February 26th, 2010
On the Internet, Associated Press writer Charles Babington writes, “But larger ideological differences overwhelmed any common ideas, all but cementing the widely held view that a meaningful bipartisan health care bill is not possible as time grows short in this election year.” There is no need to restate the positions on health care held by the Democrats or the Republicans. The public has been subjected to them ad nauseum.
The Democrats want their health plan accepted all-or-nothing. Republicans would scrap the plan and start over from the beginning. Neither group is willing to give ground.
The result is that “we the people” will see our health benefits either reduced or eliminated. The number of persons without any health insurance will increase. Those who can afford the premiums will find double digit increases. Increases of 18% to 39% are bleeding wallets dry. To keep health insurance, “we the people” have to make cuts elsewhere. Where? Where would you cut your household budget 18% to 39%?
Our elected representatives seem more content to bicker and dig in their heels rather than work for us, the people who put them where they are now. We the people are being screwed by our representatives. They seem to be deciding that what they want is what we want.
Perhaps the Republicans have it right, scrap it all and start over. The health care reform bill? No, the members of Congress. Methodically vote them out of office and replace them with people who are truly of the people, by the people, and most importantly, for the people, rather than themselves.
Tags: Democrats, gridlock, health care bill, health insurance, Republicans
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
February 11th, 2010
On Meet the Press, the Sunday before the State of the Union address, Senator Mitch McConnell said that following President Obama’s speech the Republican party would react to what the president had to say. In an instant, Senator McConnell demonstrated what is wrong not only with most American politics, but society in general.
The Merriam-Webster online dictionary (www.merriam-webster.com) defines the verb react as follows:
1. To exert a reciprocal or counteracting force or influence.
2. To change in response to a stimulus.
3. To act in opposition to a force or influence.
4. To move or tend in a reverse direction.
Observation suggests that Senator McConnell spoke prophetically.
How much better things would be if the senator had used the word respond instead. The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines the verb respond as follows:
1. To say something in return: make an answer.
2. a. To react in response i.e. respond to a call for help; b. To show a favorable reaction.
3. To be answerable.
This second definition echoes the words of the prophet Isaiah, “come, let us reason together,” and suggests the value of dialog and community over opposition and division. It also suggests sharing over selfishness. Following a disaster we often extol the virtues of the first-responders. I don’t recall ever hearing about a first-reactor. Have you?
Tags: mcconnell, politics, react, respond, society, virtue
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
January 11th, 2010
In response to the presentation about possibly installing a commercial kitchen and broadening Advent’s outreach in new ways, some commented that careful thought needed to be given because the members are getting older and can’t work as hard as they used to.
That’s true for those of us who are senior citizens. But we aren’t a senior citizen congregation. The Vestry includes members in their 20’s on up. We have any number of members who are in their 30’s, 40’s, 50’s and 60’s who are showing no signs of slowing down.
In this coming year of not doing business as usual, it seems important that when new ideas are put before the congregation, each of us must be less inclined to look at how the new idea might affect us personally, and rather consider how the idea might affect the congregation as a whole.
Using the kitchen idea as an example, there are plenty of members with the energy to make it work successfully. The future belongs to the younger members. We seniors must allow that to happen. We must allow for regeneration. If we do not, Advent will age and cease to be, along with us.
So, do we seniors sit on the sidelines and do nothing? Not at all. We continue to be involved. But above all, we encourage our younger members to carry on, knowing they won’t do things the way we did; but knowing they will be working in Advent’s best interest as hard as we did.
At least that’s what I think.
Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments »
November 30th, 2009
All of the religions of the world have their special days. Holy days. They are important to the followers of that religion. The rest of us might recognize the holy day’s name when we hear it, and may even know something of the customs of the day. Beyond that, as followers of another religion, the day has little impact on our lives.
Then there is Christmas. Devised by Christians to celebrate the birth of Jesus, and celebrated in December as an ancient alternative to pagan winter celebrations, it is a holiday (holy day) that is observed by millions of every creed. Sadly, not as a religious holiday, but as a commercial one. Merchants begin the day after Thanksgiving to ply consumers with discounts on virtually every kind of item. And credit lenders salivate as consumers spend more than is sensible as they rabidly jam shops and malls in a kind of gift-giving one-upmanship.
On Christmas Eve, many will jam churches and cathedrals to sing carols, say prayers, and ostensibly celebrate the birth of Jesus. We will see them in the pews again on Easter Sunday. You know, the day the big pink bunny hides the eggs.
Tags: bunny, celebrations, Christmas, commercialism, Easter, Jesus, perversion, religious holidays
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
November 30th, 2009
So said Rush Limbaugh on his radio show last week. Certainly Mr. Limbaugh is entitled to his opinion. It’s guaranteed by the United States Constitution. However, the statement reflects a great deal of incivility and lack of respect for another person, and the office of the president. Rush might disagree with that third one, but to demean the occupant demeans the office.
The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines moron as “usually offensive : a person affected with mild mental retardation” or “a very stupid person.” Whether one agrees with President Obama or his politics, it is inarguable that he got where he is today because he is intelligent, and not a moron.
Today, America is a politically polarized nation. And few seem willing to move toward the center and keep the nation moving. Rather, the prevalence seems to be for everyone, especially politicians, to choose up sides, go to their respective corners, and refuse to budge. Much of this is done in the name of doing what is best for America. Perhaps the nation would be in better shape if everyone were required to read John Stuart Mill’s essay On Liberty. The gist of it is that in any polarized situation both the truth of the matter and the solution lie somewhere in between the polar opposites.
Mr. Limbaugh and others must take responsibility for much of the polarization and incivility in America today. Name calling, when done by a public person of celebrity, which Mr. Limbaugh is, like it or not, empowers others to also engage in name calling and other disruptions. The Tea Baggers are an example.
Only when groups of opposites determine to find common ground and move the nation forward will things get better. Until then there will be Republicans, Democrats and other political parties, conservatives and liberals, and haves and have nots. And America will lose, with everyone pointing the finger of responsibility at others instead of at themselves.
Finally, it seems to me that those who, to win the day, must resort to name-calling instead of honest discussion and debate on any issue are losers, no matter the outcome.
Tags: conservative, liberal, Limbaugh, moron, obama, on liberty, polarization, tea baggers
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
November 30th, 2009
“I was a stranger and you welcomed me.” [Matt. 25:35b]
On the first Sunday of Advent, following second service, I finished a conversation with an Advent member, turned to a couple I didn’t know seated at the same table, extended my hand, and said, “I don’t believe I know you.” Introductions and pleasantries were exchanged. They live in another state, visit Advent once or twice a year, and receive The Scroll. Then the wife said something like, “This is not a friendly church. If it wants to grow, or even replace members who leave, it’s got to be more welcoming. If we hadn’t been here before, we wouldn’t be coming back.”
The lady then went on to explain that the only reason they hadn’t already left was because they had visited Advent before and had been welcomed. They read the Scroll and know us. To be fair, a couple of people in the narthex had greeted them. But in the fellowship hall, while in line for refreshments, and as they made their way to the table, nobody said anything to these obvious strangers.
What if the couple hadn’t visited Advent before? What if they had left? I once heard that it takes at least ten “good jobs” to overcome the effect of one screw up, because people are more likely to share a bad experience than a good one. Perhaps these strangers would have told friends and family in St. Louis about the unfriendly people at Church of the Advent. People love to share bad news and our new reputation could have spread.
It’s difficult for me to start a conversation with people I don’t know. Truly I am a shy person. But this experience has convinced me that all of us need to be sure that every stranger is welcomed at Advent. Not by watching to see if someone else does, but by doing it ourselves. It will be a good experience for the stranger. It will be a good experience for Advent. It will probably be a good experience for ourselves.
At least that’s what I think.
Tags: church of the advent, reputation, strangers, welcome, welcoming
Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
November 21st, 2009
The November 5-11 edition of the St. Louis Riverfront Times (RFT), contains a well-written article by Keegan Hamilton about Andrew Schlafly, fifth son of Phyllis Schlafly, doyenne of American conservatism. It seems that Andrew has decided to rewrite the Bible in order to make it more conservative.
States the RFT article, “’The book itself is not liberal. It’s the modern translations that are increasingly liberal,’ he [Andrew Schlafly] explains. ‘We’d been looking at how the English language has grown since the King James Version came out in 1611. We noticed a lot of new conservative words available to us now that were not available in 1611. We also noticed how each new translation was increasingly liberal, and so we decided to do our own.’” Schlafly particularly does not approve of the style of the gender-neutral New International Version, seemingly preferring the more traditional masculine-oriented versions of the past, the words of Galatians 3:28 notwithstanding (“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” KJV).
The article is available at http://www.riverfronttimes.com/2009-11-04/news/hallowed-be-thy-name-member-schlafly-clan-lord-work-cleansing-bible-liberal-bias. It is important to read the entire article. Schlafly sees biblical scholars as liberals trying to make the Bible into something it isn’t. On the contrary, biblical scholars are very conscientious about producing a translation based on the ever-increasing understanding of ancient languages and history. Schlafly doesn’t agree.
The Conservative Bible project may be viewed at http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservative_Bible. This is a work in progress and appears to be largely an effort to improve the traditional King James Version of the Bible, without including any liberal bias.
I am puzzled by at least one verse in Mr. Schlafly’s Bible. His Bible translates Genesis 1:27 as “So God created mankind in His image. In the image of God He created mankind; He created them both male and female.” God created male mankind and female mankind (a seeming contradiction) in His (God’s) image. If males are created in God’s image, and females are created in God’s image, what does God look like? And if God is both male and female, why do we refer to God as Him, He, etc.? Perhaps God is gender-neutral? Or perhaps God has been made in our image to make us more comfortable?
Tags: andrew schlafly, Bible, conservapedia, conservative, conservative bible project, liberal, phyllis schlafly, translation
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
October 13th, 2009
I’ve been following the story of Zachary Christie, the 6 year old excited new member of the Cub Scouts, who brought his new utility knife (which also has a fork and spoon)to school to share with others.
Unfortunately Zachary’s school has a zero tolerance policy on any knives. According to the New York Times, Zachary faces 45 days in reform school for the violation. The school’s policy was put into place to avoid any claims of discrimination or favoritism.
Zachary probably didn’t realize he was breaking a rule. Forty-five days is an eternity to a six year old. An eternity in reform school can probably do more damage than good to a six year old’s psyche. Dumb rule!
In ancient times when I was six years old, we proudly carried our Scout knives in our pockets — at school. It was a status symbol. Today a six year old is deemed in need of 45 days in reform school for doing the same thing. Wacko!
What I wonder is what is being done about the root causes in our wrinkled social fabric that caused the school to implement the policy in the first place. Probably not much. That’s what’s really wacko!!
If you want to follow Zachary’s story, go to www.HelpZachary.com.
Tags: 45, christie, days, knife, reform, school, zachary
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »
September 29th, 2009
Do you ever come home from work, look at what’s in the refrigerator and the cupboards and wonder, “What am I going to fix for dinner?”
My friend, Kim, sent me a URL to check out: www.supercook.com. Check it out. A person makes a list of things that they have on hand. Then they enter them on supercook.com. Presto! Within seconds, as more and more items are entered, supercook.com comes up with more and more recipes that can be prepared from the ingredients listed.
Instead of a bland one-item meal, something tasty and different can be created in the same amount of time.
Bon appétit!
Tags: food, leftovers, super cook, supercook
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
September 29th, 2009
. . . but not too good! A stay-at-home mom in Michigan let’s the children of her friends wait for no more than an hour at her home for the school bus. Evidently a neighbor complained. Now the social services people in Michigan have written to the well-intentioned mother to tell her that if she continues she may face a fine or even jail. She’s accused of running a child care center without a license.
The mother makes an offer to her working-mom friends. They accept the offer. The State of Michigan says no, the children cannot wait inside the mother’s home.
The mother asked what the children were to do if it’s raining.
“Give ‘em an umbrella,” was the curt reply.
To her credit, the mom continues to open her door to the children of her friends, despite the threat of legal action by the State of Michigan.
Sounds like some bureaucrat is on a power trip. Or, the state delights in intruding into the private lives of the citizens.
But what about the person who complained? I wonder what they told the state was going on. Shame on that curmudgeonly soul.
Tags: childcare, children, Michigan, neighbor, safety
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »