Freedom is nothing but a chance to be better. ~Albert Camus
Question #45390 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Regarding Board Question #45289,

BYU does not provide plots for students to garden, but Community Action Services does! The Daily Universe ran this article just last week:

Unfortunately, the plots are all full this year...

HOWEVER! my extensive work experience at all of the on-campus housing areas tells me that there are a lot of students (especially at Wymount) who compensate by keeping many, many plants in many, many pots. They usually just keep them outside their apartment on the grass or concrete, but I've seen people fill vacant or visitor parking spaces with potted plants too. Just try not to bug your neighbors :)

-Not a green thumb

Question #45385 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Too all those who, as Azriel pointed out, do not get #45308, please feel free to view

- I am a Banana - surprised that the 100 Monkeys didn't attempt to eat me.

A: Dear Banana

Believe us, if we could slay giants, we could eat a large walking banana. And kill CATS.

-100 Typing Monkeys
Question #45337 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I just watched the new Narnia movie and I had a question that was probably answered in the books, so I figured someone here must know. When the ice queen is tempting Prince Caspian, and then Peter to give her a drop of blood (and thus release her into Narnia), she tempted each of them by saying they "couldn't win the battle by themselves." Okay, I'll give her that much, but how exactly was she planning on helping them win the battle? There were like, a jillion soldiers* and all she had was a werewolf and a zombie-lady. And granted, her staff could turn people to stone, but only one at a time and it would have taken her months to petrify all those armies of Spaniards.

Which brings me to my question, what was she planning on doing? (I mean, that Prince Caspian and Peter could pick up on)?

- Fezywig

* Not an exact figure.

A: Dear Fezywig,

I sent this to Narniabound, my favorite expert on all things C.S. Lewis:
So here's the problem: there is no ice queen in the actual book. There are a "hag" and a werewolf, and they offer to use black magic to bring back the Ice Queen to help Prince Caspian. This was after they'd sent Trumpkin off with Susan's magic horn. They'd given up waiting for this magical help that the Badger was so confident would come. Peter and Edmond arrived with Trumpkin in the nick of time, fought and killed the hag, werewolf, and Nickabrick (the "black" dwarf, as in black-bearded), and offered their services to Prince Caspian. The Ice Queen never even materializes because Peter, Edmond, Caspian, and Trumpkin (and the Badger whose name is escaping me at the moment) put the kibosh on that before the rite ever begins. That was a roundabout way of saying: "I don't know because Lewis never wrote it."

[Aside: I hear that there is a sub-plot in the movie that has Peter and Caspian sort of battling one another for authority. This is not in the book anywhere. Shortly after Peter arrives at Aslan's How, Peter makes it very clear that he is only there to help put Caspian on the throne, not to take it away from him. One can never presume to speak for a dead author, but one might, based on his writings, assume that Lewis would be furious at such a change. It's so contradictory to the book's theme. He doesn't write any "contrary" heroes until The Silver Chair.]

"There were like, a jillion soldiers"--this is why Peter hatched the plan to fight Miraz one-on-one. Aslan had not arrived with Susan and Lucy yet, and though Peter knew his arrival was imminent, he had to come up with a plan to try to save as many of the True Narnians' lives.

I have yet to see the movie; being a Narnia purist I don't want to spend money on theater prices for something that completely distorts the actual story. I could deal with the changes in the first one because they stayed fairly true to the overall theme, but from what I've heard, this one deviates drastically. Shame on Disney.

- Katya
Question #45336 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Do any churches really practice shunning (I mean, as part of their religion; I'm not talking about individuals who choose to act like jerks)?

I've seen a lot of churches accuse a lot of other churches of shunning (btw, in this case, shunning is defined as, "the practice of not talking to or recognizing the existence former members, even if they're part of your immediate family.")

I've heard that Jehovah's Witnesses are accused of it, but I've also heard that they have denied it. And I heard that that Scientologists have some special legal form of shunning (called, "disconnecting" or something like that).

And I've even heard people accuse Mormons of shunning. Yeah. Right. I suppose an individual Mormon family could shun a former member, but I'm not sure they would stop the home teachers, the missionaries, the Bishopric the RS presidency, the compassionate service committee and several well-intentioned neighbors from stopping by.

Anyway, I've also heard that the Old Order Amish practice shunning, but for some reason they haven't returned any of my calls or e-mails (weren't they supposed to be friendly or something?). So I'm not sure if they really shun, or are just accused of it.

Which brings me back to my original question: which churches actually shun?

- Johnny Church

A: Dear church,

I know for a fact that Jehovah's Witnesses practice shunning at an official level. You can read their reasoning in this Watchtower article. One of my best friends in high school was a Witness, and I learned about many of their beliefs from him.

Several different faiths practice some form of shunning, and you can scan the list here. Mormons do NOT shun, thank goodness. Church discipline exists, but members are always encouraged to love and fellowship their brethren, no matter what happens.

Question #45335 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

One of my students asked me a question the other day that turned out to be more difficult that I though.

They asked, "which religions are pro-gay?"

Now, the simple answer is "all of them." Even the ones trying to ban gay marriage are still claiming to 'love the sinner but hate the sin'. For some churches, helping their adherents live in a heterosexual-dominated society and voluntarily adopt heterosexual norms is being 'pro-gay.' For others, it requires altering traditional religious ceremonies to include same-gendered couples.

However, even if the question was "how many churches are in favor of gay marriage"? it would still be a tough question. Some churches, like Catholicism, Scientology, Christian Science and the LDS religion have highly organized, centralized leadership structures that actually take a stance on many (if not most) controversial topics. For other churches (like Wiccans, the Amish, etc) the congregation is the highest level of organization, and each individual congregation is on it's own to make it's own choices.

So really, I guess my question is this:

How many churches (who take official stands on things) are in favor of same-sex marriages?

- Same but different

A: Dear Same but Different,

Here is an interesting summary of religious groups' official positions on same-sex marriages from The Pew Forum. In even shorter summary:

Judaism (I was surprised at this one! Reform and Reconstructionists support it, Conservatives leave the decision to the rabbi, and Orthodoxy opposes)
Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations
United Church of Christ (which is a very interesting development)

American Baptist (many congregations openly welcome gay members, which has caused a huge rift)
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (will give an official position in 2009, but currently define marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman)
Islam (very clear about it)
Orthodox Judaism
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod
National Association of Evangelicals
Souther Baptist Convention
United Methodist Church

Buddhism (although homosexuality is widely disapproved of)
Episcopal Church (have not directly given a position, but openly support the gay and lesbian population; I've seen many a Episcopalian church flying gay pride flags)
Hinduism (no official interpretation, some oppose it and and some follow Kama Sutra)
National Council of Churches
Presbyterians (they're fighting about it)

Question #45334 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

What are the regulations that the city of Provo has on furniture being put on an apartment balcony? I live at Raintree apartments and heard about some guy getting fined by the city for putting a sofa on his balcony. My roommate and I want to put recliners out on our balcony, but don't want to get fined monies. Do you know?

- J. Lutes

A: Dear J. Lutes,

From the Provo City resident reference guide and summary of key ordinances:

A maximum of two (2) inoperable vehicles may be kept on a property if stored within a fully enclosed building or behind a fully sightobscuring fence. Used materials, junk, household furniture, appliances, scrap material, etc. cannot be stored in an open area. Such materials must be stored within a building.
So, you can't keep furniture on your balcony unless it's outdoor furniture

- Katya
Question #45332 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Do you have any advice on planting corn? I was successful in my attempts at growing it back home, but Utah has not even yielded me sprouts!

-Balcony Farmer

A: Balcony Farmer,

In my experience corn doesn't do so well with the cold. We had the unfortunate experience of planting our corn about a week before this last freeze. It took weeks before we had any sprouts, and we still have one row that doesn't seem to be producing much. If you planted them deeper than an inch to an inch and a half, I'd say not to expect much until at least a week and a half to two weeks even in warm weather. An interesting experience is to drive across Nebraska through Missouri/Iowa to Indiana and notice the difference in height of the corn. I think it is a temperature difference, but it could be natural rainfall vs. irrigation, either way it seems like each hundred miles is another couple of inches difference.

One more thing with corn, if you are limited in space (anything less than 3 full rows) you will probably want to hand pollinate, corn really needs as much pollination as it can get and only having a few rows often isn't enough to get the job done naturally.

Best of luck with your garden and happy harvesting!

A: Dear Balcony ~

a) Don't grow it on your balcony.
b) If you insist, get a really deep pot. Though, we're not sure why, or if this is even good advice, since cornstalks don't have deep roots. "Maybe it'll think it's on a farm?" - Mom (We still recommend a pot at least a foot deep.)
c) Soak the seeds for at least an hour before planting.
d) Plant 3-5 seeds per hole.
e) Follow package instructions.
f) Unless the soil gets super dry, don't water after planting until it sprouts.
g) After it sprouts, water deeply. (Let the water stay on for a long time, then don't water every day, especially if it's in the ground and not in a pot. That makes the roots grow deep.)
h) Let your corn get stressed. Wait until the leaves droop or curl before watering.
i) Let me know how it turns out, I've never done corn in a pot before.

~ Dragon Lady
Question #45330 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I have an old hymn book from 1877. The title of the book is "Sacred Hymns and Spiritual Songs for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints - Sixteenth edition" I have a couple of questions regarding this book.

Why is there no music in it? Did every one know all 344 songs by heart? A lot of hymns have been written and added to our hymn book since 1877, so why doesn't our hymn book have 344+newer hymns in it?

The last question I have about this book is kind of difficult, and I don't know if you guys will actually be able to help me. On the back cover the sacrement prayers are written, and on the front cover is some sort of poem, but while the book sat on some one's shelf for years and years - something (perhaps and extra piece of paper slipped into the book) stuck itself to the front inside cover. At this point I am left with the majority of the poem, and I was wondering if you have any way of finding the missing lyrics, and perhaps who it is by. The poem is as follows, with ____ for the missing words/letters.

Days and moments quickly flying
Blend the living with the dead
Soon shall you and __ lying
Touch within our narrow bed
Soon our souls to God who gave them
Will have spread their r_____ flight
Able now by grace is s____ them
Oh that while we c___ might
Jesus infinite ____________
Makes of this _________ flame
Teach oh teah me __________
What I am and whence I came.
Be ye b_ _______ to... (the rest of the page has been worn off.

Where there are longer lines more than one word may be missing. The handwriting is kind of difficult to read, or I may have been able to guess. Some of the missing words are obvious, but some of them are not. Any help?

- Webster Girl

A: Dear Webster Girl,

Why is there no music in it? Did every one know all 344 songs by heart?

In our current hymn book, each tune goes with one specific set of lyrics, but early Church members liked to mix things up a bit. They knew a whole bunch of tunes that could work with a lot of different lyrics (or had a list of which tunes could go with which lyrics) and then they'd select both the hymn (the words) and the tune that would be sung with it. So yes, the pioneers had the tunes memorized, but they were working with a smaller group of tunes which they could use for multiple sets of words, not with 344 different melodies.

You can actually see a remnant of this system in our current hymn book, if you look at hymn #173 and #174. They both have the same words, but are sung to different melodies. (If you look at the bottom of #173, it says "Tune name: SAUL." At the bottom of #174, it says "Tune name: AEOLIAN.") If you flip to the back of the hymn book, there's a section called "Titles, Tunes, and Meters." Basically, if you have two hymns with the same meter, you can switch the tunes and still sing them OK. You might want to look at the front or the back of your hymn book to see if there's a similar list of tunes.

A lot of hymns have been written and added to our hymn book since 1877, so why doesn't our hymn book have 344+newer hymns in it?

With every edition of the hymn book, they've taken out older hymns as they've added new ones. For example, the pre-1985 hymn book had a lot of tunes that were very Utah-specific, such as the state hymn, "Utah, we love thee," which was probably removed because the Church was becoming less Utah-centric. Other hymns were removed for other reasons.

As for your third question, here's the full poem:

Days and moments quickly flying
Blend the living with the dead;
Soon our bodies will be lying
Each within its narrow bed.

Soon our souls to God Who gave them
Will have sped their rapid flight:
Able now by grace to save them,
O that, while we can, we might!

Jesus, infinite Redeemer,
Maker of this mighty frame,
Teach, O teach us to remember
What we are, and whence we came.

Whence we came and whither wending,
Soon we must through darkness go,
To inherit bliss unending,
Or eternity of woe.

Jesus, merciful Redeemer,
Rouse dead souls to hear Thy voice;
Wake, O wake each idle dreamer
Now to make the eternal choice.

As a shadow, life is fleeting;
As a vapor so it flies;
For the old year now retreating
Pardon grant, and make us wise;

Wise that we our days may number,
Strive and wrestle with our sin,
Say not in our work, nor slumber
Till Thy glorious rest we win.

Soon before the Judge all glorious
We with all the dead shall stand:
Savior, over death victorious,
Place us then on Thy right hand.

This is actually a hymn, as well, which you can hear here.

- Katya
Question #45329 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I saw this vehicle today that I need to find a picture of, but I don't know how to describe it. It was brand-new I'm guessing. The best way I can think to describe it is that it is a pickup truck that is styled sort of old-fashioned, but is new. It's very curvy rather than the angular way trucks are made today. It also somewhat reminds me of those old pickup/car combos. It also vaguely reminds me of a low-rider truck, but it was being driven by a snobby rich old white couple (not the usual purchasers of low-riders). I have tried looking everywhere online for this truck, but I don't know anything about cars and so I haven't been able to find it. Does my description sound at all familiar to anyone? I've seen a couple of these in about the past year; they stick out like sore thumbs. Anyone--writers, readers--know what kind of car I saw? Thanks!

-Jill Taylor

A: Dear Toolwoman,

If it's what I think it is, it's not new. I first ran into this car at a car show in Washington DC in 2003 and snapped a photo of it:

Does that look familiar? If that's what you're talking about, it's a Chevy SSR, made from 2003 to 2006. I thought it was stupid-looking then, and now that I've considered it again, I still think so.

-=Optimus Prime=-
Question #45306 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I am wondering what the name of a certain plant is. I've seen them around campus and around town, both in years past, and currently. Right now, there are several included in the flower beds at the south end of campus, in between the Widtsoe, MARB, and Clyde buildings. They are taller than most of the other plants, dark green in color, and kind of resemble a banana tree in shape. I remember them growing fairly tall, without too many leaves, and with sort of bird-of-paradise-looking flowers. Can you tell me what these plants are called?


A: Dear sanquinea,

The plant you are speaking of is called a canna lily.

If I were more clever, I would incorporate into my answer a bunch of silly puns using "canna" - "I canna find what the name of the plant is!" "I'm going to open up a canna lily on you!" But, I'm not.


The Cleaning Lady
Question #45252 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

In the JFSB, on the fourth floor, on the east side of the building, there's an alcove/lounge with a window that overlooks the inner courtyard, across the hall from the gallery thing that is always under construction.

Last time I was there, there was a pompous rug and some stuffy-looking chairs, but a while back there used to be a beautiful, huge silver mobile. Where did it go/what happened to it? Is it still on campus, or are there any plans for it to be put up somewhere else? I miss it...

- Orenji Jusu

A: Dear OJ,

It's gone. Forever.

No, I am not kidding you. The graduate student who owned it and put it up took it with him when he graduated and left the university.

So, I guess that answers the last part of your question: are there any plans for it to be put up somewhere else? Apparently, yes - somewhere other than BYU.

I'm so sorry for your loss.

Not really sincerely,

The Cleaning Lady
Question #45241 posted on 05/29/2008 3:01 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Quick question: I have a review book for a professional exam that says that the makers of the book "grant to you the one-time right to use the Stalla Review materials as the original user. This license is granted only to you as a first-time user and is non-transferable to anyone else." In selling a book to someone, can you really say that they are the only ones that can use it? In doing some research myself, I found something called the "first sale doctrine" (, but I am not sure it applies in this instance. So, my question is, is it legal for me to allow someone to use these review books I have legally purchased, despite what the inside of the cover says? Thanks.

A: Dear Thankful,

I stopped by the BYU Copyright Licensing Office, and asked them about this. The lady I spoke with said that although they couldn't give legal advice, I may want to look into the laws surrounding "consumable works," which include things like workbooks and practice tests (which you are intended to mark on and use).

In doing a little looking, I found the following on part of Seattle University's web site:
Consumable works. Consumable works (workbooks, exercises, standardized tests and test booklets, answer sheets, and similar consumable materials) also enjoy wide statutory immunity from the fair use doctrine. Generally, you must obtain permission to use such individually copyrighted materials unless they are in the public domain. The Classroom Guidelines prohibit unauthorized copying of works intended to be "consumable" in the course of study or teaching. Consumable works include workbooks, exercises, standardized tests and test booklets and answer sheets. Under the guidelines, unauthorized copying may not substitute for the purchase of books, publishers reprints or periodicals, or be repeated with respect to the same item by the same teacher from term to term.
And regarding the first sale doctrine:
The "First Sale" doctrine. Under 17 U.S.C. § 109, anyone who owns a lawfully manufactured and acquired copy of a published copyrighted work may distribute that copy by resale, rental, or loan.
Keep in mind that we can't give you legal advice. However, it sounds like you are not allowed to make copies of anything in there. You may be okay with letting someone else borrow it, as long as they don't mind that you've already marked it up. Some sources say that the first sale doctrine doesn't apply to works that are licensed, rather than sold; however, even that may or may not be legally upholdable, possibly depending on the license. My opinion? If you don't make copies, and if your friend is fine using your marked-up copy, you seem to be on reasonable moral ground.

—Laser Jock