by Jason Joyner | Feb 16, 2009 | Blog, CFBA, fiction
Jason sez: My wife was going to read this book to review, but alas, Real Life Intervenes (TM) once again. Here’s the official CFBA blurb.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:
Mary’s writing journey is similar to a lot of others. Boil it down to persistence, oh, go ahead and call it stubbornness. She just kept typing away. She think the reason she did it was because she was more or less a dunce around people—prone to sit silently when she really ought to speak up(or far worse, speak up when she ought to sit silently).
So, Mary had all these things, she want to say, in her head; the perfect zinger to the rude cashier, which you think of an hour after you’ve left the store, the perfect bit of wisdom when someone needs help, which doesn’t occur to you until they solve their problems themselves, the perfect guilt trip for the kids, which you don’t say because you’re not an idiot. She keep all this wit to herself, much to the relief of all who know her, and then wrote all her great ideas into books. It’s therapeutic if nothing else, and more affordable than a psychiatrist.
So then a very nice, oh so nice publishing company like Barbour Heartsong comes along and says, “Hey, we’ll pay you money for this 45,000 word therapy session.” That’s as sweet as it gets.
Mary’s journey to publication is the same as everyone’s except for a few geniuses out there who make it hard for all of us. And even they probably have an Ode to Roast Beef or two in their past.
There are two other books in this Lassoed In Texas Series: Petticoat Ranch and Calico Canyon
ABOUT THE BOOK
All aboard for a delightful, suspense-filled romance, where a Texan is torn between his attraction to a meddlesome schoolmarm and the charms of a designing dressmaker. When Hannah Cartwright meets Grant, she’s determined to keep him from committing her orphans to hard labor on his ranch. How far will she go to ensure their welfare?
Grant Cooper is determined to provide a home for the two kids brought in by the orphan train as runs head-on into the new school marm, who believes he’s made slave labor out of eight orphaned children. He crowds too many orphans into his rickety house, just like Hannah Cartwright’s cruel father. Grant’s family of orphans have been mistreated too many times by judgmental school teachers. Now the new schoolmarm is the same except she’s so pretty and she isn’t really bad to his children, it’s Grant she can’t stand.
But he is inexplicably drawn to Hannah. Can he keep his ragtag family together while steering clear of love and marriage? Will he win her love or be caught in the clutches of a scheming seamstress?
If you would like to read the first chapter of Gingham Mountain, go HERE
by Jason Joyner | Feb 11, 2009 | Biblical worldview, Blog, culture, family
The NY Times recently had an article entitled “And Baby Makes How Many?” that was triggered from the woman with the octuplets and 6 other kids, as well as the popularity of shows featuring The Duggars (17 kids) and Jon and Kate plus eight. The article discussed how family size in the U.S. is shrinking overall, which is making large families an exception that is more and more looked down upon.
Replacement level for a population is 2.1, and that is the current American birth rate, even though it has actually been lower recently and only got back UP to 2.1 in the last year stats were available. The article focuses on megafamilies, with 6+ kids, but it stated that people with more than 3 kids often get “raised eyebrows”.
The article itself is pretty respectful and non-judgmental, although it mentions that people with larger families could be considered “freak show attractions” nowadays. The comments to the article…now that is a different story.
The commenters mostly decried people having more than 2 kids “irresponsible” and “selfish”, trashing Earth’s resources for their own self-fulfillment (or more clinically put, “evolutionary need to replicate”-reminds me of the part in The Matrix when Agent Smith compares humanity to a virus). Some were generous enough to deem it appropriate to have 2 kids, then adopt needy kids/orphans if you HAD to have more than two. Heaven forbid the carbon footprint that is left by a family of 4 kids or more.
The majority of comments were disturbing on many levels. Besides the judgments and disdain for some people’s “choice” when it collides with their own self-interest, there were some issues that no one in the comments noted. I wanted to post there, but the comments were closed by the time I read the article.
First of all, do we want to become like other societies that have effective “family planning?” Countries like Japan, where a demographic crisis is looming because they are getting older without a young workforce to support the elderly? Perhaps Germany, which is rapidly becoming less German, since German families don’t hit the replacement level of 2.1 kids, but immigrant families from Eastern Europe and Turkey are filling the void, keeping their own culture without assimilating to German ways in the process? I know, how about China? Since their one child rule, the percentage of male to females is dangerously imbalanced, which is already causing human trafficking from other Asian countries to provide wives to the men who can’t find the very in-demand Chinese women?
Some in the comments cited the 70’s era Population Boom scare, which has not occurred as doomsayers were predicting back then. Technological advances have continued to allow us to produce enough food, even if political and infrastructure problems still keep way too many people without proper resources.
I am willing to become a better steward of our resources, and I want to see poverty eradicated so people in undeveloped countries have more opportunities other than having many kids so some will have a chance of surviving. However, the crass hypocrisy and judgmentalism from the commenters is pretty remarkable in a country where all sorts of “freedoms” are promoted, unless it goes against the current postmodern, environment-worshipping culture we seem to have at this time. Overall, as a parent of four wonderful children, whom I plan on educating to be the best possible citizens of Earth during their sojourn, even as I hopefully help them reach their potential in the Kingdom of heaven, I want to say as carefully and intelligently as I can to those commenters:
Mind your own business.
(Bonus-I love some of the comebacks from parents of the megafamilies:
How can you afford so many? “Lifestyles are expensive, not kids.”
Don’t you know what causes that? “Oh, yes, I now wash my husband’s underwear separately.”
Do you get any time for yourselves? “Obviously, or we wouldn’t have six kids.”)
—
by Jason Joyner | Feb 11, 2009 | Biblical worldview, Blog, culture, family
The NY Times recently had an article entitled “And Baby Makes How Many?” that was triggered from the woman with the octuplets and 6 other kids, as well as the popularity of shows featuring The Duggars (17 kids) and Jon and Kate plus eight. The article discussed how family size in the U.S. is shrinking overall, which is making large families an exception that is more and more looked down upon.
Replacement level for a population is 2.1, and that is the current American birth rate, even though it has actually been lower recently and only got back UP to 2.1 in the last year stats were available. The article focuses on megafamilies, with 6+ kids, but it stated that people with more than 3 kids often get “raised eyebrows”.
The article itself is pretty respectful and non-judgmental, although it mentions that people with larger families could be considered “freak show attractions” nowadays. The comments to the article…now that is a different story.
The commenters mostly decried people having more than 2 kids “irresponsible” and “selfish”, trashing Earth’s resources for their own self-fulfillment (or more clinically put, “evolutionary need to replicate”-reminds me of the part in The Matrix when Agent Smith compares humanity to a virus). Some were generous enough to deem it appropriate to have 2 kids, then adopt needy kids/orphans if you HAD to have more than two. Heaven forbid the carbon footprint that is left by a family of 4 kids or more.
The majority of comments were disturbing on many levels. Besides the judgments and disdain for some people’s “choice” when it collides with their own self-interest, there were some issues that no one in the comments noted. I wanted to post there, but the comments were closed by the time I read the article.
First of all, do we want to become like other societies that have effective “family planning?” Countries like Japan, where a demographic crisis is looming because they are getting older without a young workforce to support the elderly? Perhaps Germany, which is rapidly becoming less German, since German families don’t hit the replacement level of 2.1 kids, but immigrant families from Eastern Europe and Turkey are filling the void, keeping their own culture without assimilating to German ways in the process? I know, how about China? Since their one child rule, the percentage of male to females is dangerously imbalanced, which is already causing human trafficking from other Asian countries to provide wives to the men who can’t find the very in-demand Chinese women?
Some in the comments cited the 70’s era Population Boom scare, which has not occurred as doomsayers were predicting back then. Technological advances have continued to allow us to produce enough food, even if political and infrastructure problems still keep way too many people without proper resources.
I am willing to become a better steward of our resources, and I want to see poverty eradicated so people in undeveloped countries have more opportunities other than having many kids so some will have a chance of surviving. However, the crass hypocrisy and judgmentalism from the commenters is pretty remarkable in a country where all sorts of “freedoms” are promoted, unless it goes against the current postmodern, environment-worshipping culture we seem to have at this time. Overall, as a parent of four wonderful children, whom I plan on educating to be the best possible citizens of Earth during their sojourn, even as I hopefully help them reach their potential in the Kingdom of heaven, I want to say as carefully and intelligently as I can to those commenters:
Mind your own business.
(Bonus-I love some of the comebacks from parents of the megafamilies:
How can you afford so many? “Lifestyles are expensive, not kids.”
Don’t you know what causes that? “Oh, yes, I now wash my husband’s underwear separately.”
Do you get any time for yourselves? “Obviously, or we wouldn’t have six kids.”)
—
by Jason Joyner | Feb 9, 2009 | Blog, books, culture, faith
I’ve been enjoying a new devotional that I recently picked up: A Faith and Culture Devotional: Daily Readings in Art, Science, and Life. I saw it mentioned on The Point blog, and so far I haven’t been disappointed. I’m not very far into it, but it has already had articles from or quoting from Francis Collins of the Human Genome Project and Francis Schaeffer, with future articles from Erwin McManus, Chuck Colson, Scot McKnight, Dallas Willard, Lee Strobel, and J. P. Moreland.
The subjects are collected under Bible and Theology, History, Philosophy, Science, Literature, Arts, and Contemporary Culture. Quite a diversity, but the reading I’ve done so far is quite thought-provoking.
As a teaser, here’s a quote from “Art-A Response to God’s Beauty” by Lael Arrington, with an extensive quote from one of my favorites, Francis Schaeffer.
Schaeffer concludes, “What a Christian portrays in his art is the totality of life. Art is not to be solely a vehicle for some self-conscious evangelism…Christians ought not to be threatened by fantasy and imagination…The Christian is the really free man-he is free to have imagination. This is our heritage. The Christian is the one whose imagination should fly beyond the stars.
by Jason Joyner | Feb 9, 2009 | Blog, books, culture, faith
I’ve been enjoying a new devotional that I recently picked up: A Faith and Culture Devotional: Daily Readings in Art, Science, and Life. I saw it mentioned on The Point blog, and so far I haven’t been disappointed. I’m not very far into it, but it has already had articles from or quoting from Francis Collins of the Human Genome Project and Francis Schaeffer, with future articles from Erwin McManus, Chuck Colson, Scot McKnight, Dallas Willard, Lee Strobel, and J. P. Moreland.
The subjects are collected under Bible and Theology, History, Philosophy, Science, Literature, Arts, and Contemporary Culture. Quite a diversity, but the reading I’ve done so far is quite thought-provoking.
As a teaser, here’s a quote from “Art-A Response to God’s Beauty” by Lael Arrington, with an extensive quote from one of my favorites, Francis Schaeffer.
Schaeffer concludes, “What a Christian portrays in his art is the totality of life. Art is not to be solely a vehicle for some self-conscious evangelism…Christians ought not to be threatened by fantasy and imagination…The Christian is the really free man-he is free to have imagination. This is our heritage. The Christian is the one whose imagination should fly beyond the stars.
Mary’s writing journey is similar to a lot of others. Boil it down to persistence, oh, go ahead and call it stubbornness. She just kept typing away. She think the reason she did it was because she was more or less a dunce around people—prone to sit silently when she really ought to speak up(or far worse, speak up when she ought to sit silently).
All aboard for a delightful, suspense-filled romance, where a Texan is torn between his attraction to a meddlesome schoolmarm and the charms of a designing dressmaker. When Hannah Cartwright meets Grant, she’s determined to keep him from committing her orphans to hard labor on his ranch. How far will she go to ensure their welfare?