Baptism by Fire

Teaching English can be awkward if you are not constantly aware of the cultural, religious, ethnic and other differences that are present in most every class. So it is with great care that we explain idiomatic phrases, proverbs and other sayings that are often decidedly Judeo-Christian in nature. Take the expression "Baptism by Fire". For non-Christians the idea of a baptism can be a very foreign concept. So how do you explain this concept without prosetlyzing?
There are many approaches that one can use. We like to use the tried and tested method of KISS: keep it Simple Student.

Autocide part 2

As we mentioned in the last post there is an inherent danger in 'inventing new words', based on our own politics or bias. Nevertheless, I will go against my own advice and suggest a new word to describe a daily violence that happens everywhere, everyday. The violence I'm referring to is the daily massacre that happens on the streets, where automobiles kill over a million people annually: pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists and other drivers - not to mention the uncounted number of animals that become "Road Kill". Currently, drivers who are involved in such incidents are deemed to be innocent if there is no clear evidence of culpability and so we say they were in accidents. Those that are guilty of causing 'an accident' can be charged with various driver related crimes such as: reckless driving, driving under the influence (DUI), street racing, and vehicular manslaughter to mention a few. So what term do we use for a criminal act committed while driving a vehicle that caused death, but doesn't easily fit into one of these specific categories? For example, what criminal charge should a driver that sees a pedestrian crossing an intersection but refuses to slow down (expecting the pedestrian to get out of the way) be given, if he/she ends up mowing them down?
Is that reckless driving?, vehicular manslaughter? It seems that these terms fail to capture the true devastation that was known to be possible but ignored by the driver. Maybe we need a new word to describe such a crime. Autocide.

Autocide part 1

A few years ago the Bush Administration decided to invent a new word `homicide bomber´, to replace suicide bomber. This attempt to create a new word that more accurately reflects the act itself, they said, was necessary in order for the general populous to truly comprehend that particular heinous act of terrorism. As far as I know, this practice has officially ceased (i.e., the communiques released by the government no longer use their own constructed term, homicide bomber). But whether the Bush writers continue using this term or not is rather pointless anyways because the fact of the matter is that it never caught on. No one I know ever used it, and few media outlets ever really tried to use it. The reason why I believe it never caught on is simple, the term homicide bomber is purely politically motivated (right-wing) and thus was unable to supplant the existing term suicide bomber, which was created out of the need to describe a new act during World War II, in American editorials. Suicide Bombing(ers) had been accepted by all political stripes to describe particular acts of violence until 2002, in the wake of the 911 attacks.