The Beautiful Heresy- Christian Universalism

At (A) Crossroads

2012-01-23T11:32:00.000-05:00

Ty and I, after five years, have decided it's time to move on from Nexus Church, the progressive start up/experiment we helped launch in Southwest, OH. It was a difficult decision that took us well over a year to finally face. I have been out of love with church for over 20 years but decided to go back first for Ty, then for the girls and finally, at Nexus, for the community at large. Unfortunately, Nexus wasn't working for any of us. Ty didn't really feel connected with the people there as we had so much churn and, after five years, still only a hand full of families attending. We started taking Shayna and Kayla there when Kayla was 10 and Shayna was 7. From the very beginning, Kayla was pretty much alone when it came to children her age. Shayna had a couple of friends who were attending part time which stopped in the last couple of months. So, the girls were bored to tears there. Kayla joined a youth group with another church a couple of years ago and Shayna started attending that church's youth group in the fall.

So, with a heavy heart, we made the decision to move on. But, Ty has this vision of us all going to church together. So, she and Shayna have been seeking out another church. A couple of weeks ago I went with them to the satellite "campus" of Crossroads Church- in Mason. Crossroads is one of those megachurches with the fancy coffee bar, auditorium seating, video productions, slick bands and all the trimmings one needs to be fully entertained on a Sunday morning. I've been twice now. Here are my impressions:

The Pros:

Coffee bar- if you've visited one of the mega churches, you've probably come to expect the coffee bar and the way you immediately feel welcome in the building. The Mason Middle School, where the satellite services are held, is transformed on Sunday mornings into a place you would think is a church full times. There's a countdown until when the doors open, then a countdown until when the service starts. I felt like I was at Disney World waiting to get into the next showing of one of their "attractions".
The Band- the band at Nexus has dwindled to a keyboard and a guitarist. Crossroads has a full band and they rock out on Sunday mornings. I wasn't a big fan of their selections. But, it is nice to have a full band.
Children's Services- this is major for Shayna especially. The junior high and senior high school kids are together at first and they are given the same message (theme) that is being taught in the adult service. They don't watch the same video (the sermon at the satellite location is taped). But, they cover the same points. So, we can discuss the lesson of the day on the way home and we know what our kids are being taught. The kids get the chance to interact with kids their own age. Shayna already has a good friend who goes there.
Anonymity- if you want to get lost in a church, this is the place to go. First of all, so many people are there that no one knows if you're a visitor or just someone they've never met. So, you can easily blend in. The auditorium is kept dark during the service. So you're pretty much a faceless body in a seat during the service.
The Sermon- I was pleasantly surprised by Brian Tome's first sermon about money. It was practical, entertaining and made me think of money from a perspective I might not have before. I thought it might be a fluke. But, his second sermon I heard was actually even better. One of the problems I have had with Nexus is we have had two pastors who follow the "lectionary" and try to fit their sermons to a pre-assigned Bible verse. For me, that leads to a very hit or miss sermon (mostly miss). I'd rather hear what is on their heart than them being forced to fit a sermon around a verse some committee somewhere chose.
Entertainment Value- the production is impeccable. There are videos, the band is playing. There's never a dull moment. Church in the 2010s is playing to our ADHD tendencies. It's quick, snappy, bright and shiny and in constant motion.

The Cons:

Anonymity- it's really easy to just slip in and slip out of one of these churches. You never have to get involved. You really wouldn't have to even give any money. You can just come every week, be entertained and then go about your day. There are calls to get involved by volunteering (it takes a LOT to run one of these places) and by joining small groups. But, having attended one for years and been behind the scenes, experience shows that only about 20% of people really get involved.
No real "mission"- I wonder what the real mission is of churches like this. We were always being called to bring people in (at the Vineyard) and I've seen the same thing at Crossroads. The idea seems to be to introduce our friends to God. But, what then? The churches stay full. But, what I saw at the Vineyard was that as people matured spiritually and wanted more, they tended to drift away from the "seeker sensitive" Sunday morning message and wanted something more substantial.
Videotaped sermon- the Head Pastor of Crossroads runs the services at the main campus. The video that is show at the satellite campus is taped Saturday evening at the main campus. The rest of the production is live. There is a "Campus Pastor" who comes on stage to welcome people, make announcements, etc. When it's time for the sermon, they "roll the tape"
Massive effort for what return?- there is a lot of money and time that goes into putting on these productions. My friend Scott Phillips is where I first heard the idea of having a pastor broadcast his sermon to multiple locations to maximize the utility of the time spent putting together the message and to allow the best speakers to reach the most people and allow people who weren't gifted in that area to run a "campus" and not have to deal with doing the sermon. It's a great business model. But, there is still a lot of money and time being spent on these productions and I often wonder if it couldn't be better spent.
Zero interactivity- One of the great things about attending a small church is the ability for people to ask for prayer. It's not something I often took advantage of at Nexus. But, I know a lot of people really like that. There are signs up at Crossroads and you can stay after and have someone pray for you. But, with several hundred people in there for each service there is no raising your hand and asking the congregation (who doesn't even know you) to pray for your situation. Another thing that I did really enjoy at Nexus was our "talk back" time which was a time where we could comment on the sermon and share thoughts with the other people who had heard it. You can do that with 50 people in a room. You can't do it so well with 500 or 1,000.

So, that's my experience with Crossroads. Not unbearable by any stretch. But, it's definitely not what I envision church should look like. Will we keep attending? Only time will tell.

Proud Papa

2011-12-31T10:01:00.003-05:00

I am so proud of my two girls. I always am. But, lately I've been especially proud of the way they are growing up and the things they are accomplishing. It's so gratifying to see them facing challenges and overcoming them.

Kayla started public school last year as a freshman. Her first year was at the freshman building. Being there with only freshmen was a nice way to get started in public school. This year she was thrown into the big pond. She was a little concerned about how she would do at this massive high school for her first public school experience after homeschooling for 8 years. She hit the ground running and has not missed a stride. She's on honor roll. She's fitting in great socially. She's doing the homework (a heavy load with her honors classes) and she's on the swim team. Her days are longer and harder than most adults. She's up just after 6:00AM to get a ride to school which starts at 7:30. She gets out of school around 3, takes a bus to swim practice and gets home between 5:30 and 6:30. By the time she's had dinner there's usually enough time for about an hour with the family before she's up to do it all again. We were a little concerned, because Kayla is so extremely laid back, that she wouldn't do her best academically. When she started school and we encouraged her to do all of the extra credit work and complete all of her homework assignments, she told us she didn't want to be a "point grabber". We, of course, told her to grab every point she could and we were looking over her shoulder to make sure she was doing it. Now, she's doing it all on her own.

Kayla loves to swim and she has been on the neighborhood swim team for a few years now. Last year she went out for the high school team and had to make a time to qualify. Frankly, watching Kayla swim her first couple of years on the neighborhood team, you would wonder if Kayla understood she was in a race. She swims for the enjoyment. Kayla is a very sensual girl and would talk about swimming in terms of feeling the water flowing over her skin and the silence of being underwater. We were like "That's all fine and good Kayla. But, you're on the swim team to beat the other swimmers." Kayla is also someone who is extremely concerned about other people's feelings and felt bad about beating other kids. But, this year on the swim team her competitive juices have started to flow. The swim practices are ridiculously long and hard. She has to swim five days a week after school for 2 hours to 2-1/2 hours at a time. That's in addition to the meets. The swim practices over Christmas break have been optional. The first one was at 8 AM the first day of break. That meant Kayla had to roll out of bed just after 7 AM to get to practice. They had a practice at noon the Monday after Christmas. My family was in town celebrating with us. But, Kayla chose to go. As I type this on New Year's Eve, she's at an 8 AM Saturday morning practice. The swimmers are ranked by "lanes" for their practices. The faster you swim, the higher the lane you can practice in. In the past, Kayla would have been content to stay in the slow lane, just as long as she was on the team. But, a few weeks ago she moved herself up to the next highest lane. She was struggling to stay in it and got bumped back down. But, she is determined to move back up. So, she has committed to making every practice over the break in hopes of getting back into that lane. This is a side of Kayla I hadn't seen before and I'm really glad to see it.

Shayna is doing great also. This was a tough year as she was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis earlier this year. She had been in a lot of pain for several months before we finally figured out what was going on. She's so stoic and has such a high tolerance for pain that we had no idea what she was going through. She's endured the medications and the weekly injections (which are painful), like the warrior that Shayna is. I can't recall her complaining about the shots, heat packs, the medical procedures or anything at all. The only complaint is she doesn't like doing the stretching exercises because they're "boring". Shayna is one of the top players on her basketball team and is a monster on the backboards. She is a great defensive player and a coach's dream, as she tries so hard to please. In fact, she tries too hard as we found out lately that she's not enjoying basketball because of the "pressure". She is so worried about letting us and the coach down that it's taken the joy out of the game for her, at least for now. We have told her this is something she needs to work through and she's doing it. She's still playing extremely well, in fact better than ever. And she accepts that even though she's not loving it right now it's what we think is best for her. And, as long as she's doing it, she's going to give it 100%. She's on two teams now. One is a tournament only team that is just wrapping up their season. I think they came in second in two of their five tournaments, won two and the other tournament that they didn't do well in, they won the game Shayna played in and lost the ones when she wasn't there.

This has been a rough year for Ty, too. In addition to the stuff with Shayna, we lost her father earlier this year. She's constantly taxiing Kayla and Shayna to 7 or more practices a week and keeping Treasured Locks up and running. This in addition to putting up with me and maintaining the house. People often don't give "housewives" enough credit for the hard work they do. But, Ty's schedule is full just with household stuff and the girls, let alone helping me run Treasured Locks. This November, we were married 21 years, soon to be 25 years that we've been together. I have seen her grow and mature in ways I never dreamed of when I met her all those years ago.

The Adjustment Bureau- Movie Review

2011-12-31T09:20:00.002-05:00

I don't often post movie reviews. When I do it's because a movie is a real stinker or really great. The Adjustment Bureau I found to be one of the most fascinating movies I've ever seen. The more I think about the movie, the more I like it.

Over the Christmas break, the family had a chance to catch up on some movies. We watched The Help (really good), Happy Feet (again), the Chronicles of Narnia Voyage of the Dawn Treader and the final installment of Harry Potter. The last two movies are known for their Christ figures and both were really good. But, The Adjustment Bureau, surprised me with its theological implications and I thought did a great job of addressing the age-old arguments of free will versus predetermination and theodicy (how could a loving God allow bad things to happen to good people).

The movie starts out slowly and you might mistake it for one of those stupid romantic comedies. The female love interest (Emily Blunt) is "quirky" (annoyingly so IMO) making me wonder why Matt Damon is so smitten with her. Her antics at the beginning of the movie (crashing a wedding, hanging out in a men's room, etc.) are charming to Matt. But, hang in there, it gets explained and it gets better. We find out that the world is not exactly as it appears when Matt Damon begins to fall for her and it's not in the plan of "The Chairman" (God). Men from the Adjustment Bureau are accidentally discovered by Damon and they have no choice but to reveal to him that they appear in the lives of humans to make corrections where our free will has things going "off plan". It's not in Damon's destiny to be with the woman that he feels this irresistible attraction to. He is running for the senate and the plans for him (and for her) are much bigger than this.

I won't ruin any more of the plot for you by telling you what happens to our two star-crossed lovers. But, the thing I found fascinating about the movie was it's addressing how God can be both good and powerful and still things happen that are bad. Coincidentally, I am reading a book right now that talks about open theology or process theology which involves the idea that God is very powerful (not necessarily all powerful) and very good. But, God has either limited his power or has limited power that allows for free will. He has an overall plan that he's constantly working toward and he redeems bad circumstances for the better. But, free will and even random chance can "surprise" even God and He has to come up with a new plan or make adjustments. This idea of a less than omnipotent, omniscient God will be upsetting to many Christians. But, it's the only model that makes sense to me now and I think The Adjustment Bureau did a great job of exploring that, in a light hearted, kind of romantic comedy kind of way. I give it the very rare 5/5 stars.

Insurrection- To Believe is Human- To Doubt, Divine- Review

2011-12-21T13:00:00.000-05:00

I read a lot of books on theology. I generally only review the ones I like. For example, I read (most of) The End of Religion: Encountering the Subversive Spirituality of Jesus and found it not nearly subversive enough- along with a few other books I haven't even bothered to finish. Rob Bell's Love Wins (reviewed here) was supposed to be so controversial (snore). So, when I got Peter Rollins' book with a quote from Rob Bell on the cover as to how it was supposed to push me off the edge of a cliff I wasn't exactly shaking in my boots. This, though is probably one of the three most dangerous books I have ever read, ranking right up there with Pagan Christianity and How to Quit Church Without Quitting God. Right there in the introduction Peter introduces us to the idea of pyro-theology, burning away the rot to reveal that which cannot be destroyed. Peter immediately sets the place on fire by saying that having faith in the god of religion is not a divine characteristic but a human one. We all naturally desire someone to love us unconditionally, someone to watch over us and make sure that everything is all right and that we make ourselves believe in this god. This claim may sound familiar- as atheists have been saying it for decades. What is surprising is hearing this come from a Christian author- in his opening chapter. The first thing he challenges us to do is to unplug from this God of religion and open ourselves up to doubt and unknowing. The central theme of the first part of the book is that the crucifixion is a (the?) defining moment in the life of Jesus. Taking part in Jesus' crucifixion is not the abandoning of everything for religion or for God. Taking part in the crucifixion is the abandoning of everything, including God and the certainty and comfort that provides us. After all, when Jesus (God) was hanging there on the cross His last cry was "My God, my God why have you forsake me?" If God was not there at the moment when God needed Him most, why should we not expect the same? Rollins says the "dark night of the soul" which we all fear so much and look at as an exception that some Christians must pass through is not an exception at all. Nor it is something we pass through. It's part and parcel of Christianity. It's not something to be avoided but something to be embraced. We cannot participate in the crucifixion of Jesus (something all Christians claim) without experiencing this doubt and absence of God.

We all know people who say "I'm not religious, I'm spiritual." But, many people who say that still believe in the old Sunday school sky-god in their hearts. They still participate in church services that re-affirm this God of religion. They talk about the fact that they've moved on and no longer embrace this view of God. But, the Church service every week gives them that nice security blanket- singing songs, performing rituals and saying prayers out this God. So, they never fully embrace the emotional reality of this intellectual assent. This struck me very personally as I have given up on the idea of God as another object or as a big old man in the sky a long time ago. But, I have said things to the effect of "My pastor believes for me.". Peter takes away all of those security blankets exposing the coping mechanisms we put into place to keep from truly facing up to this "crucifixion" addressing the believer who has left church and even the "atheist" who continues to benefit psychologically from the believers he still hangs out with- the faith of a parent, child or friends. He ends the third chapter with this line:

It is only as we are cut loose from religion in the very depth of our being- experiencing an existential loss of God, rather than some mere intellectual rejection- that we are free to discover a properly Christian expression of faith.

So, now Peter has told us that we have to give up any thought of God as a psychological crutch to be a true Christian. This is not a crisis of faith. This is not something that just the most holy of saints must endure, this is something we all have to face to truly take part in Jesus' suffering. This is totally antithetical to the teaching most of us receive. The whole point of the church is to affirm our faith in a God who is there for us to avoid anxiety and fear.

The second part of the book is called "Resurrection" But, this isn't the part where, like in the traditional sermon, God swoops in to save us from our unbelief or is there in spite of our unbelief. Frankly, at this point I got kind of bogged down in the book after it got off to a very fast start. But, when I started to get interested again was when he began talking about the life that comes after we have gone through the crucifixion. I mean the crucifixion would be pointless without a resurrection. But, we are not resurrected back to the self-assured life of believing in the sky-god. We are resurrected to know that life is not about escaping this world and going off to live with God. We are resurrected to accept this world and our limits and fully embrace the beauty and the ugliness of the world. When we are caught up in the religious worldview, we are encouraged to give up the world to find God. While we may say God is both immanent and transcendant, we really live as though God is out there. So, either we deal with the fact that we will not experience God in this world or we live for those glimpses when God breaks through. During our normal day-to-day life, God, (the object of our desire) is elsewhere. Thus, we can never have any sustainable satisfaction and are condemned to a "type of half life". When we are resurrected, we no longer approach God as an object, a separate "person" or a thing. We no longer talk about "loving God". We realize that God is loved through the act of love itself. It is literally true that we cannot love God and hate our brother. We love God by loving our brother. God is no longer something "out there". We become immersed in God by being fully immersed in the world.

The book is full of short stories/parables. My favorite comes at the beginning of Chapter 7. God is watching the Earth go through its final trials and tribulations, as has been prophesied. But, then after the rapture instead of God staying in residence with those in heaven, descends to Earth to be with his people who have forsaken the promise of heaven for being deeply rooted in the Earth.

Another term, other than pyro-theology, that I liked in the book was A/theistic Christianity. As my view of God has evolved, I find myself asking myself the question "Do I believe in God anymore?" Peter says "What we discover here is that the question, Does God exist? is not a straightforward one for the believer". For you that may be an unambiguous question. For me, and for Rollins, it's not (anymore).

Buy it here:

Keeping the Christ in Christmas

2011-12-12T16:30:00.001-05:00

Image via Wikipedia

One of the things about getting old, and I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing, is you realize Ecclesiastes is right. There is nothing new under the sun.

What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again there is nothing new under the sun.

Every year at this time Christians start up the talk of being persecuted and their holiday being stolen. The heathen are taking the "Christ" out of Christmas. Just a few days ago I saw one of the creators of Veggie Tales on TV saying that people trying to use a Christmas tree without calling it a Christmas tree was just as insulting to Christians as if we tried to use a menorah (Jewish candle holder for Hanukkah) and call it something other than a menorah. Maybe he doesn't know this. But, the candle holder people use for Kwanzaa looks a LOT like a menorah and I don't think anyone asked the Jews' permission to knock off their menorah.

Back to putting the Christ back in Christmas. As per my usual, I can see both sides of the issue of whether Christmas is a secular or a Christian holiday. For me, it's not either/or. It's both. There's a thing in trademark law that if you don't protect your trademark, you could eventually lose it. If people commonly come to refer to something other than the trademarked item as that item, the trademark is said to be genericized- it becomes a generic trademark examples are "Band-aids" which we use to mean something other than a bandage named Band-Aid and Kleenex which many us use instead of saying "facial tissue". I think that is what has happened to Christmas. The specific meaning has been lost because the word has been used generically so much. Christmas, strictly speaking, is the celebration of the birth of Christ. But, it's come to mean a lot more than that. Some good and some not so good. Christmas is also the time of the year when we engage in shopping and eating til we drop. And, we usually don't make the distinction. Nor do we distinguish it from the time of year when we wish for Peace on Earth and good will to men. Two out of three of these meanings of Christmas can apply to anyone, Christian or not Christian. I argued once to a Jewish friend who refused to let his children celebrate Christmas that Christmas has sufficiently been capitalized (as in made into a capitalist holiday) and secularized that it has at least two meanings and there would be no harm in allowing his Jewish children to take part in the secular aspect of Christmas- giving and receiving gifts.

Once again we have the dust-up over whether we should call it a Christmas tree or not. The non-Christians are offended if we do call it a Christmas tree. So, we pretend it's not and call it a "holiday tree". The Christians are offended if we don't call it a Christmas tree. C'mon! Who cares? We all know it's a Christmas tree, even if you want to be PC and call it a "holiday tree". A rose is a rose by any other name. Oh, and Christians if you wanted to keep the birth of your savior "pure" maybe you shouldn't have stolen the ritual of bringing an evergreen into your home from the pagans. And maybe you shouldn't have chosen the day the pagans celebrated the birth of the Sun God as the day for Jesus' birth.

So, to you non-Christians who want to share in Christmas. I say, go right ahead. But, no matter what you call it, it's still a Christmas tree, a Christmas party and it's Christmas break. And to Christians who are worried about others taking the Christ out of Christmas, no one can stop you from celebrating the birth of your savior. Who cares if they say "Happy Holidays" or want to put up a "holiday tree"? Anything that causes people to reflect on being better to each other and wishing for the end to hostilities between all men is a good thing. If them dropping the "Christ" out of it makes it more palatable to them, I don't think Jesus would be offended and you shouldn't be either.

The Breath of God- Book Review

2011-12-05T12:11:00.001-05:00

This is one case where one of those ads that Facebook serves up to me everyday got it right. I saw an ad for this book one day when I was on Facebook and after reading the reviews on Amazon decided to give it a chance. I'm glad I did as I found The Breath of God by Jeffrey Small to be quite refreshing.

The book is a novel by a first time author who is really into comparative religion and gives credit for his inspiration to people like Marcus Borg, John Spong and Thich Nhat Hanh- some of my favorite writers. The book is reminiscent of The Da Vinci Code as it a thriller with the hero- Grant, a graduate student is taken on a trip around the world trying to find texts that reveal something about the "lost" years of Jesus's life. The story is based on true events. There was a claim made by a Russian- Nicholas Notovitch in the late 1800s. He said he discovered texts in a monastery in India that documented the legend that Jesus traveled to India and studied Hinduism and Buddhism during the years the Bible is silent about His life. He wrote a book about those texts. But, they could never be located and his book was largely declared a fraud. What is true though is in the gospels, we have baby Jesus, teenage Jesus (one scene where He stays behind in the Temple while His parents take a couple of days to notice He's missing) and then suddenly Jesus is 30 years old. The gospels say nothing about 90% of Jesus' life. There are legends in India about an Issa (very similar to the Muslim name for Jesus- Isa) who traveled there as a teen to learn meditation techniques. The book quotes passages from the Buddha's writings (The Dhammapada) and parallels them with things Jesus said. It also draws many parallels between the lives and legends of Jesus, The Buddha and Muhammad.

“I am the source of all things, and all things emerge from me ... Infinite are the forms in which I appear. I am the self, seated in the heart of all beings; I am the beginning and the life span of beings, and their end as well . . . I am the source of all things to come.” The Bhagavad Gita, 5th century BC

“I am the Alpha and the Omega who is and who was and who is to come.” The Book of Revelation, AD 1st

While Grant is working to find the lost texts, he is, of course, dogged at every opportunity by a fundamentalist pastor and his church who insist that it's sheer heresy to think that Jesus might have been influenced by any faith other than Christianity and that the discovery of these texts would destroy the faith of millions.

The book is very well written and suspenseful. It's set mostly in India and Bhutan where Grant is on his quest for the texts. Grant is taught by an Bhutanese Buddhist monk, Kinley who was educated in the West. For me, being interested in the similarities between religions rather than focusing on the differences, I enjoyed the way Jeffrey Small pointed out not only how similar the faiths of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism are but how similar the stories about our "prophets" are and how the faiths themselves (and the prophets) are- using a Buddhist saying are like the finger pointing at the moon. The faiths all point to the same underlying eternal universal truths. None of the comparative religion material was really new to me. But, I think it would be new to a lot of Christians who haven't read about the lives of Muhammad, Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha) and studied about their faiths. The educational material is slipped into the book in such a way that you don't feel you are being lectured, but you are educated while being entertained.

Grant, like many is caught up in whether the events recorded in the Bible are historically true or not. One of the many lessons he learns on his quest is summed up in the following quote.

Jigme shook his head. “Why must religion be a history lesson? How the Buddha, Jesus, or Muhammad learned these techniques is irrelevant. Why not focus on what their common experiences teach us about our own lives?”

Whether Jesus actually traveled to India or not is largely not important- except that so many Christians are caught up in constantly pointing out just how different Christianity is from any other faith and ignoring the fact that many of Jesus' teachings are the same as the teachings of the Buddha or Muhammad or the teachings of Hinduism. This book could give many a new found appreciation for the beauty and truth found in all of the major faiths of the world, if they're open to the possibility that Jesus Himself might have learned from them.

Steve Jobs- Gone at 56

2011-10-06T07:52:00.001-04:00

I think Apple should seriously consider this new logo someone posted on Twitter after the passing of Steve Jobs. The man was a true visionary and changed all of our lives in ways we can hardly even realize today because the innovations he made have become so pervasive and common that we take them for granted.  Even if you don't own a single Apple product (and I own about 20), Steve's creations and innovations have impacted your life.  It's hard to believe he was only 56 years old. He accomplished so much in his short time.  As I think about his life, I'm reminded that we only have a limited time here.  To not try to be someone else.  Do what you do best.  And, that in spite of having billions of dollars we cannot buy health or extra time. R.I.P. Steve. Thanks for all you did.

Pics or it didn't happen

2011-10-05T16:54:00.000-04:00

After many years out of the "debating" with atheists game I find myself dangerously close to being drawn back in. The good news is I no longer have the desire to try to win anyone over to Christianity. The pressure of having to save people from Hell is gone. And, thank G-d its gone, because I've realized it's an impossible task anyway. The prevailing attitude of of today is expressed well in this image someone posted on Facebook. The default position is "Prove it to me. Pics, or it didn't happen."

When it comes to the Bible, I've found both fundamentalist Atheists (yes, they do exist) and fundamentalist Christians commit the same errors. They both ask me the same questions. They both destroy the Bible with hyper-literalism and irrational demands. The fundamentalist Christian says the Bible must be inerrant, literal and able to interpreted in one way to be of any value. When I tell them the Bible has mistakes, is not (all) meant to be taken literally and contradicts itself, they say that's impossible because it's the Word of God. If it's anything less than 100% complete and perfect, then the entire thing has to be thrown out. The Bible is either perfect or it's worthless. The fundamentalist Atheists says the Bible is of no value because he recognizes it can be interpreted in a multitude of ways, contradicts itself and contains errors. He says "Well, using what you say, the Bible can be interpreted any way anyone wants to interpret it. So, it's of no value." Both destroy the value of the library we call the Bible, one intentionally, the other unintentionally.

When it comes to the prove it to me attitude, my experience is the demand for more and more evidence is an unslakable thirst. Does this mean I believe everything I hear with no evidence at all? Certainly not. Believe it or not I'm pretty skeptical. When someone tells me something I want to know where they heard it. Does it mean that I don't recognize that extraordinary claims (like I saw an alien) are less credible than ordinary claims (I had a peanut butter and jelly sandwich for lunch). But, what I've found when it comes to certain matters (actually just about all the really big matters) the evidence really doesn't matter all that much to most of us ordinary laypeople, who suddenly turn into pseudo-scientists about certain issue- issues like global warming and whether Jesus rose from the dead or even if Jesus existed. How is global warming related to issues of faith or the historicity of the Bible? Well, I don't know too many people who have changed their minds on either based on the evidence. I've been round and round with people about global warming. The fact is the vast majority of scientists who are credible in the field have said that climate change caused by man's actions is quite possible and is actually beginning to occur. Yet, there are people who scramble to find evidence to the contrary. And, in the courts of their minds they actively seek out evidence to support their position while people who "believe" in climate change do the opposite. The two sides go back and forth without a hope that either will ever change the other's mind as long as there is a shred of evidence to back up their view. When it comes to the historicity of Jesus (let's aside the resurrection for a moment), there are those who now say there is "no" historical evidence that Jesus existed. The vast majority of people who have studied the matter say that Jesus was a real person. The skeptics however dismiss the four gospels. They dismiss Paul's writings. They dismiss the extra-canonical gospels. They dismiss the extra-biblical writings. They're like the "birthers" who continued to clamor for the long form of Obama's birth certificate and even now say it's a fake. If Jesus' birth certificate could be produced, I'm sure they'd find a way to dismiss that.

Evidence, in these cases, is pretty much irrelevant. We use the evidence we like to reinforce the belief we already have. The atheist will not be swayed by mountains and reams of "evidence", most of which he will simply dismiss. The true believer needs no evidence. Oh he (me back the old days) might read some apologetics so he can brush up his debate points. Or, when he has some doubt, he might want to reinforce his beliefs by looking up some data.

I wish I had a nickel for every time I've been told the "burden of proof" is on me because I'm making extraordinary claims. Back in my debating days that was true. I was coming at atheists trying to win them over to my side. What a waste of time! Back when I was trying to win people over with arguments, the burden of proof was on me. Now I have no interest in doing that. The idea of this supposed burden of proof comes from the debating arena and a court of law. I have two issues with that notion when it comes to matters of the Bible and its historicity. The first is that there is no impartial judge or jury to weigh the evidence. How much evidence would it take to sway a person from their default position? When it comes to the birth of Jesus, how much evidence could we possibly hope to have? The man was born 2,000 years ago in Palestine. The second issue I have with the "burden of proof" argument is that it there is an objective reality here and no matter how much we argue about it, that's not going to change. Jesus either was born or He was not. Jesus either rose from the dead or He did not. No lack of evidence will change that. No clever debating tactics will change that. Whether I "win" by providing you with what you deem sufficient evidence, or you win by declaring it wasn't enough, you and I are each going to decide what we choose to believe about it. One of us will be right, the other will be wrong. But, whether either of us is right or wrong won't be because of the evidence. If you say to me "Pics or it didn't happen." I'll say to you "If you want to know the reason for the hope I have, I'm glad to give it to you. But, I'm not at all interested in proving anything to you."

Thank God the Bible Contradicts Itself

2011-09-28T14:40:00.001-04:00

Image via Wikipedia

This past Sunday we had a lesson from the book of Ezekiel (I know- yuck. Right?) But, aside from Mike's main point, I noticed something. Not only does the Bible contradict itself, there are time when it directly says it's contradicting itself. That's not something I was taught nor did I believe it when years ago I purchased the great big Encyclopedia of Biblical Difficulties that was supposed to explain every apparent mistake or contradiction in the Bible. I can think of a couple of examples. One concerns sacrifices. This one concerns God punishing children for the sins of the parents.

The case in point was this passage from Ezekiel:

1The word of the LORD came to me: 2“What do you people mean by quoting this proverb about the land of Israel:

“‘The fathers eat sour grapes,

and the children’s teeth are set on edge’?

3“As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, you will no longer quote this proverb in Israel. 4For every living soul belongs to me, the father as well as the son—both alike belong to me. The soul who sins is the one who will die.

5“Suppose there is a righteous man

who does what is just and right.

6He does not eat at the mountain shrines

or look to the idols of the house of Israel.

He does not defile his neighbor’s wife

or lie with a woman during her period.

7He does not oppress anyone,

but returns what he took in pledge for a loan.

He does not commit robbery

but gives his food to the hungry

and provides clothing for the naked.

8He does not lend at usury

or take excessive interest.^a

He withholds his hand from doing wrong

and judges fairly between man and man.

9He follows my decrees

and faithfully keeps my laws.

That man is righteous;

he will surely live,

declares the Sovereign LORD.

10“Suppose he has a violent son, who sheds blood or does any of these other things^b 11(though the father has done none of them):

“He eats at the mountain shrines.

He defiles his neighbor’s wife.

12He oppresses the poor and needy.

He commits robbery.

He does not return what he took in pledge.

He looks to the idols.

He does detestable things.

13He lends at usury and takes excessive interest.

Will such a man live? He will not! Because he has done all these detestable things, he will surely be put to death and his blood will be on his own head.

So, according to this passage, the proverb handed down for generations in Israel that said that basically that if the parents sinned, the children would be punished for generations is being challenged by Ezekiel. Well, according to Ezekiel, it's being challenged by G-d. Oh, and by the way, it's not just in Ezekiel this notion is challenged, it's also in Deuteronomy, Kings and Jeremiah. G-d is saying "Why did you ever believe such nonsense? I don't punish children for the sins of the parents." Well, maybe they believed it because of these passages:

The Lord...visits the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation. (Exodus 34:6-7 = Deuteronomy 5:8-10)

“Because of their iniquity, and also because of the iniquities of their fathers they shall rot away like them.” (Leviticus 26:39)

I've seen some pretty fancy footwork used to explain away some thing in the Bible. But, to my mind, these are clearly two contradictory things both put into the mouth of God. In one passage we have God saying He punishes the children (and the children's children and the great grandchildren) for the sins of the fathers. In another passage we have God saying the exact opposite. So, people ask "Which is it?" People have tried to come up with ways to make the first sound "fair". We all know it's wrong to punish the children for something their father did. So, we've said that the sins (shortcoming) of the fathers create generational patterns and situations that cause problems for the children. That's absolutely true. Is that what the verses in Exodus and Leviticus mean? I think probably not. I think they mean exactly what they say they mean and they are wrong. When people (Ezekiel) got a better revelation of what God is really like he attempted to correct the record by writing his opinion which got included into the canon.

I love this quote from Walt Whitman. It applies to me, for sure. And, just recently I realized it also applies to the Bible:

Do I contradict myself?
Very well then I contradict myself,
(I am large, I contain multitudes.)
Walt Whitman, "Song of Myself"
US poet (1819 - 1892)

The Bible is silent on many issues we face today. And, I'm darn glad it is. There is no mention of global warming or abortion or monogamous, committed homosexual relationships (no, really there isn't). Good thing too. If we get all caught up on some of the purity code laws in Leviticus about men lying with men (while ignoring the abominations of eating shellfish, touching a woman on her period or sowing two crops in the same field), imagine what would happen if the Bible actually address global warming. Would we dare be like Ezekiel and say it was wrong? It'd take some of literally forever to admit that the Bible was wrong if it had some incorrect information about global warming.

The Bible is not one coherent book. It's not the word of God dictated to man. It's the words of many men written about God. It's an on-going conversation. The Hebrews (Jews) knew this. The written Torah is only a small part of Torah. There's a rich tradition in Judaism of Oral Torah and there are tons and tons of opinions rendered both written and oral. The Bible is an on-going conversation with differing opinions and insights. There is a general trend of more and more revelation in the Bible as people's ideas about God evolved. It's not a problem that we find contradictions in the Bible unless we treat it like the "Great Big Book Of Everything" where we can go and just look an answer to every problem. "Oh, here's what God says I should do in this situation. It's right here in Leviticus." If that were the case, we wouldn't have to (or be able to) think for ourselves. We'd no longer have to seek God's revelation for ourselves, we'd just rely on good old Ezekiel. We'd be spiritual cripples. No, we have the read the Bible, as a whole, understanding historical and cultural context. We have to continue to wrestle with the tough questions. The Bible can help. But, it's not the be all and end all. Thanks be to God.

The Kindle Just Got Even Better

2011-09-22T09:04:00.000-04:00

Cover via AmazonIf you've known me for any amount of time you know I am a technology nut. And, you probably know that I absolutely love my Amazon Kindle. I wanted an ereader years and years ago when I first heard about them and they were about $500. I couldn't justify that expense. But, when the Kindle fell to below $300 a couple of years ago, I convinced Ty to buy one for me for Christmas. Fast forward to now and I have a second Kindle (third generation because she stole my other one) and I read Kindle books on my iPhone and iPad. Today, Amazon announced a feature many people have been waiting for. It's the ability to borrow Kindle books from the library. Starting today, you can borrow electronically and immediately a book from one of over 11,000 participating libraries. You just go to the library's website, check out the book there and that links you to Amazon.com where you log into your Kindle account and download the book to your Kindle. Personally, I've gotten so many cheap and free books since getting my Kindle, I don't mind paying for the other books I want to read. But, this feature probably will save me some money since my wife's book club often chooses books available from the library. She use to borrow her book club books from the library. But, now she likes reading on her Kindle so much, she's been getting them for the Kindle instead. Here's the site for Ohio. Here's the place to search for all libraries supporting this technology by OverDrive

There are several things I love about the Kindle. First, it's a dedicated ereader. Technically, there are now other things you can do on your Kindle. I find with my iPhone or my iPad, if I sit down to read, I'll find myself checking email or playing Angry Birds a few minutes later. When I pick up my Kindle to read, I just read. Second is the form factor. I have an iPad and reading on it is OK. But, after a few minutes, it gets pretty heavy and it's not easy to hold with one hand. The Kindle was made to fit in your hand and be easy to use one handed and for extended periods of time Third is the visibility. While the contrast is not as good as ink on paper, no matter what they tell you, the contrast is pretty good. I can read my Kindle in pretty low light. Better yet, I can read my Kindle outside in full sunlight. And, I don't get eyestrain from reading a backlit screen like I would with my iPad or another ereader with a color screen. I love the fact that my Kindle is e-ink, not backlit. Lastly, I love the ease with which I can download books, store books and sync between all my devices. My first Kindle has 3G connectivity. So, I can actually buy a book anywhere I can get a cell phone signal. To save $50, my second Kindle is WiFi only. But, I can still get a book downloaded to it in less than a minutes on a WiFi network. My first Kindle I attached to my computer a few times when I was messing around with trying to read PDF files on it or something. My second Kindle has literally never been attached to my computer. Everything I've ever done with it has been wireless. Amazon keeps a permanent archive of every book I've ever bought. So, I can choose whether to keep it on any of my devices or not and easily retrieve it if I want to reread the book. And, if I'm sitting somewhere and want to read a few pages on my iPhone or I've got the iPad with me and my Kindle is somewhere else, I can open up a book I was reading on the Kindle and sync right to the page I was on on the last device I was reading on.

p.s.- there is something I should add. The Kindle is both a hardware device and a platform. Since Amazon has put out Kindle software for the PC, Mac, iPhone, Andoid, iPod Touch, etc., etc. You can get most of the functionality of the Kindle without actually owning the Kindle hardware.

The Most Heretical Sermon Ever

2011-09-20T11:22:00.000-04:00

I don't think I've ever posted a sermon on my blog. This is my buddy Robert Rutherford, a fellow universalist, heretic whose sermon went so far it got him banned from a universalist conference.

It's one of the best I've ever heard. I appreciate having Robert as a friend.

3 Lives, In search of bliss

2011-09-02T17:59:00.000-04:00

I love reading a book or seeing a movie where I know almost nothing about it. When you get a free copy of a book for review, you never know if it will be a gem or a dud. Most are somewhere in between. The author, Srini Chandra, of 3 Lives, In search of bliss contacted me because of my review of one of Deepak Chopra's books. I had never heard of the author or the book. But, the premise of the melding of Eastern and Western religion/philosophy was intriguing to me as was the idea of spiritual progression through reincarnation. All I had to risk was the time to read the book and the time to review it. I went into the book with pretty low expectations based on the fact I hadn't heard of the author, this was his first book and anyone can "publish" anything on the Kindle platform now and call it a book. Boy, was I wrong. This book blew my socks off. I don't read a lot of fiction. But, this is the best fictional book I've read since "The Shack". Don't let the $0.99 price fool you (if Srini's smart, he might have raised it by the time you read this). This book is worth your money and your time.

A quick summary of the book (taken from the Amazon page)

When Ray is murdered on his forty second birthday, he cries out in anguish - Why me?. In what lies after death, Ray meets the Voice, who he believes to be God. The Voice offers him three lives, each designed of his own choices, in pursuit of happiness. In a strange turn of events, Ray, a Catholic, is born as Anwer Al Safi, son of a devout Muslim, a self made billionaire and the most famous Arab in the world. In his second life, he takes the form of Dr. Jill Clayton, a scientist and teacher at Cal Tech in Pasadena, whose husband is gunned down in a terrorist attack in Mumbai. In his third life, Ray comes back as Tenzin Lhamo, a boy monk who flees his mountain homeland to exile in India.

The author told me that he had distilled the book down from twice its original size to focus on the essence of the characters. I appreciated that. The book grabbed me right from the beginning. I could instantly relate to the character of Ray who is full of questions about the injustices of life, lives a very guarded life not allowing himself to fully risk emotional vulnerability and who dies suddenly and tragically and confronts what he assumes to be G-d full of anger and questions. The questions that Srini puts into the mouths of his characters are the big ones we all have. Why are we here? Why doesn't G-d make Himself more evident? Why do bad things happen to good people? But, Srini does not provide us with pat answers.

As a person who was raised Christian but sees wisdom in other philosophies/religions and has studied (some) Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Reincarnation, Near Death Experiences, etc., I enjoyed the easy way Srini melded wisdom from several different traditions. I've had several Christian friends question me about the wisdom of reincarnation or why it would make sense. I think this story shows how reincarnation makes sense.

Without being "preachy" or overly academic, the book covers such topics as samsara- the cycle of birth death and rebirth, maya- the illusion that what we perceive with the senses is all there is, karma, nirvana or bliss, letting go, the fact that we cannot live for another- we have to all find our own path and more. As I read the book and now that I have finished it, I find myself continuing to think about it as life circumstances arise. Near the end of the book there is maybe the best example I have seen of Nirvana or bliss. Nirvana is a difficult concept (at least for me). As I was thinking about the book in bed last night, something came to me. "Everything matters. Nothing matters." Every moment is precious. Every emotion is important. But, ultimately, it all passes. We should enjoy it while it's here because it's important. But, we should not cling to it because we cannot hold on.

There is a concept in the book that was not explained and might not be familiar to some- I read about it in "Memories of the Afterlife" by Dr. Michael Newton. That is soul groups. The idea is that we are incarnated again and again with people who we have an affinity with. They might be our daughter in this life, our husband in the next life and our mother in another life.

3 Lives is a novella rather than a novel. It's short in terms of length. But, I didn't feel that it needed to be longer. It's condensed- concentrating the action and wisdom into fewer words than a novel.

As I read the book, I was highlighting passage after passage. I was wondering where Srini had copied these pearls of wisdom from. Being a first time author, surely he didn't come up with them on his own. Here are few examples (I have lots more stuff highlighted in my copy). My favorite is the last one.

Life is short. Indeed, it is life’s way of reminding us to grasp the moments that it places within our reach. A moment arises out of the fathomless future, and subsides irretrievably into the silent river of the past that flows endlessly into oblivion. Indeed, the fleeting nature is that which defines a moment. Its beauty is wrapped in its elusiveness. In this truth lies the sweetness of life.

Indeed, it was in this remembrance that Anwer found what had eluded him for a lifetime. Death did not frighten him any longer. Nor did it abhor him. Rather, it consoled him, as the beckoning sight of a rest house soothes a weary traveler.

There is something sacred about tears. They fill a void that words find impossible to fill. They bring forth the joy, the suffering and the contrition of a thousand lives. Tears are spontaneous eruptions of emotion that this benevolent universe is unwilling to hold back any longer, knowing that their time has come. They are the silent workmen that come to carry away the burden of the soul.

Love for God is the greatest of our romances. As we grow older, the more we struggle with belief, scarred by knowledge and embittered by experience. Faith is lost in faith itself. Romance itself becomes unloved. Bliss lies inexorably intertwined with the romantic spirit of this great universe. It is indeed a universe filled with beauty and pregnant with possibilities, and held in place by its impersonal and misunderstood laws. There are some who choose to call this God.

I rarely give a book (or anything) five stars. After seeing every review on Amazon so far for this book has been five stars, I was looking for a reason to take a star away. If all the review are five stars, people might think something funny is going on. But, this book deserves every one of those stars. Pick it up.

p.s.- no Kindle? No problem. You can get a Kindle reader app for just about every platform out there, PC, Mac, Android, iPhone- Kindle Application Lots of Kindle books are cheap. Some are even free.

Let's Make A Deal

2011-07-24T13:55:00.000-04:00

Image via Wikipedia

I, just like 80% of Americans, am fed up with our government and the stalemate between Democrats and Republicans on the impending crisis with the debt limit. I know a lot of people probably think of me as a true blue Democrat, the fact is I am a reluctant Democrat at best. I chose the lesser of two evils. The majority of Americans are not ideologues and don't care about the supposed "class war" that we're supposed to be engaged in. We don't want our Congressmen signing pledges with anyone or taking oaths other than their oaths of office. People like Grover Norquist exercising so much influence on the workings of our Congress is problematic to us. We don't want to stick it to the rich and we don't want the poor to suffer. We want some degree of fairness in our tax code and we want the sacrifice that needs to be made in this crisis to be shared. Nobody wants to pay higher taxes (even though some very wealthy people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have publicly said they should pay more than they do. Nobody wants any program they are benefiting from to be cut.

Most people are not buying the idea that we simply have a spending problem, not a revenue problem (one of the talking points of the Republicans lately). And I don't think anyone thinks the reason for our deficits and our coming up against the debt limit is simply because we don't pay enough in taxes. We realize that, in this crisis, we'll need an approach that both raises revenues (taxes) and cuts spending will be necessary. As Obama put it to Congress a couple of weeks ago, telling them it was time to eat their peas, we know it's time for us to eat our peas. Eating our peas means we'll have to take less in benefits. That's going to hurt. It might mean means testing for Medicare. People who are wealthier might have to pay more out-of-pocket expenses. As people are healthier and capable of working longer and as people are living longer, we should periodically expect the retirement age for Social Security to increase. Democrats who are opposed to any changes to these "entitlement" programs are being foolish. The programs cannot continue to go on the way they are going. Most of the changes to Social Security and Medicare being proposed will impact the poor and middle class people more than they will the wealthy. Most of the spending cuts being proposed by Democrats and Republicans impact the poor and the middle class more than the wealthy. This is the sacrifice they are making.

On the other hand, we could close the budget gap by raising revenues. Both Republican and Democratic politicians realize that raising taxes on the poor and the middle class right now would be counterproductive. However, over the past several decades, the poor and middle class have experienced flat incomes while the wealthiest among us have seen their incomes increase. In the past decade, thanks to the Bush tax cuts, the very wealthy are enjoying the some of the lowest marginal tax rates in the almost 100 year history of the income tax. The poor and middle class have suffered so over the past several years while the very wealthy have seen their incomes rise at the same time their tax rates have been reduced, it's not unreasonable to ask the wealthy to make their contribution to this sacrifice paying a slightly higher marginal tax rate- an increase from 35% to 39%.

Friday evening President Obama went on TV to complain about Speaker Boehner not returning his phone calls and shutting down negotiations with the White House. Frankly, I thought it made Obama look a little childish. He's frustrated. He's not getting the respect he feels he deserves from the Republicans in Congress. He's not getting the cooperation he would like. When he give up anything in negotiations, Liberals scream their heads off saying he's abandoned his base and is "just as bad as Bush" when he "caves" on certain issues. Boehner's got a bunch of out-of-control freshmen in the House who are more committed to a pledge they signed than they are to doing their duty as Congressmen to legislate effectively for everyone. Last week, headlines were made when Grover Norquist indicated that a return to the Bush tax rates were not technically a tax increase. First of all. "Duh". Secondly, who cares what Grover Norquist thinks? It seems there are Congressmen who fear Grover Norquist more than they respect Speaker Boehner. Boehner has Cantor, the new darling of the Tea Party, breathing down his neck threatening to usurp his role as Speaker if Boehner shows too much weakness. The mere fact that the politicians are coming at this as making some sort of "deal" and are playing negotiating games show they just don't get it. The American people don't want a "deal". We don't care whether the Republicans or the Democrats win. We want a working solution that doesn't place an undue or unfair hardship on anyone and that solves this crisis that is threatening all of our economic welfare. There are Republicans now saying "Oh, we won't default on our debt. To default is to miss debt payments. There is plenty of money to pay our debt." That's possibly true. What they seem to be ignoring though is the credit rating agencies are very nervous about this situation and that it's entirely possible that they'll downgrade our debt without a default. After Obama's speech on Friday, I'm fairly certain if a deal isn't struck by the end of the day today (Sunday), we'll see the markets open sharply lower tomorrow morning. As someone thinking about my retirement accounts, I'm wondering if I should be selling my stocks and buying gold. I'm sick of this whole mess. We've known this day has been coming for seven months. But, just as I predicted, nothing will get done until the 11th hour. We need a long bipartisan solution to calm the markets, restore the confidence of the American people and to put us on a path to fiscal responsibility. And, we need it now. Here's to hoping the men (and women) in Washington can grow up a little and finally just get this done.

Baby I Was Born This Way

2011-05-31T12:14:00.001-04:00

Image by Captivated (MIM) via Flickr

I was discussing a couple of biblical passages with a friend of mine on Facebook. In particular, we were talking about the passage in Exodus where G-d hardens Pharoah's heart and the passage in Romans where Paul talks about G-d binding everyone over to sin.

New International Version (©1984)
For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

This friend is a Universalist (like myself). But, we have very different opinions on what it means to be "bound over to disobedience". I was raised to hate the way I was made. I was made a sinful, rebellious creature worthy of loathing and eternal torment. Because of the "sin" of Adam, I was born in a state where I had no choice but to sin. This idea of original sin permeated my thoughts about myself for the first four decades of my life. Then, I began to look at sin differently. The Greek word for sin, hamarto, is an archery term. It's not an "evil" thing, it simply means to "miss the mark". Judaism has a few words for sin. But, basically Judaism teaches we have two natures, one inclined to do good (yetzer hatov) and one more animalistic (yetzer hara). We have to learn to develop the good nature while containing the animalistic nature.

While it's important to me what the Bible teaches, my understanding of how G-d works and how the universe works is no longer limited to the Bible. While I'm glad to know that that Bible doesn't teach eternal torment and, in fact, teaches Universalism, I think at this point I'd be a Universalist even if the Bible didn't teach it. Even though the Bible teaches we are "bound to disobedience" so that G-d can have mercy on us all, I don't really see it that way. That sounds like G-d gave us a terrible, terminal disease just so that we'd be grateful when He cured it. I think it's more like we are creatures that were made imperfect so that we could learn and grow and develop. That's part of the adventure of life. Missing the mark or sinning, is something we do along the way, the way a toddler stumbles and falls when he takes his first steps. It's not evil. It's not rebellious. It's a normal part of the development process. It's certainly not worthy of retribution. Yes, sometimes a child will throw a temper tantrum. Sometimes a child will knowingly and willingly rebel and there is a place for punishment. But, that punishment is corrective, not given to "pay back".

I stole the title of this post from Lady Gaga. One of the things I like about her is she teaches people to embrace who they are. Embracing who you are doesn't mean you never try to do better. It means stop trying to be something you're not and appreciating the uniqueness that makes you you. In a sense, I agree that we were all born "bound to disobedience". We were all born in a state where we stumble and fall. And, then we get up and try again. But, the traditional Christian way of looking at this is extremely unhealthy in my experience. Christianity projects this image of G-d as being somewhat shocked and extremely pissed off about the way we toddlers stumble around. I just can't see it that way anymore.

My mama told me when I was young
We are all born superstars
She rolled my hair and put my lipstick on
In the glass of her boudoir

"There's nothing wrong with loving who you are"
She said, "'Cause he made you perfect, babe"

"So hold your head up girl and you'll go far,
Listen to me when I say"

I'm beautiful in my way
'Cause God makes no mistakes
I'm on the right track, baby
I was born this way

Don't hide yourself in regret
Just love yourself and you're set
I'm on the right track, baby
I was born this way

Happy Birthday to Me!

2011-05-26T14:13:00.000-04:00

Image by BrianWestChest via FlickrThe day I used to dread has arrived. Today I am 50 years old. My parents look at me with shock. "We have a 50 year old son?" they asked on my birthday card. Yep. I'm half a century old today. And I'm loving it.

It's hard to believe it was a decade ago that I turned 40. That was miserable. I didn't want to be 40. But, a lot has changed in the last 10 years. I've gotten to know myself a lot better. I didn't really like the person I was at 40. I like the guy I am at 50. I do feel older and wiser.

I am blessed with the best family on the planet. The girls keep asking me what I want for my birthday, as if any material thing could make me any happier. I want nothing. I have a loving wife who is a partner to me, a teenage daughter rapidly transitioning into womanhood and a brave pre-teen who reminds me every single day of the simple joy of just being on the planet. She's the only kid I've ever known who answers "Yep" when you say "You've got a pretty good life. Don't you?" We were told last week that Shayna has juvenile arthritis and since that time she's been through five hour doctors visits, surgery, injections, prescriptions and a host of other things she hasn't experienced before. But, yesterday after her surgery, we were talking and I said "Shayna, I don't think you were nervous. You seemed a little excited about it.". "Yes", she replied. For Shayna, the procedure was another adventure. She looks at things with a "I wonder what that would be like." attitude.

Reflecting back on the last 50 years, I think Ive done pretty well with my journey. 25 years ago I would never have imagined that at 50 I'd have such a wonderful family, be running my own business and have as fulfilling a life as I have. I was greeted today with dozens of well-wishes on my Facebook page, most from people I've never met in real life. But, people who are very special to me, none-the-less. I was telling Kayla just a couple of days ago that I love talking about religion and politics. For me, the only two topics worth talking about. And, my Facebook friends give me the opportunity to do that on a daily basis with some pretty diverse people.

Today, Ty, Shayna and I had lunch together. Tonight, we'll all go out to for dinner. No big celebration. But, there's nothing that could make today any more special than every day in my life already is.

My Snark Free Month

2011-05-23T12:19:00.002-04:00

Cover of Snark

Sometime around the beginning of April, I read a blog by a woman who had decided to try to go "snark free" for a month as a spiritual practice. The idea is to avoid snark- a contraction for "snide remark" in an effort for "right speech" and to observe things about oneself. Since it was around the time of Lent, I decide for the month of April I would, as much as possible, avoid snark in email, on Facebook and face-to-face. Given the nature of many of my conversations on Facebook, I knew this would be a challenge. And, making the declaration public ensured I'd have the harshest of judges/critics keeping me in line as I made this journey.

The first thought that popped into my head when I decided to take on this challenge was "Can I do it?" I come from a family that is the royal family of snarky remarks. Giving each other a compliment? Well, that's a monumental undertaking. But, we are always ready with a "witty retort". Would being snark free stifle me? Could I really be "me" without snark? I was willing to give it a try.

About two weeks in I said something about being snark free in front of my daughter who asked "You've given up being snarky?" First observation, people rarely notice when you make a change like this. Try it. Just try being super nice for a day or a week. Compliment people you don't normally compliment. Hug your spouse more. For the most part, I bet no one will notice. We notice negative changes about people. We'll notice when someone is more grouchy. But, we rarely notice when people change for the better.

Now, was I truly snark free for a month? No way. And, I did allow myself exceptions for humor. I was less snarky though. I didn't follow the rules of the person's blog that I read. I had my own rules/goals. I didn't beat myself up when I failed. I said going in that when I failed, I'd take that as a learning experience. Notice I said "when I failed", not "if I failed". I knew I would fail. That is part of the practice. When I failed, I'd take a mental note of it and start over. And, I believe every time I made a snarky remark I was actually aware of it and took a mental note. Being snark free made me a more thoughtful person (not thoughtful as in considerate but thoughtful as in aware of what I was doing). I was more observant of the thoughts that proceeded my remarks and how I could choose which to express and which to keep to myself. I was more aware of just how judgmental I am, how critical I am of others- both those close to me and strangers. At times I was a more quiet person, as I couldn't find anything not snarky to say about what I was observing. I was more aware of just how often I stream a running commentary of my opinions of things going around me (as if anyone really wants to know just what I think about everything). When I did choose to let loose with some snark, it was a conscious choice rather than just a habit. Being snark free also greatly heightened my awareness of just how snarky we all are. One of the rules of being snark free was I could not try to make others lives up to my new found standards. But, I began to find the remarks of my wife and daughters increasingly distasteful as I became more aware of just how ubiquitous snark is in our society.

When I started this, I thought at the end of the month, I'd make a few mental notes about the experience and go back to my old self. However, I found the less snarky, more aware me to be a buy I liked better. So, I have decided to extend the practice. I don't know if my wife or my daughters (or anyone else) is aware of the change. But, what really matters is that I am. I'd highly recommend this to anyone. It doesn't have to be being less snarky. Maybe turn it around and instead of looking at it as giving up something negative try being more complimentary or more loving as a conscious practice and see how it makes you feel.

Self-Love

2011-05-04T12:54:00.001-04:00

Image by artnoose via Flickr

I recently reviewed a book written by a man with a background similar to mine. He's a black man who was raised in a traditional Christian home and somewhere along the way, he was drawn to Eastern philosophy. One of the many discoveries we share is the concept of self-love late in our lives. One of the reasons Christianity was never satisfying to me was not just a passive lack of teaching of loving myself, but an active teaching that I was unworthy of love. The concept of self-love was unheard of. If it was ever mentioned, it wasn't termed "self-love" but "pride" or "selfishness".

I distinctly remember a Sunday school lesson about joy. Joy, we were taught, was an acronym- Jesus-Others-You. In that order. You served Jesus (God) first, then you took care of others. And, whatever was left, well maybe you could do something for yourself. I was taught that I was a creature G-d had made a horrible mistake on. G-d had created Adam and placed him in a garden where Adam screwed up, condemning the rest of humanity to be born in a state deserving eternal punishment. I was taught that (for who knows what reason), Jesus loved me and died to protect me from a G-d who was otherwise bent on seeing that I paid for being born in this state. I was covered in Jesus' blood so that G-d could not see my true nature, my true filth that was to vile to even look upon. I was supposed to rejoice that G-d accepted Jesus. But, the real teaching was that G-d could never accept me.

Then, there was the fact that I was a little negro boy growing up in the 60s. In addition to the normal everyday experience of being black in America and what that does to one's self-esteem, I had other issues that ate away at any self-love I might have. My mother never used these words. But, she was ashamed of our race. She hated any reminder that we were black and I picked up on that. I spent most of my childhood in an all black middle class neighborhood which was good for my self-esteem. But, at the age of 14 my parents sent me to an all white junior high school across town. I was the "other" there. I was the only black person many of these kids had ever known. My first year at my junior high I think there were three other black people. One of them lived in the neighborhood. The other two of us and I were bussed in. The white kids there constantly reminded me that I was different. I was accused of a stealing something by an anonymous white girl who claimed to witness me taking it from the library. The principal called me into the office and threatened me with expulsion if I didn't return it. I was an "A" student at the time and had never been in any kind of trouble like that. When I denied it, I was given the task of find the real culprit or I'd be held accountable. The situation finally was resolved. Kids used to come up to me in the hallway and touch my hair. I was a short, skinny kid and extremely shy. This made it even worse. I hated my junior high school.

I realize now why many young black men get into trouble. I actually had a pretty easy childhood. But, when people judge you before they know you. When they fear you. When they think you're a thief just because of the color of your skin, you might go one of two ways. Some black men say "You're going to fear me? I'll give you something to fear." "You think I'm a thief. Well, I might as well steal.". For me, I compensated by becoming better. I was going to be smarter than the white kids. I was going to speak better than they did. My mother is from West Virginia. So, I had a bit of a West Virginia accent when it came to certain words. I learned to perfect a Midwestern accent. I poured myself into my grades. When graduation came around, I left that school as quickly as I could going to a different high school than those kids. I hated that school, too. But, at least it was a fresh start. I had no friends in high school. I didn't go to the prom or any dances or any social events. I graduated with a 4.0 average. But, the compensation of grades wasn't enough to make up for the fact that I pretty much felt worthless. And, while blacks are a minority in America, I've always been in a super-minority. Engineering school in college, working for IBM in Lexington, KY, living in all white suburbs (we jokingly call West Chester, White Chester). To this day, I don't have a even one black male friend I can talk to about what it's like to go through this experience.

Fast forward about 20 years. I was suffering terribly from panic attacks. I had to do something. Out of desperation, I turned to the internet and stumbled across yoga. Yoga led to meditation. Then, I came across Eastern philosophy in the forms of Buddhism and Taoism. I was warned about these false religions about how they elevated the self above G-d and were totally about taking care of oneself instead of being there for others. But, I was at the point where I didn't care. I was dying inside. And, I wasn't yet sure that I had enough Jesus covering me to satisfy G-d. I had to take a chance. I ignored the warnings about "emptying my mind" and what that could make room for. I had to get out what had been festering inside there for those many decades. Nothing could be worse.

Ironically, after I found Buddhism, yoga, meditation and Taoism, I then found a branch of progressive Christianity and authors like Marcus Borg, Thomas Talbott and Daniel Helminiak that salvaged Christianity for me. I found the United Church of Christ (which I had never heard of) and that saved church for me.

So, that's my story when it comes to self-love. I'm not condemning Christianity, as a whole, when it comes to teaching one to love oneself. The pastor of our church now does a great job of emphasizing this aspect of Christianity. But, the Christianity that was taught to me taught me just the opposite of self-love. Jesus says to love our neighbor as our self, not to love our neighbor and hate our selves. For me, Christianity was a religion of self-hatred and it wasn't until I discovered other traditions that I was given permission to show myself a little tenderness.

Sol On Ice- A Book Review

2011-05-01T11:12:00.001-04:00

When the author of Sol on Ice wrote an email to me and asked me to review his book, I was intrigued. We have similar backgrounds both being middle aged black men, both being raised in a traditional Christian background and both seeking higher levels of spirituality, often looking outside of traditional avenues. But, when he told me he had taken trip (literally and figuratively) to the Peruvian rain forest to take an hallucinogenic drug, I told him that was not something I could advocate. I practice Buddhism, of a sort, meditate and do yoga. But, why would I want to read a book about something I would never do? Namely, fly to Peru and take ayahuasca. Then, I thought perhaps I could learn something vicariously through his adventure, so I agreed to read the book. And, I am glad I did.

The book is very well written. The author draws you into his story and keeps giving you enough foreshadowing to keep you interested in how this thing is going to turn out. He travels to a remote part of Peru and spends a week taking several "guided" trips on this powerful drug that doesn't sound like anything you'd want to do recreationally. While there, he figures out why he has gravitated toward Eastern philosophy during his life. When I read that part of the book, it resonated powerfully with me. As a black man living in the suburbs, I don't get to interact with too many other black men. Reading Titan's insights on being black in America and how that affects our psyches and our souls was extremely interesting to me. Titan didn't know it at the time he sent the book to me. But, we have a lot in common. His thoughts on self-love and how his willingness to go to Peru to make himself a better person was evidence of that perked me up. I may not take a trip to Peru. But, I realized that my constant seeking is a way of saying I love myself enough to keep trying to improve myself. Another "Aha!" moment from the book.

I found myself dog-earring several pages of the book. I only wished I had it on my Kindle so I could highlight and save those passages. I'd love to talk to Titan about some of the things he discovered while on his trip and in the months after returning home. While reading the book has not made me want to go to Peru and try ayahuasca, it has made me reconsider some things I have been thinking about like a trip to spend a weeks with the monks in Gethsemane, KY or taking a meditation retreat. I'd love to know Titan's take on this. But, it seems to me the insights he got from his experience weren't from the ayahuasca itself. But, from the combination of the rigors of the retreat and the ayahuasca clearing things that were blocking him from the insights he already had within. I think each person needs to find their own path to that ends. For Titan, this was the way. I'm glad he decided to share his experience. The book is definitely worth picking up and reading.

A Plague on Both Your Houses

2011-04-05T13:04:00.000-04:00

Image by markn3tel via FlickrI know... I know... The title of my post is pretty snarky and this is supposed to be my month of no snark comments. Blame Shakespeare, not me. I've tried for days to think of a nice way to put this and I can't make it any nicer.

Last week in Afghanistan, several Muslim men killed several UN workers because a "pastor" in Florida (Terry Jones) decided to put the Q'uran on trial and burn a copy of it. It's a situation that saddens me deeply and frankly makes me angry and frustrated.

Terry Jones is just the other side of the coin of the Imams that he hates so much. Yes, he's within his constitutional rights to burn anything he owns. If he wants to go out and buy a copy of a Q'uran or 1,000 copies of the Q'uran and burn them all, that's his right. But, just because you have the right to do something doesn't make it the compassionate thing to do, the right thing to do or even a smart thing to do. Mr. Jones knew that burning that Q'uran would inflame passions in the Muslim world and he burned it knowing it would put people's lives in jeopardy. In a very real sense, he deserves a share of the blame for the subsequent deaths that occurred.

On the other side, we have the Imams (Muslim preachers) in Afghanistan who use religious intolerance such as Mr. Jones' to inflame a people who are like dried timber just waiting for a spark. The Afghan people live in a failed state with foreign fighters (us) in there every day. They are largely an illiterate people- with the men having a literacy rate of less than 50%. Most of the men there, if they had a Q'uran, couldn't read it. All they know about the Q'uran is what they are told, and some Imams take advantage of that fact. These men are told that the United States hates Islam and that we are there on another crusade to wipe out their religion. They were told that not one Q'uran was burned but multiple Q'urans. I'm not excusing their actions. The bear the responsibility for being inhuman enough to think it's fair retribution to kill an innocent person (people) in response to someone several thousand miles away burning a book. I look at them and wonder how they can get so incensed over a book being burned in the name of one religion (Christianity). Yet, they have no problem with a 14 year old girl who was raped by a cousin being charge with adultery and whipped to death in the name of their own religion.

So, one the one hand, we have a "Pastor", a man of the cloth, who burns a book knowing full well it might lead to deaths. But, he does it anyway to prove his point that Islam is dangerous. On the other hand, we have a mob who thinks the life of innocent people is just punishment for an insult to their God- Allah the merciful. Allah the compassionate. Allah who says:

“…if any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.” Q'uran 5:32

I'm sorry. I can't think of a better way to say it. "A plague on both your houses."

Fear sucks

2011-03-24T14:25:00.000-04:00

Image via Wikipedia

A couple of days ago my daughter said something profoundly sad to me. She said "I'd rather not try something and get teased for not trying than to try and get teased for failing." At the time we were discussing athletics. But, this simple statement struck me so hard because I could identify with it so much. I've lived with fear all my life. Fear of what other people think of me. Fear of what God thinks of me. Fear of failure. Fear so paralyzing that instead of trying and failing, it's easier to just not try.

What I've realized is that both my daughters have inherited an introverted personality from me. I'm reading a great book on introversion (reading it for the second time) and I've been working with both of them to help them cope with being an introvert in an extroverted world. The first thing to teach them is there is nothing wrong with being introverted. We're only about 25% of the population. But, introverts are actually gifted in several ways extroverts are not. The world needs introverts. The problem is when introverts are made to feel defective by the extroverted minority- that can lead to neuroses- neuroses I was given and that I've had to work to overcome.

My hope is to get my girls to embrace their natural dispositions and to take advantage of them and avoid the issues I've had because I didn't know how to cope with mine.

Love Wins- A Book Review

2011-03-22T14:44:00.002-04:00

The rumors were flying fast and furious a couple of weeks ago. "Has Rob Bell gone completely off his rocker? Is he a (audible gasp) Universalist?" I couldn't wait to get my hands on the book "Love Wins" and see if it lived up to its title and Rob Bell had joined the ranks of us heretical universalists. My question was "Is Rob Bell one of us?" The answer? Well, keep reading...

A little background in case you don't know Rob Bell. He's the pastor of Mars Hill Bible Church a megachurch in Michigan (but, I won't hold that against him). He's a young (40 years) pastor who in addition to having a way cool look produces videos called Nooma that are cutting edge in their production and appeal to young people. Bell was raised in a traditional Christian background, but his view of God seems (to me) to have expanded quite a bit. I read his book Velvet Elvis several years ago and enjoyed it very much. Bell has been described as a "rock star" in the Christian world. So, when it was rumored that he might have given up on the belief in hell, people really got their panties in a bunch.

The book, like Bell's other book I have read is written in a very casual, easily accessible style. It took me all of two days to complete the entire book. Bell asks a lot of very important questions we should all be asking ourselves, encouraging people to not just take his word for things but to think through them for themselves. I like that about his books. Bell asks most of the questions I asked. Questions, whose answers led me away from believing in the God I was taught about in Sunday School, a cruel and hard taskmaster who could hardly wait to throw me into Hell, unless somehow Jesus managed to save me from Him.

If you want to be kept in suspense about how Rob answers the questions about hell and whether love actually wins or not, you can stop reading now and know that the book is worth getting. If you're not afraid to think or confront these questions, pick up the book and don't be afraid to read a "heretic's" point of view. If he's wrong, you can say "He's wrong." and put the book down. No harm done.

[SPOILER ALERT]

So, what is the answer to "Is Bell a Universalist?" If I had to give a one word "yes" or "no", the answer would be "no". Bell has not gone so far as to say there is no hell (as has been reported). Bell does not go so far as to say that all will eventually be saved (or get to heaven). So, in the strictest sense, Bell is not a universalist. What has got some so upset though is Bell has expanded the love and grace of God way beyond it's traditional limitations. Bell says that Jesus (Christ) is accessible to all, even to those who have never heard His name. Bell believes that all are saved through Christ. But, Bell points to Paul's story about the water flowing from the rock that Moses struck with his staff. Paul says that water was "Christ". Bell reasons if Paul can see Christ everywhere, including in the desert hundreds of years before His birth, others can have access to Christ- others who are not Christians. Bell also says that God gives us what we want. I don't agree with that. We get a lot of things we don't want and don't get a lot of things we do want. But, one thing we do have (and I think this is what Bell is talking about) is we have choices. Bell doesn't think it makes sense that those choices end at the moment of death. The picture of God as all loving and willing to do anything to save us before death and turning into a monster that casts us into eternal torment the moment we die, Bell rejects.

In a sense, I guess Bell is a universalist. He believes salvation is available to all. But, he does not go so far as to say that all will choose salvation. He points to the picture in Revelation of a new city where the gates are never closed. He says that there will be a judgement day, a day of separation where God puts everything right and says "No more, here." Choices will still be available. Choices that can lead us farther from God or choices that can lead us closer to God. Some choices will not be available to those who choose to stay "here". God will say "You can do what you like. But, you can't do it here." (I paraphrase). This part of the book reminded me of my friend Bob Edwards who just can't get all the way to universalism. He says that God allows suffering here. So, why should we believe that God will not allow people after death to make choices that continue to cause suffering? He points us to the new city in the book of Revelation where the gates are never closed. Never closed might mean those outside the city can enter. It would also mean those in the city could leave (so, I guess in heaven, we'll have the choice to make those choices that disqualify us to remain there). Like C.S. Lewis in the "Great Divorce" (reference in the Further Reading in Bell's book), Bell seems to think if there is a lock on hell, it's locked from the inside. Bell talks about those who continue and continue and continue to make choices that lead them further and further from God. Do they eventually give up their humanity entirely? Is the image of God so distorted in them that it's irretrievable? If the answers to those questions are "Yes." Then, I'd say the title of the book needs to be changed to "Love wins, sometimes." or "Love wins, most of the time."

Many of the people slamming Rob Bell (most?) have not read the book. I know because their criticisms came before the book even came out. But, Rob Bell is not a universalist. According to his critics, he's still a heretic. Some of them still think he's a universalist. It's also not true, even though it's been widely reported, that Rob Bell believes there is no hell. He's expanded the grace of God and the reach of Jesus far beyond what makes some people comfortable. But, according to Bell, it's still possible to outrun the reach of God. God's love is not inescapable, as others of us have concluded. Rob Bell is not one of us, yet.

Stick Man- by Richard Rossi- A Book Review

2011-03-07T15:12:00.000-05:00

I've forgotten how I met the author of Stick Man on Facebook. But, I've been "friends" of Richard Rossi for a few months now. So, when he said he had a novel out, I decided to take a look at it. It's described as a "coming of age" novel. Not normally my cup of tea. But, I am so glad I picked it up. Once I picked it up, I could hardly put it down because I saw so much of myself in the main character of Jeremiah, so much.

The thing that's really weird about me seeing myself in Jeremiah, the young boy who, over the course of the book, becomes a man, is that there is very little about the details of our lives that overlap at all. He was raised in Pittsburgh by an artistic family with a devout Catholic mother and a mentally ill father. Jeremiah endures physical hardships I never had to endure. And there is the issue of just who is Stick Man, a character that haunts Jeremiah's dreams. And, we're not really sure at first, maybe Stick Man is in his waking life as well. I spent the first part of the book wondering whether Stick Man was a personification of the guilt and shame haunting Jeremiah and just a projection or whether I was reading a Stephen King type novel where Stick Man, a figure made of the sticks of the cross of Christ, with nails for fingernails is an actual physical entity. The answer? Well, you'll have to read the book to find out.

I was grabbed by the book right up front when Jeremiah's mother takes him to church as a young child and he looks up and beholds the crucifix. Being raised Protestant, we weren't gruesome enough to put Jesus on the cross in our churches. But, Jeremiah's description of his first encounter with a crucifix in church was something that I could understand completely:

Mom licked her fingertips and brushed my eyebrows again, slicking them down. I wasn’t fond of spit on my eyebrows, but there was no stopping her. We walked the aisle in the center of the sanctuary. The church looked gargantuan. She found a seat, genuflected, and made the sign of the cross again. I gazed at the man on the sticks with nails stuck into his flesh. My eyes were riveted to the blood...

[the priest said] One day, God will purge our sins out of us in the stinking, scalding flames. You will burn in the light and heat of God’s purging fire. Some sins are venial, and melted away easily. But other sins, such as adultery, are mortal. Mortal sins will damn your soul forever.”...

“Satan has a stopwatch in his hand, and he sees his time coming to an end.” McCormick pointed right to the section where Mom and I sat. “Therefore, he’s chasing you harder and faster and more energetically than ever. He sees his time is running out and he wants you. His tactic is to tempt you with sin.” I squirmed. “I don’t like this, Mom. I’m scared.” “Be quiet.” “The devil goes after the young,” McCormick said. “Those who cannot fend for themselves.” I didn’t understand it all. But what I did understand made me cry. “Sit still,” Mom said. I wailed and wouldn’t stop until we left. She had me by the hair while I kicked and screamed. When we exited the sanctuary, I looked up and saw the cross, high above the votive lights. The beams seemed to reach for me. For a moment, I was transfixed. I imagined my own body on the sticks....

That’s when my nightmares started.

In church, where we're supposed to go to be comforted, to be reassured, to be loved- that's where little Jeremiah was given the deepest fear he would ever know. That's where his nightmares started. That's where my panic attacks started. I knew as soon as I read this passage this book would be something I could relate to.

When I'm reading novels, I don't normally highlight passages. But, I ended up highlighting 61 passages from Stick Man (on my Kindle). It's interesting that Jeremiah was first raised Catholic, then fell in among Pentecostals because so much of the guilt that was pumped into little Jeremiah was almost exactly the same stuff pumped into me, including some the language.

Rawlings face lit up. “Right! Yes, praise God, you got it. The key to joy, Jeremiah, is found in the letters J, O, Y. Jesus first, then others, then yourself last. (I, Brian, was taught this exact phrase)

“If you make a chair, you have the right to sit on it or burn it for firewood. We’re His. He made us, and not we ourselves. We’re just change in His pocket to spend any way He wants, as it were.”

“Maybe that’s why you believe what Reverend Rawlings teaches,” she said. “He makes God out to be a heavenly father who is like your earthly father.” “How so?” “The old man in the sky is angry. You never know when He’ll attack.”

"If God were small enough for us to understand, He wouldn't be big enough for us to trust,"

The book follows the life of young Jeremiah from the time he is a young child until he reaches the age of 21. We see the wounds inflicted upon him by the church, his parents and trusted adults. And, we see how he wrestles with the demons haunting him because of the lessons he's taught about how he's never good enough. Then, we watch Jeremiah as he learns to trust himself and to deal with all the pain of his past and as he comes to a new understanding of just who or what God is.

I don't know how well people who don't have a fundamentalist past will be able to relate to this book. It's just such a bizarre, nonsensical mindset that many people who haven't been steeped in it simply cannot understand why we didn't just reject it and not let it wound us so deeply. Even my brothers and sisters weren't impacted the way I was. But, like Jeremiah, my parents called me the "sensitive one". As a child, I accepted everything my parents, preachers and Sunday school teachers said. They knew better, they had a direct line to God and God had put them in charge of teaching me how to avoid the hell that seemed to await me at every turn. I wanted nothing more than to escape Stick Man and I was willing to listen to anything that could help me with that.

I saw a quote today that helps understand this:

First there is a time when we believe everything, then for a little while we believe with discrimination, then we believe nothing whatever, and then we believe everything again - and, moreover, give reasons why we believe.
- Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

In my experience, those of us raised with a faith tradition take on the faith of our fathers at first. Then we find that faith doesn't fit. In fact, for some of us it not only is uncomfortable, it's choking us to death. Then, we chuck the whole thing away or most of it anyway, until we can find a way to reconstruct it into something that actually works for us.

I recommend this book for people who have been scarred by a fundamentalist upbringing or for people trying to understand someone who has been. I don't know how much of the book is autobiographical. But, Rossi writes with the understanding that would seem to only come from someone who has been through the things he writes about. If Rossi is not Jeremiah, he did a great job of understanding the character. The book is PG-13 though containing some strong language and some fairly explicit sexual scenes (with the grown Jeremiah). I wouldn't really say I enjoyed reading the book as it did take me back to some uncomfortable places and feelings I have tried to put behind me. But, as I learned when I was in counseling a few years ago, if we never face those feelings, they never really heal and they haunt us in ways we don't even imagine. To truly defeat Stick Man, you have to face Stick Man.

Insufficient Funds?

2011-02-28T15:11:00.000-05:00

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday, Mike's sermon was about Jesus' lesson on not worrying about clothing or food and about not worshiping "mammon". After the sermon, we had a great discussion about what that means for us today. And, being the political group we are, it came around to talking about what we should be doing as a society and what the government should be doing.

Generally speaking, we're a pretty liberal bunch at Nexus. During Mike's sermon he showed some recent graphs showing the increasing gap between the rich and the middle class and the poor. Speaking for myself, I find that growing gap to be deplorable. The rich are getting richer while the middle class is losing ground and the poor are just barely holding their own. So, we inevitably got around to the budget cuts going on right now- cuts which seem to be targeted at the people who can least afford them. Most of us were talking about how deplorable the cuts are. One of our members point out (rightfully so) that we cannot keep up the deficit spending we've been doing. I absolutely agree with her. Something's gotta give. But, I wonder, when John Boehner says "We're broke.", who is the "we"? He's right. Tax revenues for the government are down. Government spending is up. The government is broke, just like a lot of us are. But, wait a minute. During the midst of this financial crisis, while the government is strapped, the middle class is losing ground and the poor are suffering, the rich are not only getting richer, the rich are paying tax rates that are historically low. So, while, I agree with Boehner, the "we" he is talking about is the middle class, the poor and the government, not the top 1% of income earners. The top 1% who, by the way, control 35% of the wealth in this country. Sure, our government needs to be more responsible with how it spends money. It's way out of control. But, I'm not sure the problem is simply the fact that the country is broke. I think the rich are trying to take advantage of this fiscal crisis to fundamentally alter what the American public expects out of its government. I am not at all convinced that a tax increase on the wealthy would be a bad idea. The top marginal federal tax rate has been as high as 90% in the past. Today it's at 35% and we're being told the rich cannot afford to raise it to 39%. And, we believe that!

While we're all scrambling around fretting over insufficient funds and debating about whether we can afford to continue to fund programs like home heating assistance, the rich continue to get richer. We believe that wealth redistribution is a bad thing, a socialist thing. When Barack Obama told Joe the Plumber he'd like to spread the wealth around a little bit, he was labeled a socialist. People in this country are very scared of socialists. I've got news for you who fear wealth redistribution. It's already happening. The thing that amazes me is middle class and poor conservatives keep buying into the very system that is taking the wealth of our country and redistributing it. Increasingly, our country is turning into a plutocracy, a society run by the rich for the benefit of the rich. Why aren't people who of scared of socialism scared of plutocracies?

While the rich and the corporations do have most of the wealth and the power. The rest of us still have 90% of the vote. It's not too late to change things.

Stop the Blame Game

2011-01-14T17:06:00.000-05:00

Image by BrianWestChest via FlickrWhen the shootings happened at Virginia Tech, the liberals were quick to point to all the ways Conservatives and gun laws were at fault. I refrained from writing about that for a long time not wanting to make political hay of an unspeakable and unthinkable tragedy. I finally did weigh in. This week, in the wake of the killings in Tucson, I also wanted to avoid jumping into the fray of finger pointing.

Instead of just accepting the fact that some things are beyond our control, we human beings (myself included) like to think we can control everything. The fact of the matter is we cannot. While Buddhism teaches every effect has a cause and I truly believe that is the case- everything is dependent on what came before; we live in a world of almost infinite causes and some are extremely subtle. We cannot know exactly what causes what, even though we can look at contributing factors. Who knows what goes on in the mind of someone who thinks a political "opponent" deserves to die for daring to disagree with him? When a mind has gone far enough around the bend to gun down old people and little girls for the sake of "glory", can we really claim to know how that mind works and what we might have done to keep the man who is obviously insane somehow in check?

No, I don't blame Sarah Palin or Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck or any of the the other right wing crazies for the deaths of those people in Tucson. While I have called for a more civil political discourse (before and after this tragedy), it's not just to keep the nutjobs in check. It's because it's the best thing for our country. One can hardly compromise (the word John Boehner hates) or even find common ground (the term he prefers) with someone that one is purporting to be intentionally destroying the country. It's almost impossible to get anything productive done in an environment where people portray their colleagues who disagree with them as mortal enemies. Does such talk contribute to the fantasies like this crazy? Maybe... Probably... But, do we really need the threat of crazies taking to the streets with guns to convince us that toning down the rhetoric is a good idea? Can't we be civil for the sake of being more fully human and for the sake of being able to work together more effectively?

In the wake of this, we're hearing renewed calls for gun control. We all know that guns don't kill people. People kill people. But, guns sure make it a lot easier and faster. While we can't know exactly what was going on in this guy's mind and we probably couldn't have stopped him from firing a single shot that day, we do know that he was able to fire 30 rounds before reloading. I do want to review and reinstate the ban on assault weapons. There isn't a single good reason why anyone, crazy or not, needs a gun that can shoot thirty rounds before being reloaded. Having a ban on extended clips wouldn't have made the outcome for the first couple of people shot in Tucson. But, it might have saved the last wounded or the last two or three killed. Make crazies reload sooner to give people an opportunity to take them down sooner.

So, instead of the left blaming the right for this tragedy and the right saying this guy was some sort of lefty because of his reading list and saying "Well, you use violent speech too" why don't we just stop it? Maybe the rhetoric contributed to this tragedy. Maybe it didn't. But, what are we going to lose by knocking it off and acting like grown ups. As President Obama said, I'd like to make our democracy as good as it appears in the eyes of our children. They are watching us, they are learning from us. Let's not let them down.

My New Toy

2011-01-08T13:48:00.002-05:00

Image via WikipediaBefore Shayna was born, I owned a 35 mm SLR camera. I never really learned how to use it. But, I have always been a bit of a photo bug. I retired that camera around 2000 in favor of point and shoot digital camera. There is no comparison between digital photography and film photography when it comes to speed, cost (oh how many times did I throw away four copies of the same photo Ty had taken to make sure she got the "right" shot?), the ability to instantly review your work, the ability to share your work, etc. etc. So, the move from film to digital was made with no hesitation and no looking back. But, I realized the pictures I was getting from my point and shoots were very often disappointing. Especially after the kids were getting older, trying to take pictures of school plays, basketball games, etc- places with low lighting and moving subjects- I was not happy with the results. While I loved being able to slip a camera into my pocket and take it everywhere with me, I kept chasing that elusive camera that would give me good performance under challenging conditions and the convenience of digital photography. Digital SLRs were out of the question- price-wise until a couple of years ago. And, when the prices did start to come down, I still couldn't justify the cost or the size, until a couple of weeks ago.

I was about to buy my sixth digital compact camera in less than 10 years when I thought "Wait a minute. Maybe I should do something different". I consulted my two brothers who had both gone from Canon's prosumer G series camera (an oversized P&S with a good sensor but a lens that cannot be changed out) to Canon's dSLRs. After doing a ton of research, I decided to bite the bullet and buy a dSLR that I hope to have for many years to come. I went with a middle of the road (for a consumer camera) consumer Canon T2i. It's classified as a prosumer dSLR. Some pros use it and a lot of serious hobbyists. It's not a "full body" dSLR like most of the pros use. It has a slightly smaller sensor than those. But, it has a much larger sensor than any of the cameras with non-interchangeable lenses. It's 18 megapixels and while I had lost interest in more and more megapixels at around 6 MP, I now realize the additional MP give me the ability to really crop down my shots after I've taken them. Given that I have a pretty limited telephoto lens for indoor shots right now, that is very helpful. I looked at the Micro Four Thirds cameras too but ruled them out because they were really not much less expensive than a dSLR were still too big to fit in a pocket and the peripherals for them are limited. I bought the T2i with the kit 18-55mm lens and an optional 55-250mm Canon lens because I got such a great deal on them and I wanted to try them out before investing in more expensive lenses. I've already upgraded the kit lens to a Tamron 17-50 mm lens which while it doesn't have Image Stabilization, is much faster and better suited for basketball games and swim meets.

Over the last couple of weeks I have read the owner's manual from cover-to-cover and a book specifically written for the Canon T2i and digital photography- Canon EOS Rebel from Snap Shots to Great Shots (not exactly a catchy title). The book starts where the owner's manual stops telling you how to use the advanced functions of the camera and how to compose your shots. I've learned more about photography and things like white balance and exposure compensation than I had ever learned before. I've spent the last week taking literally hundreds of shots at different apertures, speed settings, white balances and ISO settings. Even with my P&S now, I'm paying attention to the aperture and shutter speed and realizing and knowing when the automatic mode is not going to give me a good shot. I've sat up and said "A ha" I don't know how many times as I've learned why certain shots (like my product shots for the website) constantly come out underexposed. I'm recommitting to, over the year 2011, taking a photo a day, which I'll post on my other blog.

Deal Making and the Presidency

2010-12-08T10:23:00.001-05:00

Image by Getty Images via @daylifePoor President Obama. The Republicans, the so-called deficit hawks holding unemployment benefits hostage in order to get a tax break for the wealthiest 2% of wage-earners in the country. They tell people that the deficit is the number one problem in the country and that it's "jobs, jobs, jobs". And, at the same time, they say they are not going to vote on any legislation in the Senate other than a tax break for the rich; and the President gets the blame- from his own "base". Once again I'm in awe of the political savvy of the Republicans and the completely political ineptitude of the Democrats. The Republicans have found a way to control the Senate with less than a majority. The Democrats (when they had the super majority) teamed up with the Republicans to kill the public option in the Affordable Heatlthcare Act. The so-called Blue Dog Democrats are the ones that killed the public option- along with the Republicans. One of the most major pieces of legislation passed in my lifetime was done by this President and Congress yet, the Republicans were able to spin in in a way that many Americans think it is a disaster.

I think the President did a good job of laying out the facts in his news conference yesterday. Yet, his starry-eyed "base" feels betrayed. He should have fought for a better deal. Fought with what? The President can't enact legislation. In a few weeks we will have a Republican controlled house. We have a Democratic majority in the Senate that can't seem to get a single Republican to cross over on anything. We have a Republican party who has made it clear their number one priority is to ensure that they extend tax breaks to the very wealthiest Americans no matter the cost, even if it means shutting down unemployment benefits during Christmas. But, the President who got a deal that not only gets the unemployment benefits extended it provides more tax breaks for the middle class and for the cost of only a two year extension on the breaks for the rich gets hammered- not by his opposition, but by his own people.

No progressive likes the fact that we had to extend the tax cuts for the rich for another two years to get this deal done. But, let's look at what we got. One it was only two years, not a permanent extension. Fact is in two years we'll have to fight the battle again. But, the extension is not permanent. Estimates are this deal will create another 2.2 million jobs. We got not only unemployment benefits out of the deal. But, a tax holiday for everyone paying social security and other tax credits.

Obama Got	Republicans Got
Extension of Unemployment Benefits	Income tax cuts for wealthiest Americans- extended another 2 years
Tuition Tax Credit	Estate Tax reduction for super-wealthy Americans
Tax Credits for Hiring New Workers
Social Security Tax Holiday

Pat Garofalo and Michael Linden report on who'll benefit from each side's priorities.

Obama's components of the tax deal (extended unemployment benefits, the payroll tax cut, and the extended credits) will cost $214 billion to aid 156 million people. The Republicans priorities (extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich and cutting the estate tax), meanwhile, will cost $133 billion, but only benefit roughly 4.8 million people.

I've got friends now saying that Obama is another George W. Bush. Another boss, just like the old boss. I completely disagree. Look at where Obama's priorities lie and where the Republicans' priorities lie. Obama's part of this deal impacts a large number of people- mostly middle class. The Republicans' part of this deal is targeted- at the rich. The blame for the deficit growing tax cuts for the rich needs to be be laid at the feet of the Republican hostage takers who were willing to throw the unemployed and the middle class under the bus unless they got the break they wanted for their "base". Obama should be applauded for what he got out of the deal, not castigated for what he gave up to get it.

I See The Christ In You- Namaste

2010-12-06T08:11:00.004-05:00

Image via Wikipedia

The past couple of days Nexus was fortunate enough to have a Christian singer- Shawn Thomas join us for our Christmas party, worship service Sunday morning and a special concert Sunday evening. One of Shawn's songs is titled- The Christ In You. Christians are challenged to see the spirit of Christ in each other. It's easier with some than with others.

I have to admit that Shawn's type of music- worship and praise, has not been my favorite kind of music. I had never heard of him before one of our members brought up his name and said that we might be able to get Shawn to come and play a concert for us. I listened to some of his music and thought it was OK. But, what impressed me about Shawn is his ministry. Shawn travels around the country on weekends performing at churches. Nexus is a very small (and struggling church) and could not guarantee any certain amount of money to compensate Shawn for coming to spend a weekend with us. Shawn isn't exactly local (operating out of West Palm Beach, FL). So, for him to come play a weekend concert for us was going to require at the very least a flight and and overnight stay. I was amazed to find out that, for churches like Nexus, Shawn was willing to come play for us for just the agreement that we would take up a voluntary donation for him. No guaranteed minimum, no selling tickets. He was not even assured that all of his travel expenses would be covered. Talk about stepping out on faith!

I met Shawn on Saturday evening at the Nexus Christmas party. At first he seemed a little shy to me. But, when he got up to perform, he immediately lit up. Here he was in a room full of strangers (well actually a handful of strangers because we are a very small group) and he made an instant connection once he got up on stage.

Shawn stayed with one of our members while he was in Cincinnati. In addition to playing at the concert on Sunday evening, he gave us a private concert Saturday night and joined us for worship on Sunday morning where he also played a couple of songs.

Shawn's concerts were extremely enjoyable- much more so than I expected. I loved his music and the way he engaged everyone in the experience with sing-along songs, projecting the words in video, sign language and even mandatory dance moves. He has a very pleasing voice and a great stage presence. I enjoyed talking with him and learning more about his ministry. Shawn is an openly gay Christian (I know an oxymoron to some). But, his "act" is not about being gay or being straight, it's about being someone who loves and worships God and, as much as possible, lets the spirit of Christ flow through him. As he sang 'The Christ In You", I was reminded of the saying "Namaste" Loosely translated from the Sanskrit it means "The God in me recognizes the God in you" or "The Divinity within me perceives and adores the Divinity within you." Shawn reminded us that, as Christians, one of our challenges is to see all other (Christians) around us as Christ. I believe that extends to non-Christians as well, as we are all made in the image of G-d. In Shawn it's extremely evident. My thanks to him for the time he gave to Nexus and I wish him well in his future endeavors.

Namaste, Shawn.

Kayla Sets a Swimming Record

2010-12-04T12:18:00.000-05:00

Kayla had her first high school swim meet on Thursday. She swam in one event, the 50m freestyle. When the race started, Kayla made a great entry. She was the last one coming up to break the surface. But when she did, she was right with the pack. That was great. But, when she started her stroke, we were really shocked. Ty and I looked at each other and I think each thought "Who is this girl?" Kayla ended up finishing 2nd or 3rd in the race. We're not sure because the scoreboard wasn't working during her race and the team is more concerned about times than positions. But, this is the thing. Kayla beat her own personal best by five seconds! I've always known she has potential. But, she's always held back in her races. After just a few weeks on the swim team she went flat out smashed her own personal best. Way to go, Kayla!

Kayla Makes the Swim Team

2010-11-23T11:34:00.000-05:00

Kayla has been working harder than ever the last several weeks. She decided to try out for the high school swim team which means in addition to getting up at 5:30 AM every day to to go school she's been going to swim practice for a couple of hours after school every day. Friday she had her time trials to make the team and she made it. Kayla loves swimming. But, she's not extremely competitive and this was the first time she's trained for a team she actually had to try out for. We are so proud of her for all of her hard work this year, her first year in school and her first year on the swim team.

Helping Ghosts- A Book Review

2010-11-16T16:32:00.000-05:00

Frankly, Helping Ghosts by Louis Charles is not a book I would have picked up had the author not been a Facebook friend. While I am fascinated by Near Death Experiences (NDEs), I am not at all interested in becoming a Ghost Buster. I was raised in a tradition where you stay as far away from disembodied people as possible and I stick with that. So, I really don't have any interest in going out to find a ghost to help or having a ghost help me. The title could be read two ways. Is that Helping Ghosts where helping is a verb and you're giving the ghost a hand? Or is helping an adjective, and the book is about Casper-like spirits that lend us a hand? The subtitle answers the question- "A Guide to Understanding Lost Spirits". That hand on the cover, is it a ghost reaching out to grab you, a ghost reaching to lend a hand or a ghost reaching out for help? Louis is a friend, so I got the book. I very much enjoyed his book "Jesus Religion", so I picked up the book for my Kindle and gave it a read.

The basic premise of the book is that ghosts do exist. You really have to start from there because the book does not try to convince you of their existence. Ghosts are simply the spirits of people who have died and have not crossed over yet. For reasons of unfinished business or attachment to this physical plane or being lost, they have not made their way to where they should be and instead are clinging to this earthly plane. Ghosts are not demons. That is something that needs to be said for us fundamentalist and former fundamentalist types. Ghosts are not evil. Ghosts are not necessarily here to scare us or make trouble. Their reasons for being here are varied, but one thing many of them have in common is they are in need of help to make the transition.

If you don't believe in ghosts, this is not the book for you. As Louis says, there are plenty of other books out there that claim to give the evidence that ghosts are here. This book is more about why ghosts are here and what we should do about it. If ghosts are actually lost souls who have not successfully made the transition from our world to the next, they are in a confused sort of limbo state and maybe even in the "hell" that Christians have taught about. If that is the case and we can help them, wouldn't we want to?

As someone who is very interested in Near Death Experiences, I found Louis' description of what we might experience after death to be of great interest. As someone who shares a history of a Christian background, he ties much of his musings about the after-life in with scripture. He also addresses the common Christian notion that disembodied spirits are actually "demons". Several things are common in Near Death Experiences including being met by loved ones and/or a spirit guide like Jesus, a light that is usually perceived as friendly and soothing, full of love and a life review. Here are some passages that relate to each of those things:

I once heard someone say, "We are born into this world alone, and we must leave this world the same way," but I disagree. All of us come into this world from within the womb of a mother, hopefully being greeted by her and others. Our first earthly experience is not something we should share alone. Good parents comfort and protect their newly-born child, helping the infant adjust to the unfamiliar environment. Likewise, death is not something we will experience alone. If we are not alone at the birth of our body, why would we expect to be alone when the time has come for the body to expire?

It is important that we learn from near death experiences that the light itself is a cleansing force. Within its soothing presence, souls can immediately begin to experience healing from unhappiness, emotional distress, self-condemnation, unworthiness, and many other types of painful suffering. The need for an inner cleansing and healing can also be associated with the third and final major event described within NDEs, the life review. After the disembodied soul meets loved ones and is quickly ushered into the light, these events naturally transition the spirit toward reflection. A life-review of the soul is a personal viewing of one's recent history while on earth. It is like watching an autobiographical movie that retells our past earthly experiences. Usually, the life-review is said to take place in an instant. There is an old adage that best describes this experience. “My entire life passed before my eyes.”

Another thing that struck me as I was reading the book was the fact that many ghosts seem to be confused about where they are or even whether or not they are dead. This state of confusion and/or denial lines up with some things I've read about people who have been in a near death state and either seen people like this or experienced it themselves. It reminded me of reading about the Tibetan Book of the Dead and how it's important to be prepared for death so that we have some idea of what to expect and how to navigate our way through.

Ghosts often seem to be suffering from a lack of belief, from fear and are suffering self-induced punishment. They are experiencing suffering (hell) and judgment found in the Bible. But, that judgment is self-imposed. And the separation and loss is from refusing to go on to the next place either due to fear of judgment, guilt or clinging to their past lives.

The book starts out talking about ghosts, why they are ghosts and what our experience is like with them. Louis then gives several examples of ghost investigations he has been on. And lastly, he answers the question "How can we help?" As someone who is neither a believer or disbeliever, I was able to read the book with the assumption that ghosts do exist. If they do, how do I avoid being one (lost and confused)? And, if I were to run across a ghost, how could I help? As I said earlier, I'm not signing up to become a Ghost Buster. But, Helping Ghosts is a worthwhile read if you have any interest in ghosts at all and want to dig a little deeper into why they are with us.

Spreading the Wealth- I agree with Thomas Jefferson

2010-11-05T15:50:00.000-04:00

Image by BrianWestChest via FlickrI've been having a discussion with my friends about the fairness of the progressive income tax. They have pointed out to me that the very small highest percentage of people in the United States already pay a huge share of the income tax. I say "As it should be." What they fail to point out is how the percentage of wealth in this country is skewed so that a very few people also hold the vast majority of the wealth.

First of all when we're debating income tax, let's remember this is only one of several taxes people pay in this country. While it is true the very poor pay no income tax, they do pay (relatively) a LOT of regressive taxes. Sales tax, energy taxes (gasoline taxes), taxes to register your car, taxes on telephone bills, etc. etc. hit poor people at a much higher rate than they do the wealthy. Poor people can very easily pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the wealthy. So, exempting them from income tax is really just a small way of balancing out that inequality.

The question was put to me what is fair? Here is my answer. My friends had referred to the rich as the "evil rich":

It's not about punishing the "evil rich". I wanna be rich. I'd like to get to the point where I have enough money to pay MORE than my fair share. The point is "What is fair for someone to pay in taxes?" Should a guy just scraping by be expected to pay the same amount or even the same rate as a guy who is living with an excess of resources? Personally, I think if one has more money than he (and his children) can spend in a lifetime, he has a MORAL (not legal) obligation to share. Going back as far as Thomas Jefferson, he said it was better for society overall if the very rich were taxed at a geometrically higher rate.

I say, as much as possible, leave people below a certain level of income alone and let them live their lives. Once you have been privileged enough to become "wealthy", you owe something back. None of us makes it on our own. Everyone in America takes advantage of conditions afforded to us by living in the greatest country on earth. The man who thinks he is a self-made man and deserves to keep all the wealth he earned with his own grubby little hands is deluding himself. We take advantage of public education, of an educated work force, of a stable economy, of natural resources, etc. all provided to us by the fact that we live in the United States of America. Man up and pay up.

Here's what my great, great, great, great, great grandfather Jefferson said (there was no income tax at the time. This is regarding property tax):

The descent of property of every kind therefore to all the children, or to all the brothers and sisters, or other relations in equal degree is a politic measure, and a practicable one. Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions of property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there is in any country, uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labour and live on. If, for the encouragement of industry we allow it to be appropriated, we must take care that other employment be furnished to those excluded from the appropriation. If we do not the fundamental right to labour the earth returns to the unemployed. It is too soon yet in our country to say that every man who cannot find employment but who can find uncultivated land, shall be at liberty to cultivate it, paying a moderate rent. But it is not too soon to provide by every possible means that as few as possible shall be without a little portion of land. The small landholders are the most precious part of a state.

Zoe Doesn't Have Cancer

2010-10-06T15:11:00.000-04:00

A couple of weeks ago, we found a growth on Zoe's skin just below where her collar fits. We watched it for a while hoping it would go away. But, it got larger amazingly fast. I took her to the vet last week and she scheduled surgery for Friday to remove it. She was a little concerned about the color of it and how fast it had grown. But, we got good news today. The tumor was benign and she said they got all of it.

Along the Kentucky Bourbon Trail

2010-10-06T14:20:00.000-04:00

Image by BrianWestChest via Flickr

This past weekend a couple of buddies and I decided to "hike" the Kentucky Bourbon Trail. It was a great experience. Everyone knows that Kentucky is the home to the all American drink called bourbon. There is a common misconception among bourbon drinkers that bourbon must be made in Kentucky. It turns out that is not true. While well over 90% of bourbon is made in Kentucky and the name bourbon does come from Bourbon County, KY, bourbon can be made anywhere in the United States. There are some strict requirements one must follow to call their spirit a bourbon. But, it doesn't have to be made in Kentucky.

The Kentucky Bourbon Trail is a group of six distilleries in Kentucky. They are all within 60 miles of each other. The trail will take you at least two days to do due to the limited hours of operations of each of the distilleries. Tours will take from 30 minutes to an hour and a half at each. After the first two, a lot of the information does become redundant. But, each distillery is different enough to make it worth the visit. Plus, you get to have a little taste at the end of each tour. Each distillery has a guided tour and a gift shop where you can buy all kinds of souvenirs from your trip. Pick up a passport at your first stop and get it stamped along the way. If you can collect all six stamps, you can send it in for a free t-shirt.

We stayed at an historic bed and breakfast in Bardstown, KY- the Veranda. We visited The Old Talbott Tavern for a beer. We also had some down-home cooking at Kurtz Restaurant while we were there.

The distilleries we visited were (in the order we took them)

Day 1

Woodford Reserve- Woodford Reserve was one of my favorite operations. I plan to go there and to Maker's Mark again. Woodford Reserve makes only one product. It's a small batch, hand crafted bourbon. Their copper stills are unique and made in Scotland. There are several limestone buildings on the property. The place was surprisingly small to me. If my calculations are correct, based on the number of barrel houses they have and the size of each one, they are about 1/700th the size of Jim Beam. You get a real sense of the history of bourbon making at Woodford Reserve. I don't drink Woodford Reserve often. I hadn't had it in a couple of years. It was better than I remembered. If I remember correctly, it was the only bourbon we saw that is triple distilled. One thing though. Both Maker's Mark and Woodford which were the only places we visited that don't produce a slew of bourbons are part of larger organizations now. That was a bit disappointing to learn when you hear about the centuries of tradition behind them. But, both still do things much the way they did back when they were independent.

Wild Turkey- Wild Turkey dwarfs Woodford Reserve both in size and in scope. Wild Turkey makes several varieties of bourbon, including a honey-flavored bourbon liqueur. Wild Turkey had a much more industrial feel than Woodford Reserve. The guide told us that the bourbon market is way, way up over the past couple of years. So much so that Wild Turkey is moving from their current location (their second) up the road to their third location. The plant was shut down while we were there. But, the new place should be up and running by the end of October 2010. I tasted their bourbon that uses more rye than normal, which was very interesting because, it almost tasted like scotch. I also tasted their Rare Breed Barrel Proof bourbon. Whoa, nelly! There's a reason they add a little water after they take the bourbon out of the barrel. Not my favorite. While we were at Wild Turkey, the tour guide mentioned they sell some of their barrels to scotch producers. Since bourbon can only be made in new barrels, all of the producers sell their barrels off to scotch producers. But, in true Kentucky hospitality form, he told us about a beer called Kentucky Bourbon Barrel Ale that is actually aged a little while in one of their used barrels. Of course, we had to try it that night at Talbott Tavern. It was an interesting cross between a bourbon and a beer. Beer flavor and feel with a bourbon-like aroma.

Four Roses- Four Roses is a bourbon I wasn't familiar with at all, except for the name. The distillery was interesting as the buildings have a Spanish architecture, completely unique for the bourbon distilleries in the area. Four Roses produces several different bourbons. Most of the distilleries produce small batch bourbons and single barrel bourbons in addition to their standards. But, what was really wild is they produce 10 different bourbons that they blend into their "standard" bourbon. I was pleasantly surprised both by the taste of Four Roses and the price (less than $20 near me). The other tastings we had at Four Roses were good. But, I think I actually liked their cheapest bourbon best.

Day 2

Heaven Hill- I remember Heaven Hill from my college days. Heaven Hill is rock gut stuff. I was not looking forward to the tasting there. But, if you're thinking of skipping Heaven Hill, don't. Heaven Hill actually produces several bourbons, a couple of which are very good (Evan Williams and Elijah Craig). They also have the nicest visitor's center of any of the places we visited (with the possible exception of Maker's Mark). We didn't have time to do the tour there. But, the woman working there was kind enough to offer us a tasting anyway. We had the barrel shaped tasting room all to ourselves at noon on that Sunday. We even got to taste a 23 year old bottle that is only sold at the visitor's center and in Japan (at $350 a pop!).

Maker's Mark- Maker's Mark is my bourbon of choice. When I moved to Kentucky 24 years ago, I was introduced to drinking bourbon straight and to Maker's Mark. To this day, it is the smoothest bourbon I've ever had and I've had some pretty "premium" bourbons. I am an ambassador for Maker's Mark. My name is on a barrel in one of those barrel houses in Loretto, KY. I was really looking forward to this tour more than any other. The secret to Maker's Mark is most bourbon makers use corn (50-80%), rye and malted barley. The Samuels family had been making bourbon for about four generations before the founder of what would become Maker's Mark decided he didn't like their bourbon and literally burned the recipe. Instead of using rye, Maker's uses red winter wheat which makes it softer and slightly more sweet. Up until a couple of months ago (July 2010), Maker's only made one bourbon- this premium, hand-crafted, hand-dipped bottle smooth sipping' bourbon. Recently, they added Maker's 46 to the line-up, taking the exact same bourbon and adding charrred French oak stays to the barrel for a few months to give it an even smoother and slightly smoky flavor.

Jim Beam- We hit Jim Beam at exactly 3:58 Sunday afternoon. The reason I know this is Jim Beam's closes at 4:00 on Sundays. We wanted to get our last stamp so that we could collect our tee-shirts. There are no tastings at Jim Beam's on Sunday. So, getting the stamp completed our mission for the weekend.

The Church is a Whore and She's My Mother

2010-09-28T12:07:00.000-04:00

I first heard this quote a couple of weeks ago while watching Lord Save Us From Your Followers. It was attributed to St. Augustine. When I first heard it, it really set me back. I had to rewind the movie and watch that part again. The words whore, mother and church in the same sentence are shocking. It's been on of those quotes that keeps coming back to my mind time and time again. I only wish I had thought to say it first because it sums up my complicated relationship with the church from the time I was about five years old right up until today.

I would not be the person I am today without the church. That is something that will never change. In a sense, the church has given birth to me. I often hear atheists claim that morality is possible without religion and I suppose it is. But, whether I stick with the church (or Christianity) or not, I cannot deny or ever change the tremendous impact all of the Sunday school lessons, sermons, Bible reading, etc. have had on forming who I am. I was taught morality in the church. I was taught generosity in the church. I was taught compassion in the church. I was taught that each person is an image of G-d and therefore has inherent infinite worth. A couple of days ago a friend asked me who had more impact on my life, Jesus or Buddha. The answer is Jesus, by a mile. Jesus has been embedded into my psyche from the time I could understand language. Without the church we wouldn't have the Bible. The church has preserved the teachings of Jesus through the centuries. Without the church I would have never heard the name of Jesus. So, yeah, the church is my mother.

But, the church has been a whore, both to the world-with its oppression of women, condoning slavery and racism, inquisitions, homophobia, witch hunts covering up pedophilia., etc. The church has also distorted the "good news" and used it to psychologically torment little boys and girls like me. The church turned the God of unconditional and unlimited love into a schizophrenic bloodthirsty tyrant . The god I was taught about wantedto eternally torment for being just what He made me to be . But, at the same time He sent His Son to be tormented in my stead. The church taught me eternal security in my salvation, unless I backslid, in which case, I was never "saved" in the first place. The only time I would know I was eternally secure was when I passed from this life to eternity. The church told me that works could never save me. But, unless I led a good enough life to be evidence that I had truly had been saved, my faith alone was not enough. Because of the church, I have had a morbid obsession with death. From as early as I can remember, life wasn't about living for today. This life was only worth anything if you did what it took to get to heaven. This was a throw-away, a dress rehearsal at best. It was in church that my panic attacks started decades ago and it's in church where they persist to this day.

I hate church and I love church all at the same time.

What If Fred Phelps Ran the United States?

2010-09-21T15:30:00.002-04:00

Image via WikipediaLately, I've been defending Islam so much I think maybe some of my friends are starting to wonder if I'm considering converting. It probably seem sto some that I am a huge fan of Islam. Add that to my criticism of Christianity and church and... well, if you put two and two together, they add up to four. Right? Well, you can be assured that nothing could be further from my mind than converting to Islam. I don't defend Islam because I personally like Islam. I defend it against what I perceive to be unfair attacks and generalizations. I defend it because there are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, most of whom are good peace loving people. I defend it because it's the American thing to do, defend freedom of religion. I defend it because Islam is not so very different from Christianity or Judaism both of which were unfairly treated in the past.

To set the record straight, I'm not a huge fan of Islam-personally. If I had to choose a religion to convert to, Islam would be way down on the list. There are some great things about Islam. Lots of spiritual discipline (praying five times a day, fasting). I like the idea of zakat (giving to charity) that is one of the five pillars. In fact of the five pillars- praying, charity, fasting, there is only one G-d and hajj (a trip to Mecca) I think four of the five are pretty cool. I do have some problems I have with Islam. First, it seems to me like very much like an "earn your favor" with G-d religion. The rituals could easily become dry and rote. I mean praying five times a day, mandatory, on the dot, at certain times? Eating hallal (kind of like eating kosher in Judaism)? Fasting every day for a month? No, not for me. Secondly, I haven't read a lot of the Qur'an. But, I have had occasions to read bits of it. The Qur'an, to me, reads too much like the Old Testament. I have to agree with the Muslim haters out there that, misinterpreted, it could be a very dangerous text. However, I don't see it as any more or less dangerous than the Old Testament. Have you ever really read the book of Leviticus? C'mon. What could be scarier? Lastly, the thing about Muhammad being Allah's last (and I guess that means best) prophet isn't something I could not accept. In my opinion, the Qur'an (which was reportedly dictated by an angel to Muhammad) and Muhammad himself get too high of a status in Islam- similar to the way Christians give the Bible too high a status in Christianity. And similar to the way some Christians equate Yeshua/Isa/Jesus with G-d. Whenever you give a book or even a man too high a status, you're approaching idolatry-putting the written word or the words of a man on par with us individually and continually hearing from G-d. I've run away from it in Christianity, I certainly couldn't embrace it in Islam. I think G-d is still speaking and is always speaking. Declaring a particular prophet to be the best or the last or saying a book (any book) is "THE WORD of GOD" limits G-d and cuts off seeking further revelation which we always need, IMO.

So, as you can see, I don't defend Islam because I think it's the greatest religion in the world. My personal feelings about Islam have nothing to do with my defense of Islam or the rights of Muslims to practice it without having people protest every single mosque they try to build. My friends keep pointing out to me human rights abuses in Muslim run countries. I don't deny that nor do I shy away from it. Women are treated atrociously in many Muslim countries. Gays are stoned. Non-Muslims are not allowed to worship or to even have places of worship. It's really not good in many ways. However, I have a couple of things to say about that. I don't think we can blame that on Islam, exclusively. Christianity has its own history of abuse of women, blacks, gays, non-Christians, etc., etc. We have burned people as witches. Children are still killed for being witches in Africa. I think the problems we see with Islam around the world are more a product of the abuses that happen when yo have theocracies than they are problems particular to Islam. When Christianity got mixed in with state power, we saw some very ugly things. Imagine if America was run by Fred Phelps or Reverend Terry Jones? Can you imagine those guys waving the book of Leviticus around and writing the 10 Commandments as the law of the land? Some Arab countries are run by some pretty nutty guys who are trying to run things based on a book that they see as the WORD of G-d. What do you think Fred Phelps would do if he had the kind of power some of the Arab Imams have? No wonder we see stonings (also commanded by the Bible), amputations and beheadings. It's what happens when you try to take literally a book written in a completely different era. We are fortunate our Founding Fathers saw this possibility and nipped it in the bud.

That covers Islam in Islam run countries. Now, let's talk about Muslim Americans- who are bearing the brunt of this wave of Islamaphobia. Muslim Americans have contributed and continue to contribute to our society as much as anyone else has. They died with us on 9/11. They fight along side us everyday in Afghanistan. Their spiritual disciplines and their belief in the commandments of the Qur'an makes them excellent law abiding citizens. It's tragic that we associate them with the few nuts in Al Qaeda, allowing a population of probably maybe a few thousand to destroy the reputation and the faith of a population of over 1.5 billion. There are more than five times the number of Muslims in the world as there are Americans; and we judge them on the basis of the extreme beliefs and actions of not enough people to even fill a football stadium or a basketball arena. No one really knows how big Al Qaeda is. But, I've seen an estimate of around 10,000. Sounds like a lot until you divide 10,000 by 1,500,000,000 and realize that maybe around one out of 150,000 Muslims is an Al Qaeda member. Based on the actions of 19 men, on a day 9 years ago, many of us are willing to trash the entire faith of 1.5 billion people. There are only 30 people at the Dove Worldwide Outreach Center (the pastor who wants to burn the Qur'an). How would we feel if the Muslim world judge all of us based on their actions? I'm not equating burning a book with actually killing people. But, what if they even went as far as to go killing Muslim? Would we think it reasonable to judge out entire country based on those actions?

September 11th and Muslim Celebrations

2010-09-07T09:24:00.000-04:00

Image via Wikipedia

In an unfortunate coincidence, the end of Ramadan (the Muslim month of fasting) falls on September 10th this year. Why is that unfortunate? Because immediately following Ramadan, Muslims (understandably) have celebrations. And any Muslim celebration on or near September 11th is going to be fuel for the fire of Islamphobia because we are going to be told Muslims are celebrating their "conquest" of September 11, 2001.

Ramadan is a month of self-denial where Muslims fast from sun-up to sundown having nothing to eat and drink (not even water). It is a very difficult spiritual discipline and when it's over, it's time for Eid ul-Fitr (or simply Eid).

Eid is celebrated in different ways in different parts of the world. My understanding is our local Islamic Center wants to have a day at Kings Island to celebrate. But, in sensitivity, they have decided to work around September 11th (this coming Saturday). It's too bad they have to even think of doing that.

In the United States, Eid is typically marked by:

Most of the Muslims in the USA take a day off from work and go to prayer in big city Islamic centers, convention halls, or open parks. Muslims from different cultures with multi-national costumes get together for prayers and celebrations. In some cities, prayers are done in multiple times to accommodate all the people. Generally, people visit each others houses on the Eid day. During the weekend of the Eid week, Muslims join big parties sponsored either by Islamic center or a wealthy Muslim in a community. Children receive gifts. Delicious sweets and spicy dishes are served. Wealthy Muslims donate money to less fortunates. Sometimes, Muslims reserve amusement parks or Ice-Skating Rinks for a whole day fun and celebration.

So, get ready. Soon we'll be hearing that Muslims around the world are celebrating the murders that took place on September 11th. In actuality, they will be celebrating the end of a very difficult month of spiritual discpline.

Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers- Book Review

2010-09-04T17:45:00.000-04:00

Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers: No More Unnecessary Biopsies, Radical Treatment of Loss of Sexual Potency may turn out to be one of the most important books you will ever read. Frankly, this is not a book I would have picked up had I not been given the invitation to review it for Amazon.com. Fortunately, for me, I was asked to review it. Prostate cancer is fairly common among men, particularly among African-American men. Within the past couple of years both my father and an uncle have had their prostates removed due to a diagnosis of cancer. I'm about to turn 50 and the chances of me being diagnosed with prostate cancer increase with each passing year (as they do for all men). I wish I had read this book before my father was diagnosed. My father suffered from minor complications from the surgery (as far as I know). My uncle nearly died from a problem with his surgery, major blood loss. Unfortunately, we're not the type of family to discuss this stuff in intimate details. And, the complications from prostate surgery gone wrong are pretty intimate. So, I will probably never know if they have long term complications. I do know my father suffered from the two most common complications for at least a while after his surgery. Those complications, temporary and permanent, are way too common for my taste.

The book is co-written by an oncologist who works with a lot of prostate cancer patients and a lay person who has lived with prostate cancer for 20 years. The cancer patient, Ralph Blum, has a great sense of humor and keeps the book light enough to be almost enjoyable reading. The book is packed with statistics and medical facts, as is necessary. But, the human side of coping with this disease is never forgotten.

Before reading the book, I realized that prostate cancer was generally a slo moving cancer. I had heard that most men diagnosed with prostate cancer in their 60s or 70s will die with the disease rather than from the disease. However, as I've been wondering how I'd deal with the diagnosis, I knew that my attitude would be a "just get it out of me" attitude. I don't want to live with prostate cancer, I want to get rid of it. I know, if I hadn't read this book, I would say "Just get it out of me. NOW!" I think that attitude is common among men. Another common thing for us to do when sitting across from an expert is to ask the question "Doc, what would you do?" I sat down with my uncle a few weeks ago and asked him to tell me a little about his experience. He told me that after the urologist confirmed his prostate cancer, he immediately said "OK, if you were me and you had just been told what I was just told, what would you do?" What I didn't realize, and I don't think a lot of men really think about is, a urologist is a surgeon. If you ask a surgeon what he would do and surgery is an option, what do you think he's most likely to say?

Prostate cancer can be divided into three types, low risk disease, medium risk disease and high risk disease. With current diagnostic methods, you can pretty much determine which type of cancer you have. Only if you have high risk disease do you need to be in any hurry to do any treatment at all. On the other end of the scale, low risk disease is probably best treated with "active surveillance". In other words, no radiation, no surgery, no chemicals, just monitoring it. The book describes treating this type of prostate cancer as a chronic condition and even goes so far as to say it might be better to come up with another name other than "cancer" because of the terrifying connotation of the word cancer. In the case of low risk prostate cancer, the cure is worse than the disease. Whether you go with surgery or radiation, the chances of permanent side effects like impotence and urinary incontinence are extremely high- shockingly so to me (and there are some other pretty bizarre complications that are possible). Even with the newer ways of doing radiation and with robotic surgery, the chances of permanent side effects are still pretty great. In most cases, the chances of those complications are much greater than the chance of actually dying from prostate cancer. When we hear cancer, I think most of us immediately think "death" and anything is better than death. So, when we hear there's say a 60% chance that we'll be impotent for at least 18 months after surgery, we might think "Better to be impotent than dead." But, what if you didn't have to be either?

Ralph was diagnosed at the age of 58. He's one of those guys who asked a bunch of questions before undergoing any procedure. Turns out, that was a good thing. In the 20 years since he was diagnosed prostate cancer treatment has grown by leaps and bounds. He's had a few treatments over the years but nothing radical. He's had 20 good years with his wife because of his refusal to rush into treatment. Sure, there is a chance that if he had the surgery 20 years ago, he might have had a good outcome. But, the chances are greater today than they were than and he has more treatment options. The treatments available today weren't even thought of 20 years ago. One of the most important messages of this book is that, if you get a diagnosis of prostate cancer, time is actually on your side. The advances in treatment are growing at a rate faster than the disease in most men. For example, there are ways of blocking testosterone (fuel for prostate cancer) that virtually halts the disease in its tracks.

Hopefully, I won't need this book anytime soon. But, just in case I do, I'm going to keep it tucked away. There is a ton of information on different treatments, everything from the truly bizarre to the conventional to cutting edge advances. There is information on the right type of diet to eat should you be diagnosed. One thing I know for sure now, if and when I am diagnosed I don't intend to panic and rush into surgery or radiation therapy or even a biopsy. And, I won't ask a urologist "What would you do?" I recommend that every man over the age of 40 read this book and get informed about prostate cancer. If there's a type of cancer you do want to have, this is the one. It's important to make sure that you don't make a mistake and opt for a treatment that is actually worse than the disease. For any man in your life that's really important to you, this book would make an excellent gift.

Lord Save Us From Your Followers

2010-09-02T07:10:00.003-04:00

Cover via Amazon

I just watched a really very good film called "Lord Save Us From Your Followers". My favorite line from the movie (actually a quote from St. Augustine delivered by Tony Campolo) was "The church is a whore. And she is my mother.". I love that line. The church has done so much damage over the centuries. The church has "broken her marriage vows to Jesus" (as Tony phrased it) and has not been loyal to His ideals. But, if it weren't for the church I would know nothing about Jesus, I would not have the Bible. The church has been vital in preserving the gospel of Jesus. The interesting thing about Christianity is that while there are a lot of people who don't like Christianity or Christians, there are very, very few people who don't admire Jesus.

From the website:

If you were to meet ten average Americans on the street, nine of them would say they believe in God. So why is the Gospel of Love dividing America?

Dan Merchant put on his bumper-sticker-clad jumpsuit and decided to find out why the Gospel of Love is dividing America. After talking with scores of men and women on streets all across the nation, and also interviewing many well-known active participants in today’s “Culture Wars,” Dan realized that the public discussion of faith doesn’t have to be contentious.

Lord, Save Us From Your Followers is a fast-paced, highly engaging documentary that explores the collision of faith and culture in America. After seeing Lord, Save Us From Your Followers, you’ll never talk about faith the same way again!

I thought the movie would be a hatchet job of all the ways Christians and the church have screwed up (and continue to screw up). I was pleasantly surprised. I think the movie was a good, frank look at the good, the bad and the ugly of Christians and Christianity and there was a lot of good in there. He also takes on the "culture wars" in America and I found that part to be also very, very good. The movie is filled with news clips and interviews from both Christian and non-Christian sources. A couple of my favorite moments were the confession booth that Dan Merchant (the filmmaker) set up at a gay festival. The confessions though were reversed. He confessed to the gay participants in the parade his sins and the sins of the church against gay people. (if you've read Blue Like Jazz you've heard of this type of confession booth before). The reaction of the people was fascinating. Another really cool social experiment was a family feud challenge between liberal/elite types and conservative types. The test was to see how much they each understood about current culture. I won't spoil it for you by giving you the outcome.

Overall, I found the movie to be inspirational and uplifting and I think it's a good movie for both Christians and non-Christians to see. I do recommend it.

Peace,
Brian
p.s.- I think the movie was in theaters last fall. You can buy it on DVD now and you can get a license to show it in your church. I'm cheap. I watched it on Netflix.

People I Don't Care About

2010-08-31T16:19:00.003-04:00

Image by BrianWestChest via Flickr

I love people watching. Not the kind you do at the mall or a sporting event. But, observing human behavior like talking with people on Facebook. I notice that when I criticize certain things like Glenn Beck, the Tea Party, Rush Limbaugh or Sarah Palin, I get a predictable and usually vicious defense of them. I mean it's like I talked bad about somebody's mama. OK, that's to be expected. If you rag on President Obama or (well I can't think of anyone else to put in here) and I'm likely to jump to his defense, too. I get that. We identify with people we admire and when are attacked, we feel attacked. So far nothing interesting there. But, what I have also noticed is when my friends start to lose the battle they come back with some criticism of an almost totally unrelated person on the left and expect me to react in the same way they have. For example, I'm talking about the Tea Party and the underlying current of racism in it, its rallies and its slogans. I'm talking about the underlying violent tones in its very name and the implications of our government being some imperialistic foreign power and I get "Well, the New Black Panthers are racists too and they want to kill white babies.". My initial response is always the same "Huh?". Then, after I've picked up that the discussion has jumped the tracks into whole new territory I think "What does the New Black Panther Party (whoever they are) have to do with the Tea Party?" I had to Google them to even find out who they are. Or, I'll be critcizing Glenn Beck for being a demagoguing, messiah-wanna-be who spreads fear and hatred. And he just happens to also be able to sell you the cure to all the ills and fears he's telling you exist out there. And I'll get "Well, Al Sharpton plays the race card.". Again, huh? Why don't you just tell me that Tiger Woods hits golf balls. Of course Al Sharpton plays the race card. That's what Al Sharpton does. That's his profession.

For my friends who want to continue to use this tactic, I'm going to help you out. I'm going to rank all the people you can throw at me that I care and don't care about. Mostly they're on this list because they've been used against me before. The Republican/Right Wing "equivalents" doesn't mean I think they're equivalent. They are the initial subjects that prompted the mention of the name I was supposed to react to. This should make it easier for you to choose a irrelevant person to attack whenever I'm getting to close too a cause or person dear to you. I'm going to rank them on a scale of 1-100 and tell you why they got the ranking they got. The closer they get to 100 the more likely you're likely to get a reaction out of me and derail the conversation.

Person or Organization For You to Throw At Me	Their Score	Republican/Right Wing Equivalent	Reason for their score
New Black Panther Party	0	The Tea Party	I never heard of these people until my Tea Party friends started telling me what threats and racists they are. They're probably racists. But, I don't know how much of a threat they are and they're certainly not politically relevant.
Old Black Panther Party	1	The Tea Party	I give them a point more than the New Black Party just because I have actually heard of them. Never met one. Never wanted to be one. No association with them.
Nancy Pelosi	2	John Boehner/Mitch McConnell	Don't expect me to defend Nancy Pelosi for a second. If I could vote her out, I would. The woman is an embarrassment to the Democratic Party. Every time she opens her mouth it's only to stick her foot in.
MSNBC	2	FOX News	MSNBC is, IMHO, better than Fox News because I think Olbermann and Matthew, as bad as they are, are better than the bozos on Fox. I do watch MSNBC for political spin. But, I know it's spin.
Reverend Jessie Jackson	5	Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh/Sarah Palin	OK. I'll give him a few points because he did know Martin Luther King. But, it's been all downhill for him since then. He's never represented me and as far as I know never been elected to anything- least of all as spokeperson for all things black.
Reverend Al Sharpton	10	Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh/Sarah Palin	Reverend Sharpton started off as just a big old blowhard who ran around shouting "Race, race, race." at every opportunity. I did notice him maturing during the 2008 elections and he actually said some very respectable things. So, I'll rank him above Jessie Jackson. But, again, never been elected as spokeperson for all things black and certainly not a spokesperson for me. If he ever changes his hairstyle, I'll give him a couple of more points.
Keith Olbermann	15	Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh	Olbermann is one that gets thrown at me quite a bit. Guys, we lefties know this guy isn't a serious journalist. I didn't even know his show existed until the 2008 elections. Yes I watched it some. But, I don't think I've watched a complete program of his since then. Some of his rants are spot on (very few). But, for the most part he's almost as over-the-top as Limbaugh.
Chris Matthews	16	Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh	I'll give him a point more than Olbermann. Occasionally, he does act like a serious journalist.
The Coffee Party	20	The Tea Party	I had to think of a real equivalent to the Tea Party, not just the Black Panthers or New Black Panthers or even the NAACP. I like what the Coffee Party seems to stand for- common sense and reasonable respective dialog. I'm following them on Facebook. But, it took me 30 years to join the Democratic Party. So, I may not be getting my membership badge anytime soon. If I continue to like what I see, they could quickly move up the list though.
NAACP	25	The Tea Party	The NAACP is a legitimate organization, IMO. There once was a great need for them. Maybe not so much now. But, I still think there is a need. I will respond when people try to point out that there is some sort of equivalence between the Tea Party's racial makeup and the NAACP's make racial makeup as if one justifies the other.
Rachel Maddow	50	Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh	Hey, I like Rachel. She's smart and make some really good points.
Democratic Party	50	Republican Party	Now we're getting to the interesting stuff. Yes, I am a Democrat. But, not like you might think. I didn't register as a Democrat until 2008 and that was only so I could vote in the primaries. I've voted Democratic all my life. But, I'm not partisan in the sense I will defend "my party" right or wrong. I think the Democratics are dysfunctional and largely stupid. My old joke is "The Democrats are stupid. But, the Republicans are evil."
Stephen Colbert	75	Can't think of any	Love Stephen Colbert. Don't mess with him.
Jon Stewart	80	Can't think of any	I think Jon Stewart is brilliant. Sorry I can't think of any Republican/Right Wing equivalents. Rush and Glenn Beck are almost as funny. But, they're not trying to be. So, it doesn't count. So far, no has used an attack on Jon to sidetrack a conversation. But, when I post his brilliance on Facebook, he does get criticized for not being a serious journalist. At least he doesn't pretend to be and he's still better than most.
Barack Obama	90	Sarah Palin	I put Sarah Palin in there as the equivalent because when I go after her, the response I get most often is some insult about Barack Obama (Barry, or BO or "that POS President" ). You might think he gets such a high rating on my scale because I am unthinkingly uncritical of him. That would be wrong. Primarily he ranks so high because he is the only person on this list I have voted for or worked for. I do feel a bond with him because our stories are similar in many ways. I read his book "The Audacity of Hope" and I was extremely impressed. I think he's doing a fine job. And, anyone who would make the sacrifices it takes to be President at least deserves the respect of giving him credit for wanting the best for our country. I will agree with you if you criticize him on an issue where I think he's wrong (and he has been wrong). But, for the most part, if you want to really side track me, this is your go-to player.

"Ground Zero" Imam's (So Called) Support of Terrorism

2010-08-20T09:06:00.001-04:00

Image by World Economic Forum via Flickr

It is being reported/rumored that the Imam behind the "Ground Zero mosque" is a supporter of Hama and terrorism. When I've pressed for details of his support, the answer I get is something along the lines of "Well, he won't denounce Hamas.". Since when is not denouncing something the same as supporting it?

Below I've posted an excerpt of what seems to be the interview that has triggered the charge of his support for Hamas. This interview is posted all over right wing blogs with headlines like "Ground Zero Imam makes stunning terror comments.". Well, I read his comments and I don't find them stunning at all.

Klein asked Rauf on his show whether the imam agrees with the State Department's designation of Hamas as a terrorist organization.
"I'm not a politician," replied Rauf. "I try to avoid the issues. The issue of terrorism is a very complex question. ... I'm a bridge builder. I define my work as a bridge builder. I do not want to be placed, nor do I accept to be placed in a position of being put in a position where I am the target of one side or another."
Klein pointed out Hamas attacks have targeted civilians and asked Rauf again whether that qualifies to define Hamas as terrorists.
Rauf stated: "The targeting of civilians is wrong. It is a sin in our religion. Whoever does it, targeting civilians is wrong. I am a supporter of the state of Israel. ... I will not allow anybody to put me in a position where I am seen by any party in the world as an adversary." (emphasis mine)
When Klein persisted in asking about Hamas, Rauf charged the radio host of "accus[ing] me of things. You are killing the messenger." "You are trying to bring down the person who is trying to build security between our country and our faith tradition," said Rauf. "My urge to you. I have worked for the law-enforcement agencies."
Klein interrupted, stating, "And yet you refuse to tell me Hamas is a terror organization."

This is quite clear to me. The Imam is working to build bridges. You don't do that by publicly condemning one of the parties you're trying to bridge to the other. The question was intended to pit America against Hamas and force the Imam to choose which side he is on. He did specifically renounce terrorism and called it a sin. He said whoever targets civilians is wrong. He stated clearly that he is trying to build security between our country (our country being the United States) and his faith tradition. It would be counterproductive for him to get into a situation with Hamas (the elected party that leads the Palestianians). The interviewer knew he was putting the Imam between a rock and a hard place. I suppose journalists think that is their job. He put the Imam in a position where he was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. The question was reminiscent of the question the pharisees put to Jesus. "Is it right to pay taxes to the emperor or not?" If Jesus had answered it was right, He would have been accused of being a traitor to His own people. If He had said it is not right, He would become an enemy of the Roman empire. Jesus answered wisely, as did the Imam. The interviewer gave the Imam the choice of alienating Hamas by declaring them a terrorist organization on American radio or to feed the flames of Islamaphobia by not going along with the interviewer concerning Hamas. The Imam did not take the bait. He condemned terrorism, he called it a sin, that he said he supports Israel. But, that's not enough for some. No, he can only show he is a "true American" by calling out Hamas and burning the bridge that he's trying to build.

As John Stossel would say. Give me a break.

Music Friday- Jason Mraz - Live High (Live, 2008)

2010-08-20T08:34:00.000-04:00

Do it. Live high.

Another Reason Nexus and the UCC Are Needed

2010-08-04T09:11:00.000-04:00

Whiz Kids is a great program that Nexus used to participate in. A few years ago, Whiz Kids approached Nexus about working with them. Ty volunteered at a school near us. She would meet with a little girl on a weekly basis to help her with her homework, read to her and be a positive adult role model for her. Nexus did not participate in the program last year due to Ty's busy schedule. But, this year Whiz Kids approached us about participating again.

From Whiz Kids' site:

The statistics are bone-chilling. The State of Ohio uses third-grade reading proficiency scores to project future prison capacity. “If you don’t know how to read by the end of fourth grade, the state is building you a prison cell,” says Dr. O'dell Owens, Hamilton County Coroner. According to the U.S. Census, 80 percent of prison inmates are either low-level readers or illiterate. ... Several schools throughout Greater Cincinnati are on the waiting list to start a Whiz Kids site. There is a need for partnering churches, volunteers and increased funding in order to start new tutoring sites.

Nexus gladly accepted Whiz Kids' invitation to get involved with the program again. Our church has grown since we first participated and we hoped that we could provide more volunteers. Because we draw from a wide geographical area, we thought we might have volunteers available in the communities where volunteers are needed. This seemed like a great fit. Mike Underhill, our pastor, spoke with the local director of Whiz Kids and told him we'd like to participate. But, given that we are in Southwest Ohio, Mike thought it wise to inform them that we are an open and affirming church and that Mike is an "out" gay man. Their response? "We'll have to think about that." Whiz Kids is a part of City Gospel Mission and had to check with them on how they would feel about working with Neuxs. City Gospel's motto (on their website) is "Breaking the cycle of poverty and despair... one life at a time".

Apparently, Whiz Kids went back to City Gospel Mission who decided to withdraw the invitation for Nexus to participate in the program. City Gospel Mission is funded by several Christian churches and they felt to allow a church like Nexus to participate might jeopardize their funding. So, since Nexus accepts everyone, as they are regardless of sexual orientation, Nexus was not rejected by a program that needs help to "break the cycle of poverty and despair...one life at a time."

I spoke with Mike the day he found out we had been rejected by Whiz Kids and City Gospel Mission. I think he was pretty shaken by it. Obviously, he thought it might be a problem that we were open and affirming. But, we were open and affirming when we participated before. And, we have never made any secret about being open and affirming. I'm saddened that things have not improved in much in Cincinnati as we might have hoped.

In today's society, many of us wonder what the role of the church really is. We have so many other charities we could contribute to- organizations that do real good. We have so many ways we can get connected socially. There are so many churches to choose from. Why bother starting up a new church when there is already one on every corner? There are already hundreds of churches in Butler County, OH. Why do we need Nexus? I'm glad Nexus was there to challenge the status quo. If we did nothing else, we made them confront the issue that there are homosexual Christians in Cincinnati and they are committed to the work of the church- whether those churches like it or not. Many of the people who attend Nexus have been told by other local churches don't bother coming to our church. The churches make it clear they are not wanted. And, once they have left the churches, the churches are no longer forced to confront the issue. Out of sight, out of mind. We let them know that those people they have rejected want to participate in breaking the cycle of poverty and despair. These moments where we forced the homophobes to think, when we challenge their view of the Bible and of G-d's love accumulate and will eventually lead to changed hearts. Nexus needs to be around to continue to force them to confront this issue.

Why do I do this to myself?

2010-07-27T16:07:00.000-04:00

Image via Wikipedia

I think I have just recently realized I am a masochist. Situations that other people run from, I tend to wade into for some strange reason. Most people tend to flock with their own kind, I however, am fascinated by hanging out with people who are totally different than I am. I want to see what makes the "others" tick. I want to build bridges. My wife and I live in a predominantly white part of town. We've always attended predominantly white churches. I have never liked the fact that Sunday morning is one of the most segregated times of the week in our country and I have done my part to cross that color line. I have waded into to chat rooms and message boards just spilling over with angry atheists and former Christians who absolutely hated Christianity and anything to do with it. Why? Because I thought it important that I try to present a reasonable side of Christianity to them. People ask me why I keep doing what I do because it usually causes discomfort and sometimes causes pain. But, I do it because I think it's important to keep trying. Recently, it's been in the political arena that I've been throwing myself to the lions. I'm pretty active when it comes to social networking and I have friends all across the political spectrum from some who are actually socialists (not card carrying that I know of) to those who are so far right they are about to fall off the edge. In the past couple of weeks I took on a challenge cooked up by some of my Facebook buddies that took my interaction with the far right to a whole new level. They have a "champion" of sorts; aguy that several of them seem to admire. In his own words this morning, he and another friend have (jokingly) agreed he could run for President of "Moonbat Baiting Club of Massachusetts" (I gather from our conversations that a moonbat is a liberal). I've heard about him for a few months and seen a few of his posts on one of my friend's wall. He decided he wanted to meet some of their loonier, liberal Facebook friends. So, one day I get an invitation on my Facebook page to become friends with this guy. I took the challenge and while on one level, the experiment has been a total failure, on another level it has given me deeper insights to myself and to others that I think will be helpful.

Now, here's the thing about taking this challenge. I knew all along this was a set up. I normally accept friend requests immediately. But, this one I hesitated on. I knew the intent wasn't friendship. How did I know? You see, they publicly posted on their walls that they wanted to play this game with Liberals (or "moonbats" as they call us). In their minds, if you're a liberal, you're evil, stupid or both. Either you don't know enough about history, politics or economics to agree with them and if you just had all the facts, you would surely be a conservative. Or, you are actually out to destroy the country (and maybe the world). I knew going in that I was intended to be fodder for them . I waited a day or so and just mulled it over.

Several of my friends (including my wife) asked me why I would fall for such an obvious trap. Actually what they usually say, before finding out I walked into the set up willingly, is "Why do you even bother talking to those people?" And, they ask for good reason because I come away from the computer at the end of the day all fired up and frustrated. Making any progress at all on any point is agonizingly slow and painful. If I had any hair left, I'd be pulling it out. I am amazed at how people will distort facts, ignore facts and out-and-out lie just to prove their position. I am disappointed that people put ideologies (like being a good Democrat, Republican or Conservative) ahead of the good of the country. And, just like the people I waded into this situation with, I think that if I can only hit them with enough facts, surely they will see. I am a wide-eyed liberal, hope-filled change guy. But, I never had any illusions that I'd turn them into liberals. My goal was much more modest. I simply wanted them to see that being a liberal is a reasonable thing to be. I wanted them to see that liberals are not necessarily misinformed, ignorant, stupid or evil. I wanted to make them see that one can have a fair grasp of history, economics, politics, sociology, etc and still think that some liberal ideas are actually good ideas. I must confess that my ego played a part in this. I knew that if I had ignored their request they would have already won. Liberals, you see are devoid of ideas. Liberals run from a debate because they have nothing to debate with. I couldn't just let that sit there.

The first conversation we got into was about Islam. From this I learned something about the way most of us "debate" on Facebook and other places. We don't really have conversations. Our discussions are more like a boxing match where we try to score points against the other guy. We're not there to actually listen and maybe change our own mind. We're in it to win it. We're either going to convince the other person that he is wrong or at least win the debate on the score card that we keep. We started with "Is Islam good or bad?" "What should we do about Muslims and Islam?" You know. Light stuff like that. My take on it has always been the vast majority of religions and all major religions have much more in common than they have that are different. All are flawed. But, all are good. None are inherently evil. Most have fundamentalists that distort the teachings and bring a bad name to the faith. Christianity has had and continues to have its share of whackos. So, I am hesitant to point the finger at other religions as being the cause for the stupid behavior of some of its followers. I believe that everything I just said about religions in general applies to Islam. This was the position I took in the debate. On the other hand, I have friends who think that Islam is evil (my word). They are fearful of Islam itself and seem to equate Islam with the worst aspects of Sharia law. They seem to have a fear of sharia law being enforced in the United States (I say this based on their assertion that any mosque advocating sharia law be shut down). They think any mosque built in the United States is a symbol of conquest of Islam. The important thing I got out of this conversation wasn't about the specific points themselves. It was, when I saw when I stepped back for a second, I realized that that days of debate was getting us pretty much no where. What I observed is both sides were busy throwing data at each other trying to prove their point that Islam is either good or bad. Those of us defending Islam were pointing out the good things about it, talking about the peaceful Muslims in the world (the vast majority) and drawing parallels between Christian atrocities (past and present) and Muslim atrocities and we were drawing parallels between Old Testament law (which was brutal) and sharia law (which has some brutal elements). The other side dismissed any parallels between Christianity and Islam. They focused on the most controversial verses in the Q'uran (which we countered with controversial verses from the Bible.) They focused on the most radical Imams and, of course, the small percentage of Muslims who do violence. What I finally realized is that in most of these debates, the same thing happens. Each side trots out the facts that support its case. The other side promptly ignores or dismisses those facts and trots out its own facts to support its case. Since there is not way to actually weigh the facts against each other, no one ever really changes the other's mind with this technique. Each side walks away saying "We won."

After going through this exercise in futility with Islam, we did the exact same thing with whether the United States is "good" or "bad" because I made the comment that the United States is the greatest nation on earth (and the best place to live) and one of my friends took exception to that. Ironically, in this case, I was on the side of my friends on the right going against one of my friends on the left. My friend on the left did the same thing my friends on the right had done in the debate about Islam. Every positive I pointed out about the United States, he brushed aside while pelting me with all of our shortcomings. I agreed with him about every single shortcoming he pointed out. The United States is not perfect. After making this observation about the way debates tend to go, I also realized that the farther right or left people are the more it seems they engage in black and white thinking. A thing is either good or bad, period. In fact, it's more extreme than that. A thing is either perfectly good or it's perfectly evil. For my left leaning friend, it seemed from his conversation (although I know this isn't true) that he could find no good in the United States. At least during the course of that conversation, he didn't have anything good to say about our country. For my friends on the right, they idolize things I simply refuse to idolize. The Constitution, the Declaration of Independence are perfect documents in their minds. Use the phrase "living document" and they get livid. Criticize the forefathers (one of whom- Thomas Jefferson is my ancestor) and they go ballistic. The leader of the group literally used the term "sacrilegious" when a friend of mine drew a parallel between Barack Obama and George Washington. When one of us points out that the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence did not do such simple things as include black people or women, therefore they were not perfect, we are seen as being unpatriotic and not recognizing any value in them. When we point out that the man who wrote so eloquently about equality of all men actually had slaves and enslaved his own children (illegitimate offspring of his slave Sally Hemmings), they again say we are being unpatriotic. Any criticism of capitalism, means you're a Marxist. Any criticism of the United States means you hate your own country.

Another example of this black and white thinking is a lot more current. Our President- Barack Obama. Everyone knows he's being attacked by the right. We expect that. But, as I pointed out in my post on "Motivations" many of his attackers go way beyond simply attacking his policies or individual actions. In fact just this morning a friend wrote:

Brian: (based on our earlier conversations I said this was my understanding of her position) "The President is a Marxist, doesn't even deserve to be in the Oval office. So, of course, everything he does as long as he is President is offensive."

Rhonda: You betcha. That's it, Brian.

He doesn't deserve it is NIW being seen after only 18 months in office. Our country is being destroyed. Do you not see that?

If not, why not?

So, there we have it. Barack Obama is a Marxist. Therefore, he doesn't deserve to be President. Everything he does while in office is offensive. Now, an example from the left, where Obama is being attacked almost as fervently as from the right. Many have already given up on Obama saying he's not a true liberal. I was discussing Obama with a good friend of mine. The interesting thing about this guy is he's a former evangelical and voted for Bush twice. He was an extreme right guy. Now, however, he's an extreme left guy. He not only voted for Obama, he campaigned for him. But, it seems whenever we talk about Obama all he can do is talk about what Obama hasn't done. The health care bill didn't go far enough. Gitmo is still open. Some of the surveillance policies put in place during Bush haven't been stopped and on and on. Don't ask don't tell is still in place. Honestly, I agree with most of his criticisms of the Obama administration and I could name more things they haven't done and a few more things they have done wrong. But, unlike those on the far left or those on the far right, I don't think Obama is destroying the country, deliberately or otherwise. Overall, I think his administration has a done a good job with a terrible situation.

Another thing that jumped out at me during this time was how we tend to demonize our enemy and if not demonize them, at least belittle them. I have some pretty left wing friends on Facebook and I have to admit that some of them are just as angry as the people I've encountered on the right during this couple of week period. They post almost nothing but negativity and bashing. One of them recently said he'd like to see Andrew Breitbart broke and begging in the streets. A left wing blogger recently posted that she'd like to see Rush Limbaugh have a heart attack and wouldn't even help him. Seriously, grim stuff. But, watching the hatred from the right over the last week has sensitized me to this type of language even more. To be fair, none of them have said anything as bad as this. Their approach is much more nuanced. They refer to liberals as moonbats, sheeple and euphorians. The leader of their group, after his spending his days "baiting moonbats" routinely reports back on his moonbat quote of the day, always lifted out of context from a conversation and they all pounce it like a pack of wolves on red meat. This experiment has made me a little less hopeful that those on the far left and those on the far right can even begin to get along because I really wonder how much they even want to. No one wants to get along with someone who is truly evil. No one is going to put an effort into understanding another man's perspective when he thinks that man is ignorant, stupid or both.

Another thing I observed is the "you're the exception to the rule" syndrome that allows people to ignore data points that don't fit their theory. I've been complimented, by the leader of the pack I was thrown to (Or should I say I walked into?). He says I am actually articulate and well educated- unlike the liberals. I used to get the same thing from white people who were shocked that I could speak well or that I was well educated. Rather than admitting that black people are fundamentally no different than they are, they simply dismissed me as an exception.

I come back to the question. Why do I do this to myself? I have no regrets about jumping into this fray. As Nietzsche said "That which does not kill me makes me stronger." (yeah, I know he was an atheist- doesn't mean he never had a good idea). I've learned a little something about myself and a little about human nature by doing this.

Motivation

2010-07-15T13:50:00.000-04:00

I was called unpatriotic when President George W. Bush was in office. Not by many. But, by a few. I was no fan of W as President. I voted against him both times. I disagreed with him politically and philosophically. I thought he was a war-monger and I think the term "compassionate conservative" is an oxymoron. But, (and this is a big but), I never questioned the man's motivation. I never questioned his patriotism. I never questioned his dedication to doing what he thought was the best for the American people. There's a conservative radio host who praises his callers who agree with him with the phrase "You're a great American." Funny. He never says that to the callers who disagree with him. Well, as much as I disagreed with W's policies, I can say with all sincerity he is a "great American". Anyone who runs for the office of President of the United States sacrifices much. We should thank anyone who puts up with our crap for four or eight years. And, we should never, ever question his patriotism.

Good, patriotic people can have huge disagreements over how to get what's best for our country. But, we what we have in common is we want what is best. And, as long as we can all keep that in mind, compromise is possible. Heck, maybe even consensus is possible on a few issues. But, when we start questioning each others' motivation, we get ourselves into real trouble, trouble I think we are in today. And, I'll say it, it's mostly coming from the right.

Look at the picture above. What comes to mind? Does the President look disrespectful of his office? Does he look like he hates America? Does he look like he thinks he's "king"? I'm guessing you answered no unless you saw the idiotic email circulating among some conservatives now.

Now look at this picture. What comes to mind?

Here's what is being said about this picture:

When one of my conservative friends was faced with the truth about this picture and the sheer hypocrisy of the outrage over this picture but not a whimper about Bush (or Ford) putting his feet on the desk, he responded with this:

The difference is that no one ever doubted that Gerald Ford and George Bush were on the side of America and loved the country. It is clear that Obama is not on the side of America and hates the country. He is a domestic enemy of the United States and this is further proof of it.

You know... he's right- in this sense. One thing us liberals never did was say George Bush was trying to destroy the country. We may have said he was destroying the country. But, not that he was trying to destroy the country.

C'mon guys. Isn't it enough to say Obama's not the legitimate President because his father cooked up a conspiracy from the time he was born almost 50 years ago to get him elected President even though he was born in Kenya? Isn't it enough to say he's incompetent and naive? Isn't it enough to say he's a "thug"? No. You've got to say he's an enemy of the country, bent on destroying the land he's called home since shortly after his birth in Kenya. He's a secret Muslim who only pretended to be Christian for decades so he could hatch his plot of being elected President and selling us out to the Muslims who build mosques in the United States as symbols of conquest (I kid you not, one of my friends said this yesterday- mosques in the United States are a symbol of Muslim conquest).

Yesterday, when I walked away from a conversation just shaking my head, one of my conservative friends challenged me with "silence doesn't solve anything". True enough. But, it's really, really hard to come to common ground with someone who doesn't even trust your motivations.

Still a scared little boy in there

2010-06-29T07:56:00.001-04:00

Image by Capture Queen ™ via Flickr

This past Sunday at Nexus was "lay Sunday" (another term for the pastor's vacation and we didn't have substitute). It was actually really cool and, after having read "Pagan Christianity?" reminded me of what the early church might have been like before there were professional clergy.

As part of the service, three of us were asked to share our thoughts on following Jesus. I told my story which everyone who has known me for any length of time is probably sick of hearing by now. The story of how I was terrified into following Jesus at an early age and my fear of a god who wanted to torment me for all of eternity.

What I realized through this experience is those scars that I have tried so hard to recover from are still there. Almost a decade ago I went through spiritual counseling that helped tremendously. My counselor helped me see that the debilitating panic attacks I had been having for about 30 years at the time stemmed from a negative self-image and a negative image of G-d. Since that time I have been working on correcting both. But, at times I'm reminded I still have more work to do.

Before I stood up to speak, I had the thought (again) about dying suddenly in church. This is a fear I've had since I was a child and I guess probably is related to the fact that it is what happened to my grandfather- not the one who was a preacher. One day he was visiting his home church in West Virginia, stood up to give his testimony, had a heart attack and I never saw him again. It wasn't too long after that that I began having panic attacks and they started in church.

I tried to set that thought aside and stood to give my talk. But, about half way through, as I told my story again, the panic welled up in me. I realized I still have this fear of a venegeful G-d just waiting to strike me down. In spite of my intellectualizing and my meditation and my yoga and my counseling, that scared little boy is still deep in there and I guess may always be.

All I can do is continue to try to recover. It's disheartening to know that after so many years and so much work, I haven't been able to completely undo just a few years of damage planted deep inside me at such an early and vulnerable age. I don't hold any animosity for those who did this to me. They were doing the best they could. But, I will do everything I can to make sure it doesn't happen to any more children.

Here are the remarks I gave:

What It Means to Follow Jesus

I would guess that following Jesus, for most people, was a choice they made at some time in their lives. I, however, cannot remember a time before I began following Jesus. As soon as I could understand language it was made clear to me this was the only choice I could make.

I am the son of a son of a preacher man. I was in church from the time I was old enough to leave the house. I was told that I was born alienated from G-d. A god who would torture me for all eternity for having been born the way I was born. My only hope was to follow His Son-Jesus. So, that’s exactly what I tried to do. Jesus was my protector, my protector from God.

The way following Jesus was described to me was a rigid list of “don’ts”. Not do’s and don’ts. But, don’ts. Kind of like the 10 Commandments- “Thou shalt not...”. Strangely, most of the things I was told I wasn’t supposed to do, I couldn’t do as a five year old anyway. No drinking, no smoking, no cussing, no dancing, no gambling, no going to the wrong movies. So, in a way, following Jesus in those early years was pretty easy. I felt like I was a good follower. The things I could do to break the law I didn’t do much. I never stole. I hardly ever lied. But, my teachers were there to make sure I never got too comfortable. No matter how I tried to follow Jesus there was always some “sin” I had committed. And, I was told, most of the sins I committed I wouldn’t even realize I had committed. The wrong thought was a sin, even the wrong attitude was a sin. Part of following Jesus was confessing and repenting of these sins daily. And, for good measure, confessing any sin I hadn’t thought of. Any unconfessed sin was a sin that would be held against me. Any sin was enough to send me off to eternal torment because no sin was any better than any other. A little white lie might as well have been murder. One of the few “do’s” on the list was I had to love G-d. I was told I had to love G-d, a god I was absolutely terrified of. That was hard. But, I tried. I would realize later it was impossible So, in that way, following Jesus was terrifying. Following Jesus was exacting and grueling. God demanded perfection.

After several years of this exhausting way of following Jesus, I gave up. I knew I could never live up to the standards they had set for me because the only standard that was acceptable to G-d was perfection and I was far from perfect. So, I dropped out of church and just forgot about it for a while. I guess if you asked me during that time if I was following Jesus, I would have said “Yes”. But, I wasn’t really sure what it meant anymore. Christianity had lost its meaning.

A few years later, following Jesus began to change for me. I realized God (and Jesus) weren’t primarily interested in every little infraction of their code. I realized that G-d was not sitting on His throne waiting for me to screw up so He could zap me. God was actually on my side, too. Not against Jesus and me. I realized that when Jesus said He came to bring life and that more abundantly, He meant exactly that. Life, not this living death of trying to follow an impossible code. Following Jesus became more about what I should do rather than what I should not do. Following Jesus became about serving others. Following Jesus became about becoming involved in justice for the poor and the oppressed. Following Jesus became about self-actualization and living an abundantly full life. Following Jesus turned from an obligation done to avoid punishment into a joy done out of gratitude for a G-d who made me in His image and who loves me unconditionally. Even though this way of following Jesus is more difficult in some ways, it’s far superior in my mind.

How is it more difficult? I could always do more. It’s easier to not drink alcohol or to not cheat on my taxes, than it is to be a “generous” person. How do I define generous? How much giving of myself is enough? But, this way of following Jesus is life-giving rather than life-robbing and I am glad I found it.

My First Week with P90X

2010-06-28T10:09:00.000-04:00

Image by BrianWestChest via Flickr

I finished up Insanity at the beginning of the month. After a two week break, I decided to start P90X. These are my initial impressions with P90X.

The warm ups with P90X are really warm ups. Tony Horton is a hyperactive, mad man. But, P90X goes at a much slower pace than Insanity. Tony talks incessantly. But, he's a pleasant enough guy and his chatter keeps me from getting bored. You're doing set after set of lifting. So, I kind of enjoy his keeping it light. I was worried about how he'd be as a yoga instructor But, he was was able to bring it down for yoga. Insanity is like a sprint (a LONG sprint), while P90X is more like an endurance race. P90X workouts are much longer than Insanity workouts. I found myself at the beginning of P90X routines thinking "Oh, this is easy. I could do this all day." But, by the end, you feel you have been doing it all day and are pretty spent. Even in the first week, most workouts are pushing an hour and a half if you count the Ab Ripper X routine that is a 17 minute add on on the days you're not doing cardio (three days this week). So, while Insanity requires a greater commitment of body and mind. P90X requires a greater commitment of time. P90X has a lot more strength training and requires weights (or bands) and a pull up bar. P90X also provides more variety. That's great for those who are bored easily. While Insanity is fantastic for cardio fitness, flexibility and core strength there's not as much of the bulking up exercises. Shaun T. does a fantastic job of getting the most out of using just your body. But, without weights or a pullup bar there is only so much you can do to bulk up. OTOH, the "classic" P90X program is light on the cardio work. There is also a lean P90X variation that concentrates more on cardio. You take the same 12 disks and just do a calendar that involves more cardio. There is also a doubles program which gives you both. What is does is add a cardio routine to most days of the classic program that are missing cardio. But, now you're talking about some really serious time working out- over two hours a day.

I'm doing the classic program. This week had 3 days of strength training working on chest & back, shoulders & arms and legs & back. It also had 2 days of cardio (Kenpo and Plyo) and a day of Yoga which is both strength and flexibility training. For those who like variety, P90X is the way to go. Pretty much every day of Insanity is cardio (some days more intense than others). The Yoga X workout was the most difficult yoga class I've ever taken and I've taken a few fairly advanced classes. You work up a good sweat doing the yoga class. The plyo workout wasn't as intense or as jarring as Insanity's version. But, it was good. One of the things that's great about it is, for those with joint problems, you don't have to figure out how to modify the moves. There is someone showing you the modified moves on the DVD. On the strength training days, if you have bands instead of weights, someone shows you how to use the bands. If you don't have a pullup bar or can't do pullups, someone shows you how to use bands instead. Kenpo X was my first experience with Kenpo. I really didn't think I'd be able to get a good cardio workout by just punching and kicking. But, man, I did. Kenpo X was actually a lot of fun and I can't remember the last time I said that about an workout.

Today starts week 2 of P90X for me. So far so good. The only problem right now is I'm too weak to do any great number of pullups. But, hey that means more room for improvement. Right?

Accepting Impermanence

2010-06-28T08:29:00.002-04:00

I almost titled this post "embracing impermanence". But, I quickly realized I'm just not there yet. Accepting it is the best I can do. Friday we took a trip to Springfield for Ty's family reunion. It was just over a year ago that we were there visiting and realized that it was time that we had to put Pops in a place where he could be taken care of. The Alzheimer's had progressed to the point where he had completely broken with reality and was becoming a danger to himself and others. Thank G-d, we found Kenneth and Joyce who have been angels ministering to him and to Ty's family. In spite of the fact that he can no longer walk on his own, feed himself and rarely speaks, Joyce has said that she would like to continue to take care of him as long as possible and has even volunteered to lower her fee so that he can stay there longer. We were getting concerned that he was too much for her to handle. But, she says it's just the opposite. She says that since he's no longer mobile and sleeps most of the time, she can handle him.

I've only been to Springfield once since Pops hasn't been living there. After 23 years of visiting the house Ty grew up in, it's just weird to go there and have him not be there. I look around at his stuff, which is less than it was as some of his tools, etc. that he'll never use again have been sold. The ashtrays are gone. The smell of his pipe is gone. Alzheimer's is such a cruel disease. In so many ways, he is gone. But, his body lingers on.

Margaret is probably doing as well as can be expected under the circumstances. She has lost/is losing her companion of over 50 years. I don't know which way to put it. Past tense- she has lost him. Or present tense- she is losing him. People tell her to move on. To go on with her life. But, how does she do that knowing that he' still alive? They were one of those old fashioned couples. They were two halves of a whole, each living lives that would have not been complete without the other. They were completely codependent. That's a bad word in today's culture where we're supposed to be independent. Or maybe even interdependent. But, they took care of each other. Each specialized in his or her work and there wasn't a whole lot of overlap. We often talked of how lost her father would be without her mother since he had no clue how to do laundry, cook or do any of the tasks she did. I don't think I ever saw the man even make a sandwich for himself. When we got together for meals and the buffet was laid out, he'd sit in his chair and place an order for what food he wanted. But, there was no resentment from her. She was glad to serve him. They served each other. Now that that is gone, she struggles to fill in the gaping holes left by his absence. And, she feels guilt knowing that her role in taking care of him (she used to even iron his sock) is being fulfilled by someone else. It's not just chores though. They were best friends. Every evening, weather permitting, they'd pull their chairs out into the driveway and just sit and talk as the sun set. They'd watch the ever-increasing number of cars drive by on Lincoln Park Road and wave. When they moved to Lincoln Park Road, it was way out. Now, every time we go to visit there are more and more cars on the road. More and more houses. Nothing stays the same.

Margaret is talking about selling the house next spring and moving into an apartment. How weird that must be to hear for Ty and her family. It's weird for me. As we were driving back to her house from the reunion Saturday, I looked around at the landmarks we've come to know. Fred's (a kind of general store), the IGA. How many more times would we drive past these places? I told the girls to try to remember what things are like there because Springfield reminds me of Gary, WV where my mother grew up. I used to visit there as a child and have fond memories of being able to walk anywhere in town from either my grandmother's house or Aunt Dorothy's. But, when my Aunt Dorothy passed away (the only sibling of my mother who stayed in Gary), I never went back to Gary again.

To make things even more difficult for Margaret, she and Pops really never discussed the Alzheimer's or what was happening to them. Alzheimer's doesn't afflict an individual, it afflicts a family. She is just as impacted by the disease as he is. In some ways, more. The family found out about his Alzheimer's through his doctor. He had been told by the doctor. But, everyone was scared of his reaction to finding out the doctor had told us. So, for many months, we knew he had Alzheimer's and he knew he had Alzheimer's. But, he didn't know we knew. When it finally got to the point where we had to confront him, the rational man that we all had known was gone. His doctor (who was also Margaret's doctor) never discussed Alzheimer's in any depth. In fact the one time he mentioned it to her, he used the phrase "a touch of Alzheimer's" which is the only phrase Ty's father ever used when he mentioned the disease. His sister who lay in a comatose state had Alzheimer's. He only had a "touch". I think he probably knew what was going to happen to him. But, Margaret never put it together. We tried to get counseling for her from the Alzheimer's Association. But, she was afraid he would find out and didn't really take advantage of it. We sent stuff for her to read. But, she doesn't learn that way. I asked her if anyone, over the course of the last couple of years had sat down with her and told her what to expect, if Pops had ever had that talk with her and she said "No. No one.". The first real talk she had about the prognosis was just several weeks ago with her (and his) new doctor. Every time she would go to a doctor's visit, she'd ask- hopefully "Do you think I'll ever be able to bring him home again?" What they probably thought she meant by that was "Will I be able to bring him home and nurse him?" But, what she was really asking was "Is there a chance he'll recover?" Finally, the new doctor sat down beside her, took her by the hand and dashed her hopes.

As I look at her I realize she is not a woman of science. She's a woman of faith. She doesn't understand the progression of the disease, how it's eating away at his brain which is where his memories are held, his speech is formed, his power of reasoning comes from. She doesn't understand that once that brain tissue has been destroyed it won't ever come back. She's been praying daily for a miracle. She believes that God can do anything, including bring her Felton back to her. In spite of everyone telling her, gently, that is not going to happen, I still think she holds out some hope.

One bright spot of the weekend. Ty and Michelle (her sister) went to see Pops on Friday. As it's been described to me, he rarely speaks in complete sentences anymore. He sometimes will blurt out something no one can understand and he randomly says "Margaret" or Shell (Ty's sister). But, on Friday, he recognized Ty and Shell as his daughters and even showed signs of his old feisty nature. Ty kept feeling his body because he's completely emaciated and she wanted to tell for herself just how thin he is. She also was rubbing his head. He blurted out "Stop rubbing my damn head. You've done it three times already." Ty burst out laughing, grateful for a glimpse of her Dad back.

As we left Springfield, I wondered just how many more trips we'd make back there. Margaret plans to move to an apartment in town. So, I'm sure we'll continue to visit her. But, it's sad to know that I have far less trips in front of me to the home on Lincoln Park Road than I have trips behind me.

Journey to Insanity

2010-06-04T08:48:00.002-04:00

Insanity... maybe you've seen the infomericial. It's more likely you've heard of P90X. Both are extreme workout programs that promise amazing results. Insanity says they'll give you a new body in 60 days. P90X says they'll give you one in 90. I saw the infomercials for both and decided that maybe I'd give one of them a shot. I'm skeptical of all infomercials that makes claims that are too good to be true. But, I thought if I get even half the results they promise, it'll be money well spent. When deciding whether to get Insanity or P90X, I ended up making the decision to get Insanity because I thought it was less of a commitment. It doesn't require any equipment (dumbbells or chin up bar) and it's only a 60 day program. I would later find out that of all of the crazy workout programs BeachBody (www.beachbody.com) has released, Insanity is actually the most intense and probably requires the greatest commitment. The workouts are fairly short in the first month (30-45 minutes). But, in the second month with combinations, they go up to as long as 90 minutes. The workouts are the most
intense thing I've ever done by a mile, including any classes I've taken at a gym or working with a trainer or whatever. And, in doing my extensive research on the program (after I bought it), I heard
from person after person who had been through military training or intense sports training saying it is crazier than anything they've ever done before (well except for my friend's son who went through Navy Seal Training).

I was 48 years old when I decided to order Insanity. I finished at 49 years old. I felt I was in pretty decent shape. Not great. But, not too bad. Like a lot of people I put on weight over the holidays. Early in 2009 year through diet and exercise, I had taken off the extra 10-15 pounds beer and a sedentary lifestyle had added to my body. I hit my stationary bike, cut out the excess alcohol, ate right and within a couple of months was back down to close to the weight I wanted to be. I joined the gym in November 2009. But, I've never been a gym kind of guy. I went a few times and did what a lot of do who join gyms. I went a few times. Took a spinning class here and there. Hit the weights a bit. Messed around on the machines. But, with no real "program" to follow results from the gym have never been fantastic for me. I've been a member of a gym on and off for 25 years. I find I go for a while and then always fade to the point where I realize I haven't been in months and drop the membership. The results from the gym have always been "so-so" at best. I did better when I had a bench and weights at home. But, that's been over 13 years ago. Over the holidays of 2009, I put back on all the weight I had lost earlier in the year. I found myself up to 203 at the beginning of the year. At 6'2" that was more than I wanted to weigh, particularly since the weight was not in the places I wanted it to be. Most of it was hanging around my waist like a spare tire. So, in the course of a couple of months, I recommitted to the exercise bike (like I had done the year before) and took off about five or six pounds. I was 197 when I started Insanity on April 5, 2010.

Day 1 with Insanity

When I got the Insanity program, I read through the materials with all the warnings about "Don't do this if yo have a heart condition, bad knees, bad shoulders, etc., etc.". and the "No, we really mean
it". I thought "Great marketing hype". I really appeals to people who want to feel they can do something other people can't do (me). Well, when I put in the first DVD and started the Fitness Test, I realized this was no marketing hype and no joke. The warm up for Insanity is about 10 minutes and it will "kick your butt". The Fit Test consists of eight exercises where you do as many reps as you can in a minute. I got through the Fit Test OK. But, my results were nothing like the two "machines" Shaun T. (your trainer for Insanity) had doing the program with him. After taking the test for the next several times my results improved dramatically (much more than I would ever have imagined- see
results section below).

The next day I actually tried an Insanity workout I thought "Uh oh. I think I made a mistake ordering this program". The exercises themselves were difficult enough. But, the pace is what kills you. Even during the non-cardio days of the program, everything is done at a frantic pace. I decided to stick with the program. But, I had to swallow my ego. I found myself trying to keep up with Shaun T. and the
people on the video. No way. I finally figured out that Insanity is designed to push you to your point of exhaustion. Everyone's point will be a little different. But, you will hit it while doing Insanity. I realized the point was not to keep up with them but to do my personal best and to push that limit a little
more every time I did a workout. One of the great things about Insanity is that if you're not realizing that you're getting better from the workouts themselves, you will see it when you take the Fit Tests. Since you're exhausting yourself every time through the program it never really feels like it's getting easy or even easier.

Insanity Month 1

The first few days of doing Insanity I was sore ALL OVER. My calves, my feet, my quads, my hamstrings, my abs, my shoulders, my upper and lower back and my triceps. Insanity pretty much hits
your entire body. You are working out body parts you don't even realize you are working at the time. The soreness was the good kind of soreness for the most part. The only problem I experienced in Month 1 was sore knees. First my right knee swelled up. This was sometime during week one. Then, my left knee swelled during week 2-3. The swelling was manageable by icing my knees. I also bought some compression braces (not sure if those helped or hurt). I did not experience pain while working out. My self-diagnosis is the pain is in the tendons around the knee and may have been caused by improper form on the lunges in the first few weeks. The pain did not get worse during my 9 weeks of Insanity. It would be better on some days than others. But, it never got unbearable to the point where I couldn't finish my workouts.

I got on the scale a couple of times during the first couple of weeks. I'd be down a pound or two or the same. After the second week, I did a lot of reading of what results people were getting during the early part of the program. While some people saw weight loss almost immediately, it seems most people did not. I'm sure it depends a lot on what you actually need to lose in terms of fat. If you have a lot of excess weight, I think it comes off more quickly. While you are doing Insanity you've got two competing things going on. You are burning body fat. But, you're putting on muscle. Some people actually gain weight during the first couple of weeks of the program. The advice is overwhelming to just keep "pushing Play". I saw very few people who completed the program and were not happy with the results. I say stay off of the scales during the program. If you feel you need to measure your progress there are three ways I'd recomomend. The first is take pictures of yourself before you start and refer to those pictures. The second is to pay attention to the way your clothes fit. The third is to take measurements of your waist, chest, arms, thighs, etc. I did the pictures. But, I did not take measurements. The only area I was interested in reducing was my waist and I can easily measure that by the way my pants fit. No need for a tape measure.

My results for Month 1 were acceptable. Looking in the mirror I saw some increased definition in my abs and I could tell the love handles were going away. There was also more definition in my chest and arms. But, the results in the mirror were not dramatic by any means in the first 30 days. My pants started fitting looser, also. But, the best measures of my progress was my heart rate during the workouts was not getting as high and was dropping faster when I rested. And, I made some pretty impressive (to me) gains on the Fit Tests. I made progress with the work outs themselves. They started being something I could barely get through; I actually quit one workout with about 15 minutes
to go during the first or second week. I was just done and saw no point in watching the rest of the DVD while I sucked air sitting on the couch. By the end of the month, I was completing the workouts easily.

Now this does not mean I got through the workouts without stopping. But, I got through them without pressing Pause (which I did a few times in the first weeks) and I got all the way through them. The DVDs instruct you to take breaks when needed and I did. But, the breaks became shorter and shorter and I took fewer of them.

Recovery Week

After the first week of the craziness, you are blessed with what Shaun T. calls a "Recovery Week". Don't let the name fool you. While you're not beating your body up the way you do during the first month there is still plenty of opportunity to get your heart rate up and to work your muscles. The cardio is less intense and there is not as much jumping around. The recovery week gives you just enough of a break to feel like you can actually make it another four weeks.

Month 2

Month 1 is spent working up to Month 2 where the idea is you do "Max Interval" training. That is you go as hard as you possibly can for three minutes (doesn't sound like much? wait 'til you're in it).
After that three minutes, you get a 30 second break where your heart rate should come back down. As soon as it does, you're off for the next three minutes. During the first workout of Month 2 I felt like I
was right back where I was the first week of Month 1. Lost and all alone. When Month 1 was
over I thought "Hmmm.... I don't know if I'm ready for Month 2." I had definitely gotten better. But, I still couldn't make it through the DVDs without breaks (no one can- BTW. The fitness freaks doing the video with Shaun T. can't make it through the routines). I caught some of their occupations while doing the routines- fitness instructor, spinning instructor, one guy runs marathons. This becomes more apparent in Month 2 when even the evil inventor of the program (Shaun T.) takes breaks. Poor Akeel
drops out routinely and Shaun T. takes special notice to torture him during one of the tougher workouts alternately telling the guy to dig deeper and "take a break if you need a break". Finally, Akeel
succumbs "I need a break!". New, more advanced moves are introduced in Month 2. It's a good thing my daughter was in the room the first day I did Max Interval Circuit (after taking a Fit Test the same day). Otherwise, I would have cussed Shaun T. out good. As it was Shaun T. got a lot of "You can't be serious." from me. The length of the routines is kicked up and the intensity is kicked up at the same time. I felt like I must have skipped the middle part of the program that was supposed to take me from the introductory level up to the advanced level of Month 2. During Month 2, the body changes accelerated. The weight loss I had was mostly in Month 2. But, since I stayed off of the scale from week 2 to the end, I don't know exactly how the 9 pounds I lost were spread out through the 60 days. I didn't think my Fit Test results would continue to improve because I felt like I had pretty much pushed to my limits already. But, I was wrong. The Fit Test results continued to
improve.

Diet

Insanity comes along with a very detailed diet plan that allows you to calculate how man calories you'll need based on your age, weight, sex, height and current weight. It takes into account the level of
activity you'll be doing with Insanity and suggests shooting for a 500 calorie deficit which will allow you to lose a pound a week. All of these thigns are approximate. One thing that is annoying about
trying to lose weight is everything I've been reading has said if you eat too few calories, you'll impede your weight loss. That's right. Too many calories will cause you to gain weight. But, too few calories and your body reacts to the idea that it thinks you're trying to starve it by reducing your metabolism so you burn fewer calories. I'm not much for special diets. They are way too much work. What I did during my time on Insanity was to double my normal efforts of eating healthy. I cut out all alcohol with the exceptions of maybe a couple of glasses of wine at a party or a happy hour here and there. I watched calories as much as practical. One way I found that makes it easy to control my calorie intake is to eat a Lean Cuisine, Kashi or Healthy Choice meal for lunch. I made sure to eat every few hours never going more than three hours or so without a small snack to keep my metabolism revved up. For the first couple of weeks I tracked my calories using www.myfitnesspal.com (I highly recommend that site). I found that when I ate healthy it was difficult to get up to the recommended 2,500+ calories recommended for me. I made my own fruit smoothies using protein powder (Muscle Millk from Costco), soy milk or fruit juice, bananas, frozen strawberries and frozen blueberries. I avoided added sugar foregoing cookies, ice cream, cake, etc. I'm a chocoholic (and chocolate is good for the
heart). So, to satisfy my chocolate craving, I buy small pieces of dark chocolate bagged and individually wrapped. I would allow myself a couple of pieces a day and incorporate those calories into my overall plan for the day.

I may have gotten better results using the recommended diet. But, I didn't find that practical when eating in a family setting. The way I ate during Insanity is a way I can pretty much sustain when I'm
done with the program. I have to allow myself some "cheat days" because good food and a little alcohol in social settings is an big part of enjoying life for me. I made sure I ate "clean" at least six days a week while on Insanity.

The Good and the Bad About Insanity

First the bad about Insanity. It's definitely not for every one. If you're not willing to push yourself you're not going to get results. But, that's true of any exercise program. A friend of mine when
he found out I was doing Insanity said "He (Shaun T.) can't make you do what he says. Why are you putting yourself through that?" No Shaun T. can't. But, I broadcast it to the entire world (Facebook and on the BeachBody website) that I had begun this program and I snapped those "before" pictures. Every day I thought about the fact that I was a day closer to having to snap the "after" pictures. And I knew if I quit everyone would know. Those things helped keep me motivated.

Insanity involves a lot of plyometrics (jumping around and explosive moves) that are hard on your
joints. Starting the program at 48 years old may not have been the wisest decision I ever made. I had zero knee problems before Insanity and both my knees were sore during most of the 9 weeks.
I also felt an old shoulder injury start to flare up just a bit in the last two weeks. My heel got a little sore at one point. And, in the last couple of days, my left hip has hurt just a bit. Nothing unbearable. But, after 60 days, the old body's saying "Maybe it's time for a little break".

Another thing about Insanity is because they are trying to get results so quickly the program involves working out six days out of seven for nine weeks. There are days they call recovery days and even a
recovery week. But, recovery is a relative term. Month Two you start combining workouts more and you actually work out on your Fit Test days. I have about 1/3 of an acre lot which I mow by hand which is a little workout itself (and the grass didn't stop growing during Insanity). So, I ended up doing a lot of doubles the second month. I stopped riding my stationary bike during the program. This is a grueling schedule both mentally and physically. My legs have been in varying stages of soreness for the last 9 weeks- not just the kees, the calves and at times my thighs have felt rock hard the day after a quadricep intense workout.

Insanity is not a primarily a body building program. You probably won't pack on a lot of muscle doing Insanity. If you're a guy looking to beef up, Insanity is not the program for you. Without a chin up bar and bands there is only so much you can do for your biceps and back. There was almost no bicep work. The first month I complained there was not enough upper body work (I stopped that complaint during the second month when we did every kind of push up known to man). You will put on some muscle doing Insanity and muscle is more dense than fat.

Insanity is not primarily a weight loss program. While you're peeling off the goo, if you've haven't done any strength training (like me) in a long time, you're likely to be putting on muscle at what could
be a comparable rate. If you like to watch the scale for results it's likely you'll get discouraged in the first weeks. I joined a support group to get through Insanity (on the BeachBody message boards). The group was mostly women and a lot of them had a hard time not watching the scales during the program. I had set a goal (arbitrarily) to take off 12-15 pounds. After completing Insanity
I realized that goal was way too high. Taking off the 9 pounds that I did was probably about right.

Now the good about Insanity. Insanity will improve your cardiovascular endurance. Also the plyometrics will probably improve your speed, ability to jump and other sports related skills. You'll probably improve your flexibility and balance also. There is a lot of stretching in Insanity and a fair amount of balance moves. If you're looking to improve your overall fitness, Insanity is great. Personally I couldn't care less about the plyometrics (speed and quickness moves) and I think those are probably responsible for majority of my joint (knee) problems during Insanity.

Another thing I love about Insanity and the BeachBody programs in general is they don't involve any (or much) equipment and you don't need a gym membership to get great results. I find when I go to
the gym I don't know exactly what to do to maximize my results for the time spent there. I found myself thinking about hiring a trainer to help me develop a program. Well, for less than $150 I had a trainer in my home every day telling me exactly what to do, how to do it and pacing me. Shaun T. is a great trainer, just the right mix of cheerleader and drill sergeant. Watching the guys in the video
gave me a goal to shoot for everyday (getting my body to look like theirs). I had people doing the workouts along with me to keep me motivated to keep up. I got a wall calendar to check off my
workouts and knew if I skipped a day, I wouldn't get that check mark. For me, it's not about knowing just the moves to make to get fit. But, having the pacing and the schedule planned out for me made my workouts extremely efficient. I knew from the time I pushed "Play" to the time I pushed "Stop" I'd be getting maximum results from every second. I'm really busy and I hate the time wasted driving back and forth to the gym and the time spent at the gym trying to decide what to do next and getting from here to there. With Insanity, I get my cardio and my strength training at the same time and I'm not piddling around between exercises.

Results

During the 9 weeks of Insanity I lost about 9 pounds. Not bad. But, certainly not dramatic over 9 weeks. The experts say when you're trying to lose weight you should aim for a pound or two a week. I was on the low end of that number in terms of pure weight loss. But, while I didn't take body fat measurements, I am certain that I put on muscle mass during the time I was doing Insanity. I would guess I lost maybe up to twice that amount of fat and ended up putting on some of the weight in muscle. I went to the doctor about two weeks into Insanity and told her what I was doing. After she got done telling me how crazy I was to be trying Insanity at my age, she told me that I really didn't need to lose any weight. She said maybe about 5 pounds from where I was at the the time. Ideal weight charts are all over the place telling me I should weigh anywhere between 160 pounds (ridiculously skinny for someone my height) and 195 pounds. My doctor told me if I was going to do Insanity to do it for my heart, not to lose weight. I decided that, if at the end of Insanity my clothes fit the way I liked and I liked the way I looked I would accept that as my "ideal weight". I completed
Insanity at 187.8 pounds (again I started at 197). My waist size has gone from being pretty
snug in 34s to my 33s are now loose and I've got a pair of 32s that are really comfy. I'd say I lost about 2 inches off of my waist.

Here are my Fit Test Results:

Each exercise is as many as you can get done in a minute. Everyone does them a little differently. So to compare yours to someone else's might not make the most sense. If your form is consistent from week to week you can compare your own numbers to see how you are improving.

	Per Cent Improvement
Switch Kicks	172%
Power Jacks	83%
Power Knees	170%
Power Jumps	83%
Globe Jumps	83%
Suicide Jumps	200%
Push Up Jacks	150%
Low Plank Obliques	169%

A picture is worth 1,000 words.

I don't know how well you can see it in the pictures. I don't have great lighting in my bathroom. But, I've got abdominal definition showing through, I've trimmed off a lot of the love handles, my deltoids and trapezius muscles are improved, my chest is more defined, my triceps are more defined and I see improvement in my lats. My wife told me my calves are more defined.

Overall Impression and What's Next

Some people have had amazing transformations in the 60 days of Insanity. In some ways I would call my results amazing. The fit test results are definitely amazing. The strength improvement in my abs I couldn't believe. The first time I tried the Cardio Abs workout, I could barely do the exercises. My abs were so weak I felt like I got almost nothing out of it because I simply could not do the exercises as they were designed. But, by the last time I did it, I was able to keep up with the people in the video. I'm not 100% where I want to be. But, I think maybe I'm 30 days away. The other BeachBody
programs I've looked at are 90 days and a lot of the results come in those last 30 days. I'm not sure why they decided to make Insanity a 60 day program. My guess is because it's so intense you need a
break after 60 days of doing it. About two weeks out from finishing the program, I found some old pictures of me from 20 years ago back when I was more active and was lifting weights regularly. I think my body is actually better now than it was then. My abs are better now than they were then.
Compared to where I was 60 days ago, the outside transformation is pretty big- not as big as I had hoped. But, as big as I expected. I took these pictures two days before I actually finished the program and since then I've lost another pound and the abs may be a teeny, weeny bit more defined. I feel stronger in my "core". I don't have that six pack (it's just starting to peek through) or the really ripped look. I'm no Shaun T. But, at the end of Insanity, I can say am ready for more. I have P90X and will start it after a break of a week. And, I have plans to see Shaun T. again in September.

My Motivation

2010-04-16T08:06:00.001-04:00

Image via Wikipedia

It has come to my attention (more than once) that at least a few of my Facebook friends think I choose what I post simply to stir up debate. Among those friends, I found out, is my wife. I'd like to take a moment to present my side of the story on that issue. And, I'm not presenting my side just to "defend" myself. There is another motivation behind this, too.

When one person accused me of posting simply for the sake of inciting people, I thought it was just her point of view. She's a Conservative and I know it must seem like I just bash Conservatives for fun. And I would guess some of my Conservative friends think I am picking on them personally. My wife doesn't understand why I get so involved in controversial issues and why I have to air my opinions on "personal matters" publicly. So, she (and others) have assumed that I must post things when I get bored just to get conversations started so I won't be bored anymore. That is not the case. Actually, I don't have a lot of time to get bored.

Rarely, do I post blog posts or news articles that are directed at a particular person. There are exceptions. The other day there was an article about eating well and eating cheaply. My friend Annie and I have discussed that several times with me taking the position it is nearly impossible to eat well and eat cheaply and that junk food is much cheaper and easier to get. The article took Annie's point of view. I posted it mainly for Annie to see.

So, why do I post the things I do? Well, I post things that interest me. Hopefully, they'll interest other people, too. If you've been my friend on Facebook for long or read my blog more than a couple of times you probably realize I am one of those "social justice" Christians. I mainly post things that, in my humble opinion, will make you (and me) a better person, my state a better state, our country a better country and/or our planet a better planet. I am one of those Christians who believes when Jesus said the Kingdom of God is at hand He did not mean that G-d was about to come swooping in on chariots (then or now). He meant that Jesus was here to usher in a new kind of relationship between people and with G-d and that we have to work to bring that to fruition. I believe that we each have to do our part to make that happen and that is what I am trying to do with my "voice" on the Internet. I do not believe Jesus is coming back to either save or destroy the planet (depending on your view of eschatology). I believe it's up to us to work with G-d to make the planet what He envisions it could be.

Are my posts biased? You betcha! No claims of "fair and balanced" here. I am not a news organization. I present one man's opinion. I am not ashamed to be Liberal in my politics and in my religion. If asked, I'll give you justification for my point of view. If you disagree with me, I am more than happy to discuss why you are right and I am wrong and I'll tell you why I think I am right. Do I like it when people discuss my posts? Yes, I do. That means you read it and it had some impact on you.

A confession. I do try to stir things up. I try to stir up people's hearts and minds. I know I'll never convince my Conservative friends to become Liberals. But, maybe I'll make them think about a particular issue differently. Maybe I'll cause them to think what's the motivation behind people like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck. Maybe I'll get them to realize that the government does have some role to play in social justice issues.

While I am not a Buddhist by religion, I do agree with the majority of Buddhist philosophy. One of the most important things about karma is that karma is not determined by the actions we take but by the motivation or the intention behind those actions. We cannot cling to the outcomes we hope to get from our actions because the outcomes are beyond our control. When I do things I try to remember to ask myself "What do you hope to accomplish by doing this?" When it comes to my blog, I am putting out thoughts into the world with a hope and a prayer that it makes the planet just a little better.

I Don't Like the Healthcare Bill Either- But, It Was the Right Thing to Do

2010-04-14T08:07:00.001-04:00

Image by BrianWestChest via Flickr

The last couple of weeks in politics has been one of the most emotionally charged weeks I can remember. I have several good friends who are very upset about the passage of what is a middle-of-the-road healthcare bill at most. Some are so upset I've decided to not discuss it with them for a while because I'm concerned about their mental health. So, I let this post kind of stew a while before posting it. A kind of cooling off period. There are charges of nazism and socialism, members of Congress have been physically threatened and the opposition to the bill is using language used to justify the overthrow the British government during Revolutionary times. "Don't Tread On Me" flags". Are you serious?

Conservatives/Republicans are making a big deal of the poll numbers that show that less than a majority of Americans are happy with the healthcare bill. The assumption is that if less than half the people would have voted for the bill themselves, Congress shouldn't have passed it. There are several things wrong that assumption. One, we do not have a direct democracy. Sometimes Congress has to do what it thinks is the right thing, regardless of popular opinion. Congress is supposed to take care of the rights of the minority and the weak in addition to just doing the "will of the people". Two, polls are not infallible. How you ask a question influences the outcome greatly. Three- This is related to two and the point of this post. Depending on how you ask the question, ardent supporters of health care reform might answer that we are not happy with this healthcare bill. I'm not happy with this bill and I've been pushing for healthcare reform since Clinton. We are not disappointed because it goes too far. We are not happy with it because it does not go far enough. So, if you ask us "Do you like this healthcare bill?" many of us will answer no.

No one, even those who supported the bill, should feel that we have somehow solved the health care crisis in this country. Rather than health care reform, this should have been called health insurance reform. I heard Obama refer to it as a Patients' Bill of Rights on steroids. That's pretty much what is it. It pretty much only addresses the health insurance industry predatory practices. Our problem with the out-of-control costs of health care are not going to be solved solely by putting restrictions on the health insurance companies. There is still a lot of work to do on the cost control front.

But, even as far as health insurance goes, this bill does not go far enough. In an attempt to work with Republicans (and maybe to appease Blue Dog Dems), the Democrats did not deliver on the vision of universal health care that was the dream of Obama's based. And it did not deliver as much on reigning in the insurance companies as many of us would have hoped. There are some things about it we just don't like. There is no public option in the bill. But, there is a mandate to be covered. So, citizens are being forced to buy insurance from private insurance companies. I guess the justification is the insurance companies need more customers to offset the more expensive coverage they are going to have to provide to people with pre-existing conditions. But, that is not what Obama campaigned on. If we were going to have a mandate, we were supposed to have a public insurance company that we could go to. This appears to me, to be a windfall for the health insurance companies.

Secondly, the bill does not address one of the key problems with health insurance that is so deeply ingrained into culture that most people don't even notice it anymore. That is that health insurance is largely an employer based thing. It's part of our compensation from the company we work for. That's makes health insurance costs transparent for a large portion of our population. They don't realize the problem in the system because they don't directly feel the pain. Their wages are being held down as their employers look at larger and larger percentages of their compensation being set aside to pay the insurance companies. They have limited options for health insurance as their companies shop for the best deals. Companies are reluctant to hire employees because of that variable that is always out there. "How much are we going to have to pay for their health insurance?" Hidden costs are rarely a good thing. People should be responsible for paying their own health insurance directly. I think if more people were paying their own health insurance and seeing their premiums skyrocket like mine have in the last couple of years more people would realize the urgency of the need for this bill. A good friend of mine is concerned about the healthcare bill already because he is a retiree and his company is reevaluating his health insurance benefits in light of a pretty convoluted tax deduction the company will lose due to the change in law from the bill. The double-dipping loophole the company was taking advantage closes up and the employees feel the pain.

Another problem with the bill, as I understand it, is I'm not sure it addresses the exceptions the health insurance companies have to anti-trust laws and it doesn't allow us to buy insurance across state lines. I don't really understand the insurance exchanges. But, I hope there's a lot more competition for the insurance companies in exchange for the masses of people that will be forced to buy their product. Picking up people with pre-existing conditions is not enough in exchange for that.

For all of its flaws, the healthcare reform will ensure coverage for a huge number of Americans who currently cannot get insurance. It will make health insurance affordable for a number of people who cannot currently afford it. It allows children extra time to find a job and get on their feet and to stay on their parents' policies. Whether it lowered the deficit one dime or not, those are things that needed to be done, morally. What I don't understand is fiscal conservatives saying "We can't afford this" when the Congressional Budget Office (the official scorer of congressional bills) says the bill will save us tons of money over the coming decades. The fiscal benefits of this bill are great. But, the people I know who were working to get this done were doing it more for the social justice reasons than to save money. Personally, I don't know if the reform will benefit me at all. I don't expect to see a huge reduction in my premiums. I already have coverage. Thank G-d my family's "pre-existing conditions" haven't pushed past what my insurance agent calls the "three strikes and you're out rule" (I only have two strikes) and we can get companies to take us on.

So, you have a lot of people unhappy with this bill. Maybe even a majority of people. Conservatives think it goes too far. Liberals say it doesn't go nearly far enough. When asked about the individual provisions in the bill, most people both liberal and conservative agree with most of the provisions. It's the overall bill that people are not happy with. Some because of things it contains and some because of things it doesn't contain. But, even if the majority of people would not have voted for this particular bill, that does not mean it was not the right thing to do. I am hopeful that is just the first step in a series of steps that will need to be taken on the road to getting some sanity in our health care system.

Health Care Reform- Why Some (All?) of Us Need It

2010-03-09T09:10:00.000-05:00

Image via Wikipedia

I cannot recall a debate as vigorous as the one over health care reform. Charges of nazism, socialism, communism, death panels, etc. are flying around like I've never seen before. I know my friends get sick of me talking about it. One thing I find fascinating, not a single person I have discussed this with- not one has not said that we need to do something about health care in our country. I have a lot of Conservative and Libertarian friends. I find this to be pretty surprising. While I know some who hate what the Democrats are proposing. Everyone I know agrees something needs to be done.

As a corporate employee for the first half of my career I was shielded from real health care costs as many people are today. As a group, as long as we don't pay for something directly, we tend to not think about it. I remember when there were no co-pays. You just went to the doctor, handed him your insurance card and it was "taken care of". Then, there were $5 co-pays. Now there are $30 co-pays and deductibles and the employers are asking us to even kick in on premiums. It seems that Americans are finally starting to feel the pain. I've always been conscious of what I spent on health care, even when the bill was going to the insurance company. Most people I knew back in the good old days weren't so conscious. They'd run to the doctor for every sneeze and sniffle. No more.

I left the arms of corporate American 8 years ago. I was shocked at the cost of the premiums for my family of four. The single largest obstacle to making the transition was getting health insurance at a "reasonable" price. I was paying more per month for health care than I had ever paid for a car payment (and I've had some pretty high car payments). Health care was my second biggest monthly bill surpassed only by my mortgage. Over the years I kept tweaking up the deductible to try to keep the premiums reasonable. Finally about three years ago I bumped the deductible up to $2,500. But that did not stop Anthem from raising my rates about 30% that year to about $700/month for the family. I did some shopping, found another company and got a quote for over $500/month. Done. The next year, they raised my rates to $770/month. It was over a 40% increase They sent me a nice letter assuring me it wasn't based on anything I had done individually. It's all those darn Ohioans who used their insurance so much in the previous year. My agent told me this was typical. A company would give you a low quote to get you on board, then jack it up the next year. OK. Fine. I paid the $770 thinking now I'd see reasonable increases going forward. A few weeks ago (about a year after they dropped the over $200 increase on us) we got another lovely letter from the insurance company. In an effort to control costs they were dropping one of the two provider networks they had in Ohio. This was going to result in my premium going from $770 a month to about $680. This, they told me, was good news. The not so good news, not a single doctor I see, Ty sees or the girls see were on the new plan. Worse yet, Children's Hospital was not on the plan. We called our agent and began scrambling again. Let's look at alternatives. Let's have them apply to our doctors and Children's Hospital to get them in the network. I figured for the $100/month savings, if I wanted to go see my own GP, maybe I'd pay out of pocket. Then, we got another lovely letter from them. The "savings" we had been quoted had evaporated. Our new rate would be $1,008/month. Same thing happened as last year. Individually, we had done nothing wrong. But, those darn Ohioans had done it again. Used too much insurance. So, off we marched to the insurance agent again looking for options. We opted to go with an HSA. Basically, we're going to self-insure. Thank goodness the business has been successful and we can afford to set aside $5,000 for our new deductible. I know that's an option a lot of start up business owners don't have.

I'm sure my agent has heard the bitching and moaning I did a thousand times before. But, I couldn't help myself. I was telling her how fed up I am with the health insurance companies holding us hostage. I have borderline high blood pressure (controlled under medication) and borderline high cholesterol (also controlled under medication). In the health insurance game, when you're in the individual market and/or a small business owner that's known as two strikes. With many insurance companies, three strikes and you're out. IOW they won't cover you. High blood pressure and high cholesterol are not exactly rare diseases in America where 30-50% of people are impacted with one or both of these conditions. I'm relatively healthy. I eat right. I exercise. I'm not obese. Heck, I'm in better shape than most guys I know my age. No one would even know I have these conditions if it weren't for the fact I actually go to the doctor and medicate myself for them. Yet, they make me an undesirable candidate for health insurance. Every time I apply with a new company I wonder if they'll cover me and what they're going to want to charge. I wonder if/when I'll get that third strike and then I won't have any options left.

My agent then began sharing her story. She and her husband are small business owners and self-cover for insurance. She is with the same company I'm trying to leave. She has MS and a skin condition, both pre-existing conditions that prevent her from leaving the company she's with. To make matters worse, she and her daughter were attacked last year by a random whacko on the street. So, they needed medical attention. She got a not-so-nice letter from our company this year. Due to the fact that she had used her insurance too much, her rates were going up 61%. As someone who has been screaming for health care reform, I wanted to get her perspective on health care because she and her husband are Libertarians. I wondered if they would think that the government should stay out and let the market take care of things. She didn't offer any specific solutions. But, she was in agreement with me that something needs to be done. The company she is with now can raise her rates as much as they want, any time they want and there is absolutely nothing she can do about it.

The next day I was talking with a friend who is a Conservative. Her husband works for one of the largest companies in Cincinnati. I was telling her my health insurance woes and that I was now facing a health insurance payment that was about 50% higher than the mortgage on my first house. I was complaining about how a person who wanted to start up a small business might not be able to afford $12,000 a year for health insurance (plus co-pays plus a $2,500 deductible) and this situation literally prevents many people from going into business for themselves. Then, I got a surprise. She and her husband have a $3,000 deductible on their company provided health care. Wow! Back when I was working for a corporation we had no deductibles on health insurance. We were fully covered. But, now even Fortune 500 companies are sharing the pain with their employees. I have another friend who works for a small company. She doesn't make a lot of money and pretty much lives hand-to-mouth. Her employer offers health insurance. But, with a $2,500 deductible. Her son has a congenital heart condition. What this means for her is every January the clock resets and she has to pay at least $2,500 each year for his medical expenses. I would classify her as one of the working poor (or at least very lower middle class). She is fortunate enough to have a job that provides benefits. But, the deductible is one she would never choose for herself because a family that is having trouble paying the mortgage doesn't have $2,500 a year just lying around.

I know two people who have lost their jobs within the last week. Both came totally out of the blue. One was a VP working for a company that kept promoting him and giving him more responsibility right up until the day the owner of the company called him in and decided he could do it cheaper without him. What was one of his family's greatest concerns when he found himself on Monday afternoon without the job he had on Monday morning? How was he going to afford health care coverage? Asthma, an eye condition that threatens his vision, a diabetic child- all of these conditions are in his family and those things do not look good on a health insurance application.

The health care proposal on the table from Obama and the Democrats is far from perfect. It's got some really weird stuff like a mandate to get coverage but no public option. Obama said during his campaign that he was against a mandate. A mandate where an affordable public option exists at least makes some sense. But, a mandate that forces people to buy from the very companies that are responsible for a large part of this mess, I'm not so sure about that. Many Republican ideas have been included in the plan. But, as soon as an idea is embraced by Obama or the Democrats it becomes anathema to the Republicans. It's like they've never heard of it before.

I don't know what the answer is. But, I do know that the current situation is unsustainable. If things continue on the trajectory they are on for even a few more years we are looking at a national crisis. People will be forced to gamble more and more with going without coverage which is a financial and/or medical disaster waiting to happen. We are all one layoff, one diagnosis or one accident from being one of those who cannot afford insurance or who cannot buy insurance at any price.

Panentheism

2010-03-03T10:31:00.000-05:00

Image via Wikipedia

My view of G-d has changed immensely since the Sunday School days when I was taught G-d was a big, old (angry) man in the sky. Recently, someone asked me to define what I mean when I say "G-d". Wow. That is a very difficult task. He challenged me about saying I believe in G-d when I can't define G-d. Well, I do and I can't.

The closest I can come to describing the nature of G-d is a view called Panentheism. Panentheism is kind of a cross between the old image of G-d as purely transcendant- out there, separate from G-d's creation and pantheism which basically says that G-d is the universe (and nothing more). Panthentheism recognizes that G-d is both immanent and transcendent. Eastern religions have been criticized for "depersonifying" G-d and when Westerners begin saying things like G-d is "transpersonal" (I first heard Marcus Borg use this term), some think we mean G-d is less than personal.

This article comes very close to describing the way I view G-d. I hope you find it useful.
This article does the best job of describing Panentheism (and my view of G-d) that I have seen. Much better than I could have myself. I especially like the analogy where compared impersonal to personal and personal to transpersonal and used the example of how a rock is impersonal and we are so much more alive (personal) than a rock. Likewise, the transpersonal G-d is that much more alive and expressive than we are.

http://www.enlightened-spirituality.org/panentheism.html

Peace,
Brian

Sister Sleep Over-Over?

2010-02-28T08:56:00.000-05:00

Three years ago (almost to the day) I took the picture above. Shayna and Kayla began what they called their "Sister Sleep Over". Since that time Shayna has hardly spent a night in her own room. Kayla would never admit it. But, I think one of the reasons the Sister Sleep Over began was Kayla was scared to spend the night alone. She would never close her door at night unless Shayna was in there with her. The girls would wake up every morning and read together. They also would lie in bed at night and talk for way too long. But, time passes and everything must change. A couple of nights ago, the girls decided to go back to their own rooms for the night. Just another sign they are growing up (sniffle). Ty was trying to prepare Shayna for the day when Kayla would decide she wanted her room back because she (and I thought) Shayna would be crushed when that day came. But, Shayna is in agreement with the decision since Kayla was telling her to stop snuggling her and to keep her feet off of her. Now Shayna can go back to sleeping in the exact center of her bed like she did before the Sister Sleep Overs began.

Ah.... good times... good times.... Why do they have to grow up?

The Beautiful Heresy- Christian Universalism

At (A) Crossroads

Proud Papa

The Adjustment Bureau- Movie Review

Insurrection- To Believe is Human- To Doubt, Divine- Review

Keeping the Christ in Christmas

The Breath of God- Book Review

Related articles

Steve Jobs- Gone at 56

Related articles

Pics or it didn't happen

Related articles

Thank God the Bible Contradicts Itself

Related articles

The Kindle Just Got Even Better

Related articles

The Most Heretical Sermon Ever

3 Lives, In search of bliss

Let's Make A Deal

Related articles

Baby I Was Born This Way

Related articles

Happy Birthday to Me!

My Snark Free Month

Related articles

Self-Love

Sol On Ice- A Book Review

A Plague on Both Your Houses

Related articles

Fear sucks

Related articles

Love Wins- A Book Review

Related articles

Stick Man- by Richard Rossi- A Book Review

Insufficient Funds?

Related articles

Stop the Blame Game

Related articles

My New Toy

Related articles

Deal Making and the Presidency

Related articles

I See The Christ In You- Namaste

Related articles

Kayla Sets a Swimming Record

Kayla Makes the Swim Team

Helping Ghosts- A Book Review

Related articles

Spreading the Wealth- I agree with Thomas Jefferson

Related articles

Zoe Doesn't Have Cancer

Along the Kentucky Bourbon Trail

Related articles by Zemanta

The Church is a Whore and She's My Mother

Related articles by Zemanta

What If Fred Phelps Ran the United States?

Related articles by Zemanta

September 11th and Muslim Celebrations

Related articles by Zemanta

Invasion of the Prostate Snatchers- Book Review

Lord Save Us From Your Followers

People I Don't Care About

Related articles by Zemanta

"Ground Zero" Imam's (So Called) Support of Terrorism

Related articles by Zemanta

Music Friday- Jason Mraz - Live High (Live, 2008)

Another Reason Nexus and the UCC Are Needed

Why do I do this to myself?

Related articles by Zemanta

Motivation

Still a scared little boy in there

My First Week with P90X

Related articles by Zemanta

Accepting Impermanence

Journey to Insanity

Day 1 with Insanity

Insanity Month 1

Recovery Week

Month 2

Diet