Writing Review: May 2026

Writing

May was certainly an…interesting month. While I had specific plans, they’re not at all what happened. At the same time, I can’t say that May was a bust either, especially since I did hit my word count goal for the month: 21,373 words written against a goal of 19,000 words.

But while I did get the outline of Headwaters done, as assigned, every time I started drafting I found myself making excuses. I needed to update a web site. I had a random idea about Legends Lost. I did a scaled-down relaunch of the professional blog. I even reorganized the writing file folders on my computer. Bottom line, even though I kept opening the Scrivener project, I only wrote three scenes.

By mid-month, I’d figured out that my subconscious was probably trying to tell me something.

All right! I finally shouted at my muse. I’ll go ahead and work on A New Horizon since you want me to so badly! But then we’re doing something original. You hear me? We are not only writing fan fiction this year!

Read More »

Health Insurers are Supposed to Negotiate

Employee Benefits

Folks, it is your health insurance plan’s job to negotiate the lowest possible reimbursement rates with your health care providers. I get that you think they’re wonderful, but that doesn’t mean they deserve a blank check with your signature at the bottom!

And yes — that is your signature on that check. Because those reimbursements are funded through the premiums that you (and in many cases your employer) pay. Higher reimbursements equal higher premiums. The math on that is actually pretty simple.

By Federal Law, your health insurer has a restricted profit margin. They are not allowed to set rates for unlimited profits. And they don’t, not from altruism, but because the fines and penalties are high enough to get their attention. (That’s the part of the ACA you don’t hear about very often.)

Read More »

The Lord’s Prayer is Tradition, not Scripture

Catholic

Interesting fact I’ve just learned: if you say The Lord’s Prayer, you’re not quoting Scripture — you’re quoting Tradition.

The prayer taught in Matthew 6:9-13 does not include the last two lines of what’s commonly accepted as The Lord’s Prayer today. The tradition of including those lines actually comes from Chapter 8 of the Didache, a first- or second-century document that is often acknowledged as the first written Christian catechism. The Didache is not itself Scriptural, but if you read it, you can see that is is derived directly from Gospel teachings.

Read More »

You’re Reading a Man-Made Bible

Catholic

“Bible Christians” would do well to consider why everyday Jews often study Hebrew and everyday Muslims often study Arabic. (A hint: the reasons are similar.)

They would then do well to consider that the majority of modern European-based languages didn’t even exist in their current forms when Jesus walked the Earth. Including, but not limited to, English.

Put more bluntly: unless you’re reading the original texts in their original languages, you are by definition reading a manmade interpretation of Scripture. There is no such thing as a perfect translation between any two languages; all translators make choices.

This is, by the way, why Catholics (and some others) make such a Very Big Deal out of things like Apostolic Succession and teaching authority. We know we’re reading and learning from manmade interpretations. So we are extremely picky about whose interpretations we use.

Going Car-Free

General

Responding to: Meet the Americans who choose to live without a car in the US: ‘It takes some doing’

Last fall, when I was rearranging my life, I intentionally set it up so that I could be as car-free as possible. Right now, I’m probably around the 95% mark; I can do most things without driving, but not all. At this point I don’t believe I can make it to 100%.

I’ll admit that my reasons weren’t altrustic. I was tired of paying for gas and maintenance. I wanted/needed an excuse to get out and walk more places. After nearly 20 years fighting Atlanta traffic, I’ve somewhat burned out on driving. Not traveling, mind you — driving.

Read More »

The Pope: No Nukes, Period

Catholic Politics

Folks, let’s make something clear here:

It is quite literally Pope Leo XIV’s job to articulate Catholic teaching. If you’re not Catholic, then you are free to simply answer “noted” and move on. If you are Catholic, you should already know our rules on the matter — and in the United States, compliance with them is legally voluntary.

Catholics emphatically do not believe that our religious beliefs are a private part of who we are and how we live. Our understanding of “separation of Church and State” is that there is no official religion in the United States — i.e., we’re supposedly free to practice ours. See the First Amendment.

Read More »

Writing Review: April 2026

Writing

April was a planned “rest and reset” month after going full-speed through January, February, and March to finish All That Mattered. At the beginning of the month, it actually took me several days to downshift out of that mode, but by mid-April I had done what I intended. Even with that, though, my word count of 19,602 was more than the monthly goal, so I’m still well on track toward my annual goal.

Read More »

“The Tobacco People” is published!

Writing

My poem, “The Tobacco People,” appears on Page 77 of the 2026 Reedy Branch Review!

Every spring, RBR publishes work from Pitt Community College students, faculty, staff, alumni, and anyone who supports the mission of the North Carolina community college system. RBR accepts short stories, poetry, flash fiction, excerpts from longer works that can stand alone, creative nonfiction, and visual art that can be represented in a printed document.

RBR 2026 includes the work of a broad and diverse range of writers and artists, including Pitt Community College students, former students, PCC faculty and staff, and other writers who support the mission of community colleges.

Available now for reading or download now at the Reedy Branch Review web site.

Writing and AI: Is It Really About Rights? Or Quality?

Writing

One of the largest debates about large language models (LLMs, imprecisely called “AI”) and authors has to do with rights: who owns what? Who consented to what? Are creators being fairly compensated? Those questions matter, and they’re not going away anytime soon. But the rights argument doesn’t explain the sheer intensity of the opposition to LLMs among authors, especially since there are plausible solutions available via tweaks to content licensing, copyright law, and compensation structures.

The other big argument centers around quality, but even that isn’t quite enough to explain the absolute fury I’ve seen in some quarters. Poor-quality writing has never been in short supply, and it has never posed a threat to high-quality writing, even though it has always existed in greater volume. Before now, though, it was largely treated as an annoyance. Authors ignored or avoided it (including, at times, looking down on those who self-published, but that’s a separate conversation).

As a writer who uses an LLM for developmental editing*, I’ve pondered why there seems to be such vehemence in its opposition. Ethics, rights, and quality aren’t minor issues — they’re very real and very important — but the emotionality of the reactions points to something more.

I suspect I know what that “something more” is: writers and non-writers alike expect writing to be hard. Anything that makes it easier is automatically suspect.

Read More »