Relaunching Soon

Stay tuned.

Quick Note about "Classic" This Lamp Status

When I moved This Lamp from RapidWeaver to WordPress, I originally intended to leave most of the posts I wrote from 2003 to 2009 as they were. I've now changed my mind about that and will gradually move them to the current WordPress Squarespace site.

I will do my best to move not only the posts, but even the comments (via copy and paste) so that the original discussions will remain in place. Although I will use the original dates of the posts, they will be displayed as new posts in the RSS feed. Due to this, I will be very explicit in stating that the post has been moved from its original position.

A few of the posts that are now irrelevant will be removed entirely. When all posts have been transferred, the "Classic" This Lamp site will be shut down. This will not be a quick transition, but I hope to complete it within two or three years.

Comments Are Now Working

For some reason, my comments are off. I'm trying to figure out what's going on. If you have submitted a comment in the last two or three days, it's probably lost.

If you have any ideas on what possibly might be wrong, please email me at RMansfield@mac.com.

Special thanks to Joel Watts for his help in getting my comments working again.

If you've tried to post anything in the last few days and it didn't appear, please repost.

The New Rules of Flying

I still remember my first airplane flight. I was about ten years old. It was with Delta. A window seat. A 737, I think. The pilot gave me a pin in the shape of golden wings.

As I grew older and realized I was never going to get a Jetsons-esque flying car of my own, no matter how far I traveled in the future by growing older, I understood that our flying cars were instead more like flying buses. I might not get my own flying car, but the flying bus was still a convenient and quick means of getting wherever I need to go in a very expedient manner. And because I don't travel for a living, until recently, flying was still an enjoyable experience.

But those days are now gone. Not only will I never get my flying car, now I don't even want to ride the flying bus anymore.

Those of you who've been reading this blog since 2003 know that I'm neither an alarmist nor an extremist. I play it pretty middle of the road. I've never called for a boycott of anything, and my convictions about extremely divisive issues I've mostly kept to myself. But in light of recent events, I feel compelled to agree with a growing national sentiment that the Transportation Security Administration of the US Department of Homeland Security is out of control.

By now the following is old news:

• The TSA has installed over 380 full body imaging scanners in over 68 airports in the United States. Many more are to come. There are two problems with this. The majority of these scanners use an x-ray technology known as "backscatter." Some studies show that backscatter scanning is safe. Other studies indicate very different results. Look, there's a reason why the dentist gives you a lead shield to cover yourself before getting your teeth x-rayed: overexposure to x-rays can lead to cancer, including a higher risk of leukemia in unborn children. The second issue, fortunately, is not a risk to one's health, but it is a risk to one's privacy. These full body imaging scanners virtually unclothe the individual going through the machine. We are told that the person viewing the passenger is in another room and does not actually see the person. But obviously, the images are associated with your ID, and there's no set indication as to how long these images are being kept, where they're being kept, and who has access to them.


• Last week, airline pilot unions began recommending that pilots "politely decline" the use of full body scanners. Of course this begs the question—if the pilots are advised not to subject themselves to what could be dangerous radiation, why should the rest of us?


• If one "politely declines" the full body scanner, the individual is forced to undergo a full "enhanced" pat-down by a TSA representative. This involves a total stranger touching you with the front of his or her hands in places that previously should be known only to a physician or a spouse. The TSA representative will likely place his or her hands inside your clothing and no part of your person is off limits.

If you've been living in a cave and are unaware of all this, there are thousands of recent articles and reports of this on the internet. Here is one from a reputable source: "Screening Protests Grow As Holiday Crunch Looms." The entire article is worthy of your time, but pay special attention to these parts before you fly during the holidays:

On Nov. 1, screeners began using a far more invasive form of procedure for all pat-downs — in which women’s breasts and all passengers’ genital areas are patted firmly. Since that change happened to coincide with the accelerated introduction of the body scanning machines, many fliers began expressing their dismay on blogs, fanning anti-T.S.A. reactions.

A traveler named John Tyner, for example, posted a detailed account of being detained at the San Diego airport when he tried to leave after declining a body scan. Mr. Tyner recorded the encounter, in which person who appeared to be a T.S.A. screener insisted that he undergo a “groin check.” That account, and that indelicate term, quickly went viral.

I’m getting a lot of questions about the new security regime, including some pointed ones from women. Do the imagers, for example, detect sanitary napkins? Yes. Does that then necessitate a pat-down? The T.S.A. couldn’t say. Screeners, the T.S.A. has said, are expected to exercise some discretion.

This issue became personal for us on November 6, when I saw Kathy off to the airport for a conference she was attending. I had already expressed my concerns to her in regard to the scanners, so she opted for the "enhanced" pat-down, not realizing how invasive it would actually be. There was no curtained room, but in the middle of the security area at the Louisville airport, the TSA employee touched her in ways that in any other context would be considered wholly inappropriate, tantamount to sexual harassment. The TSA employee ran her hand inside my wife's sweatshirt and repeatedly in the cleavage of her breasts. Yes, the employee conducting the pat down was female, but does that actually matter anymore? [Note: I've offered a correction and clarification of this incident below in the comments. Please read that, too, for the full story of what took place.]

This is an extreme and outrageous invasion of privacy. If you travel by air, you have the choice of subjecting yourself to potentially dangerous radiation or the humiliation of being searched in ways that have previously been reserved for criminals and victims of inappropriate sexual contact. There's no "good" choice here.

Many will argue that such extreme measures will save lives. Terrorism will be prevented. Really? No one seems to be certain that any of these stricter measures would have prevented Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the now-infamous "underwear bomber" from boarding an airplane. These measures certainly wouldn't have prevented the bombs hidden in toner cartridges a few weeks ago.

Where do we draw the line? In an essay written in the spirit of Jonathan Swift last week, one of my students suggested that the only logical next step for the TSA to take is to simply require all airline passengers to fly completely in the nude. I guess that would work, right? It would certainly save lives.

Look, barriers in the middle of interstates are designed to prevent vehicles from crossing into opposing traffic. Yet, accidents of this kind still happen. So why not construct twenty-foot walls in the median? That would certainly save lives, and perhaps no one would ever cross the median again! Studies have proven that a speed limit of 55 mph saves fuel and reduces fatalities, so why do we insist on having limits at greater speeds? We do this because there's an invisible line of risk that we're willing to cross for the sake of convenience. But we know when to stop. We don't build 20 foot high safety partitions on the highway. We don't allow cars to drive at 120 mph. We understand that's crossing too far over the line.

And that's exactly what the TSA has done. They've crossed the line in potentially dangerous and decidedly invasive ways.

There's already a call for November 24, 2010, to be "National Opt-Out Day" [warning: graphic "backscatter" images can be seen at linked website] in which travelers on the busiest travel day of the year respectfully decline the invasive procedures being called for by the TSA since November 1. The organizer has stated the reasons for this protest on his website (emphasis added):

It's the day ordinary citizens stand up for their rights, stand up for liberty, and protest the federal government's desire to virtually strip us naked or submit to an "enhanced pat down" that touches people's breasts and genitals in an aggressive manner.  You should never have to explain to your children, "Remember that no stranger can touch or see your private area, unless it's a government employee, then it's OK."

The goal of National Opt Out Day is to send a message to our lawmakers that we demand change.  We have a right to privacy and buying a plane ticket should not mean that we're guilty until proven innocent.  This day is needed because many people do not understand what they consent to when choosing to fly.

Honestly, I don't know if any of this is going to help. These body imaging scanners have been paid for and there are another 700 or so on order. This is a juggernaut that will be very difficult to slow down, let alone stop. But that doesn't mean we have to sit still for it. Therefore, I'd like to propose...

THE NEW RULES OF FLYING

1. If possible, opt out completely. That is, don't fly if you don't have to. Air travel has been a wonderful convenience, but it's no longer worth the effort, the risk, or invasion of privacy. Trains, cars, and busses—there are other alternatives. Plus, alternatives will hit the airline industry—which has stayed pretty mum on the new security rules so far—right where it hurts.


2. Arrive at the airport even earlier. Before 9/11, we were told to arrive at the airport an hour before our flights. After 9/11, we were told to arrive two hours before our flights. Now, thanks to "enhanced" pat-downs (regardless of whether you opt out or not), it's going to take even longer to get through security.


3. Always opt out of the body scanners. Do it especially on November 24, but really you should opt out every time you fly. Opt out for safety reasons. Opt out on principle.


4. Understand that opting out of body imaging requires you to undergo the humiliation of "enhanced" pat-downs. According to the TSA, especially in light of the recent incident with John Tyner, once you begin the screening process, you must complete it or potentially face legal consequences.


5. Be polite, but don't stand for inappropriate contact. You're not a criminal for wanting to fly, and you shouldn't be treated like one. If you are touched in any manner that is inappropriate, be certain to write down the TSA employee's name and file the appropriate harassment report. Of course, because the TSA holds ultimate power over you while you are in security, you might find it more opportune to file any harassment report after you've arrived at your destination.

I realize that terrorism is a very real problem in the world. But in response, do we risk our health? Do we risk our privacy? Do we risk civility? When and where do we draw the line, and say, "Enough is enough"?

Comments are now working again. If you tried to post a comment in the last 24 hours, please repost.

Amazon Offers FREE Prime Accounts to Students

Yes, I occasionally put Amazon ads in some of my posts, but this isn't one of them. This is just my way of passing on a good deal.

Amazon is offering free Prime memberships to any student with a .EDU email address. That means FREE TWO-DAY SHIPPING on any order.

Go here to sign up: http://www.amazon.com/gp/student/signup/info

Comments NOW Working

If you've submitted a comment here since July 5, no, I'm not censoring you—unless you're a spammer.

I've discovered that there's a problem with my comments here on This Lamp. I kept receiving notices of new comments that were blank. At first, I thought these might actually be some kind of spam comments, but I kept getting them. And I noticed I wasn't getting any new comments.

I'm trying to get to the bottom of the problem. If you know what might be causing it, please email me directly at RMansfield@mac.com.

---

Okay, I believe comments are now working. If you don't mind, throw out a comment or two on this post to test it out. We don't need many--maybe just four or five.

Ceasefire

I've been blogging since 2003, and in that time, I've only completely deleted one post before today.

And yet, I believe that what started out as some friendly competition was getting out of hand on multiple levels, including the level on which I was participating.

While I believe some (but not necessarily all) reaction to my words was due to miscommunication, I must nevertheless take ownership and responsibility for what I write and say.

More seriously, arguing over Bible software seems in the end to be something that brings no glory to God, the one who has given this revelation to us to begin with. Add to that the fact that this discussion is public and a horrible witness to the culture outside of the body of Christ.

So, I have deleted the post, including the comments, and I want to offer a sincere apology to any who were offended.

I am hopeful that we can build better bridges to the future and find opportunities to be as one instead of divided.

Regarding the New FTC Guides Governing Endorsements, Testimonials

New regulations go into affect on December 1, 2009, that affect all advertisers as well as any blogger, such as myself, who has ever accepted a product for review.

From the statement released by the FTC on October 8, 2009:

bloggers who make an endorsement must disclose the material connections they share with the seller of the product or service.

Failure to do so may result in a fine of $11,000. See also the following documents:

• Text of the Federal Register Notice


• Text of the Revised Endorsement and Testimonial Guides

For what it's worth, I believe these guidelines are a good idea. Further, I want my readers to know up front that I have always given notice when I have reviewed a book sent to me by a publisher. In my mind, this is the right and ethical thing to do. I've always tried to be as explicit as possible about this.

In fact, in my recent review of the NET Bible, although I had personally bought the 2nd Beta edition, the First Edition, the Greek-English Diglot, and at least three electronic editions, I still wanted to point out that an employee of Bible.org (but not Bible.org itself) had personally sent me a copy of the NET Reader's Edition.

I'm probably not even the best reviewer for publishers because as I mentioned a couple of weeks ago, I've got a number of items I've been very slow to get around to actually reviewing. In fact, I have so much stacked up I feel a bit guilty about it, but I'm determined to fulfill my end of the deal. These items will start to appear here soon.

I don't need guidelines from the FTC to keep me honest, but I think I'll even go a step further. From now on, I'll also make a statement about books, Bibles, software or any other products reviewed here, when I've purchased them with my own funds, just so there's no question as to whether or not I've been totally forthcoming.

I was trying to figure out the best way to do this or find the right wording, when I discovered a website for this purpose, http://cmp.ly/. This site offers six different statements that can be added to blog posts, and from what I can tell, this will suit my purposes just fine.

In there interest of full disclosure, here are a few other things you ought to know:

• While I admit getting free stuff is nice, I've usually been pretty honest about the things I didn't care for. Receiving a free item for review hasn't stopped me from being pretty hard on some publishers in the past. Regular readers here will know that. I'm also under the impression from publishers that they want me to be honest and will accept any disapproval, disagreement, or constructive criticism.


• If you see a link to a product on Amazon.com, you can assume that I've used an Amazon Associate link. But I'm not getting rich on this. Last month's cut of purchases made from my Amazon links was a whopping $13. That's a bit below average, but even that is not going to equal the cost of running two websites. And you won't ever see me placing a Paypal donation button on my site (but that's not a jab at those who do). But if I can get a little bit of love through Amazon now and then, that's enough for me.


• You see those banners to the right for Café Press, Biblical Illustrator and Accordance? Well, the Café Press link takes you to my creations on that site, but even having sold a few items, I've yet to make a dime because their monthly rates are so high. And no one is paying me to put the Biblical Illustrator or Accordance links there either. Biblical Illustrator has never paid me anything; I just like their publication. And although I have done some contract work for Oak Tree Software in the past (leading training seminars and helping out at the ETS/SBL booths), I got paid for that work only. They don't pay me to put their banner ad up and I don't make a commission if you buy from them—even if you purchase after clicking the banner. And the only reason I've ever done contract work for them is because I personally use their software and without reservation endorse their products. If I didn't, you wouldn't see the banner there. I have other Bible software on my Mac, but you don't see banners for it, do you?

So, again, I think the guidelines are a great idea, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to essentially change anything I've not already been doing all along. What about you? Are you a blogger, and if so how do you plan on implementing the new regulations on your site?

Procrastination

HT: Richard Skaggs

Comments Policy

(same as before)

I think it may be helpful to suggest a few simple policies for posting comments.

1. BE COURTEOUS.
If everyone will follow this simple rule, the other two will take care of themselves. You don't have to share my point of view. Debate can be fun. But politeness is a characteristic of civilized behavior. TRUE tolerance is the ability to disagree without going to war, but we should be polite and respectable of one another at all times.

2. DON'T MAKE IT PERSONAL.
Name-calling and impolite labeling are unnecessary. Further, besides being discourteous, name-calling displays one's inability to adequately articulate a point of view.

3. KEEP IT CLEAN.
A wide variety of people read this blog--people of all ages. My MOM reads this blog! Please keep your comments rated G to PG.

4. DON'T BE A TROLL.
Disagreement is both tolerated and welcomed. But don't come here JUST to disagree with everything said. That becomes not only annoying, but boring. A troll is defined on the Wikipedia as "a person who enters an established community such as an online discussion forum and intentionally tries to cause disruption, often in the form of posting messages that are inflammatory, insulting, incorrect, inaccurate, absurd, or off-topic, with the intent of provoking a reaction from others."

WordPress is set to alert me to any new comments, so I read them all. I value your opinions. Please respect these guidelines. Violators will be tolerated up to a time (with the exception of #3), but then will be banned without warning if unacceptable behavior persists.

Thanks!