Response to a Friend on Discourse and Disrespect

Believing isn't the point. Being able to explain your beliefs in a way that makes sense is the point. All of us can be swayed by argument (in the philosophical sense) that is well reasoned and clearly presented. My pointing out the discrepancies in some religious statements is a way of presenting a chance for believers to articulate their beliefs. For example, you are clearly not a Muslim, but probably have challenged the idea that Islam is a peaceful religion when all you ever see is violence and death coming from Islamic countries.  For you not to challenge Muslim friends to explain/support the contention that theirs is a peaceful religion would be ignoring a festering reality. The same with Christianity. Challenging beliefs is the best way to strengthen them. Discourse is the best way to clarify your own thoughts as well as persuade others of the value of your opinion. So rather than disrespect, which is never intended in a rational discussion, you should see opportunity to educate. The example I cited from the Old Testament is a good one to start some discussion of the way religious thought has changed over the time since the “good books” were first written. No one with a rational brain would think that a wife should be stoned to death at her father’s door for not being a virgin is acceptable. But they did just that in the old days, and in many fundamentalist countries where Mosaic Law is practiced they still do. And they use the Bible to justify it. So if one asserts that the Ten Commandments are truly the word of God, and should be followed without any thought, then how can one deny the word of God as articulated in Deuteronomy? See? Here is where the discourse comes in. And you know that many Christians claim that with the coming of Christ, the rules of the Old Testament were no longer valid. The question is “which rules?” In an earlier posting I said that I agreed with Scott, not because I thought he was right, but because his argument was well reasoned and based on a premise he held deeply. No disrespect at all. And I have none for you. To answer the other two points in your posting, I think you do not know what my religious beliefs are. They are certainly not Christian or any other named religion, but even I don’t call myself an atheist. I have had a personally fulfilling relationship with an entity you call Jesus for many years, yet think the mysteries and rules attributed to him are mostly man-made and wrong minded. So I take exception to the people who use “him” to support an agenda that is clearly not at all what “he” is about. Your other point is also worth a mention: Christians do impose their religious beliefs on everybody, or at least try to. Many of the laws we have in this Nation, while supposedly secular are Bible based. Look at all the fuss about stem cell research and abortion and teaching creationism in schools. Behind every one of these is the Biblical argument about what “God” said and wants. Well, many people don’t believe in God, and thus should not have to follow those teachings. For example, if a woman believes that life begins at conception, she shouldn’t use an IUD for birth control. Nor should she make another woman become pregnant by making IUDs illegal to use. That is imposing a religious belief on someone else. Same with abortion. Same with stem cell research. Same with creationism. You probably don’t agree. So explain how outlawing abortion is a secular thing and not a religious thing. In other words what is the basis for outlawing abortion that is not based on a religious belief? If you can’t think of a good and rational reason, then you are in favor of imposing a religious belief on a non-believer.

Whew. See what happens when I get up early?  


Image: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgx6qXC26ZzmFviyMhE9lyJ7hn2ExVCDGxoizzIZBLC84cFcsHggkSF80rv675P7H_dPhpVvFhRR9gRsAeQDk1EMAFdcXmWttMmP0BY2xFzW4qjtJyLTk-AnxYq_biTj9ihtsX7SQ5g9unMnZ6Q/s1600/discourse-into-the-night.jpg

Big Texan and Big Beer(1)

Amarillo started out as a cattle and ranching town. Over the last century it has become a modern city with a broad economic base. And now, finally, it has a craft brewery. Situated in the Big Texan steak ranch, brew master Tom Money crafts a number of memorable brews. The list includes a variety of drinkable beers from a nice honey blonde ale to a tasty "whiskey barrel" stout.

It wasn't very busy when I stopped by to have a pint of my favorite, Rattlesnake IPA. This hoppy ale pours a nice hazy golden color with a creamy head and good lacing. The bitterness is obvious on the front and lingers after the swallow. Exactly the way I like it. Tom was in the middle of getting a boil of Honey Blond going and I joined him in the kitchen where the kettle lives. Remember, this brewery is built within a restaurant, so some of the brewing process takes place alongside grills, stoves and setup counters. Not ideal, but tom has conquered the problems. Anyway, we talked about brewing and what was new or different while the kettle came to a boil. Tom showed me some changes in the brewing room, a reefer box attached to the back of the building. Then, back to the kitchen to begin hopping.

We moved to the bar and I sampled some of the other (besides the IPA) creations currently on tap. First the 1836 Chocolate Bock Ale. It carries a healthy 7.2 ABV and an 18 IBU and has a dark, rich color. The head is fairly thick and leaves fine lacing behind. The serving temperature is a bit low and carbonation level of all Tom's brews is a bit high for my taste, but drops to a pleasant level after sitting. I know that many people like the tingle of cold beer and I have no problem with that. My taste runs to British style cask ales that are served at cellar temperature and pumped from the cask with little carbonation. Back to the ale. It has a solid malty base with bitterness derived from the Belgian cocoa as well as mild hopping. Slight flavors of coffee, also from the cocoa, add to the complexity. The texture is typically of ales, but the color and taste couple easily be found in a porter.

I was looking forward to the Whisky Barrel Stout and was not disappointed. At 9.22 ABV and 26 IBU this stout holds its own. It pours with a creamy head and has a smooth feel as it is sipped. Yes, sipped. The echoes of oak and Whisky are complemented by a caramel base, no doubt from the roasted barley and some possible caramelization during the boil, and a hint of vanilla. Overall a fine brew and one with which I would end a robust meal.

Next up was the Texas Red Amber Ale. This is a quaffable ale that would be a great pairing with a hot Texas (or Florida for that matter) bar-b-que afternoon or a fiery curry. Easy drinking with a crisp taste and here the carbonation is a real plus. This is exactly what you want after a hot day of work. That feeling in the throat from the first long pull, really refreshing.

I finished up with a glass of Pecan Porter. Here is Tom's description: “Dark ale dominated by the rich malty aroma of pecans. Light notes of chocolate, molasses and brown sugar. Northern brewer, Williamette, and Hallertuer hops provide a moderately spice earthy component. 4.5 ABV – 28 IBU”. I usually stay away from beer made with fruit or nuts so I wasn't actually planning to try this one. But as luck would have it, I had a long conversation with a trucker, a regular at the bar, who stopped in for lunch. He had a big mug of this brew with a BBQ plate and raved about both. I didn't try the BBQ but he was right about the Porter. It delivered Tom's expectations nicely, and with an IBU of 28 had enough bitterness for me. The lesson learned was not to pass up a brew because it has strange things in it.
So, after the Pecan Porter I bid Tom goodbye and returned safely to my room for a nap.

All in all a very good day and, I will be back in Amarillo again and back at the Big Texan. Thanks, Tom, for a lovely day. See you soon and on Facebook.

1. Origionally posted on the Southern Beer Magazine site.