Family Time

We arrived in Modesto Sunday morning and enjoyed exploring the backyard, relaxing, and eating lots of good food while visiting with family and friends.

Dave grilled entire dinners on the barbecue almost every night; that's what I call summer living!

Solace showed me how she is learning to be a ballerina before her dance class. It was fun to see how much she has grown, but she's still her friendly and energetic self. 

Fireworks

Friday night we went to the Rawhide game because they have a fireworks show after the game on July 3.

A sisters picture from Michelle's Instagram.

Snow cones are part of the tradition. This year it wasn't as hot as usual, which was appreciated.

Evan brought Pokeman cards to play with Uncle Joshua.

The fireworks were good as always. I love big fireworks. 

On the fourth, we had a swimming and dinner party at Dad and Mom's house. 

Then we all headed to Jonah and Michelle's house for snacks, dessert, and fireworks.

 More great fireworks.

Mom was hanging out inside with Ezra and Emery who weren't quite sure about all the noise and lights outside, so Heather and I went to visit with them.

 After all the excitement of the day and being up late, it was hard to say goodbye to everyone. The next morning, Mom and I went on a walk and we had breakfast with her and Dad before hitting the road to head north. Of course, it would have been nice to have a longer visit, but it was great to spend so much time with everyone for a few days.

California Lovin'

We headed down to California to visit our families for a few days. It was so nice to see everyone.

Joshua finally got to meet baby Ezra.

We enjoyed lots of time in the pool. 

 We enjoyed delicious tacos from Mi Casita.

Evan and I had fun playing cat's cradle and jacob's ladder. I was impressed by how quickly he learned how to do it. 

No one can get enough of sweet baby Ezra.

I miss the beautiful browns of California; Friday I enjoyed some time in the early morning sun.

 Joshua and the boys each won a game of Monopoly.

Heather and I made apricot jam with the end of the apricots from her tree. I had forgotten how nice it is to make jam with someone, and how much more quickly it goes.

Reactions to the Supreme Court Decision

In a moment of insight in 1868, the people of this country enshrined into the Constitution a principle: all persons ought to have equal protection under the law. We should stress that it is a principle, like most important laws. Those who ratified the 14th Amendment did not take upon themselves the burden of imagining and enumerating every possible way some future society might conceive of denying a group of people equal protection under the law; instead, they said that doing so will not be permitted under the Constitution.

In 1880, someone said, "wait a minute, aren't the laws some states have prohibiting black men from serving on juries a violation of the equal protection idea?" It is the Supreme Court that is tasked with ultimately interpreting these matters, and, after hearing arguments, it said, "although we didn't realize it in 1868, it is clear that keeping black men off of juries is a violation of equal protection." Those laws fell. We didn't wait for each state to decide that it would be so. In fact, majorities in some states would have continued treating black men unjustly in this regard. Fortunately, we have a Constitution that protected them.

In 1927, someone said, "wait a minute, aren't the laws permitting only white people to vote violations of the 14th Amendment?" They were, of course, and they were struck down by the Supreme Court, even though it was democratic majorities in certain jurisdictions who were wieldly the law unjustly.

In 1938, someone said, "wait a minute, aren't states that deny black people admission to law schools violating the equal protection idea?" While those who ratified the 14th Amendment were not thinking about law schools, the Supreme Court said rightly that it was. Thus, the states were not allowed to decide for themselves if they would restrict legal education to whites; fortunately, the people of this country had constitutional protections on this matter.

In 1942, someone said, "wait a minute, isn't the forced sterilization of certain criminals a violation of the equal protection clause?" The Supreme Court said yes, and we didn't have to hope that the states that were abusing people in this way would stop on their own, because we have a Constitution to protect people from these kinds of abuses.

In 1953, someone said, "aren't segregated schools a violation of the equal protection clause?" It turns out they were, and they were eliminated, despite the majorities who enacted and maintained them.

In 2003, someone said, "aren't laws specifically criminalizing the sexual activities of homosexuals violations of the equal protection clause?" They were, the Supreme Court decided, and they were struck down. Homosexuals in Texas did not have to wait for the majority of Texans to stop using the law against them, because they were protected by a Constitution.

In 2015, someone said, "aren't the laws denying marriage rights to homosexual couples violations of the equal protection clause?" The Supreme Court heard arguments and determined that they were. And homosexual couples who were living under unjust laws did not have to wait around hoping that their oppressors would have a change of heart, because they have a Constitution that protects them.

Perhaps at some future point we will discover an alien race of peoples. Those who ratified the 14th Amendment certainly didn't expect that. And I am sure there will be jurisdictions on earth where the impulse is to make them second-class citizens, and to wield the law as an instrument of injustice against them. If the United States happens to still be around, though, we will be able to say, "wait a minute -- doesn't the 14th Amendment require that all persons receive the equal protection under the law?" And we will be right.

I have heard a number of people object to Obergefell v. Hodges (the decision that came out last Friday) on the grounds that the authors of the 14th amendment never intended it to apply to non-heterosexuals. While accurate, this is no objection: our forebears need not be omniscient to enact a worthwhile principle which can then be worked out as we come to better understand injustices.

Likewise, I have heard a number of people object that Obergefell v. Hodges circumvents the "will of the people" and the democratic process. This objection misses the point entirely: the purpose of Constitutional protections is to apply in precisely those cases where the "will of the people" in some jurisdiction becomes -- as it often does -- unjust. Democratic processes are not immune from the threat of tyranny, and majorities can abuse their power just as much as dictators. This is why the 14th amendent exists. If Obergefell v. Hodges is objectionable because it asserts constitutional protections for those who are victims of unjust majorities, then it is not so much nine judges in 2015 that are the problem, but the Constitition itself.

Obergefell v. Hodges is a cause for celebration, not just because the outcome is a victory for justice, but because the process is an example of the United States legal system operating at its best.

Porter Production

 Joshua and I have been talking about making beer together for awhile and now that school is out we finally had a chance to get started. Eugene has a number of home brewing stores and it was fun to go look around before purchasing what we need. We got a kit with all the ingredients to make porter.

 First, we steeped the grains.

One of the important things to remember is that you should always drink something home fermented when you are making home brew.

After the grains steeped, we discarded them and put the wort in our biggest pot with more water and the malt extract. Then we boiled it for an hour, adding hops and Irish moss at the times specified in the recipe.

After the boil was complete, we removed the hops (which were in cheesecloth bundles) and poured the liquid into our five gallon bucket. We added cold water to make five gallons and put the bucket in an ice bath to cool it down as quickly as possible. Once it cooled to about 80 degrees, we stirred in the yeast and put it in a cool dark place to ferment for two weeks.

This weekend it was time for bottling. First, we cleaned all the bottles and siphoned our beer into a different bucket so we could get rid of the sludge left from fermenting. Then we added sugar water to the beer so it would carbonate in the bottles, filled and capped the bottles, and put on labels. Now it's all done and just needs to age a couple weeks before we can try it. 

Sweet Pickled Beets

I realized this week that we had some large beets in the garden and I needed to get them harvested. So our second canning project of the year was sweet pickled beets. I had never pickled beets before and am looking forward to trying them; for now, they look pretty in the jars.

Curiosities in Paul

I have been reading through the seven Pauline Epistles in roughly the order they were written, looking into some of manuscript and textual issues for each letter and trying to approach them with "fresh eyes," as it were. A few things have stood out as unexpected or previously unnoticed.

1 Thessalonians and Galatians

Paul's Account of Jesus: Paul's Jesus does not appear to be very human. Paul doesn't talk about Jesus as though he was ever walking about on earth. He does not talk about Jesus ever doing anything on earth, and he does not mention him teaching anything to people (other than directly, through visions). Similarly, Paul frequently talks about how Jesus will soon appear, but this is never a second coming, a coming back or return. At the beginning of Galatians, Paul says that he is an apostle from Jesus, but not men or a man. This seems strange if Paul presumably thinks that it is of central importance that Jesus is a human. Paul then goes on to relate how he received the gospel of Jesus Christ. Rather than say that he learned of Jesus' life, as we would expect, he instead stresses that he did not receive the gospel of Jesus Christ from any person and was never taught it. Instead, everything he knows about Jesus, he knows directly from revelation. This all strikes me as strange.

The Origin of the Law: In Galatians 3, Paul is talking about the covenant and the law. The law was a curse from which Christ liberated us, he says. By example, no one annuls a human covenant once it is ratified; likewise, the law does not annul God's original covenant. So the law was given until the child came of age to receive the covenant inheritance. So far so good. Then v19: the law "was ordained by angels through an intermediary." Paul contrasts this intermediary with God, who is one. He then continues the discussion, saying that a child with an inheritance is like a slave to his guardians and trustees until he comes of age. So also, when we were under the law, we were "slaves to the elemental spirits of the universe" (4:3) who gave the law. Then, we were "in bondage to beings that by nature are no gods," but now there is no need to "turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits, whose slaves you want to be once more" (4:8-9). This account of where the law came from surprised me.

Garden Update

 I realized that the garden has grown quite a bit since I posted pictures last month, so here are some photos from today. Everything is doing well and enjoying the sunshine. We have been harvesting lettuce, spinach, and cilantro, although the cilantro is now busily going to seed. The beets are starting to get nice and big, so we have eaten a few of those.

These little guys are our next big harvest. The sugar peas are just starting to get ripe and the plants are really loaded. We are planning to have some with dinner tonight. This is the first time in awhile that I have had a large amount of space for a summer garden and we are loving having freshly picked goodies to add to our meals.