheless, tonight the Fort Wayne Historic Preservation Commission voted to designate the 1000 block of Broadway. (article) I couldn't attend the meeting, but I did send in a letter of support. Maybe I'll be able to get audio to post.
Anyway, I don't think it's quite over yet, as the City Council has the final vote. And even though I understand they typically always follow the HPC vote, this one is a little trickier because the owner of four of the six properties on the block - St. John's ELC - opposes designation. Should be interesting...
link
Been uploading a lot of video clips lately, but I thought this one deserved special attention. It's almost eight minutes long, but well worth it if you have the time.
I have a few friends and colleagues who are pretty hardcore New Atheists. Conversations are often spirited, if not persuasive. Not sure this post by Douglas Wilson will work, either, but it seemed pretty straightforward to me.
(HT: Justin)
What to Say About Virginia Tech
Difficult yet comforting words for a difficult time in need of comforting.
Just got taken to task over here for supporting this. I had a feeling this would happen. Anyway, here my comment from over there:
Funny, when Ryan Lengerich interviewed me for his story, I actually paused before going on record and thought to myself, "I need to be careful what I say, because it'll probably end up on Leo's blog." Hmmm...
Leo, you raise some interesting points, and the property rights discussion is a good one to have (even though FW tends to have it until she's blue in the face!). But I do think you painted it black and white, when it really needs to be gray. Barry did a great job illustrating this, but I'd like to add a little, too.
In any non-libertarian anarchist society (arguably, all that have ever existed), regulations on property rights always exist to some degree and should really be viewed not as always bad or always good, but rather as sometimes appropriate and sometimes not. And as Barry suggested, some properties should without question have more regulations placed on them than should others. Most people would see that as very reasonable.
FW has agreed that she doesn't want to be a city where abandoned cars can sit in residential yards (enter private property regulations). Historic designation is the same thing: FW agreeing that she doesn't want to be a city without any historically significant buildings (enter private property regulations). Conceptually, they're the same thing. The degree of effort necessary to comply may differ, but the concept is the same. So unless FW wants to throw out all codes, zoning regulations, etc. she needs to see this issue through gray-colored glasses.
Re: your specific comments:
"'Historic preservation' lets you keep it -- you just can't do anything with it." - Not true. You can do many things with it, just not anything you want. Again, only different than any other property by degree, not principle.
"nobody, after all, is really 'losing' anything" - You're right on this one. The property owner is losing something (not truly libertarian), but not everything.(not truly socialist, either).
"It's nice that he has some sympathy for the church. Is he willing to help the church find the chance to grow and prosper some other way since he is taking from it the most obvious way? Preserving historic structures is important, but how do you weigh that value against a planned productive use for that space? ...And somebody owns the buildings and has plans for them." - I do love urban churches! I hope to join one myself when we return. But I guarantee my purchasing of 1010 is not taking away St. John's ability to grow and prosper. They knew this property was on the market, and if they were already bursting at the seams and financially capable, they would have bought it themselves (surprisingly, neither the Realtor nor the previous owner even received a phone call from them!), just like they bought the one to the north in 2003. (And you should know, 1010 was significantly less than that one.) But if they couldn't afford this property now, how on earth could they be contemplating, let alone afford, a multi-million dollar building expansion? No, from my conversations with church reps, which, by the way, have been remarkably pleasant and civil, the only thing they are currently interested in and able to afford is razing the old buildings. That's it! They told me directly that they have no current need, plans, or financial ability to build now or in the near future. Rather, they're main desire is to "have better control over their destiny". But tell me, Leo, do you have some other knowledge of their "planned productive use for that space"?
"The history we are making -- expansion of an urban church -- I submit is just as important as the history we would remember." - Again, I know of no plans for expansion of St. John's. But even if there were, I might still disagree with your comparative analysis, as would many others in the community and FW.
"care better be taken not to give ordinary people the idea that they have lost control of their city..." - I don't even know how to address this type of exaggeration. But as a question, do you think historic landmarking in general accomplishes this belief, or just this particular designation that would do so?
"...people who think they know best and just aren't going to listen." - Without addressing your overwhelming cynicism, I will tell you that though I and many others do think it better to preserve these building than raze them, we certainly wouldn't stand in the way if the City (citizens and elected officials) decided otherwise. If the church prevails in thwarting designation, so be it.
As I said in the article, I've seen landmarking both help and hurt communities. As such, sometimes I favor it, sometimes I don't. And I believe I can do both from a principled position. Why I have agreed to favor it in this case (remember, I didn't initiate it, the HPC called me out of the blue!) is because when it comes to losing historic structures, FW has seen enough. I don't know anybody who's happy with what's been lost. On the contrary, most grieve it. So let's just have the discussion, at least. Let's present the arguments. And which ever side prevails, I sincerely hope the other doesn't feel it's lost control of its city.
Ryan asked me, when he called researching the story, whether I knew buying 1010 would have such political implications. Answer: not quite!
Anyway, the News-Sentinel didn't upload the story, so I've only read the front page (shown here). But a family member called to say the article goes on to state we live in a 7,000 sf Manhattan apartment. Close, just take away one zero. It should read "700 sf apartment". That's one of the main reasons for leaving NYC: our family of six needs more space, and obviously that's extremely hard to come by for a middle class family. If we had a 7,000 loft, I promise you, we wouldn't be leaving!
Another minor correction: Hallie graduated from Concordia, not Elmhurst.
But basically my point was that Fort Wayne's stock of historic buildings has been decimated! I mean shockingly so. (examples Keenan Hotel now part of GWC, Anthony Hotel now a parking lot, Barr Street Market now a parking lot, Berry Street, now a parking lot, etc.) Any reasonable effort to save the remaining stock and increase public awareness of the need to protect the Fort Wayne's architectural, historical, and cultural heritage should be seriously considered.
**UPDATE**
article link
DFWB link
St. John's ELC
video link
Once again, the action follows the Greiders. Not even a month after we closed on our new building at 1010 Broadway, St. Joseph's Hospital announced plans to build a new $7M, 29,000 square foot medical center just two blocks up from us at 800 Broadway.
Way to go St. Joe! Your commitment to downtown is commendable, especially in light of other local (and national) hospitals fleeing the center city.
For the last six or so years, any photo of either Hallie or myself - or both of us - has typically included at least one kid. Which is great, of course; we love our kids and photos of us with them. But all the same, when a friend emailed me this photo he'd taken at church on Sunday, I did a double take. You see, often when we look at each other these days, we see the same thing our children see: a mother and a father. Even when the kids go to bed, it's not exactly easy to make the mental shift, especially when "calendaring" consists mainly of family scheduling.
So when I saw this photo, I noticed not primarily a mother (though she was wearing a sling, God love her, and was keeping a motherly eye on all four of the rugrats!) and a father, but a husband and a wife. And a beautiful wife to boot! Married almost 15 years, and Hallie doesn't look a day older than on her wedding day. Yes, it reminds me that we were just the two of us for eight years before kids, and, Lord willing, we'll someday be just the two of us again when all the brood is grown and on their own.
So good being the husband of so lovely a wife.
Love you sweetie!
Hope you all had a wonderful Easter Sunday. We were very blessed to be able to celebrate at TVC. And though we don't have a powerful organ, or huge thundering choir, we do have a pretty good Kapellmeister in Sarah Lentz-Dickinson. This morning she arranged a wonderful diverse set of resurrection-themed hymns and spiritual songs.
The Easter Song (Keith Green, 1977)
Christ the Lord is Risen Today (Charles Wesley, 1739)
Low in the Grave He Lay (Robert Lowry, 1874)
Rock of Ages (Augustus Toplady, 1776)
Amazing Grace (Instrumental) (John Newton, 1779)
Were You There? (African-American spiritual, date unknown)
In Christ Alone (Keith Getty & Stuart Townend, 2001)
As Emmett's first communion approaches, we've been thinking and talking and reading a lot about what it represents. Tonight, after flipping back and forth through all the Gospels trying to give the kids a complete picture of what occurred that Thursday evening, we turned to a chapter in a new book we received from a friend (thanks, Anna and family, so much!) entitled The Jesus Storybook Bible, by Sally Lloyd-Jones. The book is in narrative form and really keeps the kids riveted.
Anyway, tonight we read the chapter "The Servant King" about The Last Supper. I hadn't read this chapter before and was completely blown away at how simply and clearly and correctly! the author conveys the rather heavy Christian doctrines of propitiation and substitutionary atonement. I thought to myself, "Yes! That's a perfect way to describe it to children. Yes! That's what I've been fumbling around to say for years!" So how'd she say it?
So Jesus picked up some bread and broke it. He gave it to his friends. He picked up a cup of wine and thanked God for it. He poured it out and shared it.
"My body is like this bread. It will break," Jesus told them. "This cup of wine is like my blood. It will pour out."
"But this is how God will rescue the whole world. My life will break and God's broken world will mend. My heart will tear apart, and your hearts will heal. Just as the passover lamb died, so now I will die instead of you. My blood will wash away all your sins. And you'll be clean on the inside - in your hearts."
"So whenever you eat or drink, remember," Jesus said, "I've rescued you!"
