It’s that time of the year. Where do we draw the line between “Christian” and “pagan” customs, such as Halloween, Christmas, and Easter? These three more popular special days all have a connection to some “pagan holiday” in terms of time of the year and the kind of celebration. The only holy day (holiday) that is nearly pure in its Christian origin is Pentecost (A Jewish Holy Day), which celebrates the birth of the first church.
So what should I do about these pagan slanted days and my own faith? Should I support them, boycott them vigorously, ignore them, or keep them in perspective with my faith and ethics?
In my youth I understood from my particular church that they were against a or any special day for celebrating Christmas, and if I recall, it also felt the same about Easter. I don’t recall anything big about Halloween. Our town always had a great big Halloween party on Front Street with awards for best kinds of costumes, vats to dunk for apples, cider and powdery donuts, and lots of pumpkin jack-o-lanterns.
But even though our church didn’t celebrate Christmas and Easter, almost all of the members did. We just looked upon it as a cultural holiday. As I have matured, I have seen how that distinction has greatly expanded. Christmas and Easter are Special Marketing seasons for American retailers. Their coffers have benefitted from these celebrations. Our economy depends upon them.
When was Jesus born? Exactly what happened at Easter? Neither question is of concern to the retailers celebration. That is why in most Churches we take a special evening and a special morning to celebrate these events within the walls of our church. That is my major separation.
Paul taught the followers of Christ that they are in the world, but not of it. So my special religious events are celebrated with my own people, and I don’t impose them on others.
In turn I can pick and choose within my own society or culture which special days I want to celebrate and which ones I don’t. It is the same option I had when I lived in or visited other countries. I found some of the Greek, Mexican, German, and Israeli holidays to be great fun! I enjoyed getting to know the people in the places where I traveled. I never once took on their celebrations as my own.
The same is true in my own country. When I walk around and feel surrounded by the retail Christmas, which starts in early October, I don’t take them on as my own. They are popular, so somebody must like them.
I don’t believe there can ever be a culture totally based on one set of religious standards. Ever where I look, I see “religious based countries” with deep religious divisions within themselves. Unfortunately the religious bullies try to reign over the others, and ruin it for all. I see this today in the major Muslim movements throughout the world. They don’t care to share their space with anyone different.
So where do I draw the line between religious and cultural celebrations? I keep the religious ones within my religious body, and pick and chose which cultural ones I will celebrate. Let’s see I love chocolate bunnies, powdered donuts, and cider. I hate the loneliness and stress I see in people around our retail orientated Christmas, because suicides increase and people go deep in debt to satisfy children seduced by clever marketing tools. It is a season of depressions of all kinds.
In my life there is no line needed between pagan and Christian, because they are two separate worlds. In my spiritual world a man’s word is honored. It ain’t so in the one where I now live.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Religious Freedom or A Religious Dictator
Reflecting on the past few weeks - November 19, anniversary of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address; November 21, date of signing the Mayflower Compact. The 26 remembers the first nationally proclaimed Thanksgiving Day. Seven days of celebrating our heritage in freedom. Each of these milestones includes a reference to God. But whose God?
Some would have us believe it was God as they define God. This thinking would frighten our Founding Fathers. This nation was created by people from many segments of planet Earth. They came to establish and reside in a free society that practiced the separation of church and state.
Today some organizations in the far right and the far left want citizens of this nation to return to a state that no longer tolerates people with different beliefs. Our Founding Fathers would be against these groups left or right. They were devout men. None were enemies of God. All were of the Enlightenment or Age of Reason.
Benjamin Franklin strongly affirmed God's existence; the freedom for individual choice; and the potential value of institutional religion as an enforcer of moral codes. But he rejected churches that focused exclusively on dogma and neglected moral reasoning. Asked his belief, he said, "Here is my creed. I believe in one God, Creator of the universe: that he governs the world by his providence. That he ought to be worshiped. That the most acceptable service we can render him is to do good to his other children. That the soul of man is immortal and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to be fundamental principles of all sound religion, and I regard them as you do, in whatever sect I meet them."
Washington had the least to say about religion. As an baptized Anglican he kept his beliefs private and declared his religious tenets to few and simple. He studiously avoided referring to the person and ministry of Jesus. When some Presbyterian leaders complained of the lack of any Constitutional reference to "the only true God and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent," he calmly replied, "The path of true piety is so plain as to require but little political direction."
The congregationalist, John Adams joined the crusade for liberal Unitarianism that grew out of his own denomination. In France he had been exposed to the Enlightenment and was definite a free thinker. He hailed the sovereignty of God with deepest feelings. For him it was enough to be answerable for your own actions. He was not overly concerned with acts from the beliefs of others.
As a member of the Virginia legislature and US Congress, plus as Secretary of State and President, James Madison held long and hard for separation of church and state. In fact he argued vigorously against Patrick Henry's tax bill that would support "the Christian religion." Madison strongly advocated leaving all laws pertaining to religion to the only true qualified authority in this area: "the Supreme Lawgiver of the universe."
Thomas Jefferson the primary author of our documents that emphatically defend religious freedom was the strangest of all the five Founding Fathers. Instrumental in bringing about the First Amendment, he very much admired legislation that "had the courage to declare that the reason of man may be trusted with the formation of his own opinions." In 1803 he stated, "I am a real Christian ... sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others." Yet he rejected the divinity of Jesus (as he believed Jesus did). He felt the idea of the Trinity was "mere abracadabra." In 1819 he he declared, "I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know."
The Founding Fathers wanted a land where people were able to explore and define God in their own way. A place where the evidence of faith and not the law of the land will bring people to God. My God as I believe is my business and your God is your business. Can we not build a bridge to the future with a keystone of freedom AND tolerance? It is what built the first bridge of a freedom for so many pilgrims from so many lands.
Please allow us all the privilege of the basics of religious freedom established so long ago? Huh, could we?
Some would have us believe it was God as they define God. This thinking would frighten our Founding Fathers. This nation was created by people from many segments of planet Earth. They came to establish and reside in a free society that practiced the separation of church and state.
Today some organizations in the far right and the far left want citizens of this nation to return to a state that no longer tolerates people with different beliefs. Our Founding Fathers would be against these groups left or right. They were devout men. None were enemies of God. All were of the Enlightenment or Age of Reason.
Benjamin Franklin strongly affirmed God's existence; the freedom for individual choice; and the potential value of institutional religion as an enforcer of moral codes. But he rejected churches that focused exclusively on dogma and neglected moral reasoning. Asked his belief, he said, "Here is my creed. I believe in one God, Creator of the universe: that he governs the world by his providence. That he ought to be worshiped. That the most acceptable service we can render him is to do good to his other children. That the soul of man is immortal and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this. These I take to be fundamental principles of all sound religion, and I regard them as you do, in whatever sect I meet them."
Washington had the least to say about religion. As an baptized Anglican he kept his beliefs private and declared his religious tenets to few and simple. He studiously avoided referring to the person and ministry of Jesus. When some Presbyterian leaders complained of the lack of any Constitutional reference to "the only true God and Jesus Christ, whom he hath sent," he calmly replied, "The path of true piety is so plain as to require but little political direction."
The congregationalist, John Adams joined the crusade for liberal Unitarianism that grew out of his own denomination. In France he had been exposed to the Enlightenment and was definite a free thinker. He hailed the sovereignty of God with deepest feelings. For him it was enough to be answerable for your own actions. He was not overly concerned with acts from the beliefs of others.
As a member of the Virginia legislature and US Congress, plus as Secretary of State and President, James Madison held long and hard for separation of church and state. In fact he argued vigorously against Patrick Henry's tax bill that would support "the Christian religion." Madison strongly advocated leaving all laws pertaining to religion to the only true qualified authority in this area: "the Supreme Lawgiver of the universe."
Thomas Jefferson the primary author of our documents that emphatically defend religious freedom was the strangest of all the five Founding Fathers. Instrumental in bringing about the First Amendment, he very much admired legislation that "had the courage to declare that the reason of man may be trusted with the formation of his own opinions." In 1803 he stated, "I am a real Christian ... sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others." Yet he rejected the divinity of Jesus (as he believed Jesus did). He felt the idea of the Trinity was "mere abracadabra." In 1819 he he declared, "I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know."
The Founding Fathers wanted a land where people were able to explore and define God in their own way. A place where the evidence of faith and not the law of the land will bring people to God. My God as I believe is my business and your God is your business. Can we not build a bridge to the future with a keystone of freedom AND tolerance? It is what built the first bridge of a freedom for so many pilgrims from so many lands.
Please allow us all the privilege of the basics of religious freedom established so long ago? Huh, could we?
Wednesday, December 7, 2011
Goofy or Deadly? Watch what you buy for children at Christmas
“Goofy String” scared me Straight! Not the string itself, but what I read on the can.
Let me start from the beginning. My eight year old grandson is visiting us for “Camp Meemaw” and he had five dollars burning a hole in his pocket. Meemaw took him to a local Dollar Store. He bought an assortment of kid things from the children’s section of the store.
The next morning while we were all on the deck watching the birds, he decided to surprise meemaw and papa. He sprayed us with “Goofy String” as we laughed aloud. With great vigor and merriment he covered us from head to toe. It all seemed like great harmless fun.
As we laughed and brushed off the “Goofy String,” I picked up the can and read the label. As fast as it started, the laughter stopped. I read the label aloud as my left eye began to sting a bit. Here is what I read in small print on the can of “Goofy String” found in the toy department of a local store, “Caution. Contents under pressure. Do not puncture or incinerate container. Do not use near open flame or heat sources. Do not store at temperatures above 120 F. Keep out of reach of children. Test before use. May stain fabrics and other surfaces. Do not spray at eyes or faces. Do not ingest.” And on the side it says, “Non-flamable”
This caution label was on a can sold to a lone eight year old boy, who found it on the shelves in the toy department at that store in our own community! I am trying to remember if at eight years of age did I know what incinerate or ingest meant.
Now my ire and curiosity were up. My attention turned to what were the ingredients of this spray can that should be kept out of the reach of children. Guess what? The ingredients are listed. The only other information are the simple directions for use by the prohibitive child; the weight at 3 oz.; and that it was Made in China and distributed by Greenbrier International, I.nc., in Chesapeake, VA. 23320.
Let me capsulize the above. A company in China sells something, who knows what, in a spray can. It has many safety potentials and by all means it must be kept out of the reach of children.
A company in Virginia in the USA distributes it in this country without any further information. Then a company puts it on the shelves of the toy or children’s department for any unsuspecting innocent child to purchase with their birthday money. Have I got it correct so far?
Let me clarify even further. Business people could careless if something is harmful as long as no one notices. Guess what? I noticed.
And Mr. Businessman, it does take a genius to know that things that are labeled “Keep out of reach of children” don’t belong on the shelves where children can reach them, or worse yet buy them.
One of the very first things I learned at New York University’s Safety School of Certification is that labels should be red by the distributer BEFORE it is distributed. Buyer Beware is not for children When it comes to children it is Seller Beware, because we consumers depend upon your honesty.
My grandson has learned a lot from this experience. In fact, he is taking this article back to New York with him for discussion in class when school starts next week or so. I only hope our local merchants are astute. And young customers, Read the Label before you buy.
My left eye still stings. Be careful what Santa brings this year!
Let me start from the beginning. My eight year old grandson is visiting us for “Camp Meemaw” and he had five dollars burning a hole in his pocket. Meemaw took him to a local Dollar Store. He bought an assortment of kid things from the children’s section of the store.
The next morning while we were all on the deck watching the birds, he decided to surprise meemaw and papa. He sprayed us with “Goofy String” as we laughed aloud. With great vigor and merriment he covered us from head to toe. It all seemed like great harmless fun.
As we laughed and brushed off the “Goofy String,” I picked up the can and read the label. As fast as it started, the laughter stopped. I read the label aloud as my left eye began to sting a bit. Here is what I read in small print on the can of “Goofy String” found in the toy department of a local store, “Caution. Contents under pressure. Do not puncture or incinerate container. Do not use near open flame or heat sources. Do not store at temperatures above 120 F. Keep out of reach of children. Test before use. May stain fabrics and other surfaces. Do not spray at eyes or faces. Do not ingest.” And on the side it says, “Non-flamable”
This caution label was on a can sold to a lone eight year old boy, who found it on the shelves in the toy department at that store in our own community! I am trying to remember if at eight years of age did I know what incinerate or ingest meant.
Now my ire and curiosity were up. My attention turned to what were the ingredients of this spray can that should be kept out of the reach of children. Guess what? The ingredients are listed. The only other information are the simple directions for use by the prohibitive child; the weight at 3 oz.; and that it was Made in China and distributed by Greenbrier International, I.nc., in Chesapeake, VA. 23320.
Let me capsulize the above. A company in China sells something, who knows what, in a spray can. It has many safety potentials and by all means it must be kept out of the reach of children.
A company in Virginia in the USA distributes it in this country without any further information. Then a company puts it on the shelves of the toy or children’s department for any unsuspecting innocent child to purchase with their birthday money. Have I got it correct so far?
Let me clarify even further. Business people could careless if something is harmful as long as no one notices. Guess what? I noticed.
And Mr. Businessman, it does take a genius to know that things that are labeled “Keep out of reach of children” don’t belong on the shelves where children can reach them, or worse yet buy them.
One of the very first things I learned at New York University’s Safety School of Certification is that labels should be red by the distributer BEFORE it is distributed. Buyer Beware is not for children When it comes to children it is Seller Beware, because we consumers depend upon your honesty.
My grandson has learned a lot from this experience. In fact, he is taking this article back to New York with him for discussion in class when school starts next week or so. I only hope our local merchants are astute. And young customers, Read the Label before you buy.
My left eye still stings. Be careful what Santa brings this year!
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Christmas and Defcon 5
Recently a poll indicated that while 87% of Americans claim to be Christians only 36% focus on the birth or coming of the Christ child. Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!!
Every Christmas focuses on the coming of the Christ. Advent means arrival or coming and we celebrate the first and second coming of Christ. While Jesus, the babe in the manger is the image of our celebration, the real issue is who he was, is and will be that inspires believers to annually celebrate .
When will he come? Two thousand years ago, this was the question on the lips of a few Jewish believers. The vast majority had begun to focus on the celebrations and traditions. Ever since the fall of Jerusalem they had been told by their leaders, the Christ, the Messiah, the Anointed One would be coming soon. Their annual disappointment had caused them to push it into the back of their minds. Not to worry. When and if he comes, he comes! Not a thing we do can help it happen.
Years ago I was up on a high mountain in Greece looking out on the Aegean Sea toward Sparta in the southwest. I asked my friend Yani, a captain in Greek Air Force how far away was the huge island that held Sparta and Patriae. He asked me how far I believed it looked to be. I replied about twenty or thirty miles. He chuckled and said it is over one hundred US miles. Many things in life seem closer than they are in reality. We just need to look with an educated eye.
In the military we had five levels of alert status. Defcon 1 thru 5. Number One was total let your guard down time. Number Five was: we are being attacked or about to be attacked any minute. Twice in my military career I experienced Defcon 5. Both involved President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. The first time was the Cuban missile crises. The second was in Turkey when he was senselessly assassinated. The first seemed like an exercise and few of us cadets took it seriously. Why? Because our lives had been sheltered from reality.
The second was total experience of living on the edge. We were on total alert with every listen devise we had cranked up and pointed north over the Black Sea. The ears and eyes of Trabizon where fully focused on the Soviet Bear.
Was the bear ready to come out of his cave and ravish the free world? Was JFK the start of Armageddon? If so they would be moving through Turkey to the valley of the Jordan River. To the last man, we were thinking, "My God this is it!" Its not an exercise or movie script. The Evil empire has started their move. A move that will lead to the most horrible war we could imagine. I recalled the many times in school during air raid drills, we climbed under our seats to avoid the shattered glass. At first we were all scared, but by the seventh grade it had become a joke. But there in Turkey on November 24, 1963 it was no joke. We soon expected to hear the roar of Soviet bombers or missiles overhead any moment. Armageddon was about to begin and we were ready! And nothing happened!
That was 48 years ago in another life. I no longer worry about Armageddon or major catastrophe. Life every day keeps me busy enough.
Yet, we are told to always be alert and keep watch. Every Advent and Christmas season so far has been an exercise. Yes, it has become extremely routine. It is hard to imagine that Christ will be coming to usher in a new era of existence and end life for many. But then after marching in JFK's inaugural parade, I thought he would live forever and freedom would triumph over the evil empire. That assassin's bullet in Dallas yanked me back into reality. We must always be alert for the advent of the Christ and the Day of the Lord. It is just part of life.
How do you maintain a state of readiness? Believe it will happen and have the essentials ready. Christ will come whether we see it as the first or second time. Those, who are about his business in life are deemed ready. God’s business? Loving others with all our hearts as we love ourselves. Simple straight forward. In 1963, we knew it could happen. When it did we did exactly what we had practiced over and over in other exercises. When the Lord comes we are to do what we have been practicing Advent after Advent; Christmas after Christmas: showing our love for God and others. The world is in Defcon 5. Are you ready?
Every Christmas focuses on the coming of the Christ. Advent means arrival or coming and we celebrate the first and second coming of Christ. While Jesus, the babe in the manger is the image of our celebration, the real issue is who he was, is and will be that inspires believers to annually celebrate .
When will he come? Two thousand years ago, this was the question on the lips of a few Jewish believers. The vast majority had begun to focus on the celebrations and traditions. Ever since the fall of Jerusalem they had been told by their leaders, the Christ, the Messiah, the Anointed One would be coming soon. Their annual disappointment had caused them to push it into the back of their minds. Not to worry. When and if he comes, he comes! Not a thing we do can help it happen.
Years ago I was up on a high mountain in Greece looking out on the Aegean Sea toward Sparta in the southwest. I asked my friend Yani, a captain in Greek Air Force how far away was the huge island that held Sparta and Patriae. He asked me how far I believed it looked to be. I replied about twenty or thirty miles. He chuckled and said it is over one hundred US miles. Many things in life seem closer than they are in reality. We just need to look with an educated eye.
In the military we had five levels of alert status. Defcon 1 thru 5. Number One was total let your guard down time. Number Five was: we are being attacked or about to be attacked any minute. Twice in my military career I experienced Defcon 5. Both involved President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. The first time was the Cuban missile crises. The second was in Turkey when he was senselessly assassinated. The first seemed like an exercise and few of us cadets took it seriously. Why? Because our lives had been sheltered from reality.
The second was total experience of living on the edge. We were on total alert with every listen devise we had cranked up and pointed north over the Black Sea. The ears and eyes of Trabizon where fully focused on the Soviet Bear.
Was the bear ready to come out of his cave and ravish the free world? Was JFK the start of Armageddon? If so they would be moving through Turkey to the valley of the Jordan River. To the last man, we were thinking, "My God this is it!" Its not an exercise or movie script. The Evil empire has started their move. A move that will lead to the most horrible war we could imagine. I recalled the many times in school during air raid drills, we climbed under our seats to avoid the shattered glass. At first we were all scared, but by the seventh grade it had become a joke. But there in Turkey on November 24, 1963 it was no joke. We soon expected to hear the roar of Soviet bombers or missiles overhead any moment. Armageddon was about to begin and we were ready! And nothing happened!
That was 48 years ago in another life. I no longer worry about Armageddon or major catastrophe. Life every day keeps me busy enough.
Yet, we are told to always be alert and keep watch. Every Advent and Christmas season so far has been an exercise. Yes, it has become extremely routine. It is hard to imagine that Christ will be coming to usher in a new era of existence and end life for many. But then after marching in JFK's inaugural parade, I thought he would live forever and freedom would triumph over the evil empire. That assassin's bullet in Dallas yanked me back into reality. We must always be alert for the advent of the Christ and the Day of the Lord. It is just part of life.
How do you maintain a state of readiness? Believe it will happen and have the essentials ready. Christ will come whether we see it as the first or second time. Those, who are about his business in life are deemed ready. God’s business? Loving others with all our hearts as we love ourselves. Simple straight forward. In 1963, we knew it could happen. When it did we did exactly what we had practiced over and over in other exercises. When the Lord comes we are to do what we have been practicing Advent after Advent; Christmas after Christmas: showing our love for God and others. The world is in Defcon 5. Are you ready?
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Ifs of Pilgrims and Giving Thanks
On July 22,1620 the Pilgrims started out from Holland aboard the "Speedwell". At Plymouth, England, they transferred to the "Mayflower". And as they say, "The rest is history."
Historians have often speculated about what would have happened if they had landed where they intended to, which was far south of the Plymouth Rock. Virginia was their original destination. Cape Cod was not on their course, but when they saw it they followed it to the mainland and a new Plymouth.
Ironically today is also the day in 1587, that the Lost Colony landed on Roanoke Island, off North Carolina. That colony expected to be met by a group that landed earlier. A third group, landing later at Roanoke also expected to be met by the colony before them. A familiar story to all and a mystery to this day.
But the story of the Pilgrims is no mystery - except what might have happened in American history if they had reached the original destination instead of Massachusetts. History and life is full of big "ifs". "If" we do this or that, what happens? Today each of us as individuals and all as a community face some really big "ifs".
If I don't find hope for myself or society, what will happen? If I don't take an extra effort to better my
community, why should I expect the politicians to do any better? If there is no God, why are we here? If I acknowledge God; if I become involved in my community; and if I have hope in a future will life as I know it be better?
Do you realize at this point there is a great urge to say emphatically, "Yes!" life will be better "if". But that would be a spectator's response and none of us are spectators in life. Everyone participates, some good, some bad. Was it a good or bad moment when the "Mayflower" changed course and headed in land to Plymouth?
Would New York be where Norfolk is today? Would slavery be unnecessary in an industrial South? Would Haiti and other Caribbean Islands be part of our great nation? Do we see the endless possibilities of "what ifs". These "what ifs" did not happen. That course change was an important moment in history. Good or bad are merely a form of speculative evaluation of a historical decision. Everyone has their own view.
How will history evaluate our decisions today? Should the church keep after the image of a church as we had it in the Eisenhower years? Or is it time to change course and venture into new territory? Should any community follow the ways of old or give their Mayor support to take them into new progressive waters? Should we resist the changes facing our youth or sail with them into uncharted waters?
A great nation of traditions and values held so dear, came out of that decision in the North Atlantic in 1620. Since that first Plymouth Rock, we have become a great nation of pioneers and risk takers. Don't stop now.
The Plymouth Rock of every community across the land is being built by peoples’s decisions today. To prevent our children from being plagued with "what ifs", let us all head for uncharted waters together. Let's change courses as churches and work together for our children. Let us as citizens endorse visions of our Mayors. As a community let's all quit doing things for and to our children. Let's do more things "with" them.
The original vision of every community in this great land began nearly two hundred years ago. There have been course corrections along the way, some good and some bad. Overall they have brought us to communities way beyond the greatest hopes of anyone on the "Mayflower". Today some of our leaders have seen a glimpse of a new era on the horizon and want to change course to see where it leads us. I say, remember the brave Pilgrims following a glimpse of land to their New England. Shall we encourage our leaders to go for it! It will be worth any hardships endured. Who knows what great future we can established? Will they look back three hundred years from now and celebrate the course changes of today's leaders? I pray so.
Historians have often speculated about what would have happened if they had landed where they intended to, which was far south of the Plymouth Rock. Virginia was their original destination. Cape Cod was not on their course, but when they saw it they followed it to the mainland and a new Plymouth.
Ironically today is also the day in 1587, that the Lost Colony landed on Roanoke Island, off North Carolina. That colony expected to be met by a group that landed earlier. A third group, landing later at Roanoke also expected to be met by the colony before them. A familiar story to all and a mystery to this day.
But the story of the Pilgrims is no mystery - except what might have happened in American history if they had reached the original destination instead of Massachusetts. History and life is full of big "ifs". "If" we do this or that, what happens? Today each of us as individuals and all as a community face some really big "ifs".
If I don't find hope for myself or society, what will happen? If I don't take an extra effort to better my
community, why should I expect the politicians to do any better? If there is no God, why are we here? If I acknowledge God; if I become involved in my community; and if I have hope in a future will life as I know it be better?
Do you realize at this point there is a great urge to say emphatically, "Yes!" life will be better "if". But that would be a spectator's response and none of us are spectators in life. Everyone participates, some good, some bad. Was it a good or bad moment when the "Mayflower" changed course and headed in land to Plymouth?
Would New York be where Norfolk is today? Would slavery be unnecessary in an industrial South? Would Haiti and other Caribbean Islands be part of our great nation? Do we see the endless possibilities of "what ifs". These "what ifs" did not happen. That course change was an important moment in history. Good or bad are merely a form of speculative evaluation of a historical decision. Everyone has their own view.
How will history evaluate our decisions today? Should the church keep after the image of a church as we had it in the Eisenhower years? Or is it time to change course and venture into new territory? Should any community follow the ways of old or give their Mayor support to take them into new progressive waters? Should we resist the changes facing our youth or sail with them into uncharted waters?
A great nation of traditions and values held so dear, came out of that decision in the North Atlantic in 1620. Since that first Plymouth Rock, we have become a great nation of pioneers and risk takers. Don't stop now.
The Plymouth Rock of every community across the land is being built by peoples’s decisions today. To prevent our children from being plagued with "what ifs", let us all head for uncharted waters together. Let's change courses as churches and work together for our children. Let us as citizens endorse visions of our Mayors. As a community let's all quit doing things for and to our children. Let's do more things "with" them.
The original vision of every community in this great land began nearly two hundred years ago. There have been course corrections along the way, some good and some bad. Overall they have brought us to communities way beyond the greatest hopes of anyone on the "Mayflower". Today some of our leaders have seen a glimpse of a new era on the horizon and want to change course to see where it leads us. I say, remember the brave Pilgrims following a glimpse of land to their New England. Shall we encourage our leaders to go for it! It will be worth any hardships endured. Who knows what great future we can established? Will they look back three hundred years from now and celebrate the course changes of today's leaders? I pray so.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Time for self examination
As the end of this year rushes upon us we all begin many self-examinations and I thought an old story was appropriate. It goes like this: A man came to an elderly rabbi and said, “You Jews use a special form of reasoning, called Talmudic, which explains your cleverness. I want you to teach it to me.”
“My friend,” sighed the old rabbi, “I am afraid you might not be able to.”
“Nonsense! Why?”
“Well, when Jewish boys wish to study the Talmud- we first give them three questions. Those lads that answer all three correct are allowed to study the Talmud; those who can’t, are not.”
The man frowned and demanded, “Give me the exam.”
The rabbi shrugged and gave him the first question: Two men fall down a chimney. One emerges filthy, covered with soot; the other emerges clean. Which one washes?”
“The dirty one of course,”sneered the man.”
“Wrong, sir. The clean one washes.”
“The clean one?” the man was astonished. “Why?”
“When the two emerge,”explained the rabbi, “they look at each other, correct? The dirty one looks at the clean one and thinks, ‘wow we came out clean’. But the clean one looks at the dirty one and says, Holy Mackerel! We really got dirty. And he washes.”
‘Ah,” the man says, “very clever. Now, what is the second question?”
“The second question is this: Two men fall down a chimney. One emerges filthy, covered with soot; the other emerges clean. Which...”
“Whoa, that’s the same question,” roared the man.
“No it is not. This time the dirty man washes. The clean man looks at the dirty man and says how dirty we must be, but when he looks at his hands he sees he is clean. Likewise the dirty man looks at the clean man and thinks how clean they must be, but realizes he is dirty when he looks at his hands. So the dirty man washes.”
“Clever, Jew,” said the man, “very clever. Now give me the third question. You won’t fool me again.”
“Very well, here it is: Two men fall down a chimney. One emerges filthy, covered with soot; the other emerges clean.”
“Wait a minute, that’s the same question!” cried the man.
“Wrong,”said the rabbi. “The words may be the same-but the problem is entirely new. Which man washes?”
“The dirty one!” snapped the man.
“Wrong,” murmured the rabbi.
“The clean one!”
“I am sorry,” said the rabbi, “wrong again.”
“Then what is the answer?” seethed the man.
“The right answer,” replied the rabbi, “ is that this is a cuckoo examination! How can two men fall down the same chimney and one come out dirty and the other come out clean? Anyone that doesn’t see that at once will, I am afraid, never be able to understand the Talmud.”
Now a new story from me: Two men read their Holy Writings and one comes out very very perfect and the other not so perfect. Which one must repent?
Silly isn’t it how we work hard in life to gain labels and at the same time work to get rid of labels. So this year don’t take the silly examine of constant repentance, just work at being the image of God as you see it.
“My friend,” sighed the old rabbi, “I am afraid you might not be able to.”
“Nonsense! Why?”
“Well, when Jewish boys wish to study the Talmud- we first give them three questions. Those lads that answer all three correct are allowed to study the Talmud; those who can’t, are not.”
The man frowned and demanded, “Give me the exam.”
The rabbi shrugged and gave him the first question: Two men fall down a chimney. One emerges filthy, covered with soot; the other emerges clean. Which one washes?”
“The dirty one of course,”sneered the man.”
“Wrong, sir. The clean one washes.”
“The clean one?” the man was astonished. “Why?”
“When the two emerge,”explained the rabbi, “they look at each other, correct? The dirty one looks at the clean one and thinks, ‘wow we came out clean’. But the clean one looks at the dirty one and says, Holy Mackerel! We really got dirty. And he washes.”
‘Ah,” the man says, “very clever. Now, what is the second question?”
“The second question is this: Two men fall down a chimney. One emerges filthy, covered with soot; the other emerges clean. Which...”
“Whoa, that’s the same question,” roared the man.
“No it is not. This time the dirty man washes. The clean man looks at the dirty man and says how dirty we must be, but when he looks at his hands he sees he is clean. Likewise the dirty man looks at the clean man and thinks how clean they must be, but realizes he is dirty when he looks at his hands. So the dirty man washes.”
“Clever, Jew,” said the man, “very clever. Now give me the third question. You won’t fool me again.”
“Very well, here it is: Two men fall down a chimney. One emerges filthy, covered with soot; the other emerges clean.”
“Wait a minute, that’s the same question!” cried the man.
“Wrong,”said the rabbi. “The words may be the same-but the problem is entirely new. Which man washes?”
“The dirty one!” snapped the man.
“Wrong,” murmured the rabbi.
“The clean one!”
“I am sorry,” said the rabbi, “wrong again.”
“Then what is the answer?” seethed the man.
“The right answer,” replied the rabbi, “ is that this is a cuckoo examination! How can two men fall down the same chimney and one come out dirty and the other come out clean? Anyone that doesn’t see that at once will, I am afraid, never be able to understand the Talmud.”
Now a new story from me: Two men read their Holy Writings and one comes out very very perfect and the other not so perfect. Which one must repent?
Silly isn’t it how we work hard in life to gain labels and at the same time work to get rid of labels. So this year don’t take the silly examine of constant repentance, just work at being the image of God as you see it.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Reactions at a Political Gathering
I don’t know why, but in the time period we celebrate “Hallowed Eve, thanksgiving and Christmas, I can’t help enjoy what The Force Behind Creation (God in my system) thinks of how we take ourselves so seriously over two celebrating events.
One of the neatest sounds in all of creation is the “Heavenly Chuckle.” This is the chuckle, we seem to hear, when Life says, “Relax, you're taking yourselves way to seriously!”
Since no person has ever completely seen The Force Behind Creation (my God), all studies about them are a matter of opinion. We are asks us to respect one another, to accept one another without censure. If we have this mutual respect we can laugh “at and with” each another. The “Heavenly Chuckle” is to be shared by all people.
Recently an article I read included something along these lines, that gave me a chuckle and I want to share it with you. When I read it the very first time, I am positive I heard the “Heavenly Chuckle.” Here it is my modification of that article.
“HOW PEOPLE RESPOND IN A CRISIS...”
During a political gathering, someone rushed in and shouted, “The building is on fire!”
The Congressional attendees yelled throw money at it;
The Methodist gathered in the corner and prayed;
The Baptist cried, “Where's the water?”;
The Christian Scientist agreed there was no fire;
The Fundamentalist shouted, “It's the vengeance of God!”;
The Atheist began to sing “Case Sera” - whatever will be will be;
The Lutherans nailed a notice on the door declaring the fire was not justified;
The Quakers quietly praised God for the blessings the fire would bring;
The Jews posted symbols above the door hoping the fire would pass over;
The Congregationalist shouted, “Everyone for themselves!”;
The Muslims were divided over whether the fire was an act of heroism or terrorism;
The Church of Christ kept the news all to themselves;
The Episcopalians formed a procession and marched out in grand style;
The PAC members asked if anyone needed advice as what to do;
The Catholics sold tickets to toast marshmallows;
The Presbyterians appointed a chairperson who was to appoint a committee to look into the matter;
The President declared the fire started before I got here!
Yes we are all different in our views and understandings about who or what God is or what this life is all about, but we still are beholden to Someone or Something in all things. Perhaps the last laugh is on us. Maybe we are here for fellowship with Someone or Something, for their amusement. I personally can hear my God chuckle at are seriousness of the subject. Ain't that neat?
Shall we all lighten up on who is right or wrong and solve life’s problems together, before it is to late and the “Chuckle” turns to a “Sob” over our demise?
One of the neatest sounds in all of creation is the “Heavenly Chuckle.” This is the chuckle, we seem to hear, when Life says, “Relax, you're taking yourselves way to seriously!”
Since no person has ever completely seen The Force Behind Creation (my God), all studies about them are a matter of opinion. We are asks us to respect one another, to accept one another without censure. If we have this mutual respect we can laugh “at and with” each another. The “Heavenly Chuckle” is to be shared by all people.
Recently an article I read included something along these lines, that gave me a chuckle and I want to share it with you. When I read it the very first time, I am positive I heard the “Heavenly Chuckle.” Here it is my modification of that article.
“HOW PEOPLE RESPOND IN A CRISIS...”
During a political gathering, someone rushed in and shouted, “The building is on fire!”
The Congressional attendees yelled throw money at it;
The Methodist gathered in the corner and prayed;
The Baptist cried, “Where's the water?”;
The Christian Scientist agreed there was no fire;
The Fundamentalist shouted, “It's the vengeance of God!”;
The Atheist began to sing “Case Sera” - whatever will be will be;
The Lutherans nailed a notice on the door declaring the fire was not justified;
The Quakers quietly praised God for the blessings the fire would bring;
The Jews posted symbols above the door hoping the fire would pass over;
The Congregationalist shouted, “Everyone for themselves!”;
The Muslims were divided over whether the fire was an act of heroism or terrorism;
The Church of Christ kept the news all to themselves;
The Episcopalians formed a procession and marched out in grand style;
The PAC members asked if anyone needed advice as what to do;
The Catholics sold tickets to toast marshmallows;
The Presbyterians appointed a chairperson who was to appoint a committee to look into the matter;
The President declared the fire started before I got here!
Yes we are all different in our views and understandings about who or what God is or what this life is all about, but we still are beholden to Someone or Something in all things. Perhaps the last laugh is on us. Maybe we are here for fellowship with Someone or Something, for their amusement. I personally can hear my God chuckle at are seriousness of the subject. Ain't that neat?
Shall we all lighten up on who is right or wrong and solve life’s problems together, before it is to late and the “Chuckle” turns to a “Sob” over our demise?
Monday, November 7, 2011
A sad Christian General
For years I was blessed to look at the painting entitled, "The Christian General" by William L. Maughan. It is a picture of General Lee reading the Holy Bible as a sleeping child rest peacefully on his lap. Robert E. Lee, a graduate of the US Military Academy and leader of the Confederate Armies, was a remarkable human being, who spoke many wise proverbs in his life.
None more wiser than what he said on December 13, 1862. Pondering the Battle of Fredericksberg, General Lee said, "It is well that war is so terrible, or we should grow fond of it." Do you think the politicians in Washington believe war is so terrible? What about the neo-brown shirts called the Christian Coalition or anti war zealots of the sixties? Have they all become fond of war? One would think so with recent actions.
Our nation during the last quarter of the twentieth century and into the present one, has become the "champion of freedom" at home and abroad. My heart pounds with pride when we send troops to defend freedom, whether it is in Birmingham, Detroit, Berlin, Bagdad or wherever. I took an oath to serve those causes and defend the nation against all tyrannies that threaten our freedom.
But recently, and I mean the last thirty years, the leaders of this nation seem to have forgotten why we send men and women to war. Their primary reason seems to be capitalistic gains or oil. Now I know all wars have a capitalistic undertone, but it should not be the primary focus.
With all of the wars being fought on our beautiful planet, why are we choosing to get involved in a religious war, that has been going on since the fall of Constantinople? If we are going to send peace keeping troops into every Muslim country, shouldn't we also send them into Ireland, South Africa, China, Korea, Thailand, etc.? Are we really getting involved to protect freedom, religion or our nation's security and financial interest?
I believe places like Bosnia and Iraq are good marketplaces for our military industrialist. We declare we are there to maintain peace and in the same breath announce we can now sell arms to the Muslims. The people of Bosnia even look like Mr and Mrs Middle America, so the war was easier to sell to our citizenry. Let's face it selling Asians or Blacks as victims of anything is a hard sell in this country.
Bosnia was also close to our economic and ancestral roots. We still fall all over European Royalty no matter how ridiculous they behave. It also is close to the cradle of what we call civilization - Greece and The Fertile Crescent of civilization . The roots of many of our religious organizations come out of these neighboring regions. Yes, Bosnia and our religious geography are an easy sell to Americans.
It was and is a win win situation. It was and is easy to sell. It is good for our industrial manufactures. After all we are the largest producers of killing machines. It could be a prolonged market surge. Television can help it be perpetuated and more and more war products will be consumed in the name of peace. My fellow military officers will benefit as they did in Vietnam. Nam was a two promotion tour. Nam was a down payment on a new home, thanks to combat pay.
Yes Bosnia and the Fertile Crescent are much better places to be involved in a war. People are really growing fond of the idea. How that must sadden the "Christian General" I saw on my wall for so many years..
None more wiser than what he said on December 13, 1862. Pondering the Battle of Fredericksberg, General Lee said, "It is well that war is so terrible, or we should grow fond of it." Do you think the politicians in Washington believe war is so terrible? What about the neo-brown shirts called the Christian Coalition or anti war zealots of the sixties? Have they all become fond of war? One would think so with recent actions.
Our nation during the last quarter of the twentieth century and into the present one, has become the "champion of freedom" at home and abroad. My heart pounds with pride when we send troops to defend freedom, whether it is in Birmingham, Detroit, Berlin, Bagdad or wherever. I took an oath to serve those causes and defend the nation against all tyrannies that threaten our freedom.
But recently, and I mean the last thirty years, the leaders of this nation seem to have forgotten why we send men and women to war. Their primary reason seems to be capitalistic gains or oil. Now I know all wars have a capitalistic undertone, but it should not be the primary focus.
With all of the wars being fought on our beautiful planet, why are we choosing to get involved in a religious war, that has been going on since the fall of Constantinople? If we are going to send peace keeping troops into every Muslim country, shouldn't we also send them into Ireland, South Africa, China, Korea, Thailand, etc.? Are we really getting involved to protect freedom, religion or our nation's security and financial interest?
I believe places like Bosnia and Iraq are good marketplaces for our military industrialist. We declare we are there to maintain peace and in the same breath announce we can now sell arms to the Muslims. The people of Bosnia even look like Mr and Mrs Middle America, so the war was easier to sell to our citizenry. Let's face it selling Asians or Blacks as victims of anything is a hard sell in this country.
Bosnia was also close to our economic and ancestral roots. We still fall all over European Royalty no matter how ridiculous they behave. It also is close to the cradle of what we call civilization - Greece and The Fertile Crescent of civilization . The roots of many of our religious organizations come out of these neighboring regions. Yes, Bosnia and our religious geography are an easy sell to Americans.
It was and is a win win situation. It was and is easy to sell. It is good for our industrial manufactures. After all we are the largest producers of killing machines. It could be a prolonged market surge. Television can help it be perpetuated and more and more war products will be consumed in the name of peace. My fellow military officers will benefit as they did in Vietnam. Nam was a two promotion tour. Nam was a down payment on a new home, thanks to combat pay.
Yes Bosnia and the Fertile Crescent are much better places to be involved in a war. People are really growing fond of the idea. How that must sadden the "Christian General" I saw on my wall for so many years..
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
How One Man Ruined Humanity
The Death of Humanity or How Curiosity Killed the Cat
Ever wonder how we humans got in this mess?
People killing people in every corner of the world. People driven by greed stealing financial opportunities and security from thousands, no make that millions, of people in every village, town, city, and nation on this giant beautiful blue marble spinning through space and time. People seeking power and fame crushing people as they climb over their broken bodies and empty wallets at any spot on the globe. The bad guys seem to be winning.
The grand and glorious goal of a perfect socialist nation crumbled when angry citizens torne down A WALL. The vision of a nation of people worshiping and honoring their God as they see fit was struck down when freedom was deemed to be for everyone, not just the Christians. The idea that all human beings deserve the same opportunities and freedoms in this life was crucified: when a gay man was strapped to barb wire, tortured, and killed; when a young girl is mutilated and covered with a burka; when a white collar billion dollar criminal is better treated in prison than a homeless man in a shelter; and when national and international leaders meet and meet and talk on and on and on, while people continue to suffer from an array of persecutions.
HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?
FIRST WHEN DID IT HAPPEN?
Well, I have an idea that it started a long, long, long time ago, when humans existed in their own separate clusters. There were some in the hill country and they lived in comfortable caves. The ones in the plains lived in grass huts. The ones near the sea in warmer climates lived on the beach. And so on and so on, well you get the picture.
None of these groups knew about the other groups. They believed they were the only ones on this small planet. They each developed their own language, diet, ethics and beliefs about where they came from, why they were here, and where they were going. All was right with the universe!
SECOND WHY DID IT HAPPEN?
It probably started when the boys were playing on the edge of their "village" and one of them, let’s call him Abe, looked up the hill where the horizon met his world. The play stopped and one of his friends asked, "Abe what are you looking at?"
Abe answered, "The top of the hill. Have you ever wondered what is beyond the top of our hill?"
His friend replied, "Abe you should not say or think that. What if the elders heard you?"
Then over the next few years, Abe would go to the edge and ponder the hill and what laid beyond. He never discussed it with anyone, for fear of sounding different. Then one day after he had entered manhood, he made an important decision. A decision that would change humanity forever. On that particular day, Abe decided to venture over the hill and see what was on the other side.
In just a few days after he crossed the crest of the hill he encountered some beings that looked a little like him, except that their color and built were different than his. They were lighter skinned than Abe and much taller. He stayed hid and crept closer to observe them better. They spoke strange words and were eating fruits and vegetables.
What they ate bothered Abe the most. In his world human beings only ate the animals they caught and killed. Things from plants were for the pigs and other beast. Plus with their lighter skins and tall bodies, how could they hide in the forest and hunt for their food. They were so different than Abe. It unnerved him!
With great fear and a trembling heart, Abe ran back over the hill to his own world. As soon as he arrived he ran to the head elder and reported the awful and fearful things he had seen over the hill. Those beings he saw were so very different than him! It was frightening.
The elder listened. He had never encountered these things he was hearing. What to do? So he pondered for a moment before responding to Abe’s report.
As the elder pondered, Abe blurted out, "They look like wild animals to me. They also seem dangerous because they are nothing like us. We should kill them before they come up over our hill." The elder agreed and so did the rest of the human beings, who looked like Abe and ate like Abe.
AND IT HAPPENED!
Ever since Abe reported to that elder so very, very, very long ago, human beings have been afraid of any being different than them. So much so, they believe it is their duty to eliminate anything different. Of course, the methods of elimination have improved and the kinds of differences we fear have expanded since Abe first introduced that kind of fear to humanity.
THAT IS HOW IT HAPPENED!
Ever wonder how we humans got in this mess?
People killing people in every corner of the world. People driven by greed stealing financial opportunities and security from thousands, no make that millions, of people in every village, town, city, and nation on this giant beautiful blue marble spinning through space and time. People seeking power and fame crushing people as they climb over their broken bodies and empty wallets at any spot on the globe. The bad guys seem to be winning.
The grand and glorious goal of a perfect socialist nation crumbled when angry citizens torne down A WALL. The vision of a nation of people worshiping and honoring their God as they see fit was struck down when freedom was deemed to be for everyone, not just the Christians. The idea that all human beings deserve the same opportunities and freedoms in this life was crucified: when a gay man was strapped to barb wire, tortured, and killed; when a young girl is mutilated and covered with a burka; when a white collar billion dollar criminal is better treated in prison than a homeless man in a shelter; and when national and international leaders meet and meet and talk on and on and on, while people continue to suffer from an array of persecutions.
HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?
FIRST WHEN DID IT HAPPEN?
Well, I have an idea that it started a long, long, long time ago, when humans existed in their own separate clusters. There were some in the hill country and they lived in comfortable caves. The ones in the plains lived in grass huts. The ones near the sea in warmer climates lived on the beach. And so on and so on, well you get the picture.
None of these groups knew about the other groups. They believed they were the only ones on this small planet. They each developed their own language, diet, ethics and beliefs about where they came from, why they were here, and where they were going. All was right with the universe!
SECOND WHY DID IT HAPPEN?
It probably started when the boys were playing on the edge of their "village" and one of them, let’s call him Abe, looked up the hill where the horizon met his world. The play stopped and one of his friends asked, "Abe what are you looking at?"
Abe answered, "The top of the hill. Have you ever wondered what is beyond the top of our hill?"
His friend replied, "Abe you should not say or think that. What if the elders heard you?"
Then over the next few years, Abe would go to the edge and ponder the hill and what laid beyond. He never discussed it with anyone, for fear of sounding different. Then one day after he had entered manhood, he made an important decision. A decision that would change humanity forever. On that particular day, Abe decided to venture over the hill and see what was on the other side.
In just a few days after he crossed the crest of the hill he encountered some beings that looked a little like him, except that their color and built were different than his. They were lighter skinned than Abe and much taller. He stayed hid and crept closer to observe them better. They spoke strange words and were eating fruits and vegetables.
What they ate bothered Abe the most. In his world human beings only ate the animals they caught and killed. Things from plants were for the pigs and other beast. Plus with their lighter skins and tall bodies, how could they hide in the forest and hunt for their food. They were so different than Abe. It unnerved him!
With great fear and a trembling heart, Abe ran back over the hill to his own world. As soon as he arrived he ran to the head elder and reported the awful and fearful things he had seen over the hill. Those beings he saw were so very different than him! It was frightening.
The elder listened. He had never encountered these things he was hearing. What to do? So he pondered for a moment before responding to Abe’s report.
As the elder pondered, Abe blurted out, "They look like wild animals to me. They also seem dangerous because they are nothing like us. We should kill them before they come up over our hill." The elder agreed and so did the rest of the human beings, who looked like Abe and ate like Abe.
AND IT HAPPENED!
Ever since Abe reported to that elder so very, very, very long ago, human beings have been afraid of any being different than them. So much so, they believe it is their duty to eliminate anything different. Of course, the methods of elimination have improved and the kinds of differences we fear have expanded since Abe first introduced that kind of fear to humanity.
THAT IS HOW IT HAPPENED!
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Real Evil and The Source
G-d causes Life. (Like the chosen people of G-d, I am now seeing how any human word for
G-d limits the understanding of our Creator) Humans are life's crown. Evil soils life.
G-d has the final burden for evil. At the beginning, we humans were not created as puppets. G-d made us so we were able to oppose the will of G-d, if we desired. If this was not so, why did G-d command them not to eat of the tree? At that moment, they were not sinful people. They had a clear choice before them, but with no clear consequences. In that world choices counted. The divine-human relationship had not been mapped out by G-d. The first humans enjoyed a special freedom!
Evil destroyed that freedom. Today, humans are still searching for the lost freedom of walking daily with G-d in the Garden of life. What is this thing we call evil? It is anything that destroys our innocent connection with G-d. The story of the Garden is the classic explanation.
The earliest account tells of two supernatural trees in Eden, the Garden of G-d, the tree of life and a tree of the knowledge of good and evil. We humans were forbidden on pain of death to eat of the special trees. The reason seems to be G-d's concern that we would gain knowledge of good and evil. This would make us more like G-d. Maybe, with this knowledge we might could even threaten G-d's design for Creation. So we had to be removed from any access to the tree of life. With it our new position would be a permanent threat to the designed order of things.
Some say that the evil force there was the serpent or demon. They say he deliberately lied to lead them astray and they were helpless to his cunning ways. Many like that approach, because it makes us victims and not responsible for our fallen condition. I think this is an intellectual cop out and a cowards approach to G-d in regards to our sin.
That old serpent was hostile to G-d, and wanted the humans to know a truth about the trees, so they could be like G-d. Evil takes place when we desire to open our eyes and see what G-d sees, just to benefit ourselves. With opened eyes we see things differently from a theological perspective.
But like the first couple we soon realize that once we must decide for ourselves what is in our best own interest, things look rather different. On our own, we see the world entirely through our own eyes. We now only live out of our own resources.
Real evil is our trying to be G-d for ourselves. The primal sin is defined as mistrust of G-d and G-d's word. This is seen in human disobedience and our blaming others for our own bad actions. Evil is not our being victims in the state of sin. Our condition is merely the consequences of evil, which is our wanting to be G-d. As G-d we will know what is best for everyone. We will have final say so in every matter. Our way will be the right and only way. Evil is ambitious. In the world evil drives us to seek and grab power now.
A story: A person thought of running for mayor of a big city. If elected, they wanted to be the best mayor ever. But they knew that would not be enough. They would need to be Governor. Not just Governor, but the best one ever. No, it still would not be enough. President would be next, and the best one ever! No, wait their sights must be set on being a world leader, the best ever. Still, this was not enough. They must become the greatest person in all history and change all humanity. Then it suddenly hit this person. They were wanting to be the Christ, G-d incarnate!
End of story? The person chose to follow G-d, rather than compete with G-d. Like the humans in the beginning he was free to decide either to walk with G-d or not. They chose the walk, and the struggle that accompanies that freedom.
G-d limits the understanding of our Creator) Humans are life's crown. Evil soils life.
G-d has the final burden for evil. At the beginning, we humans were not created as puppets. G-d made us so we were able to oppose the will of G-d, if we desired. If this was not so, why did G-d command them not to eat of the tree? At that moment, they were not sinful people. They had a clear choice before them, but with no clear consequences. In that world choices counted. The divine-human relationship had not been mapped out by G-d. The first humans enjoyed a special freedom!
Evil destroyed that freedom. Today, humans are still searching for the lost freedom of walking daily with G-d in the Garden of life. What is this thing we call evil? It is anything that destroys our innocent connection with G-d. The story of the Garden is the classic explanation.
The earliest account tells of two supernatural trees in Eden, the Garden of G-d, the tree of life and a tree of the knowledge of good and evil. We humans were forbidden on pain of death to eat of the special trees. The reason seems to be G-d's concern that we would gain knowledge of good and evil. This would make us more like G-d. Maybe, with this knowledge we might could even threaten G-d's design for Creation. So we had to be removed from any access to the tree of life. With it our new position would be a permanent threat to the designed order of things.
Some say that the evil force there was the serpent or demon. They say he deliberately lied to lead them astray and they were helpless to his cunning ways. Many like that approach, because it makes us victims and not responsible for our fallen condition. I think this is an intellectual cop out and a cowards approach to G-d in regards to our sin.
That old serpent was hostile to G-d, and wanted the humans to know a truth about the trees, so they could be like G-d. Evil takes place when we desire to open our eyes and see what G-d sees, just to benefit ourselves. With opened eyes we see things differently from a theological perspective.
But like the first couple we soon realize that once we must decide for ourselves what is in our best own interest, things look rather different. On our own, we see the world entirely through our own eyes. We now only live out of our own resources.
Real evil is our trying to be G-d for ourselves. The primal sin is defined as mistrust of G-d and G-d's word. This is seen in human disobedience and our blaming others for our own bad actions. Evil is not our being victims in the state of sin. Our condition is merely the consequences of evil, which is our wanting to be G-d. As G-d we will know what is best for everyone. We will have final say so in every matter. Our way will be the right and only way. Evil is ambitious. In the world evil drives us to seek and grab power now.
A story: A person thought of running for mayor of a big city. If elected, they wanted to be the best mayor ever. But they knew that would not be enough. They would need to be Governor. Not just Governor, but the best one ever. No, it still would not be enough. President would be next, and the best one ever! No, wait their sights must be set on being a world leader, the best ever. Still, this was not enough. They must become the greatest person in all history and change all humanity. Then it suddenly hit this person. They were wanting to be the Christ, G-d incarnate!
End of story? The person chose to follow G-d, rather than compete with G-d. Like the humans in the beginning he was free to decide either to walk with G-d or not. They chose the walk, and the struggle that accompanies that freedom.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Survival of Everyday men and Women
Title: The everyday men and women of the world and how they survive
Regardless of your religion, nationality, race, gender most of us live in a real world unlike what we hear from our religious leaders, our politicians, and yes, our TV and internet connections. And over a hundred years ago, Edwin Markum wrote a poem that vividly captures the real world of the everyday men and women, It was titled “The Man with the Hoe.” Here it is:
“Bowed by the weight of centuries he leans
Upon his hoe and gazes on the ground,
The emptiness of ages in his face,
And on his back the burden of the world.”
That burden is still there and it always will be. The everyday men and women of the world still are the foundation of all that takes place on this planet. Most of the everyday men and women handle this burden with great pride in what part they must play in keeping this old world moving and spinning ahead. Pride in what I do and who I am has been the backbone of all great civilizations.
But the sad thing for me is how many of the everyday men and women are now handling the burden of the world on their shoulders. They no longer see the pride in carrying that burden. Instead it is a depressing position, not one of pride. These men and women wrap their burden in things like depression, alcohol, or drugs. And in the new electronic era many are wrapping themselves up in the internet and twitter world to escape the reality of their true burden in life - the world.
To rid ourselves of “the emptiness of ages” we take the advice of others and wrap ourselves in every new medication that is designed and promises to free of us of our burden and enclose our lives in impenetrable stupors. We even believe them when they assure us we are “victims” of something greater than ourselves. And we happily line up like sheep, passively leaning on our hoes gazing on the ground with almost empty blank faces because we believe we only carry these burdens as a result of the actions of others.
But is the man with the hoe a victim filled with despair? Not the way I read the poem.
“Bowed by the weight of centuries” recognizes we are all components (large and small) of a long history of hardworking peoples. We stand shoulder to shoulder with our ancestors and our children and their children’s children. How can we be depressed or feel like victims if we ourselves as reflections of others in this long line in history? We are proud members of the human race!
“Gazing on the ground” tells me that this man, like myself and millions of others, is a man who contemplates life. In the earth he sees his survival in the fruits of his labor. He does see dirt, he sees earth that sustains life. As I gaze into my world I see it is as a place that allows me freedom to survive and enjoy the fruits of my labors, no matter how limited they may be.
“The emptiness of ages in his face” illustrates to me that he is a man of peace, who does not need to escape reality with depression brought on by loneliness. He does not need a drug legal or illegal to anesthetize him from his reality. He knows life is what life is going to be. None of us were promised a rose garden, only a chance to smell the flowers we have planted and nurtured.
“On his back the burden of the world” lets us know he shares this planet and life with others. Therefore he will never be alone in this life. Depression will never visit this man. This man is not a victim. The everyday man with the hoe is part of something beyond his vision and comprehension, but his faith in the greater truth sustains him every day of his life.
Oh, the burden of life is always there. What can we do about it? Accept it as the normal terrain of life. Hold any judgements of it being good or bad. Simply approach it as a garden you must work in side by side with others. Escaping life is a futile folly because there is nothing to escape to or from in life. Our lives are where we find ourselves at birth and on each day as it unfolds as a chapter in the story of our individual lives.
Burdens are not negative, they are the exciting purpose of our lives. They are unique to us and ours to savor and enjoy as we enjoy all the facets of life. Wishing I had another person’s burden and escaping into a fantasy is nonproductive and never removes the actual burden of my life.
The man with the hoe knows that things like depression, alcoholism, drugs, and any means of escaping his burden are for men and women who have never actually stopped and leaned on their hoes to gaze at the soil they have worked and think upon the other men and women, who have shared their burdens. These poor souls see themselves as unique and victims of something greater.
The man with the hoe does not see life the way they do. The man with the hoe sees that he is part of the ages and stands shoulder to shoulder with the everyday men and women of the world and he is proud of it. Lean on your hoe and gaze upon what your toil has produced and remember it is a small part of a greater story. This where true peace is found.
Regardless of your religion, nationality, race, gender most of us live in a real world unlike what we hear from our religious leaders, our politicians, and yes, our TV and internet connections. And over a hundred years ago, Edwin Markum wrote a poem that vividly captures the real world of the everyday men and women, It was titled “The Man with the Hoe.” Here it is:
“Bowed by the weight of centuries he leans
Upon his hoe and gazes on the ground,
The emptiness of ages in his face,
And on his back the burden of the world.”
That burden is still there and it always will be. The everyday men and women of the world still are the foundation of all that takes place on this planet. Most of the everyday men and women handle this burden with great pride in what part they must play in keeping this old world moving and spinning ahead. Pride in what I do and who I am has been the backbone of all great civilizations.
But the sad thing for me is how many of the everyday men and women are now handling the burden of the world on their shoulders. They no longer see the pride in carrying that burden. Instead it is a depressing position, not one of pride. These men and women wrap their burden in things like depression, alcohol, or drugs. And in the new electronic era many are wrapping themselves up in the internet and twitter world to escape the reality of their true burden in life - the world.
To rid ourselves of “the emptiness of ages” we take the advice of others and wrap ourselves in every new medication that is designed and promises to free of us of our burden and enclose our lives in impenetrable stupors. We even believe them when they assure us we are “victims” of something greater than ourselves. And we happily line up like sheep, passively leaning on our hoes gazing on the ground with almost empty blank faces because we believe we only carry these burdens as a result of the actions of others.
But is the man with the hoe a victim filled with despair? Not the way I read the poem.
“Bowed by the weight of centuries” recognizes we are all components (large and small) of a long history of hardworking peoples. We stand shoulder to shoulder with our ancestors and our children and their children’s children. How can we be depressed or feel like victims if we ourselves as reflections of others in this long line in history? We are proud members of the human race!
“Gazing on the ground” tells me that this man, like myself and millions of others, is a man who contemplates life. In the earth he sees his survival in the fruits of his labor. He does see dirt, he sees earth that sustains life. As I gaze into my world I see it is as a place that allows me freedom to survive and enjoy the fruits of my labors, no matter how limited they may be.
“The emptiness of ages in his face” illustrates to me that he is a man of peace, who does not need to escape reality with depression brought on by loneliness. He does not need a drug legal or illegal to anesthetize him from his reality. He knows life is what life is going to be. None of us were promised a rose garden, only a chance to smell the flowers we have planted and nurtured.
“On his back the burden of the world” lets us know he shares this planet and life with others. Therefore he will never be alone in this life. Depression will never visit this man. This man is not a victim. The everyday man with the hoe is part of something beyond his vision and comprehension, but his faith in the greater truth sustains him every day of his life.
Oh, the burden of life is always there. What can we do about it? Accept it as the normal terrain of life. Hold any judgements of it being good or bad. Simply approach it as a garden you must work in side by side with others. Escaping life is a futile folly because there is nothing to escape to or from in life. Our lives are where we find ourselves at birth and on each day as it unfolds as a chapter in the story of our individual lives.
Burdens are not negative, they are the exciting purpose of our lives. They are unique to us and ours to savor and enjoy as we enjoy all the facets of life. Wishing I had another person’s burden and escaping into a fantasy is nonproductive and never removes the actual burden of my life.
The man with the hoe knows that things like depression, alcoholism, drugs, and any means of escaping his burden are for men and women who have never actually stopped and leaned on their hoes to gaze at the soil they have worked and think upon the other men and women, who have shared their burdens. These poor souls see themselves as unique and victims of something greater.
The man with the hoe does not see life the way they do. The man with the hoe sees that he is part of the ages and stands shoulder to shoulder with the everyday men and women of the world and he is proud of it. Lean on your hoe and gaze upon what your toil has produced and remember it is a small part of a greater story. This where true peace is found.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Cain, Bloomberg and others New Founding Fathers?
Is it time for The USA to find a new set of Founding Fathers?
The original set of Founding Fathers established a Republic based on a democracy that protected the entire citizenry against leadership that lived off the government. They feared that the heavy hand of the Lords and Earls of King George’s court could be replicated in this new nation if they didn’t take strong constitutional action to prevent it.
Escaping the yoke of royalty that lived off of income provided by the taxes imposed on the citizenry was a primary goal of most of the colonist. The same colonist that provided us those brave and insightful first Founding Fathers.
What was the profile of the first leaders who laid the foundation of our great nation that lasted nearly two hundred years? First there were no career politicians. There were none who were seeking positions of leadership that would set them financially for life. They were leaders from a wide variety of backgrounds, who sought to gather and do what was best for the citizenry as a whole. They had no special interest groups padding their pockets to buy their votes. They did not deem it necessary to give up their lives and businesses back home, because service to their country was temporary, not a whole new career. George Washington demonstrated that when he refused to serve more than two terms in office. He feared that any longer term of service might develop the greedy mentality of the Lords and Earls of King George’s court.
So how did it turn out? We don’t call them Lords and Earls. No, we call them representatives and Senators. We see them as career politicians, who live fully off of income provided by the taxes imposed on the citizenry. It looks as if, in the long run, it isn’t turning out so well. We are right back where we didn’t want to be in this new land of individual opportunity and freedom.
What now?
It is time for a new set of Founding Fathers. The Mayans believe the world calendar will reset in 2012 and a new era will begin. I think they are correct and we should reset our nation back to what the Founding Fathers intended.
How to do it?
The solution is ever so simple. We need only follow their example. In the 2012 election let us send leaders from our communities and businesses on temporary assignments in our governing bodies. Let us make sure there are no career politicians among them. Let us make sure there are none with ties to special interest groups that are padding their pockets. Let us make sure they all understand it is a temporary thing and we wish that they follow the lead of George Washington and serve no more than two terms.
If we don’t pry the reins of government from the hands of career politicians and self-serving greedy beings looking for a lifetime of income, this great nation is set to fail in a catastrophic way.
It thrills me when I see some new Founding fathers emerging from the business communities. Look what Bloomberg has done in New York. Maybe it is time to give the men like Herbert Cain, Donald Trump, and a hundred others an opportunity to reset our great nation, so we are once again what the original Founding father’s intended.
Let us have new Revolutionary War, but instead of bullets let us use ballots.
The original set of Founding Fathers established a Republic based on a democracy that protected the entire citizenry against leadership that lived off the government. They feared that the heavy hand of the Lords and Earls of King George’s court could be replicated in this new nation if they didn’t take strong constitutional action to prevent it.
Escaping the yoke of royalty that lived off of income provided by the taxes imposed on the citizenry was a primary goal of most of the colonist. The same colonist that provided us those brave and insightful first Founding Fathers.
What was the profile of the first leaders who laid the foundation of our great nation that lasted nearly two hundred years? First there were no career politicians. There were none who were seeking positions of leadership that would set them financially for life. They were leaders from a wide variety of backgrounds, who sought to gather and do what was best for the citizenry as a whole. They had no special interest groups padding their pockets to buy their votes. They did not deem it necessary to give up their lives and businesses back home, because service to their country was temporary, not a whole new career. George Washington demonstrated that when he refused to serve more than two terms in office. He feared that any longer term of service might develop the greedy mentality of the Lords and Earls of King George’s court.
So how did it turn out? We don’t call them Lords and Earls. No, we call them representatives and Senators. We see them as career politicians, who live fully off of income provided by the taxes imposed on the citizenry. It looks as if, in the long run, it isn’t turning out so well. We are right back where we didn’t want to be in this new land of individual opportunity and freedom.
What now?
It is time for a new set of Founding Fathers. The Mayans believe the world calendar will reset in 2012 and a new era will begin. I think they are correct and we should reset our nation back to what the Founding Fathers intended.
How to do it?
The solution is ever so simple. We need only follow their example. In the 2012 election let us send leaders from our communities and businesses on temporary assignments in our governing bodies. Let us make sure there are no career politicians among them. Let us make sure there are none with ties to special interest groups that are padding their pockets. Let us make sure they all understand it is a temporary thing and we wish that they follow the lead of George Washington and serve no more than two terms.
If we don’t pry the reins of government from the hands of career politicians and self-serving greedy beings looking for a lifetime of income, this great nation is set to fail in a catastrophic way.
It thrills me when I see some new Founding fathers emerging from the business communities. Look what Bloomberg has done in New York. Maybe it is time to give the men like Herbert Cain, Donald Trump, and a hundred others an opportunity to reset our great nation, so we are once again what the original Founding father’s intended.
Let us have new Revolutionary War, but instead of bullets let us use ballots.
Monday, October 3, 2011
Crisis Management The World Needs
The Chinese word for crisis combines the symbols for danger plus opportunity. For decades this nation has been in one crisis or another. Politicians, preachers, news people, and other public person are always declaring, The sky is falling_ The sky is falling_ Run for cover__ Danger seems to be every where.
First it was the big war in Europe. Then the Atomic age_ The Evil Empire of Communism_ Global Warming_ Bigotry_ Zero Population_ Dictators_ The Far Left_ The Far Right_ The Indifferent Middle_ Danger every where_ The world and this nation are going to hell in a hand basket_
Could we please do something different this time? Let us assume the dangers are self evident and focus on the opportunity side of each crisis faced. Aunt Mary taught me long ago that every girl has some nice or unique qualities. I also learned it was true about the boys. If I know another's strengths and good points, I know what opportunities we can have together.
Relationships are meant to be constructive not destructive. The same is true when viewing communities, nations and planets_ Perhaps it might be more beneficial, if we approach a crisis with the intent of discovering more opportunities than dangers? The old sayings carry a lot of truth. _You can get more flies with honey than vinegar._ or _The glass is half full not half empty._
Would this approach work at local levels in our society? Can we focus on opportunities in a crisis, rather than danger? If so, how? We know what is wrong. What about what is right? Local communities, already know the dangers of one particular crisis. That being the growing crisis of the poor. Amongst the poor education levels have diminished to near extinction; jobs and career opportunities have all but vanished; crime and gangs have become the norm; welfare has become a demanded right and a way of life; families with two parents are an exception rather than a rule; and the pride of a community has no clear focus. Yet every segment of society is affected in this crisis.
Initially in each community, gather a designated group of people under one roof. Then challenge, no, demand the group answer two questions: _What opportunities exist for our poor at this time?_ and _What opportunities may we have to create for them ourselves?_ Keep them assembled until they have listed and acknowledged actual opportunities apparent in the crisis of the poor today.
Who should be in the group? First, no elected officials. They have a mechanism to do all of this and they fail to ever use it properly. The group might be about thirty people from a variety of backgrounds and positions. Maybe a local federal judge; a local school superintendent; an unemployed single parent; an adult in a two parent home; a high school junior; a college senior; a tech school sophomore; a member of the local police and fire departments; a divorce lawyer; a criminal lawyer; an assistant district attorney; a fourth grade teacher; a high school teacher; a public housing resident; three clergy - fundamentalist, liberal, and moderate; a member of AA; a county prisoner convicted of robbery; a owner of a small business; presidents of three businesses - small, medium, and large; a doctor with a family practice; a hospital nurse; a food stamp counselor; a homeless person; a newspaper editor; and a TV reporter. A farmer or rancher would be a good chairperson.
Thirty people, vowing to enter a room together and not emerge until the opportunities available in the crisis amongst the poor are discovered. The resulting list of opportunities would be a social agenda and mandate for eliminating this crisis amongst the poor in our community. Opportunities would be provided for everyone, because everyone is involved. While the poor feel the biggest impact, we are all effected by their plight.
The list will provide signs of hope, not more warnings of danger. It produces something everyone enjoys, progress. Any win - win situation stimulates enthusiasm, cooperation as well as progress. Examinations of opportunities are much more productive than those that only look at dangers. In this up lifting approach, the dangers of the crisis are not ignored, they are simply treated as cautions.
Over fifty years ago, president Sukarno of Indonesia used this method to stabilize his nation. That small, but populated, nation still remains one of the few stable areas in the world. This approach is not limited to small or local communities. It is a perfect instrument for a nation in crisis. As a nation what would result if we addressed a budget deficit crisis with the same positive approach? We know the problems. Now we want them solved_
Crisis produces opportunity not just danger. Let us once again make this wonderful nation a land of opportunity seekers and not a brood of chicken littles_
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Me vs We
"Life In A Blender: the life and times of J.Q. Public", title of your autobiography? A friend said, "I have spent my life pursuing the American Dream and it's turning out to be a nightmare. I must be number one at everything. At the same time I must please everyone. I jumped head first into the vat of life, only to find out it was a blender."
To illustrate he shared this office fax with me: "Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up. It knows that it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed. Every morning a lion wakes up. It knows that it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death. It doesn't matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle: WHEN THE SUN COMES UP YOU HAD BETTER BE RUNNING". At first it sounds funny, but after a reflection it is a sad commentary on much of our society.
Have some of us grown so far away from our original roots of caring for one another? Is "We The People" only for some and "Every Man For Himself" others? My faith advocates that a true believer is one who serves humanity and leaves judgement of it to God. This social compulsion for being number one is anti "We The People" and any religion known to this writer.
Some expect to leap tall buildings, stop locomotives, be all things to all people and live a saintly life. In school all A's are a must. In competition, number one is god. In politics, being President seems to be the only label for success. In business and religion, being C.E.O. or Pastor of the largest, fastest and most progressive company or church is mandated. Nothing less seems to be acceptable.
For a large group of citizens individualism is far more important than the team. Me vs We, and their particular little team or group is far more important than the whole of society. Their "Golden Rule" seems to be "Do unto others before they do it to you". When a religion is a highly individualized one, that elevates a person above anyone else, it is destructive to our society. In it Life does seem to be in a blender. Peace of mind is a distant memory. This runs against the grain of all basic faiths.
What to do about the situation? It isn't necessary to be either a gazelle or a lion. Why not be a goose? The geese can teach us a lot about team work and caring for one another." Next time you see geese flying in formation, you'll do well to remember why they choose to fly in 'teams':
1. As each bird flaps its wings it creates uplift for the bird behind. By flying as a team ('V'), the whole flock adds at least 71% greater flying range than if flying alone. (Teams sharing a common direction and sense of esprit de corps will get to their destination quicker, and easier - they may even go further too!)
2. When a goose falls out of formation or 'goes it alone', it immediately feels drag and resistance and gets back into the team to take advantage of 'uplift' from other team members. (If we are as smart as the goose, we'll head in the same direction as the rest of the team).
3. When the team leader gets tired, he/she rotates back and another goose flies point. (Remember, leaders get tired too; teams can share the load of setting the pace - even the leadership).
4. The geese honk from behind to encourage those up front to keep up the speed. (When you honk, are you honking for support?)
5. When a goose gets sick or wounded, two geese fall out of formation and follow it down to help protect the fellow 'team' member. They stay until the goose either dies or flies and then catch up or join another team. (We all should show the same consideration for other team members - it's called esprit de corps)."- Atheneum Learning Corporation
Life is not a blender. For many it is a parfait. The people of God jump into the vat of life and find something perfect and wonderful, layers upon layers of persons and groups caring about others more than themselves. Where the last shall be first and the first shall be last. And if you can't get up running someone will stay with you and help.
Maybe John F. Kennedy was right, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country". Or perhaps Jesus was being prophetic for today when he said, "Do unto others as you would have them do to you". Whatever, my plea is for a society serving humanity and not a society of self serving humanity. And let it begin with me.
To illustrate he shared this office fax with me: "Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up. It knows that it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will be killed. Every morning a lion wakes up. It knows that it must outrun the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death. It doesn't matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle: WHEN THE SUN COMES UP YOU HAD BETTER BE RUNNING". At first it sounds funny, but after a reflection it is a sad commentary on much of our society.
Have some of us grown so far away from our original roots of caring for one another? Is "We The People" only for some and "Every Man For Himself" others? My faith advocates that a true believer is one who serves humanity and leaves judgement of it to God. This social compulsion for being number one is anti "We The People" and any religion known to this writer.
Some expect to leap tall buildings, stop locomotives, be all things to all people and live a saintly life. In school all A's are a must. In competition, number one is god. In politics, being President seems to be the only label for success. In business and religion, being C.E.O. or Pastor of the largest, fastest and most progressive company or church is mandated. Nothing less seems to be acceptable.
For a large group of citizens individualism is far more important than the team. Me vs We, and their particular little team or group is far more important than the whole of society. Their "Golden Rule" seems to be "Do unto others before they do it to you". When a religion is a highly individualized one, that elevates a person above anyone else, it is destructive to our society. In it Life does seem to be in a blender. Peace of mind is a distant memory. This runs against the grain of all basic faiths.
What to do about the situation? It isn't necessary to be either a gazelle or a lion. Why not be a goose? The geese can teach us a lot about team work and caring for one another." Next time you see geese flying in formation, you'll do well to remember why they choose to fly in 'teams':
1. As each bird flaps its wings it creates uplift for the bird behind. By flying as a team ('V'), the whole flock adds at least 71% greater flying range than if flying alone. (Teams sharing a common direction and sense of esprit de corps will get to their destination quicker, and easier - they may even go further too!)
2. When a goose falls out of formation or 'goes it alone', it immediately feels drag and resistance and gets back into the team to take advantage of 'uplift' from other team members. (If we are as smart as the goose, we'll head in the same direction as the rest of the team).
3. When the team leader gets tired, he/she rotates back and another goose flies point. (Remember, leaders get tired too; teams can share the load of setting the pace - even the leadership).
4. The geese honk from behind to encourage those up front to keep up the speed. (When you honk, are you honking for support?)
5. When a goose gets sick or wounded, two geese fall out of formation and follow it down to help protect the fellow 'team' member. They stay until the goose either dies or flies and then catch up or join another team. (We all should show the same consideration for other team members - it's called esprit de corps)."- Atheneum Learning Corporation
Life is not a blender. For many it is a parfait. The people of God jump into the vat of life and find something perfect and wonderful, layers upon layers of persons and groups caring about others more than themselves. Where the last shall be first and the first shall be last. And if you can't get up running someone will stay with you and help.
Maybe John F. Kennedy was right, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country". Or perhaps Jesus was being prophetic for today when he said, "Do unto others as you would have them do to you". Whatever, my plea is for a society serving humanity and not a society of self serving humanity. And let it begin with me.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Education of Children of Illegal Immigrants
The subject of allowing children of illegal immigrants has been around for a few years and gaining more attention in recent months. Unfortunately the subject provokes some issues that are diametrically opposed as to how they should be addressed. In other words the issue of educating children of illegal immigrants, and immigrants themselves, puts us all between a rock and hard place.
There seem to be two underlying issues behind this dilemma. They are: the Law of The Land and Societal Compassion. Illegal is illegal. But, carrying for children in our land has been a hallmark in our evolution as a advanced society.
Let’s start with the issue of illegality, because it confuses me most. When reports indicate that there are over 40,000 illegal Irish immigrants in the Boston area or that there are 12 million illegal Mexicans working in the USA, I have to ask myself a question. How do they know all of this if the people are illegal? Is there a separate reporting line on the census questionnaire? "Are you illegal? Check here! Is their a separate box to check on applications and drivers licences? And yes, many illegal immigrants drive legally.
When a child comes with his or her parents to enroll in a public school, how is it determined that they are children of illegal immigrants? Does the principal ask it? Is there a special form to fill out? How do they know?
Which brings me to the next issue. If they know, why aren’t the parents arrested? Instead of saying your child will be in classroom so and so, why don’t they say please wit a moment while I call the authorities. But wait a minute! You can’t separate children from their parents. Or can you?
If a legal USA citizen does something illegal, he or she is sent away regardless of whether or not they have children. Our court case workers will tell you it is common place and a real problem. Is that the same for children of parents being deported? Almost, because in most cases the children of illegal immigrants are natural born citizens of this country. Gets complicated doesn’t it?
Solution? I can think of one that has worked occasionally in other areas. And since it seems apparent that the business community and citizenry of our country need or want these illegal immigrants, it might work. Yes, we do need and want them because we keep hiring them.
What is that possible solution? Take seriously the concept of The United States of America. By widening the scope and understanding of America. Just like we added Alaska and Hawaii, let us add the nine or so states to our north in what is now called Canada and the twenty-five or so states in what we now call Mexico. The it would truly be the UNITED STATES OF NORTH AMERICA.
Then we could take advantage of the best of the three present countries, just as Europe is doing today. It is also the radical concept our forefathers had when they comprised these United States of America, that every human being on planet Earth seem to want to come to and enjoy.
There seem to be two underlying issues behind this dilemma. They are: the Law of The Land and Societal Compassion. Illegal is illegal. But, carrying for children in our land has been a hallmark in our evolution as a advanced society.
Let’s start with the issue of illegality, because it confuses me most. When reports indicate that there are over 40,000 illegal Irish immigrants in the Boston area or that there are 12 million illegal Mexicans working in the USA, I have to ask myself a question. How do they know all of this if the people are illegal? Is there a separate reporting line on the census questionnaire? "Are you illegal? Check here! Is their a separate box to check on applications and drivers licences? And yes, many illegal immigrants drive legally.
When a child comes with his or her parents to enroll in a public school, how is it determined that they are children of illegal immigrants? Does the principal ask it? Is there a special form to fill out? How do they know?
Which brings me to the next issue. If they know, why aren’t the parents arrested? Instead of saying your child will be in classroom so and so, why don’t they say please wit a moment while I call the authorities. But wait a minute! You can’t separate children from their parents. Or can you?
If a legal USA citizen does something illegal, he or she is sent away regardless of whether or not they have children. Our court case workers will tell you it is common place and a real problem. Is that the same for children of parents being deported? Almost, because in most cases the children of illegal immigrants are natural born citizens of this country. Gets complicated doesn’t it?
Solution? I can think of one that has worked occasionally in other areas. And since it seems apparent that the business community and citizenry of our country need or want these illegal immigrants, it might work. Yes, we do need and want them because we keep hiring them.
What is that possible solution? Take seriously the concept of The United States of America. By widening the scope and understanding of America. Just like we added Alaska and Hawaii, let us add the nine or so states to our north in what is now called Canada and the twenty-five or so states in what we now call Mexico. The it would truly be the UNITED STATES OF NORTH AMERICA.
Then we could take advantage of the best of the three present countries, just as Europe is doing today. It is also the radical concept our forefathers had when they comprised these United States of America, that every human being on planet Earth seem to want to come to and enjoy.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Christianity and Capitalism
“How Christian is free market capitalism, and what is the proper Christian response to those who succeed in it and those who fail in it?”
Definitions cause and prevent wars and schisms. First some definitions, to understand where I am coming from for this issue.
1) Christian = a person who disciplines their life’s ethics after the Christ. (Followers of the Christ) In my personal faith that Christ was the man Jesus of the Gospels in Holy Scriptures.
2) Free Market Capitalism = an economic system that allows supply and demand to determine the cost and the focus of production (agricultural, industrial, services, etc.).
Jesus was a capitalist. As a carpenter/contractor, he made his living according to the demand for his services. Scripture doesn’t really let us know his economic level, although his contemporaries seem to have been somewhat successful in their fields of endeavors.
Thus the question, “How Christian is free market capitalism?” It depends upon the ethics of the individuals in the marketplace. If all conduct their business with a Christian code of ethics it is a Christian free marketplace.
History has proven that to be a pipe dream. But it doesn’t alter the fact that a Christian must follow the Christian code of ethics regardless of what the rest of the marketplace is doing. In short a Christian must learn to use the Christian golden rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you) in a system where the golden rule of most is do unto others before they do unto you and he who has the gold rules. A tough task, but one that many very successful people have come close to doing most of the time.
What than is the Christian response to those who succeed in the marketplace and those who fail? Maybe a conversation I had with a rich lawyer might help. He said he felt guilty in church because of how he had been blessed with riches due to his God given talent.
I told him I was sure God was pleased to hear him acknowledge his riches were the result of a gift from God. He didn’t claim riches in arrogance, he claimed it in humility.
Next I said in the gospels the disciples went about their business of spreading the gospel. How do you think they were able to do that full time? He responded, “Others helped them along the way.”
My response was, “You got it!” God gives the gift of earnings to some and they underwrite the work of others. This is essentially the basic financial system of the church.
What about the poor? Hey, Jesus said, “The poor will always be with us.” And we are to care for them. So, the more successful a person is in the marketplace the more they will be able to care for the poor.
My whole notion fails if a person is in the marketplace primarily out of greed and not out of a response to God. But operating under Christian ethics in a non-Christian atmosphere is nothing new and neither are the results. Sometimes the Christian capitalist is successful and sometimes they crucify him. Regardless of the situation all Christian capitalist must apply the laws of God when it comes to the distribution of the wealth. After all since it is God’s gift that made it possible the earnings all belong to God anyway.
Definitions cause and prevent wars and schisms. First some definitions, to understand where I am coming from for this issue.
1) Christian = a person who disciplines their life’s ethics after the Christ. (Followers of the Christ) In my personal faith that Christ was the man Jesus of the Gospels in Holy Scriptures.
2) Free Market Capitalism = an economic system that allows supply and demand to determine the cost and the focus of production (agricultural, industrial, services, etc.).
Jesus was a capitalist. As a carpenter/contractor, he made his living according to the demand for his services. Scripture doesn’t really let us know his economic level, although his contemporaries seem to have been somewhat successful in their fields of endeavors.
Thus the question, “How Christian is free market capitalism?” It depends upon the ethics of the individuals in the marketplace. If all conduct their business with a Christian code of ethics it is a Christian free marketplace.
History has proven that to be a pipe dream. But it doesn’t alter the fact that a Christian must follow the Christian code of ethics regardless of what the rest of the marketplace is doing. In short a Christian must learn to use the Christian golden rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you) in a system where the golden rule of most is do unto others before they do unto you and he who has the gold rules. A tough task, but one that many very successful people have come close to doing most of the time.
What than is the Christian response to those who succeed in the marketplace and those who fail? Maybe a conversation I had with a rich lawyer might help. He said he felt guilty in church because of how he had been blessed with riches due to his God given talent.
I told him I was sure God was pleased to hear him acknowledge his riches were the result of a gift from God. He didn’t claim riches in arrogance, he claimed it in humility.
Next I said in the gospels the disciples went about their business of spreading the gospel. How do you think they were able to do that full time? He responded, “Others helped them along the way.”
My response was, “You got it!” God gives the gift of earnings to some and they underwrite the work of others. This is essentially the basic financial system of the church.
What about the poor? Hey, Jesus said, “The poor will always be with us.” And we are to care for them. So, the more successful a person is in the marketplace the more they will be able to care for the poor.
My whole notion fails if a person is in the marketplace primarily out of greed and not out of a response to God. But operating under Christian ethics in a non-Christian atmosphere is nothing new and neither are the results. Sometimes the Christian capitalist is successful and sometimes they crucify him. Regardless of the situation all Christian capitalist must apply the laws of God when it comes to the distribution of the wealth. After all since it is God’s gift that made it possible the earnings all belong to God anyway.
Sunday, September 11, 2011
Is it Time to think Global
An auto manufacturer in India buys Jaguar and Land Rover. China outsourced labor intensive work to a nation in Africa. Being built in Japan is a sign of craftsmanship and quality. A popular model of a Japanese automobile manufacturer vehicle is one hundred percent built in the USA.
In the Congo province of Katanga Chinese businessmen are buying copper ore at a record pace. In Canada, Southeast Asia and the southern tie of the old USSR they are also buying up or securing leases to explore the rich oil, gas, and alloy fields of the regions at an unheard of pace.
Because of the recent interest and actual activity generated by the Chinese the economies of Latin America and Africa are expanding more than they have in nearly a century. This story is being repeated across the globe with many Arab and India based companies as well as the Chinese.
What is this phenomenon? It is called Fast Paced Globalization, which for Western European Countries finds its roots in the expansion work started by Christopher Columbus.
The whole phenomenon reminds me of what transpired when a leak first sprang out in a very enormous dam. It was a trickle and the people realized they could harness it and get not only better water, but more water for their community. This improved their economies.
Then another person realized this leak could be developed into a larger controlled system and really create an economic boon for them. Of course, this new wave of expansion required more workers. It didn’’t take long before their pool of workers evaporated as the old workers discovered better levels of life with their new found wealth from the increased economy. So they looked else where for workers.
You get they idea. Eventually the entire dam was the included in the system, which weakened its ability to hold back all of that water. Then, of course, the damn broke and they no longer had control of their precious water. It moved on, and others quickly came in and attempted to harness the precious water resource in the same way the first group had done many years ago.
Globalization is telling us the dam is broke and all of the resources we thought we had control over are now spilling out into other economies that are quickly gobbling them up. And like a broken dam with water bursting forth, it cannot be fixed by putting our fingers in the hole. It is to big, now, and it will require much work if we are to gain any control of the resources now spreading out across the land. Some is better than none.
But, alas, the people are shouting warnings about what all this expansion means. They resent the gas companies coming in. They resent the impact. They resent the Arab oil cartel. They resent, foreign workers. They resent...... etc. etc.
Ladies and gentlemen, the damn is broken and globalization is here! It is time for our community to begin seeking at least five foreign partners to our industrial complex. Maybe one partner from China, one from Mexico, one from India, one from Venezuela, and one Egypt, since each has already some industry compatible with our economic and marketing situation.
We cannot wait for the gas phenomenon to pass to act upon this new phase. It must be started up as fast as possible, if we wish our grandchildren to have an economy like what we have enjoyed these past two or three hundred years. If we don’’t act, our grandchildren may become recipients of China’’s outsourced work.
In the Congo province of Katanga Chinese businessmen are buying copper ore at a record pace. In Canada, Southeast Asia and the southern tie of the old USSR they are also buying up or securing leases to explore the rich oil, gas, and alloy fields of the regions at an unheard of pace.
Because of the recent interest and actual activity generated by the Chinese the economies of Latin America and Africa are expanding more than they have in nearly a century. This story is being repeated across the globe with many Arab and India based companies as well as the Chinese.
What is this phenomenon? It is called Fast Paced Globalization, which for Western European Countries finds its roots in the expansion work started by Christopher Columbus.
The whole phenomenon reminds me of what transpired when a leak first sprang out in a very enormous dam. It was a trickle and the people realized they could harness it and get not only better water, but more water for their community. This improved their economies.
Then another person realized this leak could be developed into a larger controlled system and really create an economic boon for them. Of course, this new wave of expansion required more workers. It didn’’t take long before their pool of workers evaporated as the old workers discovered better levels of life with their new found wealth from the increased economy. So they looked else where for workers.
You get they idea. Eventually the entire dam was the included in the system, which weakened its ability to hold back all of that water. Then, of course, the damn broke and they no longer had control of their precious water. It moved on, and others quickly came in and attempted to harness the precious water resource in the same way the first group had done many years ago.
Globalization is telling us the dam is broke and all of the resources we thought we had control over are now spilling out into other economies that are quickly gobbling them up. And like a broken dam with water bursting forth, it cannot be fixed by putting our fingers in the hole. It is to big, now, and it will require much work if we are to gain any control of the resources now spreading out across the land. Some is better than none.
But, alas, the people are shouting warnings about what all this expansion means. They resent the gas companies coming in. They resent the impact. They resent the Arab oil cartel. They resent, foreign workers. They resent...... etc. etc.
Ladies and gentlemen, the damn is broken and globalization is here! It is time for our community to begin seeking at least five foreign partners to our industrial complex. Maybe one partner from China, one from Mexico, one from India, one from Venezuela, and one Egypt, since each has already some industry compatible with our economic and marketing situation.
We cannot wait for the gas phenomenon to pass to act upon this new phase. It must be started up as fast as possible, if we wish our grandchildren to have an economy like what we have enjoyed these past two or three hundred years. If we don’’t act, our grandchildren may become recipients of China’’s outsourced work.
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Extremist of all faiths caused 9-11
Sunday is the tenth anniversary of the cowardly attack on the Trade Towers and the Pentagon. It seems as if extremist are moving front and center in our lives. Why not? We have extreme skiing; climbing; racing, dress; politics; and of course religion to name just a few.
Personally, I have a problem with many extreme positions. In the last few years, I have known and/or buried persons killed while participating in an extreme sport. I have watched a war between extremist take the lives of over a thousand young men, and wound over ten thousand. I have endured criticism from extremist from both the far right and far left.
Let me reflect on some of these extreme positions.
First, those that include physical danger just for the fun of it.
A bumper sticker that reads, “MUD GUTS GLORY” is on a camouflaged civilian vehicle, which for me, is like having a four wheel drive vehicle in New York City. It reminded me of the vehicle that belonged to one of the a young men I buried. I thought, “Hey, that should read “MONEY STUPIDITY DEATH.” In my world GUTS and GLORY are reserved for the battlefields of life. I wonder if the young man, with that bumper sticker, ever served his country or honored a loving God? I seriously doubt it.
Another series of events has been the proliferation of news reports in all the media about the religious extremist, both left and right. They dominate the events and overshadow the vast middle spiritual majorities found in every religion. These stories frighten me for how they reveal where these extremist are taking us. Are we facing a cataclysmic religious war between the extremes?
Let me explain by showing you how I understand their views on three common subjects: 1) Freedom of the individual - 2) The position of women - and 3) Standards of life.
1) Freedom of the individual -
a) Far Left says let everyone do whatever they want, because it is their God given right to be free (They will let a murderer or molester free to protect their rights).
b) Far Right says everyone must be alike, and make the same acceptable choices (Those with the most might tell us what is acceptable).
c) The Spiritual Middle says respect your fellow human beings with equality, since all were created in the image of God (Those who don’t show this respect lose privileges of society according to their degree of disrespect, which is determined by the people’s chosen leaders).
2) The position of women -
a) Far Left says women are suppressed and it is a war, between the genders, as to who will dictate the rules of society (Therefore, they can dress and act however they want and not feel responsible about anything that brings).
b) Far Right says women should be subjected to men in all things (They should not be seen or heard from, and any violation brings punishment from the men).
c) The Spiritual Middle says God created men and women together as images of God, therefore they should be treated with equal respect (Gender is not a stereotype for expectations in the world, so people should be equally evaluated in their endeavors in life).
and
3) Standards of life -
a) Far Left says each person sets their standards and as long as they don’t interfere to much with others, they should be tolerated (pedophiles deserve respect, just as much as preachers).
b) Far Right says everyone must adhere to one set of rules (anyone who doesn’t is condemned).
c) The Spiritual Middle says the standards for life is respect of each person, of ourselves, and of our Creator, by whatever name you apply).
What will happen if either of these extremes controls society? Death! That is correct death. Why? If I am ridged in my approach of things, demanding all to get in line with me, and condemn anyone who doesn’t, I will eventually have to do physical battle with them to remove them. Why? Because, I see them as an obstacle to what I truly believe in.
What will happen if the Spiritual Middle controls society? Respect! That’s correct, respect will govern relationships and attitudes. If, I respect you, I will listen to your perspective and give it equal credence. Wait a minute, wasn’t there a song about it sometime ago? Oh, yes, it went something like this, “Let’s get together and love one another, right now!” Maybe we could even beat our swords into plowshares, instead of beating people into submission. What say ye fundamentalist of the world’s religions? Time to quit killing and start respecting? Or should we hunker down for another Pearl harbor or 2/11?
Personally, I have a problem with many extreme positions. In the last few years, I have known and/or buried persons killed while participating in an extreme sport. I have watched a war between extremist take the lives of over a thousand young men, and wound over ten thousand. I have endured criticism from extremist from both the far right and far left.
Let me reflect on some of these extreme positions.
First, those that include physical danger just for the fun of it.
A bumper sticker that reads, “MUD GUTS GLORY” is on a camouflaged civilian vehicle, which for me, is like having a four wheel drive vehicle in New York City. It reminded me of the vehicle that belonged to one of the a young men I buried. I thought, “Hey, that should read “MONEY STUPIDITY DEATH.” In my world GUTS and GLORY are reserved for the battlefields of life. I wonder if the young man, with that bumper sticker, ever served his country or honored a loving God? I seriously doubt it.
Another series of events has been the proliferation of news reports in all the media about the religious extremist, both left and right. They dominate the events and overshadow the vast middle spiritual majorities found in every religion. These stories frighten me for how they reveal where these extremist are taking us. Are we facing a cataclysmic religious war between the extremes?
Let me explain by showing you how I understand their views on three common subjects: 1) Freedom of the individual - 2) The position of women - and 3) Standards of life.
1) Freedom of the individual -
a) Far Left says let everyone do whatever they want, because it is their God given right to be free (They will let a murderer or molester free to protect their rights).
b) Far Right says everyone must be alike, and make the same acceptable choices (Those with the most might tell us what is acceptable).
c) The Spiritual Middle says respect your fellow human beings with equality, since all were created in the image of God (Those who don’t show this respect lose privileges of society according to their degree of disrespect, which is determined by the people’s chosen leaders).
2) The position of women -
a) Far Left says women are suppressed and it is a war, between the genders, as to who will dictate the rules of society (Therefore, they can dress and act however they want and not feel responsible about anything that brings).
b) Far Right says women should be subjected to men in all things (They should not be seen or heard from, and any violation brings punishment from the men).
c) The Spiritual Middle says God created men and women together as images of God, therefore they should be treated with equal respect (Gender is not a stereotype for expectations in the world, so people should be equally evaluated in their endeavors in life).
and
3) Standards of life -
a) Far Left says each person sets their standards and as long as they don’t interfere to much with others, they should be tolerated (pedophiles deserve respect, just as much as preachers).
b) Far Right says everyone must adhere to one set of rules (anyone who doesn’t is condemned).
c) The Spiritual Middle says the standards for life is respect of each person, of ourselves, and of our Creator, by whatever name you apply).
What will happen if either of these extremes controls society? Death! That is correct death. Why? If I am ridged in my approach of things, demanding all to get in line with me, and condemn anyone who doesn’t, I will eventually have to do physical battle with them to remove them. Why? Because, I see them as an obstacle to what I truly believe in.
What will happen if the Spiritual Middle controls society? Respect! That’s correct, respect will govern relationships and attitudes. If, I respect you, I will listen to your perspective and give it equal credence. Wait a minute, wasn’t there a song about it sometime ago? Oh, yes, it went something like this, “Let’s get together and love one another, right now!” Maybe we could even beat our swords into plowshares, instead of beating people into submission. What say ye fundamentalist of the world’s religions? Time to quit killing and start respecting? Or should we hunker down for another Pearl harbor or 2/11?
Sunday, September 4, 2011
How the world will end in 2013
Reading and listening to the news is depressing. It doesn’’t matter if it is political news, scientific news, financial news, religious news, educational news, or whatever else. Whatever publication you pick up or whatever web site you go to, it is all depressingly similar. Everything is increasing in cost due to the rapidly rising cost of oil.
The industrial world’’s frantic craze to cling to being oil dependent is strangling the entire world. We ignore anything that can replace oil, even the more efficient, cleaner and cheaper ones.
Pondering the question, why we won’’t change our attitude, is a waste of time. The Arab oil moguls, that we built with our own money and scientific know how, could care less what happens to us. In fact Dubai is building an economic center for when their oil runs out. How do I know? Watched it on our TV!
With that said, I can tell you when and how the world we know will end. When? 2013!
How will it happen? It will start in Africa and radiate out. Why Africa? Because we industrial nations have a greater desire to cling to an oil base society than we do with people starving in Africa,
How so? We divert food products and subsidize farms, so ten percent of our fuel will be ethanol or the like. Now less food is available to give away. Plus, we are afraid to stand up to the pathetic leaders of Saudi Arabia and other oil producing dictators. So the cost of oil needed to distribute food causes it to be to expensive to help.
Therefore, current epidemics of Africa starvation and killing will rapidly escalate. Starving people can’’t survive that long, so this will happen fast.
The fringe nations will see their economies collapse quickly. Why? They are dependent upon industrial nations for employment. These are the "out source" people we have heard about over the years.
Transportation costs will sky rocket and drive the cost of goods from the fringe nations through the roof . The industrial world will quickly look inside themselves for ways and means of reaching their goals of production. But a giant hurdle will emerge. How can the industrial society’’s workers earn enough monies at these menial tasks? Tasks desperately needed for all production. Can the citizenry still earn enough to keep up with the spiraling oil driven inflation?
Then the end will quickly unfold. The poor of the world will have turned on themselves in order to survive. They and the fringe societies will also turn on anyone who has what they need.
The industrial societies will be at a stand still. Needed monies will not be available due to the high cost as oil prices drive costs higher and higher. Money to buy air conditioning, drive to entertainment, purchase more and more electronic devises, and worse yet, there will be no cheap illegal workers available, because they will be eliminated in the fringe nation revolts. The citizens of the industrial nations will sit down and die. After all, who will flip their burgers? Mow their lawns and pick the crops? Who will take care of them?
Well, after the poor have died off in their struggle to avoid starvation; and the fringe societies disappeared because the industrial nations could no longer afford to use them; and the industrial nations wilt away because they must fend for themselves, the final exit will happen. The oil despots will shrivel up since all their dumb oil dependent clients will be gone.
How to prevent this eminent demise of the world? Insist that our society dump oil and replace it with nature’’s own free sun, air and water power. Act now or die soon.
The industrial world’’s frantic craze to cling to being oil dependent is strangling the entire world. We ignore anything that can replace oil, even the more efficient, cleaner and cheaper ones.
Pondering the question, why we won’’t change our attitude, is a waste of time. The Arab oil moguls, that we built with our own money and scientific know how, could care less what happens to us. In fact Dubai is building an economic center for when their oil runs out. How do I know? Watched it on our TV!
With that said, I can tell you when and how the world we know will end. When? 2013!
How will it happen? It will start in Africa and radiate out. Why Africa? Because we industrial nations have a greater desire to cling to an oil base society than we do with people starving in Africa,
How so? We divert food products and subsidize farms, so ten percent of our fuel will be ethanol or the like. Now less food is available to give away. Plus, we are afraid to stand up to the pathetic leaders of Saudi Arabia and other oil producing dictators. So the cost of oil needed to distribute food causes it to be to expensive to help.
Therefore, current epidemics of Africa starvation and killing will rapidly escalate. Starving people can’’t survive that long, so this will happen fast.
The fringe nations will see their economies collapse quickly. Why? They are dependent upon industrial nations for employment. These are the "out source" people we have heard about over the years.
Transportation costs will sky rocket and drive the cost of goods from the fringe nations through the roof . The industrial world will quickly look inside themselves for ways and means of reaching their goals of production. But a giant hurdle will emerge. How can the industrial society’’s workers earn enough monies at these menial tasks? Tasks desperately needed for all production. Can the citizenry still earn enough to keep up with the spiraling oil driven inflation?
Then the end will quickly unfold. The poor of the world will have turned on themselves in order to survive. They and the fringe societies will also turn on anyone who has what they need.
The industrial societies will be at a stand still. Needed monies will not be available due to the high cost as oil prices drive costs higher and higher. Money to buy air conditioning, drive to entertainment, purchase more and more electronic devises, and worse yet, there will be no cheap illegal workers available, because they will be eliminated in the fringe nation revolts. The citizens of the industrial nations will sit down and die. After all, who will flip their burgers? Mow their lawns and pick the crops? Who will take care of them?
Well, after the poor have died off in their struggle to avoid starvation; and the fringe societies disappeared because the industrial nations could no longer afford to use them; and the industrial nations wilt away because they must fend for themselves, the final exit will happen. The oil despots will shrivel up since all their dumb oil dependent clients will be gone.
How to prevent this eminent demise of the world? Insist that our society dump oil and replace it with nature’’s own free sun, air and water power. Act now or die soon.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Where to draw the line between dedication to holiness and religious fanaticism (in light of the 9/11anniversary)?
What is holiness? What is religious fanaticism?
Holiness is a measurement of a person’s divine nature. How godly a person are they? Understanding what holiness is, requires an understanding of what divine identity is defined. If the divine being is a loving identity, holiness is a measurement of one’s loving nature. If the divine being is a wrathful God, who will destroy any opposition, then holiness is a measurement of one’s triumphs over any opposing ideas or definitions.
Religious fanaticism is an intolerance of any religious beliefs that do not fully align with our own. This covers every religious belief from the far left to the far right, if the person is avidly intolerant of any religious belief, other than their own.
In ancient times this was only a problem when two religious ideas crossed paths. The world’s societies or cultures were divided by religious beliefs. A person’s neighbors were of the same faith as they. As populations grew and humanity became more mobile and urban, people found themselves with neighbors of different religious views.
These new neighborhoods of mixed views taxed the concept of holiness. If a person’s holiness was a measure of their love of their fellow beings, they would never attack anyone else’s beliefs. They would always forgive, while turning the other cheek. The classic example of this was killed by his neighbors. Any person who truly follows this way of holiness will always end up in some form of crucifixion, not triumph, on this Earth.
If a person’s holiness is to prove here on Earth that their religion or understanding of the divine is the one and only true one, they will always attack the beliefs of others. They will live by the sword and die by the sword. Their earthly triumphs are never permanent, because someone always eventually attacks and defeats them.
So is it futile? Where can we draw the line, so each can survive as neighbors? I am not sure any longer. I thought we could exist side by side, but the attackers don’t like to heard disagreeing ideas, no matter how philosophical it might be. So, may be we are headed back to the dark ages, when neighborhoods were divided over religious differences.
Perhaps we could let each group build a wall around their cities and allow no one but true believers into their particular neighborhood. Let them all sign a treaty that says they will keep their noses out of the business of the other cities and neighborhoods. I think its called isolationism.
Wait a minute, isn’t that what they are doing with the Gaza strip? North Korea? Saudi Arabia? and other places? It is even close to home, with the blossoming congregations in several religions. These growing groups are against anyone with different views. The people inside these movements usually don’t really know for sure what their religion is in truth, but they love the comfort of being surrounded with fellow believers. Just like living in a village around the castle with a king protecting you.
I guess the line to draw between dedication to holiness and religious fanaticism is a circle and allow in only people like me - And to Hell with the rest. Or forget any line at all and respect my fellow human beings and their beliefs - And be fanatical about it.
Holiness is a measurement of a person’s divine nature. How godly a person are they? Understanding what holiness is, requires an understanding of what divine identity is defined. If the divine being is a loving identity, holiness is a measurement of one’s loving nature. If the divine being is a wrathful God, who will destroy any opposition, then holiness is a measurement of one’s triumphs over any opposing ideas or definitions.
Religious fanaticism is an intolerance of any religious beliefs that do not fully align with our own. This covers every religious belief from the far left to the far right, if the person is avidly intolerant of any religious belief, other than their own.
In ancient times this was only a problem when two religious ideas crossed paths. The world’s societies or cultures were divided by religious beliefs. A person’s neighbors were of the same faith as they. As populations grew and humanity became more mobile and urban, people found themselves with neighbors of different religious views.
These new neighborhoods of mixed views taxed the concept of holiness. If a person’s holiness was a measure of their love of their fellow beings, they would never attack anyone else’s beliefs. They would always forgive, while turning the other cheek. The classic example of this was killed by his neighbors. Any person who truly follows this way of holiness will always end up in some form of crucifixion, not triumph, on this Earth.
If a person’s holiness is to prove here on Earth that their religion or understanding of the divine is the one and only true one, they will always attack the beliefs of others. They will live by the sword and die by the sword. Their earthly triumphs are never permanent, because someone always eventually attacks and defeats them.
So is it futile? Where can we draw the line, so each can survive as neighbors? I am not sure any longer. I thought we could exist side by side, but the attackers don’t like to heard disagreeing ideas, no matter how philosophical it might be. So, may be we are headed back to the dark ages, when neighborhoods were divided over religious differences.
Perhaps we could let each group build a wall around their cities and allow no one but true believers into their particular neighborhood. Let them all sign a treaty that says they will keep their noses out of the business of the other cities and neighborhoods. I think its called isolationism.
Wait a minute, isn’t that what they are doing with the Gaza strip? North Korea? Saudi Arabia? and other places? It is even close to home, with the blossoming congregations in several religions. These growing groups are against anyone with different views. The people inside these movements usually don’t really know for sure what their religion is in truth, but they love the comfort of being surrounded with fellow believers. Just like living in a village around the castle with a king protecting you.
I guess the line to draw between dedication to holiness and religious fanaticism is a circle and allow in only people like me - And to Hell with the rest. Or forget any line at all and respect my fellow human beings and their beliefs - And be fanatical about it.
Sunday, August 28, 2011
Are women only valuable for their female forms
September 12, 1866, a new era of entertainment and feminism started with the New York premiere of "The Black Crook". It is the first American theater show to feature beautiful American girls. The beginning of an era when some of the public go to the musical theater to hear the show while others go to see the showgirls. Since then there has been a tendency, so to speak, to bring on the dancing girls as attractive window dressing to help sell a concept or an idea. Flesh became an agent of profit.
Ye gads! That sounds awful. Are you saying that anything that shows flesh is bad, vulgar or indecent? You don't look or sound like a prude. I am not a prude. I believe flesh in art has a place. The works of the great masters stir people at the inner core of their being. It, also, is not for me to say what is art or what is trash. One person's trash is another person's art. Don't believe me? Go antique shopping with me sometime.
What caught my attention about what "The Black Crook" ushered into society is the purpose of flesh in its presentation. Was the script or cast so weak, the director found it necessary to parade a female form to secure audience approval? Flesh for profit? Today slim beautiful female forms stand smiling in ads for socket wrenches, fishing and hunting gear, automobiles, and alcoholic beverages. Flesh for profit?
Ye gads! There you go again. What are you some kind of crusader for a return to good old American values? Heavens no! Nobody, but good old boys, wants to return to those good old days. You know, days when a man could belt the old lady and brag about it at his local watering hole. The era when a woman, broke, barefoot and pregnant, kept her place, while old dad kept his mistress happy in town or himself in socially accepted brothels like Miss Laura's Place. Ah yes, the summer days in sweat shops with ten year olds girls sewing fourteen hours a day and occasionally losing just a finger or two. Will we ever return to a day when young ladies keep their mouths shut and accept what comes naturally to good old boy fathers, uncles or neighbors? Ah yes, those days when men were men and women were women, whatever that means. Flesh for profit?
My point is that since that eventful day 145 years ago, we have wonder far into the forest of misuse of the female form as an object. Like a hiker in the woods we are surrounded by ads dominated by smiling standing women. As these slim young icons work for profiteers, they net a deeper sale. They subconsciously sell another powerful image. A fundamental message that beauty of the flesh is the only profitable asset a real woman can have in her life. No wonder she is the darling of the good old boy set.
The spill over effect in the rest of our lives is frightening. Witness frustrated women of all ages throwing billions of dollars to a diet industry, who promises you will look like those fleshly images, if you just spend a few more dollars. And nothing is more frightening to a modestly built middle aged woman, than a fashion industry that designs for sports car image bodies. The final straw is the increasing number of upper level executives, who feel compelled to seek a trophy wife from the flesh for profit cult.
Let us see the Madison Avenue ad companies present products solely in light of benefits and features. Please Mr. Ad Man recognize me as a person, who can think. Only a few of us are mindless twits. Restore the standard of truth in advertising. Let me see what I am going to get for my money, not what I wish in my pubic fantasies. It is time to end the era of flesh for profit.
Ye gads! That sounds awful. Are you saying that anything that shows flesh is bad, vulgar or indecent? You don't look or sound like a prude. I am not a prude. I believe flesh in art has a place. The works of the great masters stir people at the inner core of their being. It, also, is not for me to say what is art or what is trash. One person's trash is another person's art. Don't believe me? Go antique shopping with me sometime.
What caught my attention about what "The Black Crook" ushered into society is the purpose of flesh in its presentation. Was the script or cast so weak, the director found it necessary to parade a female form to secure audience approval? Flesh for profit? Today slim beautiful female forms stand smiling in ads for socket wrenches, fishing and hunting gear, automobiles, and alcoholic beverages. Flesh for profit?
Ye gads! There you go again. What are you some kind of crusader for a return to good old American values? Heavens no! Nobody, but good old boys, wants to return to those good old days. You know, days when a man could belt the old lady and brag about it at his local watering hole. The era when a woman, broke, barefoot and pregnant, kept her place, while old dad kept his mistress happy in town or himself in socially accepted brothels like Miss Laura's Place. Ah yes, the summer days in sweat shops with ten year olds girls sewing fourteen hours a day and occasionally losing just a finger or two. Will we ever return to a day when young ladies keep their mouths shut and accept what comes naturally to good old boy fathers, uncles or neighbors? Ah yes, those days when men were men and women were women, whatever that means. Flesh for profit?
My point is that since that eventful day 145 years ago, we have wonder far into the forest of misuse of the female form as an object. Like a hiker in the woods we are surrounded by ads dominated by smiling standing women. As these slim young icons work for profiteers, they net a deeper sale. They subconsciously sell another powerful image. A fundamental message that beauty of the flesh is the only profitable asset a real woman can have in her life. No wonder she is the darling of the good old boy set.
The spill over effect in the rest of our lives is frightening. Witness frustrated women of all ages throwing billions of dollars to a diet industry, who promises you will look like those fleshly images, if you just spend a few more dollars. And nothing is more frightening to a modestly built middle aged woman, than a fashion industry that designs for sports car image bodies. The final straw is the increasing number of upper level executives, who feel compelled to seek a trophy wife from the flesh for profit cult.
Let us see the Madison Avenue ad companies present products solely in light of benefits and features. Please Mr. Ad Man recognize me as a person, who can think. Only a few of us are mindless twits. Restore the standard of truth in advertising. Let me see what I am going to get for my money, not what I wish in my pubic fantasies. It is time to end the era of flesh for profit.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Justified Homicide depends upon your culture
Recently, the news showed a Roman Catholic priest advocating the killing anyone involved with preforming an abortion. He refered to it as "justifiable homicide". According to this priest anyone killing a doctor, who performs abortions, should receive a medal. Yes, he said a medal!
No it wasn't Pope Gallistus II at the Lateran I Council in 1123 forbidding married priest. Nor was it Paul III reaffirming moral standards for clergy at the Council of Trent, 1545-63. It certainly wasn't Dietrich Bonhoeffer who after his work, "The Cost of Discipleship", was executed in a concentration camp. And most assuredly it wasn't something from Derek Humphry founder of the Hemlock Society and ERGO! (an acronym of Euthanasia Research and Guidance Society).
It was a simple parish priest. It could have just as well been a extreme fundamental Protestant or Muslim. Or taken to extremes any ideologue, who thinks he or she is God's personal judge and jury. But who he was is not as important as the point he raised. What is "justifiable homicide"?
Justifiable - adjective: liable to trail in a court of justice or capable of being decided by legal principles or by a court of justice - do justice is to act correctly.
Homicide - noun: a person who kills another or a killing of one human being by another.
Justifiable homicide is the legal act of killing another human being. The key area here is legal. By whose standards or laws? if we go by the laws of our creator we are not allowed to take the life of any human beings. Of course after the Creator established this standard for humanity it became obvious everybody was not going to live up to the expectation of not killing. So particular rules tailored for the people were established that justified some killing.
The keystone to this system is the presence of the one who made the initial rule, the Creator. The absence of the Creator is perhaps the essence of the problem the priest from Mobile was addressing. Tolerate me now as I walk through the various paths logic thinking creates around this issue.
First question needed: what is a human being? Does life begin at conception and end at brain death or does it start with the first breath of fresh air - end with the last grasp?
Second question: can people live together who answer question one differently?
Third question: if they cannot live together what must be done?
Fourth question: is it possible for a group of one opposing view to impose their views and standards on the opposite group in an acceptable manner?
Final question: can a group of people with certain values live peacefully in a society with opposing values?
Possible answers to the above questions -
First answer: however you answer the only justifiable homicide is that defined by the legal or ruling identity.
Second answer: in America we have people who either oppose or favor the death penalty which is justified homicide. If the biological matter is not a human being the whole discussion is moot. If it is a human being, cannot the proper authorities define accurately justifiable homicide?
Third answer: history teaches us that when two opposing standards exists in one place, something eventually must give. Since the beginning of time one or the other groups becomes dominated by the other group and slave to their rules and standards. History also shows that the enslaved group either attempts political take over by peaceful or violent means. If that is not possible they usually migrate to a new land where they can impose their desired standards.
Fourth answer: There are no historical examples of this ever being done successfully.
Final answer: some major philosophies teach that a person or group may live in a society but not be of that society. The early Christian Church is a classic example of this approach. They were a minority group with certain values they could not impose on the greater society of the day. They developed a sub culture and over generations won converts to their beliefs and standards, but it was never peaceful.
In my subculture justified homicide is defined by our God with each person answerable directly to that God. We stress the turning of the cheek; the freedom of others from being judged by God and only God; and that all life that belongs to God goes to God after death of any kind. I am a Christian in a non Christian world. The people of God have always been strangers in our own land.
No I have no answers for all of you. I only have answers for those in my subculture. Just as you find yourself. It is called life.
No it wasn't Pope Gallistus II at the Lateran I Council in 1123 forbidding married priest. Nor was it Paul III reaffirming moral standards for clergy at the Council of Trent, 1545-63. It certainly wasn't Dietrich Bonhoeffer who after his work, "The Cost of Discipleship", was executed in a concentration camp. And most assuredly it wasn't something from Derek Humphry founder of the Hemlock Society and ERGO! (an acronym of Euthanasia Research and Guidance Society).
It was a simple parish priest. It could have just as well been a extreme fundamental Protestant or Muslim. Or taken to extremes any ideologue, who thinks he or she is God's personal judge and jury. But who he was is not as important as the point he raised. What is "justifiable homicide"?
Justifiable - adjective: liable to trail in a court of justice or capable of being decided by legal principles or by a court of justice - do justice is to act correctly.
Homicide - noun: a person who kills another or a killing of one human being by another.
Justifiable homicide is the legal act of killing another human being. The key area here is legal. By whose standards or laws? if we go by the laws of our creator we are not allowed to take the life of any human beings. Of course after the Creator established this standard for humanity it became obvious everybody was not going to live up to the expectation of not killing. So particular rules tailored for the people were established that justified some killing.
The keystone to this system is the presence of the one who made the initial rule, the Creator. The absence of the Creator is perhaps the essence of the problem the priest from Mobile was addressing. Tolerate me now as I walk through the various paths logic thinking creates around this issue.
First question needed: what is a human being? Does life begin at conception and end at brain death or does it start with the first breath of fresh air - end with the last grasp?
Second question: can people live together who answer question one differently?
Third question: if they cannot live together what must be done?
Fourth question: is it possible for a group of one opposing view to impose their views and standards on the opposite group in an acceptable manner?
Final question: can a group of people with certain values live peacefully in a society with opposing values?
Possible answers to the above questions -
First answer: however you answer the only justifiable homicide is that defined by the legal or ruling identity.
Second answer: in America we have people who either oppose or favor the death penalty which is justified homicide. If the biological matter is not a human being the whole discussion is moot. If it is a human being, cannot the proper authorities define accurately justifiable homicide?
Third answer: history teaches us that when two opposing standards exists in one place, something eventually must give. Since the beginning of time one or the other groups becomes dominated by the other group and slave to their rules and standards. History also shows that the enslaved group either attempts political take over by peaceful or violent means. If that is not possible they usually migrate to a new land where they can impose their desired standards.
Fourth answer: There are no historical examples of this ever being done successfully.
Final answer: some major philosophies teach that a person or group may live in a society but not be of that society. The early Christian Church is a classic example of this approach. They were a minority group with certain values they could not impose on the greater society of the day. They developed a sub culture and over generations won converts to their beliefs and standards, but it was never peaceful.
In my subculture justified homicide is defined by our God with each person answerable directly to that God. We stress the turning of the cheek; the freedom of others from being judged by God and only God; and that all life that belongs to God goes to God after death of any kind. I am a Christian in a non Christian world. The people of God have always been strangers in our own land.
No I have no answers for all of you. I only have answers for those in my subculture. Just as you find yourself. It is called life.
Monday, August 22, 2011
What is the Statue of Liberty like?
Years ago while living in Greece an interesting thing happened to me. It has always helped me understand the uniqueness of this great nation. This special event happened in a small sheepherder's village north of Athens during a wedding feast in the village square. While sitting at a table with my friend Johnny (Yanni in Greek) sipping Retsina, the peasant's national wine, he asked me a profound question. It rings in my ears today.
With a very earnest look on his face Yanni asked, "Denny (yes they use to call me Denny) what is the Statue of Liberty like? Is she as beautiful as everyone says?"
I had seen the statue many times and thought it quite beautiful and special. But his question and the expression on his face made me realize it was more beautiful and special than I had ever realized. In fact the same could have been said about this free nation.
There are times when a different perspective can give a new meaning to something we take for granted. The Statue of Liberty is our nation's primary symbol of what we believe is the spirit of America. The statue arrived at what was known as Bedloe's Island in New york Harbor in 1885.
This "beautiful lady" as Yannis called her, was a gift from France. She was built across the Atlantic, disassembled, transported here, and reassembled as a noble symbol of freedom. It was a gift to us because of the way other people thought of us and not of our own self image.
Interestingly she, the lady of freedom and inspiration to all is an immigrant. Immigrants she beckons to come, bringing their poor, their tired and their hungary. That "beautiful lady" was quite a sight and when I sailed into New York Harbor a year later I was able to see how really beautiful she is and how proud I was of the message she sends to people like Yanni. She was the image we want them to see.
Is that still true today? Has her image abroad changed over the last few years? Does it now say don't bother me if you are poor? This is a land of opportunity for only those, who got in before we slammed the gate. Does it project the notion that religious freedom, means only Christians, especially the religious right? Jews, Islam, Buddhist, Hindus and others find your own New Jerusalem (New Foundation for Peace). Is our lady turning her back on people, who may have been created different then us? Is that the image she now has abroad?
Of course these questions could be asked of our own local neighborhoods. What is our image in the eyes of our neighbors? Is this a place where the poor can come and find new opportunity? Is my community a place that tolerates other religious beliefs? Do we welcome those who are different than us? Do we have freedom of thought and speech?
How shall we know the answers to these and other similar questions? Ask our neighbors from afar. What image do they have of us? Do they see a homogenized island or a melting pot of opportunity? Does that lady in New York Harbor extend her invitation to all in behalf of our own local community?
According to the principles of our founding documents for freedom, every community across this great land endorses her invitation. The ones, who don't become a cancer toward the existence of freedom as understood by the rest of the world, when they think of the "beautiful lady."
This also can be applied to your own home, business and church. It also applies to those who immigrate to this great land. Does the Statue of Liberty symbolize the spirit of you? America is a land of individuals, who are free and brave. America is a nation of communities. America is these United States, united in freedom as symbolized by the "beautiful lady."
Yes, Yanni everyone in America believes the lady is beautiful. I am right about this aren't I? Or must I brace myself for the bigotry and censorship I found in our neighbor's countries? Have the new immigrant brought their bigotries with them or have they also become admirers of the “beautiful lady”? Let’s hope not! Why? She keeps her beauty through our nation’s inner beauty. Let’s keep her beautiful to the world! Insist that every citizen living here and any person who crosses our borders pledge allegiance to what the “beautiful lady” stands for!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)