The Least of These Brothers

Almost nothing could be further from the truth than the misconception that people who are poor are also suffering and unhappy.

Growing up, I shared a bedroom with four brothers. My four sisters shared another bedroom. We all slept in beds that were built by my dad. Those of us who weren’t assigned hand-me-down clothes to wear, wore cheap mail order clothes, two new shirts and two new pants a year. When we outgrew the clothes we were wearing, the clothes were passed down to a younger brother or sister or turned into rags when the holes become more prominent than the material. Clothes that become rags were still valuable for cleaning around the house. Most of what we owned could be used for more than one purpose.

We ate potatoes for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. My mom had more recipes for potatoes than Forrest Gumps’ friend Bubba had for shrimp. Our Sunday treat was a roasted hen with dumplings made from white flour and chicken fat. Often while eating a meal, my parents told us the very same stories as every other parent in our neighborhood told their children about walking three miles to school and eating everything on our plate so the children in China wouldn’t starve to death.

Very few of my childhood memories include memories of unhappiness and almost none of my memories include suffering. I probably suffered more in my first week of Marine Corps boot camp than I suffered in my first eighteen years of life. Like everyone else, with or without money, I sometimes wanted things that were not affordable to my family. I learned to accept the fact that the gratification that I desired usually needed to be delayed longer than some of my friends had to wait and sometimes even delayed indefinitely, but I never walked around unhappy because waiting seemed normal. This experience as a child has served me well as an adult.

However, once I started school, I began to get the feeling that those people with money thought they were better and better off than those of us without money. As a child, I wondered if the people with money were right, and for a while I even started to believe that they were superior to me and my family because of their monetary wealth. Then I had one of those light-bulb-turning-on moments.

Around the time I was ten years old, we had a neighbor who couldn’t get his television to work. None of our neighbors could be considered wealthy, but this was a neighbor with one of the better jobs and bigger houses in our neighborhood. The neighbor came and asked my dad if he would take a look at the television and figure out why it didn’t work. My dad took the television apart and discovered that a couple of the vacuum tubes needed to be replaced. After my dad replaced the tubes and put the television back together, my neighbor opened his wallet, pulled out a five dollar bill, which is probably equivalent to eighty dollars today, and started to hand it to my dad.

I almost yelled “alright” out loud. I knew what an extra five dollars would mean to my family. But my dad wouldn’t take the money from my neighbor. He told our neighbor to put the money back in his pocket. My dad said he would not even consider taking money for something he did for a neighbor. Later in the evening, the oldest daughter of the neighbor knocked on our door with the five dollars in her hand. She told my dad that her dad wanted him to take the money. My dad took the five dollars, walked back across the street, and returned the money to our neighbor.

At first, my brothers and sisters and I couldn’t believe what our dad had just done. But the more I thought about what had happened, the more I understood. Better, better off, superior, and inferior didn’t have anything to do with size of a bank account, the number of possessions, or the value of possessions. Better, better off, superior, and inferior however did have everything to do with the size of the character of a person. I went to sleep that night knowing I was one of the wealthiest kids in the whole neighborhood.

When Jesus says, “whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me”, he isn’t usually talking about people with money sharing their money with people who don’t have money. The “least” Jesus is talking about is the person who has a need that we, as neighbors, can help alleviate. The need is rarely a monetary need. The need is much more often a need to see someone else living a life of Christian values through sacrificial actions. Many of the needy (the least), have very large bank accounts, but are still in severe sprirtual need. I will get to this point in a future post.

My dad wasn’t a perfect man by any stretch of the imagination. He had a temper that sometimes went over the top, but he also had a reputation as a truly good man; a reputation that had nothing to do with the lack of money he made, the simple house he owned, or the causes he failed to advocate. When he died of cancer in 1972, he didn’t leave his family with any money because he never earned much money, but he did leave us wealthy.

In my next post, I will adress what happens to the financially poor when they are incorectly treeated as “the least of these brothers of mine”.

(Mis)Understanding the Poor

I suspect that many of the advocates for the poor, including the organizers and promoters of the ONE Campaign, have never been poor and don’t really understand what it is like to be poor. There are at least two main reasons why people with money don’t understand the lives of people without money.

The first main reason why the wealthy are misinformed about poverty is the same as why people are misinformed on most issues. The news media, particularly the major networks and newspapers, present an unbalanced view of poverty. In mainstream media reports, the poor are always depicted as needy, helpless, and abused by the uncaring wealthy, which is true in some situations, but completely false and misrepresented by the media in most situations.

The second main reason has to do with feelings about money. People born into wealth, people who have spent a lifetime working to acquire wealth, and people with big ambitions, place a disproportionate amount of importance on wealth, including possessions, activities, and everything else that can be purchased with money. Similar feelings about money are true for some of the poor, but the vast majority of the people who are poor have other priorities besides wealth and the trappings of wealth. People who are wealthy may not understand how money can be unimportant to others, or even believe that money is unimportant to others, but for most of the poor, poverty is a choice; a logical, moral, and good choice.

Misconceptions wealthy people have about poor people can cause all sorts of unintended problems for the poor people when the wealthy people, either out of guilt or misplaced compassion, decide to use their wealth, power, and influence to try to help the poor people. Guilt and compassion can lead to the right behavior when the behavior is based on the truth and not the misconception. Therefore, it is vitally important for the wealthy people to know the truth and start to change how they view and treat the poor.

In my next post, I will address and correct some of these misconceptions.

You Did For Me

“I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.”

“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”

As a follower of Jesus Christ and as someone who believes that Jesus Christ is God, I don’t have an option or even a decision to make about how I treat anyone who is less fortunate than me. What I do for those less fortunate than myself, and what I fail to do for those less fortunate than myself, I do or fail to do to God himself. My obligation to the poor and my behavioral standard, as prescribed by Jesus Christ himself, is to treat others the way I would want to be treated.

I’m sure God wants all of us to do the right things for the right reasons. One of my daily prayers is to ask God to give me a heart after his heart. I want to care about what he cares about. However, I am just as certain that God has a higher standard for our actions than he does for our hearts. In the passages I quoted, Jesus emphasizes what we do to others, not how we feel about ourselves or how we feel about others. He is prescribing the right behavior, not the right feelings.

Most believers are in agreement with me about the poor. Practically every Christian Church is involved in charity. We all believe in helping the poor. However, the ONE Campaign and the supporters of this campaign have really opened my eyes to the damage that is being done to the poor by Christians in the name of Christ. A large number of Christians, including prominent Christian leaders, have elevated their feelings about helping the poor way above the correct actions to really help the poor.

In my next few posts, I will elaborate on the causes and solutions to poverty and address what I consider to be misconceptions about poverty.

ONE Questions

After methodically working his way through most of the issues regarding the ONE Campaign, Pastor Mark Roberts made some questionable statements in this entry as he continues to reflect on the goals of the ONE Campaign.

Throughout his series, Pastor Roberts has been asking his readers to consider various Bible passages as well as the practical implications of the methods and goals of the ONE Campaign. He has thrown his support behind the goals of the ONE Campaign, while remaining neutral on the methods. He has asked many good questions, but let his readers draw their own conclusions regarding the ONE Campaign methods. Today, I have a few questions for Pastor Roberts that came to my mind after reading his piece that I summarized yesterday.

Pastor Roberts, since you claim that it is terribly easy for Americans, most of whom live far removed from the horrors of poverty, to minimize what is surely the most horrible problem in our world today; isn’t it just as easy for Americans who live far removed from the people who are labeled as poor to over emphasize the horrors of poverty? Why can’t a moral person choose to be poor? Why can’t a poor person choose to be left alone?

Pastor Roberts, since you claim that widespread poverty in our world is unacceptable and that it is simply wrong that there are so many poor people on this earth; what is the right number of people who should be poor? Also, exactly what does it mean to be poor?

Pastor Roberts, why do you take the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Bread for the World at their word when both organizations have a vested interest in separating tax payers from their money? Is six million children dying each year and two billion people who are chronically malnourished the truth? One out of every three people on earth are chronically malnourished? Where do they get the energy to reproduce?

Pastor Roberts, why do you assume that people who live in relative luxury have little concern for the poor since most of the ONE Campaign organizers, promoters, and spokespeople are some of the wealthiest people on our planet? Is it possible the wealthy are too far removed from the problem to understand the real solution to the problem? Is it possible that people like Bono are using their fame and influence to force us to make poverty throughout the world worse? Is it possible that the poor need to be protected from the wealth and influence of people like Bono? Is it possible God wants the poor protected from the powerful people like Bono?

Pastor Roberts, do you really believe that poverty which is often a result of choices, but not always, is a bigger problem for the world than terrorists who blow up themselves along with innocent people who have no choice? Aren’t there certain degrees of culpability for those who are poor? Is a child dying of malnutrition the same as a hungry terrorist? Is a child suffering from malnutrition the same as an adult suffering from malnutrition? Is there a difference between suffering and extreme suffering? Is a hungry person who can work the same as a hungry person who is disabled? Does discernment matter in regards to Global poverty or is everyone who claims to be hungry a victim?

Pastor Roberts, why do you assume that most of us are self centered and would rather not think about poverty? Would you believe that many of us think about poverty all of the time? Would you believe that some of us have thought about poverty for over 40 years and some even longer? Did you know that the picture you showed on your site is similar to pictures that have been used for over 50 years for nothing more than eliciting a guilt response?

Pastor Roberts, did you not know that paying less for imported goods is helping to solve the problem of poverty throughout the world? Why would you want to stop doing something that is actually solving the problem in favor of something that would only make the problem worse?

Bad ONE

In his series addressing the purpose and methods of Bono and the ONE Campaign, Pastor Mark Roberts has been very supportive of the goals of this organization while questioning some of the methods. I have been a little surprised by his reluctance or unwillingness to make definitive statements regarding the methods of ONE, but I have been very impressed by the way he has thought through most of the major issues regarding this cause and by the questions he has asked his readers to consider.

Today however, I was disappointed to see him making definitive statements about matters I consider to be very debatable since he has shown reluctance in the past to make definitive statements regarding matters that are far less debatable. In his latest entry titled Why the ONE Campaign is So Important, Pastor Roberts makes some assertions that need to be scrutinized, and not just digested as truth.

Pastor Roberts starts his piece by making the claim that poverty is the most horrible problem in our world today and that the suffering caused by poverty is greater than the suffering caused by all other global problems. Terrorism and the differences between Muslims and the rest of the world are the two other problems he lists. He bases this belief on a claim by a United Nations organization that hunger and malnutrition are killing almost six million children each hear and a claim by a Christian lobbying organization that two billion people throughout the world are chronically malnourished.

For three straight pieces Pastor Roberts has questioned the wisdom of using tax money to combat world hunger, but today he didn’t see a problem in using a figure supplied by an organization that has a sole purpose of extracting tax money from tax payers to support the cause of global hunger.

He then goes on to make the following statement:

Of course we can and should debate the root causes of poverty, and work on eradicating these. But I would add my small voice to chorus of people who are saying that, no matter what causes poverty, the fact of widespread poverty in our world is unacceptable. It's simply wrong that there are so many poor people on this earth. The wrong is made even more obvious by the fact that many of us live in relatively luxury, often with very little awareness of or concern for the poor.

Following this statement, Pastor Roberts credits the ONE Campaign with reversing the lack of awareness of poverty and he also praises Bono for using his fame and influence to force us to think about that which we’d rather avoid. Pastor Roberts then states his belief that global poverty needs to be a much more prominent feature of American concern and conversation and he finishes with this paragraph:

I realize this might sound overly idealistic. Okay, fine. I admit that most of us are self-centered, and that we'd rather not bother about poverty on the other side of the globe, especially if taking it seriously might require us to make certain sacrifices, like paying more for imported goods, or buying fewer designer shoes (not my weakness) or electronic gizmos (my weakness). Nevertheless, I believe that it would be possible for millions upon millions of Americans to become committed to the cause of eliminating global poverty. I say this, in part, because I believe many Americans have, underneath a shell of selfishness, generous hearts. The more they realize the human cost of poverty, the more they will want to help. Moreover, around 150 million American claim to acknowledge biblical authority. This means, in principle, that there are a whole lot of folks in our country who could be persuaded to join the war on poverty with their prayers, their activism, and their giving.

In my next few pieces, I will have some questions for Pastor Roberts regarding some of his statements and claims as well as a few definitive statements of my own.

More ONE

Pastor Roberts continues his fair and balanced evaluation of the goals and methods of the ONE Campaign here, here, and here .

His analysis asks many good questions and raises just as many valid concerns. I was hoping for more definitive answers from him, but I am grateful for the way he has systematically thought through the major issues regarding ONE.

2 Good Questions

Mark Steyn asks a couple of very good questions:

* Is abortion in society's interest?

* Can a society become more Muslim in its demographic character without also becoming more Muslim in its political and civil character?

Solution to Poverty

As a systems analyst and computer programmer, it is my job to solve software problems. I get paid to design and code system enhancements and solutions to software problems. In order to learn my trade, I had to take a few college level computer programming classes, ask lots of questions, and make more than a few mistakes. Before long and with a little experience, I was able to learn the difference between a temporary solution that appears to fix a problem, but in reality only prolongs a problem, and solution that actually fixes a problem permanently. Sometimes, the permanent solution takes a little more effort and a little more time up front, but in the long run, it saves time and effort.

I now have enough experience that I don’t have to start from scratch to analyze and solve a problem. I know what will work because a solution that has worked in the past will always work to solve a similar problem. Experience has reduced my rate of trial and error and increased my rate of immediate success in designing software solutions. However, I would not be able to design the right solution if I was not able to make the right analysis. More lines of computer code will not solve a software problem without the proper analysis and the right solution.

Poverty throughout some parts of the world including Africa is a real problem. Just as in software development, in order to solve the problem of poverty, we need to make the right analysis of what has caused African poverty, and then implement the right solution to the problem.

The poverty in Africa is not caused, has never been caused, and never will be caused by too little money or resources for the poor. It takes very little money to grow crops and raise livestock. The poor in Africa do not need more money from western governments. More money will not solve the problem of poverty in Africa because the problem of poverty in Africa is not caused by a lack of resources in Africa. Poverty in Africa is caused by the control and abuse of citizens by corrupt governments. Money from western governments will only make the problems worse.

The solution to poverty in Africa and other parts of the world does not require any more trial and error. Enough mistakes have already been made to know what will not solve the problem of African poverty. The redistribution of wealth will not all of a sudden start working in the future because it has never worked in the past no matter how many times it has been tried.

However, we do know from experience exactly what will work to solve the problem of African poverty. The problem of poverty is always solved by freedom. Free people making free choices about what to own, what to sell, where to work, how hard to work; and just as importantly, when, where, and how to give. With the exception of the mentally disabled and some physically disabled, people really can care for most of their own needs. Freedom works every time, past, present, and future to solve the problem of poverty.

God and the Poor

Pastor Roberts is stretching out his series on Bono and ONE and keeping me nervous. Although I'm not sure why. So far, everything he has written has been excellent. Here is his latest entry.

Pastor Left Turn

I am often chastised by my lovely wife for having a style of communication that is inappropriately caustic. On occasion, she does have a point. However, this post by Steve Camp about Rick Warren and Global Warming takes sarcasm to an entirely new level. It makes me feel downright amiable. It is also astute and well worth reading.

Know ONE

Mark Roberts, Senior Pastor at Irvine Presbyterian Church and blogger extraordinaire is one of the most balanced thinkers and writers on the Internet. I admire how he is able to incorporate multiple perspectives into everything he writes. He is a recognized authority on Scripture and a model of temperance and fairness. I don't necessarily completely change an opinion based on his explanations, but I do always rethink, and usually modify, an opinion when he presents an explanation that conflicts with my own beliefs. I am extremely grateful for him, his dedication to truth, and his blog.

For the last three days, Pastor Roberts has been writing about the sermon Bono gave to the invited guests at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington D.C. on February 3rd. So far, his remarks have been very complimentary towards Bono. His pieces can be found here, here, and here. I’m sure there will be several more to follow. I can hardly wait!

I have been reading this series with some nervousness and trepidation though since it is also an analysis of the ONE Campaign that I have previously criticized here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

I want to know exactly what Pastor Roberts believes, but I also want him to articulate a position that is similar to my own and I don’t want to have to rethink this matter [Pride - Of course I will give this matter more thought based on Pastor Roberts remarks.] I have been convinced from the start of the ONE campaign that it is just a repackaging of the same failed policies that have created and perpetuated the poverty and problems that currently exist in Africa.

The goals of the ONE Campaign sure seem to be Biblical, but the methods are the antithesis of an application based on Biblical principles. Taking from some and giving to others is wrong. The circumstances of the person doing the taking (government), the circumstances of the person being robbed (tax-payers), and the purpose of the theft (African Poverty) are all irrelevant.

The West Can't Save Africa

The West Can't Save Africa:

"The West's focus on sensational tragedies obscures the achievements of people such as Patrick Awuah and Robert Keter, who are succeeding even against tremendous odds. Economic development in Africa will depend -- as it has elsewhere and throughout the history of the modern world -- on the success of private-sector entrepreneurs, social entrepreneurs and African political reformers. It will not depend on the activities of patronizing, bureaucratic, unaccountable and poorly informed outsiders.

Development everywhere is homegrown. As G-8 ministers and rock stars fussed about a few billion dollars here or there for African governments, the citizens of India and China (where foreign aid is a microscopic share of income) were busy increasing their own incomes by $715 billion in 2005."

The Olympics Need...

"How she avoided marrying John Daly, we will never know."

Evangelical Leaders Join Global Warming Initiative

I had a smile on my face all the way to work this morning. Today felt like it was going to be a great day. Then I do a little early morning surfing and find out that 86 evangelical Leaders are encouraging congress to take legislative action to reduce global warming.

You can read more about the busy body's here.

Is it time for Christians to start boycotting Evangelical Churches? Just where are we supposed to go to Church when our leaders become part of the politically correct class in America?

My Blessing

My six-year-old daughter and I have been playing golf on weekends at a nine hole executive course in Long Beach for several months, but we still go to the driving range on an 18 hole course that has a waterfall on the first hole. She has been begging me to play the course with the waterfall, but I haven't thought she was anywhere near ready, so I told her that once she pars one of the holes on the executive course, I would take her to the waterfall course to play. Her best score ever on a single hole at the executive course was a five, so I didn't expect her to make a three for quite some time.

Last Sunday we were playing a round at the executive course. I had to fuss at her a few times on a couple of the beginning holes because she wasn't focusing on her shots enough. My fussing made her mad and she started crying which made me wonder if we should be playing together on a course at all.

When we arrived at the sixth tee, she looked at me and reminded me that I had to take her to the waterfall course if she made a three. I acknowledged to her I would, so she turned around and stuck her tee in the ground and hit one of the most beautiful shots I have ever seen. The flag was about 80 yards from the tee. Her shot was slightly down hill and down wind. I knew from the moment she struck the ball and I heard a distinctive ding that it was a great shot and would probably be on the green.

Her ball hit right in front of the green, bounced up, and then started rolling right toward the hole. It looked like her ball actually had a chance to go in the hole and it would have if my yelling could have influenced the roll at all, but in the end it trickled inches by the hole and came to rest about four feet from the flag. She proceeded to miss her birdie by another few inches and then tapped in for a par.

There are moments in life that defy logic. I don’t know how my daughter managed to hit the best shot of her life at exactly the right moment when she knew she had the best opportunity to get what she wanted. Coincidence? Perhaps! I wouldn’t believe it happened if I didn’t see it myself.

Last night she turned into a Gremlin before bedtime as she sometimes does and we both returned to earth. Today, I made a tee time for the course with the waterfall. I still wish the moment could have lasted forever.

Update: The round at SkyLinks (Waterfall Course) was fun. We managed to play 16 holes before dark. There wasn’t very many golfers on the course after the Super Bowl started. The little one had a 5, 7, 7, and 18 on the par threes. Her other holes ranged from 9 to 17 with a 13 on a tough par five. I think I’ll keep her.

Revolution?

Tod Bolsinger has been commenting at his blog about the book Revolution by George Barna. Revolution describes the large number of Christians who don’t consider the local Church essential to Christianity. Like Tod, I consider this a very bad trend in Christianity. Unlike Tod, I am one of the Christians who have been dropping out of the local Church. I hate not being a member of a local Church almost as much as I hate being a member of a Local Church.

I think Biblical Christianity consists of “fitting in” and “standing out”. The two go together and are inseparable. When either the “fitting in” or the “standing out” are overemphasized at the expense of the other, the body of Christ is weakened. However, I can completely understand why strong Christians are leaving the local Church and going it alone out of discouragement and frustration.

From my perspective, part of the problem is the over controlling nature and the under performing example of many Pastors. Tod seems to be the exception, not the rule. He has the mentality and spirit of a true shepherd. When Pastors don’t have what it takes to lead by example, the local Church becomes just another social organization. Most of us have unlimited resources for proper exegesis. We can’t benefit as much from a Pastor who can explain a passage as we can benefit from a Pastor who lives a passage. Most Churches choose a Pastor based on the former and not the latter.

Update: Steve also makes some excellent points regarding this trend. He is right; other believers and I do need to be members of a local Church.

Cowards

As I browse through various news pieces recently, I keep reading this exact phrase:

“… official spoke on condition of anonymity because the official is not authorized to speak publicly."

Apparently the Associated Press has developed a “cut and paste” way of telling a story that may or may not have legitimate sources or our government officials want to disseminate information without having to take responsibility for the poor information that is disseminated.

I suspect the Associated Press is using this same verbiage to describe both scenarios. This type of reporting is not acceptable to me. It is no different than spreading rumors. News consumers need to know the names of sources and government officials need to take responsibility for their comments.

It is no wonder our government is mostly inept. Our press and our public officials are complete cowards.

Good Looks and the Right Message

It sure is encouraging to know that good looks can overcome wrong politics/religion when it comes to getting face time on TV.

Don't believe me; how else did this guy make it?

onepeat.com

TDACSATASWI

Team Donars and Corporate Sponsors Against Talking About Skiing While Intoxicated

Either Americans are suffering from way too much prosperity or the evil spirit busy-body has gained control.

Memo

Inter blogsphere Memo

Date: 1/10/2006

To: GodBloggers

From: Contrarian Views

RE: Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, et al.

There is no need to disassociate yourself from comments made by televangelists, church leaders, and Para-church ministry leaders every time their comments are reported in the Mainstream Media. Everyone knows these folks don’t speak for you anymore than Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, or Jimmy Carter speaks for you. You are giving the Mainstream Media, the comments, and the reports of the comments, much more attention than they deserve.

Is American Girl a pro-abortion company?

My daughters love the American Girl dolls and the American Girl website. Our purchases have been limited, but by buying American Girl dolls, we have inadvertently supported abortion rights.

John J. Miller on National Review Online has the story.

Raw Deal

There was a time when I thought Pete Wilson and Bill Clinton were the poster boys for stick-a-wet-finger-in-the-air politician.

Arnold almost makes those two look like Alan Keyes.

Artist In Residence

Warrant Officer Mike Fay at Fire and Ice is the Artist in Residence for the United States Marine Corp. Unlike me, and most other soldiers, he has a brain where both sides fire on all cylinders.

Free to Drink and Drive

Every time I listened to the radio for the last two weeks I heard at least one warning about the danger and associated punishment for drinking and driving. The message I heard over and over again was that if a person chooses to drink and drive, the full coercive power of government will be used to punish the offender in ways that will make the offenders’ life miserable for many years. One News story even mentioned a new law in Tennessee that requires first time offenders’ convicted of drunk driving to do 24 hours of roadside cleanup wearing an orange vest emblazoned with the phrase, “I am a Drunk Driver”.

I can think of many crimes where reasonable people can disagree over the social harm of an offense or the appropriate punishment for a person convicted of a particular crime, but I can’t think of any other civil offense other than DUI where someone can be severely punished for a crime that hasn’t harmed anyone. Even hate crimes based on political correctness have offenders and victims. I may be in a very small minority this time, but DUI laws don’t seem appropriate in a country founded on freedom.

Military chaplains told to shy from Jesus

It's too bad the military needs to be part of the culture war in the middle of the war on terror.

This story is discouraging.

"I am a Navy chaplain being fired because I pray in Jesus' name," said Navy Lt. Gordon Klingenschmitt, who will be holding 6 p.m. prayer vigils daily in Lafayette Park.

The hunger strike is intended to persuade President Bush to issue an executive order allowing military chaplains to pray according to their individual faith traditions. The American Center for Law and Justice has gathered 173,000 signatures on a petition seeking an executive order.

Seventy-three members of Congress have joined the request, saying in an Oct. 25 letter to the president, "In all branches of the military, it is becoming increasingly difficult for Christian chaplains to use the name of Jesus when praying."

Gallup Poll Finds Americans' Belief in God Remains Strong

According to a new Gallup Poll, Americans' Belief in God Remains Strong. 94% think God exists. (HT:Drudge Report)

Thinking Right or Acting Left

Suppose those on the political right started thinking and legislating like those on the political left. Activities and beliefs that are considered harmful by those on the right would be taxed and regulated and activities that are considered virtuous by those on the right would be subsidized.

Research Grants would be funded by the government for every college and university that developed and promoted research programs into methods, tools, and nutritional supplements for creating more effective soldiers and more effective battlefield techniques. Institutions of higher learning would be shown preference based on the political beliefs of their professors. Additional awards would be based on the success of a developed technique that resulted in the actual assassination of a high ranking terrorist leader.

Abortion would technically remain legal, like cigarettes and guns, but would only be performed by a licensed abortion practitioner who was required to pay a majority of the fee for service in taxes and only after a considerable waiting period. The taxes would be increased every year to pay for public service announcements that condemned the abortionists and their victims. Children in public schools would be taught the evils of abortion and required to sign a pledge promising to never partake in such an evil act.

Couples who get married before living together would be given funds from the Federal government for a down payment on their first house. Those couples who are members of a licensed Church would be given an additional 25% to furnish the house. Child Care, transportation, education, and ancillary expenses would be paid by the government for each child until the child becomes an adult as long as the couple stays married and are members of a Church. Sunday morning employees of Fox News would get an exception to the Church rule.

Unmarried adults who impregnate or become pregnant would be required to pay a significant tax penalty as well as enter a sensitivity class that stresses the societal importance of marriage. The children of unmarried couples would be taught about the harmful effects of single parenthood in our public schools. The unmarried adult parents would retain no rights to object to the educational curriculum of their children.

Every adult would be required to own a gun. No exceptions, except for felons, who would be in jail and have no use for a gun for protection anyway. Those adults who could not afford to buy their own gun, would be supplied a gun and a sufficient amount of ammunition from the government.

PBS would be required to document the sacrifices being made by medium income Americans in order to pay the taxes that fund welfare and other transfer of wealth government programs. In addition, PBS would also have to report on an itemized account of how many funds go to the recipients of welfare and how many funds are absorbed into the government bureaucracy.

Every adult with the last name of Kennedy, and every adult related to a Kennedy, would be required to pay an additional 15% Income Tax for disgracing the name of a great President. Robert Kennedy Jr. would be required to pay double.

As a person who values freedom and truth above all else, I would not support any of these measures to attain a social benefit because the cost of coercion would be too morally expensive and out way the benefits of the outcome. However, I do wish those on the left cared more about truth and freedom even if they disagree with me on everything else.

Belief in Evolution

Tom Bethell has just written a great piece on the debate over Intelligent Design and the scientific problem with Darwinian evolution. Read Don't Fear the Designer

Old Problem Example

In RealClearPolitics - Commentary - How GM Failed to Meet the Challenge Robert Samuelson gives a perfect example of the old problem.

"In 1921, Ford had 60 percent of U.S. car sales. GM overtook Ford because ``the old master (Henry Ford) had failed to master change,'' Sloan wrote. Ford stuck too long with the Model T, conceived as cheap transportation for everyman. But the advent of used car sales satisfied consumers wanting ``basic transportation,'' while new-car buyers demanded more comfort and performance. GM offered a full line of cars (Chevrolets, Buicks and Cadillacs) at different prices."

The Old Problem

Young organizations with younger people tend to be more innovative, quicker to change and adapt, and more prone to quick failure. Old organizations with older people tend to be more stable, slower to change and adapt, and more prone to slow failure. This is true of political organizations, business organizations, and church organizations. Young organizations have problems assessing the risk associated with specific actions or policies. Risk ignorance sometimes results in great success and sometimes results in great failure. Old organizations have problems taking an action involving any risk. Risk knowledge sometimes results in avoiding mistakes, but often results in missing opportunities.

The United States has always enjoyed an advantage over Europe because we have been a younger country with a higher percentage of younger people and a greater willingness to take calculated risks. However, as more and more baby boomers in America reach retirement and start to prefer stability to innovation, the American advantage over Europe will start to erode. Also, as more and more of India’s, Brazil’s, and China’s younger population start to realize opportunity and achieve success without migrating to America, the United States will cease to be the country of innovation and leadership.

The best hope for the United States would be for our government to allow more legal immigration. America has vast amounts of unused land, resources, infrastructure, and laws, that would allow the process to be transparent to the daily lives of most Americans, but beneficial to the long term prospects of both the immigrants and current Americans. Imagine all of the opportunities if we were to build new schools, hospitals, businesses, churches, parks, sport and activity centers, and communities all with wireless internet access.

There is a big problem though. Our government, our political parties, many of our people, and a lot of our ideas have become old and risk averse. At a time when we need new people, new ideas, and new organizations, the old people in old organizations with old ideas want to slow down and stop immigration.

Wouldn’t it be better for America if new jobs were done by new Americans in America than by Chinese in China? Wouldn’t it be better for democracy and freedom if new businesses were created in America by new Americans than by Socialists in China? Wouldn’t it be better for the Gospel if new Churches were formed in America by new Americans than by Chinese who face imprisonment for conducting a Church service? Wouldn’t it be better for America if a new political party with new ideas gained a little traction?

As much as I like President Bush, and as much as I think the only realistic hope for positive progress in America is with the Republican Party, I sure wish there was another alternative that wasn’t so old.

Quitting Too Soon

I once heard a statement declaring that many people deny themselves a chance for success because they give up too soon. In contrast, there is a contemporary belief that to continue to do what you have always done and expect different results is a sign of idiocy. Both concepts seem to be true on first thought. However, both concepts can’t be completely true because of the conflict between the two. One of these concepts could be mostly true and the other concept mostly false or both concepts could be partially true and partially false.

There seems to be many people who give up before achieving a goal, but there are also many people who die before accomplishing their plans. There are also many people who work and sacrifice most of their life in order to realize a small success while others seem to luck into wealth, success, and achievement early in life without much effort at all.

The conflict in Iraq has attracted the attention of the proponents of the “don’t give up too soon” and the “it’s lunacy to continue” ideas. While the conflict in Iraq is of supreme national and historic importance, it still becomes a decision based on the price America is willing to pay to achieve the results we desire. As long as the results are adequate for the price we are paying, the national consensus will be to continue. When there does not appear to be any results or the results are minimal, the national consensus will be to end the lunacy.

As someone who rarely quits once I establish a goal, I am thankful for the recent good news concerning Abu Musab al Zarqawi. We could use more good news like this because I would hate for the American military to leave Iraq too soon.

Mixed Messages

My little girls aren’t so little anymore. They don’t just hear the things my wife and I tell them anymore, they also interpret what we tell them. One of my themes for them is the importance of being appropriately kind to everyone, not just their friends. On the drive to school a few weeks ago, I was reminding my oldest daughter to remember to consider the feelings of everyone who will be affected by one of her decisions before making a the final decision. Her reply to me was that her mommy told her to quit worrying so much about others. Oh boy, talk about mixed messages.

My wife was trying to teach her to be independent, which is also of extreme importance to me, but the message came across to her as an encouragement to be selfish. My girls can jabber until my ears hurt. Yet, this was a good lesson and a reminder for me to always listen to what they are saying when they are talking. It’s not enough for us to teach our children morals. We need feedback to understand all that we are teaching them, so we can correct our mistakes before a wrong lesson becomes permanent.

Why The Morning-After Pill Is Pro-Life

In RealClearPolitics - Commentary - Why The Morning-After Pill Is Pro-Life Steve Chapman makes a Pro-Life case for why Plan B should be approved by the FDA.

Is Wal-Mart a Problem?

John Stossel is one of the few clear thinkers in Big Media.

In "RealClearPolitics - Commentary - Is Wal-Mart a Problem? by John Stossel" he makes the case for Wal-Mart and simple economics.

Individuals

It seems to me that there are many Christian writers and leaders who use the words “community” and “relationships” interchangeably. I don’t think the meanings of the words are the same. The more I hear and read the word “relationship”, the more I am convinced it is a word that doesn’t have a meaning, or at least a clear meaning. I have a relationship with God, a relationship with my wife, and a relationship with the chair I am sitting on, but the three have very little in common and how I relate to each of the three is very different. If I had my way, the word “relationship” would be stricken from the Christian vocabulary along with the word “just”.

Communities are groups of individuals and organizations who voluntarily cooperate in a way that is mutually beneficial. When an individual chooses to purchase bread from a baker instead of baking his or her own bread, the baker and the buyer are both rewarded; the buyer saves time and usually money, and the baker earns additional income. The baker and the buyers form a community of dependence, where both are giving and both are getting. Healthy Churches are very similar. In a healthy Church community, there is a balance between giving and getting.

Unfortunately, many Churches struggle to achieve a balance between giving and getting. These Churches usually have a small percentage of givers trying to serve a larger percentage of getters. Eventually, some form of temporary balance is achieved, but the constant struggle to maintain the balance always remains. Churches with the highest percentage of independent individuals will have less trouble achieving the balance because of the lower percentage of needy individuals who are a burden to others. One of the goals of ministry should be to minister in a way that moves individuals from a position of dependence on others to a position of independence so they will no longer be a burden, but become a servant and a contributing member of a community.

Each of us have a different quotient for how much individuality we can sustain, just as we each have a different quotient for how much compromise and cooperation we can sustain. Within a healthy Church community there is room for those with high individuality quotient, a low individuality quotient, a high cooperation quotient, and a low cooperation quotient. Those with no individuality quotient or no cooperation quotient are the burdens to a healthy Church community. I know there are many today who look at Church and society and see too much individualism. I’m not one of them. I look at Church and society today and see way too much dependence on others in ways that are unnecessarily burdensome. In my view, this is an unhealthy trend.

Culture

Most Christians consider fundamentalism to be a slightly warped or extreme form of Christian belief. However, fifty years ago the fundamentalists were mainstream American Christians. Nowadays, they seem odd because they have diligently preserved the cultural Christianity of 1950 and refused to adapt to an evolving culture. By holding on to a fading culture, fundamentalists have almost completely lost the ability to influence our present culture.

Every Church in America has it’s own culture. Churches that experience growth in early years are usually able to appeal to a cultural segment of seekers and believers who are not being served by traditional Churches. However, as Churches age, they tend to preserve their original culture, sometimes becoming mainstream and then eventually passé. The fundamentalists are an obvious example of this process, but the process is not limited to the fundamentalists; all Churches go through these stages. Churches that invest in timeless architecture might be a slight exception, but it is still rare to find a thriving older Church even when the Church buildings are able to attract new members.

Christian principles and beliefs are timeless truths that are not dependent upon a cultural setting. Sacrifice, charity, forgiveness, prayer, worship, discipleship, discipline, faithfulness, honesty, love, study, thought, and maybe a few others will be important to a Christian in any culture. Music, clothes, expressions, activities, and accessories are always changing and have nothing to do with Christianity. Hate, murder, thievery, lust, selfishness, cruelty, deceit, bitterness, prejudice, sloth, and maybe a few others are the eternal enemies of the Christian regardless of the culture.

There have always been and there will always be believers and non-believers including myself who mistake culture for principle. I try to get it right, but I also realize I am a product of my genes, my upbringing, my experiences, and my God. There are also some beliefs that aren’t quite culture and aren’t quite Biblical principle. I have written before about how over done and over emphasized relationships have become in our Churches. Relationships with God and others is important, but the over-emphasis on relationships is more cultural than Biblical.

Another aspect of relationships that may be more cultural than Biblical is the claim that God created us to be dependent upon each other and that individualism is sinful. Paul White at reluctant but faithful claims, “Independence leads to unaccountability, and unaccountability leads to all manner of sin, and sin, as C.S. Lewis wrote, causes us to curve inward upon ourselves, eventually, independently, dying.” Hammer left a comment stating, “The American cultural image of rugged individualism is not supposed to fit into the church.”

While there is some truth to both of these statements, neither is completely true. Dependence and conformity can also lead to sin and often do lead to sin. It is selfish to be dependent to a point of being an unnecessary burden on someone else and it is lazy for Church members to conform to an arbitrary or even negotiated standard. I have no doubt, God created us to have a dependent relationship with him. I also believe we serve best as part of a Church community. However, the best community is not a group of dependent conformists; the best community is a Church comprised of individual and independent believers.

Senate Hair Rule

Is there some type of Senate rule that all Senators have to wear a hairpiece or color their hair? Isn’t a gray and thinning hair line a sign of wisdom?

We do get the leadership we deserve.

Why Men Would Rather Stay Home on Sunday

Mike at Eternal Perspectives has written a great post named The Emasculated Church with excerpts from a book by Robert Hicks titled Uneasy Manhood.

As much as I love being contrarian, sometimes I need to know I am not completely alone in my observations and views. This post made my day because it gives me hope that other men recognize the problem and are starting to do something about it. (HT:Blogotional)

Start With Transparency

The Harriet Miers affair is another good example of how privacy hurts our ability to be appropriately informed. We should know, but don’t:

1. The real reason Ms. Miers was nominated by the President.
2. The real reason her nomination was withdrawn.
3. The sources of money who backed her nomination.
4. The sources of money who opposed her confirmation.
5. The elected officials who supported her confirmation.
6. The elected officials who opposed her confirmation.
7. The real views of Ms. Miers.

Democracy doesn’t work when the people we elect, the people appointed by the people we elect, and the people lining the pockets of the people we elect can all act in secret.

It is time to quit demanding privacy and start demanding transparency if we are going to have any chance of fixing the government mess.

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

”You've got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away
Know when to run”

First the good:

1. Harriet Miers didn’t have enough fight in her; she didn’t deserve confirmation.
2. Harriet Miers didn’t articulate her views clearly enough to dispel doubts about her views; she didn’t deserve confirmation.
3. There were many conservatives who stood on principle in opposing her confirmation; Republicans are not a party of lemmings.

Then the bad:

1. President Bush has had 5 years to determine and refine a list of excellent nominees; it was careless of him to go with a last minute gut feeling about Harriet Miers. He may be a man of his word, but he also needs to be prepared for practically every possibility. He is starting to appear lazy and unprepared.
2. We don’t know how a single Senator felt about the confirmation of Ms. Miers; Senators need to go on record. Government and the people are not served when decisions are made through whispers. There should have been an up or down vote for her confirmation, just like Conservatives have been arguing for the last four years.
3. It has now become exceedingly more difficult to get a good conservative nominee approved; Republicans will pay a political price for the type of nominee most conservatives want and who may not even get confirmed.
4. The next nominee may be more like Souter or Kennedy than Sandra Day O’Connor; a track record of conservative decisions is not as important as a track record of impeccable character.

And the ugly:

1. Not a majority, but many conservative pundits sounded more like Air America than reasonable representatives of a noble cause; this will embolden those who lack civility.
2. Liberals didn’t spend a dime in borking Ms. Miers. Their war chest will be spent on the next nominee. It will get very ugly then.

He Means What He Says

I support the Miers nomination.

President Bush is doing exactly what he said he would do while campaigning for a second term. He has proven time and time again that he means what he says and he says what he means. Ms. Miers can be expected to rule on the law and not make law because that is what President Bush promised.

Stewards of Conservatism

Hugh Hewitt has been taking a hammering from many in the conservative blogshpere for his defense of Harriet Miers and his desire for temperance in the Republican Party. I think Mr. Hewitt has really distinguished himself since the Miers nomination; not that he wasn’t already quite distinguished, but since the Miers nomination, he has persuasively argued for supporting President Bush’s nominee even if disappointed by the nomination. My entry today is an attempt to conceptualize Mr. Hewitt’s and my beliefs regarding the Republican Party.

The Republican Party is the vehicle or method for applying conservative principles to government decisions and actions. The conservative members and leaders of the Republican Party are the stewards of the conservative movement. Without the Republican Party, there is no conservative voice in government.

Ideologues need to understand the difference between advocating a cause, and the implications of advancing the cause in our form of government. There is nothing wrong with a conservative being hard core in their beliefs, but pragmatic in advancing those beliefs inch by inch.

Therefore, we need to care just as much about our vehicle that advances our beliefs, as we do about our beliefs. We need to be stewards of our party, not just ideologues.

Privacy and Freedom

Most Americans believe in the right to behave privately in ways that may not meet the approval of others. All of us have something to hide. We each have our own reasons for keeping certain aspects of our life hidden from our government, or our family, or our friends, or solicitors, or criminals, or our enemies, or just plain old busy bodies. We all have an emotional need for privacy to go along with many practical reasons for keeping some parts of our life and our past hidden from others.

Privacy is so central to who we are as Americans, the Supreme Court has ruled we have a constitutional right to privacy even though the verbiage for such a right is nowhere to be found anywhere in our U.S. CONSTITUTION. Privacy is so important to most Americans that we consider it to be an integrated attribute of our freedom.

Perhaps some of our thinking about privacy needs to change. We will always have an emotional need and some practical reasons for wanting privacy, but the real truth about privacy and freedom is the exact opposite of what most people believe. Freedom and privacy actually have an inverse relationship. As privacy goes up, freedom goes down and as privacy goes down, freedom goes up.

The more information we have, the more we are able to make decisions that reduce our risk of being able to achieve our goals and purposes. The opposite is also true, the less information we have, the greater our risk of not being able to achieve our goals and purposes. The internet has been a big boost in our ability to live freely due to the increase in good information that can be easily accessed.

As much as I like my privacy, there is nothing I value more than freedom. Perhaps all of us need to relinquish a little privacy in order to increase our freedom.

A Conservative Penumbra?

Pundits and politicians who use the word “crony” to describe Harriet Miers and who use the word “cronyism” to describe the nomination of Ms. Miers to the Supreme Court by President Bush are revealing much more about themselves, their sloppy use of language, and possibly their sloppy thinking, than they are revealing about our President or his nominee.

Most of these slanderers who use slur words to describe the nominator and the nominee claim to be die-hard advocates of protecting the original intent of the U. S. Constitution. However, the U.S. CONSTITUTION is silent as to the qualifications of a Supreme Court Justice other than that he or she must be nominated by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

Ms. Miers has fulfilled the first half of her qualifications the moment she was nominated. By definition, Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, and every other Justice remained unqualified right up until the point they were confirmed by the Senate. By definition, Ms. Miers will remain unqualified up until the point she is confirmed, but once she is confirmed, if she is confirmed, she will be just as qualified as any other Justice who has ever served on the Bench. Therefore, everyone who has not been confirmed, including Robert Bork, you, me, and Ms. Miers, is unqualified, and every confirmed Justice is qualified, by definition.

It is fair to accuse President Bush of nominating Ms. Miers primarily because of the close working relationship they have had for over ten years. However, it is not fair to claim that because of the close relationship between President Bush and Ms. Miers, she is therefore not suited to even be considered for nomination. Our President can either surround himself with the best and brightest and then move those people into other positions and roles as higher responsibilities in government need filling or alternatively he can leave the best and brightest outside of his inner circle waiting for better positions to become available. The former is much preferable to the latter in my view.

Condi Rice was considered by many conservatives to be too lightweight for the position of National Security Advisor. President Bush knew her well enough to know she could handle the job of NSA and once the position of Secretary of State became available, she was the perfect nominee to replace Colin Powell. Was Ms. Rice a crony or did the President do what we pay him to do?

Do these slanderers not believe in our constitution, do they think they know more about qualifications for the bench than the framers of our country, or are they like the penumbra crowd who read what they want into our constitution? Perhaps the divide between conservative and liberal is not so wide when it comes to applying the Constitution and I don’t mean that in a good way.

Conservatives can trust in Miers

I think Newt Gingrich makes the most compelling and simple case for why conservatives can trust in Ms. Miers and President Bush here.

A Little Bit Drunk

It wasn’t easy being enlisted in the United States Marine Corps in the late 70’s and early 80’s. Two weeks pay never lasted two weeks. The Saturday evenings before payday were like the movie Groundhog Day. Every Saturday evening before payday was a repeat of the previous Saturday evening before payday.

Marines back then would scrape together their last few pennies and head over to the base club to hang with other depressed Marines and sip the cheapest beer on the planet. The base club never managed to stay open until closing time because the beer money didn’t last that long. As the last remnants of the paychecks were handed over to the bartender and as the brews took effect, the frustration of the Marines grew, and as the frustration grew, the Marines needed to fight. The last person in the world a Marine wants to fight is another Marine. However, if the only person available to fight is another Marine, the other Marine will have to do.

Republicans this week have been acting like frustrated and depressed Marines, the Saturday before payday, and a little bit drunk. Some conservative Republicans were so ready for a fight with the Democrats that when no Democrat's showed up to fight, they had to take out their frustration on other Republicans. They are frustrated by the fact they have labored so hard to acquire some power and they are depressed by the fact they are not able to have all of the power. Just like a Marine wanting more beer, these conservatives wanted more power.

Marines who woke up on a Sunday morning in 1980 with a black eye, a swollen jaw, and various bruises knew that payday was just around the corner and good times were on the way. It is amazing how men trained to do serious bodily injury to others with their bare hands are able to restrain their aggression when fighting another Marine. Perhaps it is a sixth sense or perhaps it is just the honor of a serious fight to a draw with a comrade.

The Marine Corps Private, the Saturday before payday, after a beer or two, seems to have more honor than some of the conservative commentators this week. It is one thing to disagree with the decision of President Bush. Maybe our President deserves a bruise or two. It is an entirely different matter to try to take him out completely. Claiming that President Bush has lost the right to be trusted due to one bad decision is wrong and completely over the top. A person does not lose the right to be trusted for being wrong. A person does lose the right to be trusted for not keeping their word, or breaking a promise, or telling a lie. President Bush can not possibly be right all of the time, but he has done nothing to forfeit our trust.

As crazy as it sounds, the fights on base between Marines are good for the Marine Corps. It is good to know the guys you are going to battle with have what it takes and are willing to do whatever it takes to win the battle. The guy with the courage to fight, and the control to know when to stop fighting, is the guy I want next to me in any battle.

There are many Republicans this week who need to develop a little control to go along with their rhetoric. If they are able to develop control, the conservative movement will strengthen and good times will be on the way. However, if conservatives are not able to develop control, all of the hard work will have been in vain.

Blankley Wisdom

Tony Blankley has a thoughtful, funny, and profound take ending with this:

"Consider, in the alternative, the deeper disappointment that liberals contemplate in this dreary autumn of their aspirations. The last remaining champions of their principles sit aged and infirm on the high bench -- their former brilliance now brittle and susceptible to being chiseled and crumbled by even the most modest conservative laborers.

Victory may not be heroic, but it will be ours. "

More Blabber

There sure are a lot of commentators who worship at the church of Saint Ronald Reagan [the Ronald Reagan who nominated Sandra Day O’Connor to sit on the Supreme Court; the Sandra Day O’Connor who has been just as likely to legislate from the bench in favor of the liberal position as judge the law from the bench according the intent of the legislators who wrote the law] who are now outraged that a mere mortal like President Bush would have the audacity to nominate anyone who does not have a proven track record of conservative activism. I wonder if being a conservative means having a very selective memory of the accomplishments and failures of the patron saints.

I have to include President Bush as a Blabberer today also. It doesn’t ring true to me that Ms. Miers is the best possible person to fill the Supreme Court vacancy. If President Bush would claim that she is the surest bet to judge the law and not make law, it would sound more believable. However, there are many more judges and lawyers who are more accomplished and have more of a proven track record than Ms. Miers.

It is also a bit troubling that President Bush is asking everyone who voted for him to trust his judgment in the nomination of Ms. Miers. I do trust his judgment, but I also wonder why he didn’t have a wider circle of advisors who he trusted in order to choose a nominee who would uphold his campaign promise and be more popular with the conservative establishment.

The American Thinker

The American Thinker thinks there is more to the nomination of Harriet Miers than meets the eye.

"President Bush is a politician trained in strategic thinking at Harvard Business School, and schooled in tactics by experience and advice, including the experience and advice of his father, whose most lasting political mistake was the nomination of David Souter. The nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court shows that he has learned his lessons well. Regrettably, a large contingent of conservative commentators does not yet grasp the strategy and tactics at work in this excellent nomination."

Look Good or Do Good?

One of the big plagues of our time, perhaps all time, is the prioritizing of looking good above doing good. I work for a Fortune 500 company with an uncountable number of Vice Presidents. These Vice Presidents come in many different shapes, size, and gender, but the one thing they all have in common is the mastery of business verbiage. Most of them have held many different positions as they have climbed the corporate ladder playing it safe, talking a good game, and appearing competent without ever rocking the boat.

Most of our Churches are no different from a large company. The Pastor and Church Leader who dresses the right way and says the right things which sound pleasing to the majority is able to rise through the ranks without ever having to actually achieve any results by taking an unpopular risk in order to achieve an important goal. Just as in business, the appearance of good is valued above the doing of good.

Politics might be the worst of the three. At least since FDR, and probably before, most Democrats have advocated social programs and social spending that sounds a whole lot better than it actually works. The fact that many of these programs have hurt the very people they are supposed to help hasn’t deterred the advocates because they continue to get elected based on what they advocate, not on what they achieve.

The conservatives who are opposed to the Supreme Court Justice nomination of Harriet Miers by President Bush are no different than any other group of advocates who are more concerned about appearance than results. President Bush could have nominated a sitting Judge who appeared to be a conservative and this group would have been happy eventhough there is no guarantee the person nominated would judge the law and not make law. Instead President Bush kept his campaingn promise and nominated a person who he is sure will judge the law and not make law. What a refreshing exception to the plague of our time.

Back on His Game

President Bush has seemed a little off his game since returning from his August vacation. Promising to do whatever it takes and to spend whatever it takes to rebuild New Orleans was the response of someone wanting to bypass a controversy and get back to more important long term matters. While New Orleans is not a long term National problem, the precedent that was set by President Bush when he promised to rebuild New Orleans will create a long term national problem. The funding of the Federal government will forever be more expensive and more difficult to control as a result of the promise to rebuild New Orleans with Federal dollars.

The nomination of Harriet Miers to replace Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court has left many in the conservative movement more than a little depressed today. While I know practically nothing about Harriet Miers, I think I know enough of President Bush to know he did not appoint Ms. Miers primarily as some type of compromise with the Democrats. Perhaps, he appointed her in order to avoid an ugly fight with the Democrats. However, he appointed her primarily because he has known her long enough to know she will uphold his campaign promise to appoint Justices who will interpret the law, not make the law.

I don’t always agree with President Bush, but I do respect him as a man and as a President. He is a man of his word, which always carries the most weight with me. I am comforted to know that President Bush has known Ms. Miers for over 10 years. I think it is preferable for our President to appoint someone he is sure about than it is for him to appoint someone who may look better on paper, but still come with too much uncertainty.

Liberals and conservatives can keep blowing gaskets over the fight they wanted that it doesn’t look like they are going to get. I’m happy my President is back on his game.

Katrina Takes a Toll on Truth

After hurricane Katrina, I wrote about how biased the media coverage was here.

The LA Times now has a piece about how bad the media coverage was here.

Selected excerpts:

"His assessment is one of several in recent days to conclude that newspapers and television exaggerated criminal behavior in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, particularly at the overcrowded Superdome and Convention Center."

"Journalists and officials who have reviewed the Katrina disaster blamed the inaccurate reporting in large measure on the breakdown of telephone service, which prevented dissemination of accurate reports to those most in need of the information. Race may have also played a factor."

"Hyperbolic reporting spread through much of the media."

"Some of the hesitation that journalists might have had about using the more sordid reports from the evacuation centers probably fell away when New Orleans' top officials seemed to confirm the accounts."

"Of the 841 recorded hurricane-related deaths in Louisiana, four are identified as gunshot victims, Johannessen said. One victim was found in the Superdome but was believed to have been brought there, and one was found at the Convention Center, he added."

"The media inaccuracies had consequences in the disaster zone.

Bush, of the National Guard, said that reports of corpses at the Superdome filtered back to the facility via AM radio, undermining his struggle to keep morale up and maintain order."

There is an old saying that if something sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't true. Likewise, if something sounds to bad to be true, it probably isn't true.

Visualization

A part of the mental game of golf is to visualize a shot prior to striking the ball. A mental picture of the perfect shot does not guarantee a perfect shot, but it does help the golfer focus on the aspects of the shot that are needed to hit the best possible shot.

A part of the mental game of life should be to visualize holiness and resistance to sin prior to being in a situation that may become sinful. Likewise, the visualization of sinful behavior should be avoided. Daydreams and fantasies are often visualizations of sinful behavior. It is more difficult, and sometimes even impossible, to live a holy life when our thoughts are pursuing a sinful life.

The sins of envy and lust are primarily sins that originate in the mind prior to corroding the heart. Instead of visualizing a newer car, a bigger house, or a more attractive spouse, the visualization of the same car, the same house, and the same spouse well into the future will increase holiness and contentment and decrease envy and lust.

The sins of gluttony, sloth, and wrath, are sins of discipline. Instead of visualizing a feast, a vacation, or revenge, the visualization of a simple meal, a repetitive task, and an expression of forgiveness will increase holiness and contentment and decrease gluttony, slothfulness, and wrath.

The sins of pride and greed are sins of selfishness. Instead of visualizing success and wealth, the visualization of sacrifice will increase holiness and contentment and decrease pride and greed.

Two Questions

Is it hypocritical to criticize someone else for being too critical?

Is encouragement criticism with a positive spin?

My Goal

Contentment and satisfaction are vastly different feelings.

The pursuit of satisfaction rarely leads to contentment. It is pure folly to believe that once a desire gets satisfied, the feeling of contentment will follow. Satisfaction is, at best, a fleeting feeling of accomplishment. Yet, most people will continually sacrifice contentment in order to pursue the feeling of temporary satisfaction. Some people are never satisfied or happy regardless of how many goals they achieve.

Contentment is a state of being that is not dependent upon accomplishments, possessions, recognition, immediate circumstances, future expectations, or even past failures. Contentment is a decision to be content in all circumstances. It is an acceptance that God always has me exactly where he wants me. It is trusting God completely.

I don’t know how a non-believer could ever feel content. Apart from God, I would need to be constantly measuring my stuff. With God, the things that are important are immeasurable. Integrity doesn’t have a size or a weight or a volume. Integrity isn’t something I can achieve if I work hard enough or long enough or smart enough. I can’t buy integrity with my vast amounts of wealth. I either have integrity or I don’t.

There is nothing wrong with setting and trying to achieve goals. Part of my contentment is knowing that I am moving in a certain direction; a hopefully better direction. However, I’ve learned throughout my life that I will never reach of point in this life where I have gotten where I’m going.

Contentment is my goal in life. Satisfaction isn’t worth the bother.

A big hit

Self reliance and personal responsibility took a big hit last night in the speech of President Bush from New Orleans. I admire the boldness of our President. However, I strongly disagree with where the recovery plan is almost certain to lead. A lesser President would have said the right things without making any commitments. This President made a commitment that he will keep.

The size of the Katrina disaster requires a Federal government response. The people who have been displaced need to be replaced and the city of New Orleans needs to be rebuilt in a way that will prevent or at least lessen future Hurricane damage. However, the recovery plan sounds like one big never-ending welfare plan.

Reasonable people always make plans based on reasonable expectations. If there is a reasonable expectation that there is some risk associated with a decision, reasonable people are less likely to make the risky decision. If there is no risk, or if the insurance policy is provided without charge by the government, the dynamics of the decision process change. No-Go decisions become Go decisions.

In planning for the future, it has now become reasonable to expect the Federal government to restore any losses in a natural disaster. This expectation will cause more people to take a risk in Hurricane zones and increase the size of future disasters. It also means that those of us who don’t take the risk will be paying for those who do. How fair is that?

The Priority of Vocation

Imagine my surprise when I came across The Priority of Vocation post today!

"It's always nice when you find an author that agrees with you and this has been one of my pet projects for a while. Without attempting to rigorously document it, I will assert that there seems to have been a decided shift among Evangelicals in the past, say, 50 years attempting to replace the priority of vocation with the idea of relationship."

There IS someone besides me who has a sense that relationships have been over-emphasized.

Tension and Cooperation

For the American system of government to work, there has to be some tension and some cooperation between the different levels of government. Local decisions based on local circumstances, local expectations, and local capabilities tend to produce the best results for the local citizens.

However, Americans are not just citizens of a City without also being citizens of a County or Parish, State, and Country. Citizens of a State can force the citizens of a City within a State to conform to State standards and citizens of a America can force citizens of a State to conform to the standards of America as a whole.

Tension between the different levels of government is needed to prevent one level of government from becoming too powerful and the other levels of government from becoming too weak. Cooperation between the different levels of government is needed to maintain an orderly society.

During the Katrina disaster, neither the tension, nor the cooperation, between the City, State, and Federal government was what it should have been. It is interesting to me that the person probably least responsible for the problems in New Orleans is the person who has taken the most blame and has ended up accepting the most responsibility.

As usual, President Bush has risen above all of the partisan rhetoric. I do think he deserves some blame and should take some responsibility. I admire him for the way he admitted the Federal government made mistakes, but I also think he has established a bad precedent by taking all of the responsibility.

It is usually wrong to base a policy on extreme circumstances. The best policies are based on typical circumstances. In the future, States and Cities will both be less prepared to deal with disasters because the leaders and citizens of the states will expect more of a federal response. I think this is wrong and dangerous.

Teresa

When Teresa at Restoration Station started visiting my site and leaving comments, I thought I had found a kindred spirit. We were both a little dissatisfied with traditional Church and we were trying to express our dissatisfaction along with some possible changes.

As so often happens, my first impression of Teresa was a little off the mark. However, she has proven to be much more important to me and my blog than I ever could have imagined. Instead of marching down the same path as me, Teresa has been a very good spokesperson and representative of some of the concepts and beliefs I have challenged. I started blogging as a way to improve my communications skills. Teresa’s challenges have helped me to realize when I could and should have written something differently and better.

Teresa has developed quite a following on her site mainly because of her warm heart and her infectious passion for Christ. However, she is also one of the few bloggers who I think has really grown as a thinker and writer since starting to blog.

I’m sure most of my readers already know about Teresa, but if not, let me encourage you to visit her site. Today’s post is one of her best.

Thanks Teresa; you make me smile.

Blabber

The mayor of New Orleans blames the Governor of Louisiana and the President of the United States for everything that went wrong in his city during hurricane Katrina, but he insists that the rebuilding effort should be done by the citizens of New Orleans under his control.

Most liberals and many conservatives who have been staunchly opposed to the Patriot Act because someone from the government might find out what books someone is reading are now insisting the Federal government must have complete and absolute control over the citizens of a state during a natural disaster.

Every Tom, Dick, and Harry who predicted the flooding in New Orleans have been on television bragging about how accurate they predicted the disaster and how FEMA and the Federal government ignored all of their warnings. Conveniently though, not a word is mentioned about how these predictions were wrong about the number of deaths caused by Katrina. Either God intervened, or the Federal government response was incredible, or their predictions were completely wrong.

One thing is for certain; disasters sure expose the blabber and the blabberers!

What is important?

It is almost impossible to know whether or not someone is rich or poor or in between by observing what they do for a living, where they live, or what they own. Credit cards and lines of credit make many people appear to be much more prosperous than they actually are. Owners of large savings and investments sometimes appear to be of modest means disguising their actual net worth. Some people live beyond their means, some people live within their means, and some people live below their means.

I am unable to determine anything important about a person based on their appearance. I do make some judgments about people based on how neat they appear, but neatness is more of a personal preference of mine than it is an attribute of real importance. I don’t care about the real net worth of other people because the real net worth of a person also tells me nothing important about that person.

People have a right in this country to be poor as well as rich. Everyone has a right to decide how much stuff they want and what they are willing to do to get what they want. There is no shame, and there should be no shame, in not wanting as much as others want or not being willing to do what others do to acquire stuff.

The people who should feel shame are the people who treat the poor different than they treat others. Almost nothing makes me madder than to hear someone referred to as a burger flipper or to hear a customer in a restaurant fuss at one of the workers. Every person who does a job well, regardless of the job, as long as it is a legal job, deserves respect. Those who look down on the poor, those who mistreat the poor, and those who advocate for the poor, are all equally contemptible because all of these groups consider the poor to be lesser than they are.

It is important for a person to get up and go to work five days a week, it is important for a person to keep his or her word, it is important for a person to be honest, it is important for a person to take care of his or her family, and it is important for a person to be kind.

I wonder how many people in Church this weekend feel the same as me.

Katrina Coverage

Conservative leaning thinkers are convinced the mainstream media has a liberal bias that is evidenced by what news gets reported and also how the news is reported. However, most of the conventional wisdom since 911 is that the mainstream media does a pretty good job covering disasters. Conventional wisdom just bit the dust again with the coverage of Katrina.

Hurricane Katrina may have been the worst natural disaster in the history of the United States. The number of lives lost my not be the greatest, but the number of lives affected, most certainly will be the greatest. Even those of us thousands of miles from the disaster will have our lives changed by the government regulations and spending that will be the eventual result of the political process in the aftermath of Katrina. However, the major affect of Katrina will be the continuation and expansion of the trend of government interference and government care, not a complete change of government direction.

The news coverage of Katrina, however, will go down in history as a complete turning point; a seminal moment; a paradigm shift. Last year during the California special election, the Los Angeles Times unabashedly ran a hit piece on Arnold Schwarzenegger the day of the election. In addition to running the piece accusing Gov. Schwarzenegger of being a sexual predator, the Times also printed and delivered hundreds of thousands of free newspapers to neighborhoods considered to be leaning towards Gov. Schwarzenegger. The Los Angeles Times clearly crossed a line from having a bias in its reporting to being an advocate in its reporting. The result for the Times has been a loss of subscriptions, a loss of readership, and a complete loss of respect. I have no way of knowing what the results of the special election would have been if the piece had not been printed and distributed, but my guess is that the Times helped Gov. Schwarzenegger more than it hurt him.

With their coverage of hurricane Katrina, ABCCBSNBCCNNNEWYORKTIMES have all just repeated the Los Angeles Times mistake. The mainstream media has now crossed the line from having an obvious bias to being advocates of anything that will make our President look incompetent and unprepared. As so often happens though, not knowing when to back off has unintended consequences. The majority of Americans have seen through all of the negative coverage and have not changed their opinion of President Bush. The mainstream media though, has lost the last chunk of what little credibility they had left. News consumers now have even more of a reason to look for alternate sources of information.

In a perfect world, we would have two strong political parties and an independent media. The Democrat’s and the media have both really been hurt by the media coverage of Katrina. I don’t know where this is going to lead. I find myself longing for heaven again today.

Point of Reference

Human beings would have very little ability to reason or be reasonable without a point of reference. The Russian scientist Ivan Pavlov even demonstrated that animals can be conditioned to respond in certain ways based on a point of reference. By always ringing a bell prior to feeding his dog, Pavlov was able to condition his dog to start salivating from the time the bell rang in anticipation of being fed. The association between the bell and the food was a point of reference for the dog.

I have been playing golf for almost 40 years. My initial goal in golf was to break 100 because I had read somewhere that serious golfers should break 100. My goal was based on the point of reference of someone else. I didn’t have my own point of reference because I had never played a round of golf before. Breaking 100 turned out to be much more difficult than I had ever imagined, but the more I played, the more I was able to learn about how to manage my game in ways that would reduce my score.

I was eventually able to break 100, so then I set my goal to break 90. After I broke 90, I changed my goal to breaking 80, and that’s where I’ve been stuck for just about as long as I can remember. I want to break 80, I think I can break 80, I plan to someday break 80, but I have no reasonable expectation that I will break 80 anytime soon because my point of reference is 40 years and countless rounds of never playing well enough for 18 holes to break 80. Wanting to break 80 is a reasonable goal, but expecting to break 80 is an unreasonable expectation for me.

Just as I have a history of golf scores, the United States Federal government and all of the private relief agencies have a history of responding to natural disasters. There has always been a lag between the end of the disaster and any type of large scale relief. From what I know, there never has been a natural disaster in the Untied States where the Federal government and the major relief agencies were able to make a significant difference any sooner than 72 hours.

I can understand the emotional desire of most people to want a quicker response from the leaders of our country. Anyone who watched the scope of the disaster on television naturally wanted the victims to be relieved of their suffering quickly. However, the size of the disaster made immediate relief impossible. A quicker response than 72 hours to Katrina would have been like me breaking 80 for the first time on the most difficult course I have ever played.

It is reasonable to want a faster response from our government and relief agencies to Katrina, but it is totally and completely unreasonable to expect a faster response because we have history as a point of reference. From my perspective, the United States Federal government and relief agencies just broke 85 at Pebble Beach. Maybe not the best ever, but pretty darn close.

Burdens

Whenever one of my daughters, 6 and 8 years old, ask me to do something for them, most of the time I will respond by asking her if she really needs me to do what she requested or if it is something she can do herself. I am still waiting for the day when one of them will react to my question by deciding to go it alone, but my lack of success in raising independent children so far has not deterred me. I know we will get there someday. I almost always make them at least start doing what they need on their own and then I only help when they are ready to give up. I figure that if they aren’t willing to at least start on their own, then they don’t really need what they requested. I am confident that I am raising two daughters who will learn and grow to be independent.

Independent people are an asset to their family, Church, community, and society as a whole. Dependent people are a burden to all of these institutions. Those who foster dependence by creating and enabling dependence have in effect weakened our society.

A lot went wrong in New Orleans last week. Some of what went wrong could have been avoided with better planning and preparation and some of what went wrong could have been mitigated with a quicker response. Government officials, at all levels, could and should have done better, both before and after the disaster. However, government officials did not cause the disaster. The disaster was an act of nature that was made infinitely worse by the larger number of people who should have been more responsible for their own welfare and who ended up creating a much greater burden for all of the government officials trying to respond to the disaster.

I don’t know how many of the survivors of Katrina were disabled. It appears that there were many people who legitimately needed help in order to survive. However, there were many, many, more who had no problem getting on and off of busses and who had no problem getting in front of a microphone and complaining who should have evacuated the affected area when they were told to leave instead of staying and then requiring government resources and government help in order to survive.

The government response would have been much more effective if government officials only had to respond to the thousands of people who really needed help instead of the hundreds of thousands who insisted on the government to provide the help that never should have been needed. I have nothing but contempt for those who unnecessarily burden others.

Katrina Blame

There is a fine line between criticism and blame. Every cell in my body is awash with the DNA of a critic. I can’t look at a computer program without seeing ways it could have been coded better. I can’t look at my lawn without seeing the weeds and the brown spots even when there is only one weed in the entire lawn. I can’t look at my family, my community, my employer, my Church, your Church, your community, your family, or even myself without seeing areas and aspects that need improvement. I am always harder on myself and my immediate circle than I am on those further from my immediate circle. The critic in me is different from most of the people I know, but I know there are many others who also have this particular gene in their DNA.

I try to avoid placing blame when I express criticism. Sometimes blame is appropriate. People who give their word and people who are paid to perform a well defined job function deserve blame when they fail do what they are supposed to do and expected to do. An umpire who makes a bad call in an important baseball game is rightly blamed for the bad call by the losing baseball team. Most of the time, however, blame is inappropriate. People who are doing the best they can and the best they know how to do deserve constructive criticism in order to get better, not condemnation for failing to meet the expectations of the person or group placing the blame.

Most of the media coverage, most of the statements by politicians, most of the comments by the people affected, most of the discussions on talk radio, and most of the blogs have spent more time and effort pointing a finger of blame than honestly and fairly analyzing the Katrina disaster. I plan on spending the next few posts discussing and analyzing Katrina as well as pointing out where the blame should be properly placed.

Rethinking Libertarianism & Socialism

The situation in New Orleans is forcing me to rethink my libertarian tendencies.

It’s always wrong to use events with special situations to form broad based beliefs and principles, but acts of nature with the tragic results like what is happening in New Orleans is a glimpse of an extreme situation that reveals the expected results of an extreme ideology.

The aftermath of Hurricane Katrina demonstrates the futility of complete dependence on government for care by the citizens of a society and also the unreasonableness of pure and complete freedom.

Anyone else longing for heaven today?