The best years of my life were at college. After 13 years of bullying and cliques in a small midwestern community school, my reflection of college was like heaven. I was finally able to live life without being harrassed daily and I could surround myself with people who were similar to me. It was there that I experienced epiphanies that changed my view of life.
So, it was with great shock and sadness when I heard about the shootings that occurred Tuesday at Virginia Tech. I can only pray that the survivors may find a positive epiphany out of their sorrow.
Whenever I hear of such tragedy at the hands of an armed gunman, I begin to feel defenseless and helpless. It is from such a feeling that I wonder why we are not better equipped to handle such situations in our lives. Why aren't we taught how to defend ourselves in school?
I recall hearing the news on April 20, 1999 as I imbibed some cocktails with co-workers at a restaurant in the Denver Tech Center area. I watched the TV screen at the bar with disbelief as local and national media recounted the story umpteen times about Columbine.
I then thought, what would have happened if PE classes routinely taught self-defense to all grade levels? What if all students knew how to confidently, proactively, quickly and respectfully diffuse a negative physical altercation?
It's all fine and dandy to know our readin', writin', and 'rithmetic, but how does that prepare us to live as good, responsible citizens? How can we prepare our children, our next generations, to be better citizens and be responsible and caring members of our society? How can we teach our children to face evil and subdue it?
Our first response is not the trained police or authorities in these situations, it is people like you and me. We are the first response. I'm not talking about arming teachers and professors with weapons, as I believe weapons are motivation for violence (we all go off the edge ever so often, and I can't imagine what would have happened if one of my worst teachers had ready access to a gun--doubt I would be here today). I'm talking about knowing exactly how to deal verbally to calm a potential violent situation, to infuse kind respect to everyone involved, and if there is a weapon (a fist, a knife, a gun, a kicking leg, etc.) that those involved can make quick, unnoticable motions to take over the weapon, safely secure it, and calm the perpetrator to the good of all who surround the incident.
Then, the nation was jolted by the events of September 11, 2001. I immediately thought, what would have happened if the people on those three fateful planes could have known how to properly diffused that terror situation in the air? They had the strength in numbers. But they didn't have the knowledge to intelligently overcome the terrorists and physically subdue them.
The after effect of the tramatic events of September 11th was not to equip all citizens in our nation with self-defense strategies to subdue any form of terrorism. No, it was to put guns in the cockpit. What will that accomplish? Guns, in the hands of someone preoccupied with something like flying a plane, can easily be used against them.
Now, if pilots and flight attendants knew self-defense and knew how to coordinate efforts by the passengers to maintain control of their plane at all times, then we could say we've done something to combat terrorism.
Flash forward to this week. Again, victims were held defenseless because instead of being taught how to defend themselves through 13 years of primary school, they were taught how to do the tinikle (You know, when you had to jump between the rhythm of the clapping bamboo sticks? Our PE teacher would call it double dutch with bamboo sticks.) in PE class.
What would have happened if the girl and the RA practiced self-defense against the attacker in the dorm? The worst that could have happened if they had tried to subdue the attacker with self-defense moves is exactly what happened to them that fateful Tuesday morning.
The best thing that could have happened is that they would have been able to successfully subdue the attacker before the gun was raised, or even if the gun was raised, they strategically and successfully gained control of the weapon from the attacker, were able to subdue the attacker while maintaining respect and consideration to the attacker as a fellow human, and allow him to understand that his decisions and choices to attack were not the right thing to do.
I know this is a pipe dream in a utopian world. But, just imagine... If we were all taught how to effectively think through choices and make decisions in our daily lives that would not only benefit ourselves, but also benefit all those around us? If we were taught not only self-defense, but also how to maintain positive relationships, regardless the situation?
Think about it. Imagine.
Showing posts with label life. Show all posts
Showing posts with label life. Show all posts
Friday, April 20, 2007
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Let's Call The Whole Thing Off!
Tomato, tomahto...Potato, potahto...Let's just call the whole thing off!
Never in my wildest imagination did I ever think I would put those lyrics to the abortion debate. But, today after reading some of the reactions from both the pro-abortion, anti-choice groups, these lyrics seem to fit right in.
You'd think with a full ban recently legislated in South Dakota, you'd think the pro-life would be rejoicing. Think again.
"As a pro-lifer, I feel guilty saying this, because people are out there all excited, but a ban is actually counterproductive," said Mary Kay Culp, executive director for Kansans for Life. Does that statement seem odd to you, too? Yes, really, she said that.
Now, apparently, pro-lifers feel that they need more time to turn society's thinking around about abortion before going for the jugular on abortion rights. Ah, you've had over 30 years to turn society's head on to the ideals of the pro-life movement, and you say you need more time? What? The posters of aborted babies, protests at abortion clinics and other places that accept abortion practices not helping society to see the pro-life movement in a good light? What's missing here??
Ok, let's look at the other spectrum. The pro-choice, pro-abortion movement. You'd think they'd be outraged at this outright ban in South Dakota and the possibility of a ban in Mississippi. You'd think that, wouldn't ya?
Nope. Their message seems to be going soft, as well. According to the article, a memo circulated by Third Way, a progressive movement, through congress a message to uphold personal liberties while accepting a moral responsibility to reduce the number of abortions. Nothing new there. I believe this was Bill Clinton's stance on abortion when he was president. And my stance, as well.
What I see happening is that both sides are beginning to realize is that being pro-life or pro-choice is all about respecting and valuing life, regardless of its stage. And in the history of both movements, there have been extremes that have devalued life. Now, they see that they are defending life, either that of the mother or that of the child or fetus. Both movements, in essence, are pro-life. They both want to uphold life.
Potato, potahto... whatever. I'm taking my ball and going home. You want to come along? I'm a bit thirsty and I think mom could make us PB & J sandwiches. Sound good?
Never in my wildest imagination did I ever think I would put those lyrics to the abortion debate. But, today after reading some of the reactions from both the pro-abortion, anti-choice groups, these lyrics seem to fit right in.
You'd think with a full ban recently legislated in South Dakota, you'd think the pro-life would be rejoicing. Think again.
"As a pro-lifer, I feel guilty saying this, because people are out there all excited, but a ban is actually counterproductive," said Mary Kay Culp, executive director for Kansans for Life. Does that statement seem odd to you, too? Yes, really, she said that.
Now, apparently, pro-lifers feel that they need more time to turn society's thinking around about abortion before going for the jugular on abortion rights. Ah, you've had over 30 years to turn society's head on to the ideals of the pro-life movement, and you say you need more time? What? The posters of aborted babies, protests at abortion clinics and other places that accept abortion practices not helping society to see the pro-life movement in a good light? What's missing here??
Ok, let's look at the other spectrum. The pro-choice, pro-abortion movement. You'd think they'd be outraged at this outright ban in South Dakota and the possibility of a ban in Mississippi. You'd think that, wouldn't ya?
Nope. Their message seems to be going soft, as well. According to the article, a memo circulated by Third Way, a progressive movement, through congress a message to uphold personal liberties while accepting a moral responsibility to reduce the number of abortions. Nothing new there. I believe this was Bill Clinton's stance on abortion when he was president. And my stance, as well.
What I see happening is that both sides are beginning to realize is that being pro-life or pro-choice is all about respecting and valuing life, regardless of its stage. And in the history of both movements, there have been extremes that have devalued life. Now, they see that they are defending life, either that of the mother or that of the child or fetus. Both movements, in essence, are pro-life. They both want to uphold life.
Potato, potahto... whatever. I'm taking my ball and going home. You want to come along? I'm a bit thirsty and I think mom could make us PB & J sandwiches. Sound good?
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Determining Value of Life
Let me preface this post by saying that I believe that certain events, though unrelated, happen because they are trying to tell us something. They are signs.
"A long way from the gallow"as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle about the ethical issues surrounding postponement of Michael Morales' execution.
"S. Dakota targets abortion ruling" reported by Indianapolis Star regarding South Dakota's passing a law banning virtual all abortions, with the exception to save the mother's life. This story basically kicked yesterday's story about the ban on partial-birth abortion into dead news space. Although, they are, in a way, similar and both tie in with the death penalty issue.
I believe these two unrelated news stories are really related in a factually abstract way. "Fabstractually" if you will. No, wait. "Factstractually." There's a difference. Fabstractually, would be an abstract fabrication, something George W. Bush would say if he were talking about WMDs in pre-war Iraq.
The death penalty and abortion issues are about the value of life. These issues will be the proving ground for George W. Bush's stance on life. Whose existence is worth continuing? Whether it be a fetus in the womb, a brain-dead woman on life support, an Iraqi insurgent, a combat soldier, or a man convicted of murder on death row, there are philosophical and ethical questions about the value of life that we as a society must face and solidify in our thinking and in our laws.
When does an individual existing become a true, bonafide human? When does an individual's existence cease? Those are existence issues. Sure, a fetus exists. But, when does it achieve rights and responsibilities of a human existence? How do we define a human? When a fetus completely exits the mother's womb? When the fetus is viable outside the womb? When the fetus takes its first breath?
Then, when it takes its first breath, how do we as a society value that life through the years? What is the true value of its life? How do we define the value of a life? How do we react and respond to that life? We do place value on the lives of others daily in our own lives by the way we react and respond to the lives around us.
We devalue people when we offer devaluing comments to them, do mean and spiteful acts against others, and ignore those who most need our attention. In a way, our devaluing is a way to kill the value of another's life and we are extinguishing a bit of that life by every act or negligence we place on that individual.
Does devaluing others' lives by the act of murder, devalue the life of the murderer as well? To the point that the murderer's life is no longer valued by society? That is how our society views it today. Should those who devalued the murderer before he committed his crime be held to be devalued in society as well? Our society places great value in those who can strategically manipulate and devalue others while being able to assert and persuade that they are doing the right thing.
Life as we know it has various levels of value or worth. Many of us see our worth in our paychecks and/or benefit plans at our places of work. Some of us see our worth in our families and how they appreciate our existence and contributions that we make as a member of the family. Some of us see our worth in other social or working groups that make us feel our existence is valued and in some ways justified. In most cases it is what we do that gives us our personal sense of worth, and also a social sense of worth, as well. (And in my case, my true worth far exceeds the amount of my paycheck, as many others could also claim, too.)
Some lives find value, satisfaction, and justification by devaluing other lives. Should we continue to value that individual, even if they devalue us?
When a devaluing person is punished for a crime, what is cruel and unusual punishment for any crime? Is confining a criminal in jail cruel? Is detaining someone without judgment unusual? Is execution by injection cruel? What did they mean when they wrote cruel and unusual punishment in the Constitution?
Then, we have other circumstances where a human life has declined by physical or mental decay. These lives may continue to bring value to others, even if they do nothing but exist. But when do we say that life fails to provide value or worth and should not truly exist?
When should ideals and ideology trump life itself? What is worth losing a life? What is worth taking a life? Is life really worth living?
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When does life take a back seat to liberty or the pursuit of happiness? These are the tough questions.
We think it is the courts, and especially the Supreme Court that should answer these questions. No, these are definitions that need to be answered by our legislators both at the state and Federal level. These are definitions that we need to answer to our legislators so they can do their jobs and write (or rewrite) legislation according to our definitions of life that can be applied, enforced, judged and upheld.
"A long way from the gallow"as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle about the ethical issues surrounding postponement of Michael Morales' execution.
"S. Dakota targets abortion ruling" reported by Indianapolis Star regarding South Dakota's passing a law banning virtual all abortions, with the exception to save the mother's life. This story basically kicked yesterday's story about the ban on partial-birth abortion into dead news space. Although, they are, in a way, similar and both tie in with the death penalty issue.
I believe these two unrelated news stories are really related in a factually abstract way. "Fabstractually" if you will. No, wait. "Factstractually." There's a difference. Fabstractually, would be an abstract fabrication, something George W. Bush would say if he were talking about WMDs in pre-war Iraq.
The death penalty and abortion issues are about the value of life. These issues will be the proving ground for George W. Bush's stance on life. Whose existence is worth continuing? Whether it be a fetus in the womb, a brain-dead woman on life support, an Iraqi insurgent, a combat soldier, or a man convicted of murder on death row, there are philosophical and ethical questions about the value of life that we as a society must face and solidify in our thinking and in our laws.
When does an individual existing become a true, bonafide human? When does an individual's existence cease? Those are existence issues. Sure, a fetus exists. But, when does it achieve rights and responsibilities of a human existence? How do we define a human? When a fetus completely exits the mother's womb? When the fetus is viable outside the womb? When the fetus takes its first breath?
Then, when it takes its first breath, how do we as a society value that life through the years? What is the true value of its life? How do we define the value of a life? How do we react and respond to that life? We do place value on the lives of others daily in our own lives by the way we react and respond to the lives around us.
We devalue people when we offer devaluing comments to them, do mean and spiteful acts against others, and ignore those who most need our attention. In a way, our devaluing is a way to kill the value of another's life and we are extinguishing a bit of that life by every act or negligence we place on that individual.
Does devaluing others' lives by the act of murder, devalue the life of the murderer as well? To the point that the murderer's life is no longer valued by society? That is how our society views it today. Should those who devalued the murderer before he committed his crime be held to be devalued in society as well? Our society places great value in those who can strategically manipulate and devalue others while being able to assert and persuade that they are doing the right thing.
Life as we know it has various levels of value or worth. Many of us see our worth in our paychecks and/or benefit plans at our places of work. Some of us see our worth in our families and how they appreciate our existence and contributions that we make as a member of the family. Some of us see our worth in other social or working groups that make us feel our existence is valued and in some ways justified. In most cases it is what we do that gives us our personal sense of worth, and also a social sense of worth, as well. (And in my case, my true worth far exceeds the amount of my paycheck, as many others could also claim, too.)
Some lives find value, satisfaction, and justification by devaluing other lives. Should we continue to value that individual, even if they devalue us?
When a devaluing person is punished for a crime, what is cruel and unusual punishment for any crime? Is confining a criminal in jail cruel? Is detaining someone without judgment unusual? Is execution by injection cruel? What did they mean when they wrote cruel and unusual punishment in the Constitution?
Then, we have other circumstances where a human life has declined by physical or mental decay. These lives may continue to bring value to others, even if they do nothing but exist. But when do we say that life fails to provide value or worth and should not truly exist?
When should ideals and ideology trump life itself? What is worth losing a life? What is worth taking a life? Is life really worth living?
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When does life take a back seat to liberty or the pursuit of happiness? These are the tough questions.
We think it is the courts, and especially the Supreme Court that should answer these questions. No, these are definitions that need to be answered by our legislators both at the state and Federal level. These are definitions that we need to answer to our legislators so they can do their jobs and write (or rewrite) legislation according to our definitions of life that can be applied, enforced, judged and upheld.
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
"I Have A Dream..."
I don't think there is any tribute that could match the courage of Martin Luther King Jr., Coretta Scott King, his family or followers. As Coretta Scott King is honored during her funeral today, it is a time to look back, and look forward.
Martin Luther King Jr. had a great dream. A dream that freedom rings across the United States to all its citizens. MLK was a great advocate of peaceful protest. We all have much to learn and much to gain from his stance.
When I grew up in a very colorless part of the country, I still felt that people of color were still God's children, even if I seldom encountered one. They still have feelings. They still have been given gifts and talents by their Creator. And they are still precious in God's eyes. They are like me. They should be free, indeed.
Violence and unrest continue to destroy that preciousness that lies in each of God's creations on this earth. Materialism and ideologies have seemingly conquered over the preciousness of life and the sacredness of freedom.
Even in our daily lives, we allow other things to strip us of our freedoms. We quietly follow someone, even if we don't agree, just to be in the "in" crowd. We do things that go against our inner sense of reason. We don't do things we ought or long to do, because either a mental, cultural, societal or physical roadblock has been placed in our way. We can break the roadblocks. We can challenge the challenges that lie before us.
Freedom is sacred. Freedom is full of responsibility and obligation and reverence. Freedom is accessible and a challenge. It is work. It is conditioning the heart, mind and soul to peacefully seek freedom. It is to define a peaceful freedom for all, and to honor others' freedom so that your freedom does not hinder anothers' freedom. It is to work, play and rest peacefully with our brothers and sisters on this earth. It is peace and freedom walking hand in hand.
And someday, we will all sing together, "free at last."
Martin Luther King Jr. had a great dream. A dream that freedom rings across the United States to all its citizens. MLK was a great advocate of peaceful protest. We all have much to learn and much to gain from his stance.
When I grew up in a very colorless part of the country, I still felt that people of color were still God's children, even if I seldom encountered one. They still have feelings. They still have been given gifts and talents by their Creator. And they are still precious in God's eyes. They are like me. They should be free, indeed.
Violence and unrest continue to destroy that preciousness that lies in each of God's creations on this earth. Materialism and ideologies have seemingly conquered over the preciousness of life and the sacredness of freedom.
Even in our daily lives, we allow other things to strip us of our freedoms. We quietly follow someone, even if we don't agree, just to be in the "in" crowd. We do things that go against our inner sense of reason. We don't do things we ought or long to do, because either a mental, cultural, societal or physical roadblock has been placed in our way. We can break the roadblocks. We can challenge the challenges that lie before us.
Freedom is sacred. Freedom is full of responsibility and obligation and reverence. Freedom is accessible and a challenge. It is work. It is conditioning the heart, mind and soul to peacefully seek freedom. It is to define a peaceful freedom for all, and to honor others' freedom so that your freedom does not hinder anothers' freedom. It is to work, play and rest peacefully with our brothers and sisters on this earth. It is peace and freedom walking hand in hand.
And someday, we will all sing together, "free at last."
Thursday, February 02, 2006
Another Perspective of Danish Cartoons Gone Awry
Sigh. Now how many posts have I done on these sour Danish cartoons? Good grief.
I want to present to you this link that gives a different perspective on the situation from a Danish muslim.
In so many ways, the profound remark President Bush said in his State of the Union speech, applies here, too.
"America is a great force for freedom and prosperity. Yet our greatness is not measured in power or luxuries, but by who we are and how we treat one another. So we strive to be a compassionate, decent, hopeful society."
Yes, it is in how we treat one another that sets us apart.
The Danish cartoons were done in response to how they were perceiving treatment from Muslims. However, the manner of conveying that has been distorted in that Muslims are upset about any image of Muhammad.
Muslims should feel upset and they should stand up for their religion. However, they should also remember that they are known by how they treat one another, as well, which is why the cartoons were done. Do you see the tangled web that is being weaved here?
This is indeed a public relations issue for all involved here. We'll see who comes out with the least mud on their face.
I want to present to you this link that gives a different perspective on the situation from a Danish muslim.
In so many ways, the profound remark President Bush said in his State of the Union speech, applies here, too.
"America is a great force for freedom and prosperity. Yet our greatness is not measured in power or luxuries, but by who we are and how we treat one another. So we strive to be a compassionate, decent, hopeful society."
Yes, it is in how we treat one another that sets us apart.
The Danish cartoons were done in response to how they were perceiving treatment from Muslims. However, the manner of conveying that has been distorted in that Muslims are upset about any image of Muhammad.
Muslims should feel upset and they should stand up for their religion. However, they should also remember that they are known by how they treat one another, as well, which is why the cartoons were done. Do you see the tangled web that is being weaved here?
This is indeed a public relations issue for all involved here. We'll see who comes out with the least mud on their face.
Feel Good State of the Union
So, do you feel good, again? As usual, the state of the union speech given by President Bush was a pep rally for his administration, his congress, and now his Supreme Court.
But, if you listened carefully to the first couple of paragraphs of his speech. Errr, how about after the first one, where he lauded Coretta Scott King, who passed away that day. Did you hear what he said? Did you??
The second paragraph and the first half of the third paragraph sounded like it was coming from a president that was saying his last State of the Union speech. Then, at the end of the third paragraph, in between the lines, he is saying please don't impeach me. Did you hear that?
No? Think of it this way. It's just like jilted love affair when the spouse is ready to divorce the other. The other says, but we can do so many great things together. Then, goes on to say what wonderful things could be accomplished if they'd just stick together.
The frustrated spouse just sits there shaking his/her head from side to side as he/she thinks about how the past hasn't panned out so well.
"In this decisive year, you and I will make choices that determine both the future and the character of our country," remarked President Bush.
This was how the fourth paragraph starts for the State of the Union. It may sound bland and inspecific, and could be applied to any president and any year in the history of the United States. But no, this is the here and now. Going back to the analogy, the other spouse is saying that we both will be doing things that will determine our future. In a sense, the other spouse is trying to make the frustrated spouse feel empowered in the relationship and able to have a say in the future of the relationship.
However, the frustrated spouse continues to shake his/her head from side to side.
The pep rally continues. The other spouse is looking into the future, saying that all the things they will do will prove his love. In this case, the president is saying that he will prove that he upholds freedom.
The other spouse, seeing that his spouse is still not convinced, tries to explain away his agressive and harmful actions, saying that they are needed because he loves her and that is how he shows his love. In the State of the Union speech, the president goes on to say how we need to take the fight outside of our borders, so that we will not have to deal with it on our land. The president is building freedom in other lands, and we should rally behind that, regardless what the other lands really want.
The head continues to shake from side to side, and the eyes start to roll.
The other spouse then goes on to say how he is helping his buddy with marital issues, and how that marriage is surviving. But the frustrated spouse knows better. He/she's heard the other side of that marital situation, too.
Just like the president's remarks on the battle in Iraq. He says we will win this battle and gain victory. Whoa, wait... Whose country is this, where the battle is raging? Iraq's or the United States? Ok, then. Let Iraq win. Let the citizens of Iraq take the victory. Victory in Iraq is for Iraqis, not for us. Let's not get pompous here.
But, the other spouse loves being pompous and prideful. They love to boast of things they themselves have no personal stake in and really shouldn't be sticking their nose in someone else's business. Although, the frustrated spouse knows about the bet the other spouse made with his buddy at the bar to fudge a bit about "goings-on" after hours.
"America is a great force for freedom and prosperity. Yet our greatness is not measured in power or luxuries, but by who we are and how we treat one another. So we strive to be a compassionate, decent, hopeful society."
Probably the most profound remark of the whole night, yet the president received no applause for this one. Maybe everyone was too busy thinking about that one. Now, are we supposed to be compassionate, decent, and hopeful to the whole world? Or just for President Bush? Mabye we were too busy shaking our heads from side to side to think about it.
The pep rally continues. And the other spouse makes rallying points to make his side look good against his opponent, not knowing who the true opponent really is, and not realizing that this opponent just might be himself.
But, if you listened carefully to the first couple of paragraphs of his speech. Errr, how about after the first one, where he lauded Coretta Scott King, who passed away that day. Did you hear what he said? Did you??
The second paragraph and the first half of the third paragraph sounded like it was coming from a president that was saying his last State of the Union speech. Then, at the end of the third paragraph, in between the lines, he is saying please don't impeach me. Did you hear that?
No? Think of it this way. It's just like jilted love affair when the spouse is ready to divorce the other. The other says, but we can do so many great things together. Then, goes on to say what wonderful things could be accomplished if they'd just stick together.
The frustrated spouse just sits there shaking his/her head from side to side as he/she thinks about how the past hasn't panned out so well.
"In this decisive year, you and I will make choices that determine both the future and the character of our country," remarked President Bush.
This was how the fourth paragraph starts for the State of the Union. It may sound bland and inspecific, and could be applied to any president and any year in the history of the United States. But no, this is the here and now. Going back to the analogy, the other spouse is saying that we both will be doing things that will determine our future. In a sense, the other spouse is trying to make the frustrated spouse feel empowered in the relationship and able to have a say in the future of the relationship.
However, the frustrated spouse continues to shake his/her head from side to side.
The pep rally continues. The other spouse is looking into the future, saying that all the things they will do will prove his love. In this case, the president is saying that he will prove that he upholds freedom.
The other spouse, seeing that his spouse is still not convinced, tries to explain away his agressive and harmful actions, saying that they are needed because he loves her and that is how he shows his love. In the State of the Union speech, the president goes on to say how we need to take the fight outside of our borders, so that we will not have to deal with it on our land. The president is building freedom in other lands, and we should rally behind that, regardless what the other lands really want.
The head continues to shake from side to side, and the eyes start to roll.
The other spouse then goes on to say how he is helping his buddy with marital issues, and how that marriage is surviving. But the frustrated spouse knows better. He/she's heard the other side of that marital situation, too.
Just like the president's remarks on the battle in Iraq. He says we will win this battle and gain victory. Whoa, wait... Whose country is this, where the battle is raging? Iraq's or the United States? Ok, then. Let Iraq win. Let the citizens of Iraq take the victory. Victory in Iraq is for Iraqis, not for us. Let's not get pompous here.
But, the other spouse loves being pompous and prideful. They love to boast of things they themselves have no personal stake in and really shouldn't be sticking their nose in someone else's business. Although, the frustrated spouse knows about the bet the other spouse made with his buddy at the bar to fudge a bit about "goings-on" after hours.
"America is a great force for freedom and prosperity. Yet our greatness is not measured in power or luxuries, but by who we are and how we treat one another. So we strive to be a compassionate, decent, hopeful society."
Probably the most profound remark of the whole night, yet the president received no applause for this one. Maybe everyone was too busy thinking about that one. Now, are we supposed to be compassionate, decent, and hopeful to the whole world? Or just for President Bush? Mabye we were too busy shaking our heads from side to side to think about it.
The pep rally continues. And the other spouse makes rallying points to make his side look good against his opponent, not knowing who the true opponent really is, and not realizing that this opponent just might be himself.
Thursday, December 29, 2005
American Values?
Reflecting on 2005, it seems the saying "American Values" continues to get tossed around in political conversation like a broken, and warped record (you know, the vinyl-type). I thought that slogan would have ended after the 2004 election, but NOOooo. It's still being chimed in 2005.
So, what are our American Values? I tried to look up a list that clearly delineates our American Values doing a Google search, but I found many sites that touted that ambiguous term, but nothing definitive. So, I will now attempt to define what our American Values are from what is written, and by what our society and government advocate in our actions.
Life
With limits, of course. We may fight tooth and nail to make sure unborn lives are born into the world, regardless what the parents may want. However, a boy's life in Texas apparently wasn't worth saving, and because of a state law, was denied life-sustaining efforts because his parents were too poor. Another lady from Florida, in a neurologic coma for over a decade and virtually brain-dead, is worth saving, and worth shorting the president's vacation to create a law in an effort to save her life. And the death penalty is still tops in our commander-in-chief's book, so apparently not all lives are worth living.
Speaking of lives, living is a global affair and since we have decided that the US is into affecting the global affair, let's look at how we translate that American value of life to other countries and people of varying persuasions. Our Republican congress and executive branch encourages torture, even though they still think other countries should not do it. We started a war in Iraq because of the threat of WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction, I've learned), although we widely have used DU (Depleted Uranium, not Denver U.) battling 'terrorism' in Afganistan and Iraq. That can't be as bad as the WMD Saddam used against his people, could it?
I searched for "American value life" and the first entry was an article by a pro-life writer with what seemed to be a Republican slant.
He speaks of "unalienable" and "self-evident truth" about the right of life. Unalienable, which is similar to inalienable, means not to be separated, given away or taken away. What does that mean for life? Basically, we don't torture or cut up, enslave or destroy life, or do we?
The right to life is also seen as a self-evident truth, meaning requiring no proof or explanation. Although, you are required to have a birth certificate and other documents to prove you are you just to exist in the US, so apparently your self-evident right to life lasts as long as you don't have to provide docuementation for it. Or you are unborn, and have yet to draw your first breath, then you have more rights than many who are living, according to some. There is no law stating what is life and human, thus, anything could be life, animate or inanimate.
However, there are several federal and state laws that say when a life can be extinguished. Like in the event they are charged with some heinous crime against themselves or society (death penalty), or if they just don't have the money to keep themselves alive, or someone says that a life is not worth using life-sustaining measures (yes, it is a law in Texas, so Terry Shiavo's parents should be grateful they didn't live there or she'd only have 10 days).
So, LIFE is an American Value, as long as that life has some type of worth according to the powers that be.
Liberty
Again, with limits. Liberty is like freedom, so check out the value of freedom below, too. If you have enough $$$ to push your weight around, you can impose on other's liberties so that you can gain more liberty for yourself. It's fairly easy to buy off local governments, and even state and national ones, if you have enough $$$, know the right people, are related to the right families, and rub the right people the right way.
Sure, some people say that liberty can be saved by speaking up for your rights and liberties. Well, reviewing history and personal experiences, that doesn't always happen. Most of the time liberties happen because of $$$. This is a capitalist society. The value of $$$ trumps all other values, really.
A search for "American value liberty" brings up a vehicle blue book website, and two websites about money. That certainly explains a lot.
Pursuit of Happiness
With limits, of course. This is a very subjective value, really, and pursuing happiness in our capitalist society entails money. True happiness, of course, is an intrinsic concept, and only happens when one is content with who they are and what they possess inside. But that doesn't help our capitalist economy, so the pursuit of happiness has been translated to purchasing whatever it takes to make one feel happy. Sometimes that means purchasing a diamond for that special someone in your life, or getting the right clothes and style to fit in with a certain social group. It is all about what you can get to make you happy, that is the American way.
Defenders of the US Constitution
As long as it doesn't impede on anyone, especially the executive branch these days. The US Constitution must yield to our capitalist society, so if it doesn't, we'll just make some minor adjustments so it will.
Governed by the People, for the People
As long as those governing have incentive ($$$) to govern, whether that be from individuals, special interest groups, or companies.
Separation of Church & State
Separate as long as it doesn't offend anyone, but necessary to sway the people one way or another. Also, great backup for state to help faith-based (church) organizations when the state help just doesn't cut it.
Conglomeration of Corporation & State
I don't think it is fair to talk of the separation of church and state, and not mention the flip side of the coin with the cooperation of big companies and large special interest groups with their large coffers of money and government. Hey, it's that mentality of "if you rub my back, I'll rub yours" as long as there's no direct link from the government to a specific company. Or in the cases of Enron and Haliburton, direct links make for great $$$. Hey, this is a capitalist society.
Freedom
Of course, with limits. You can't allow one man's absolute freedom when it impedes another man's freedom, right? See liberty, above.
Oh, there was the issue with slavery over a century ago, but wasn't that taken care of with the civil war? What about women's freedoms? Ah, a woman is not a man, right? Oh, they are people, too? Women aren't slaves to their fathers or husbands? Women get individual rights and freedoms here, too? Oh, great, what are all these new Muslim immigrants going to do now? Oh, separation of church and state, right.
Equality
As long as someone is human and on US soil, they are apparently equal, regardless of race, ethnicity, creed, gender, handicap, etc. Oh, that's not the case, you say? There's a class system in the US? What's that? Rich people get more tax breaks than poor and middle class? Rich people get better health care? Rich people's lives are saved more than poor and middle class? Even natural disaster, which used to be the great equalizer, now still can wipe out the poor and middle class, while leaving the rich virtually unscathed? It's not about you, as much as it about who you know and how much $$$ you make.
Add your ideas of American Values
This is definitely not an exhaustive list of American Values. Please feel free to add your ideals of American Values by commenting to this post. Thanks!
Abstract List of American Values:
I want to also add this website for you to right-click and link in new window to read: American Family Values, a very altruistic view of values, which, from my experience, doesn't quite match with reality in the US. If you were truly to espouse those values and principles, you would easily get trampled on by the masses. Sure, you can make a noble attempt to live and pass such ideals to your children and grandchildren, but when you take these ideals to heart and use them in your daily life, you will see that all of these ideals are easily used against you.
These ideals make you weak in our society because they all (integrity, self-discipline, proactivity, empathy, humility) reveal your passiveness and honesty. If you want to get ahead, you will learn that integrity will not get you there, because the dishonest resume and interviewee will likely get the job and/or the sale. Self-discipline is good only to a point, because there will always be people who throw self-discipline to the wind to get their point across or to make sure they trample on you. If you don't throw some of your restraints away, they will continue to walk all over you. Heck, there are very few businesses out there that are proactive, so if you try to get them proactive, they will react, because that is just not the way it happens in the real world. Then, there's empathy--oh, I feel your pain. Sure, as long as feeling your pain can get them ahead in some way, otherwise you are just showing how gullible you are in our society. Finally, humility. The ability to fess up to your weaknesses and blunders, if you should ever acknowledge them. A noble trait, indeed, and one big NO-NO in our society if you don't want them to come back and haunt you for the rest of your life. Success in our capitalist society will always be given to someone else, if you don't stand up for yourself and lose these notions of congeniality.
Not all places in our society and business world work to keep those principles/values from being valuable. But, most do. Just look at our government for starters. Sigh.
American Democratic Values, as taught by the Michigan Board of Education. Great link for black and white ideals of our values, presented for youth of just about all ages.
Stale Conclusion:
Our American Values are not absolute, nor are they set in stone. They change like the ebb and flow of the ocean. The United States is not the utopian mecca that we all claim it is to be, and as we are all human and prone to error, that utopian society may never be met until we meet our Maker in heaven.
So, what are our American Values? I tried to look up a list that clearly delineates our American Values doing a Google search, but I found many sites that touted that ambiguous term, but nothing definitive. So, I will now attempt to define what our American Values are from what is written, and by what our society and government advocate in our actions.
Life
With limits, of course. We may fight tooth and nail to make sure unborn lives are born into the world, regardless what the parents may want. However, a boy's life in Texas apparently wasn't worth saving, and because of a state law, was denied life-sustaining efforts because his parents were too poor. Another lady from Florida, in a neurologic coma for over a decade and virtually brain-dead, is worth saving, and worth shorting the president's vacation to create a law in an effort to save her life. And the death penalty is still tops in our commander-in-chief's book, so apparently not all lives are worth living.
Speaking of lives, living is a global affair and since we have decided that the US is into affecting the global affair, let's look at how we translate that American value of life to other countries and people of varying persuasions. Our Republican congress and executive branch encourages torture, even though they still think other countries should not do it. We started a war in Iraq because of the threat of WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction, I've learned), although we widely have used DU (Depleted Uranium, not Denver U.) battling 'terrorism' in Afganistan and Iraq. That can't be as bad as the WMD Saddam used against his people, could it?
I searched for "American value life" and the first entry was an article by a pro-life writer with what seemed to be a Republican slant.
He speaks of "unalienable" and "self-evident truth" about the right of life. Unalienable, which is similar to inalienable, means not to be separated, given away or taken away. What does that mean for life? Basically, we don't torture or cut up, enslave or destroy life, or do we?
The right to life is also seen as a self-evident truth, meaning requiring no proof or explanation. Although, you are required to have a birth certificate and other documents to prove you are you just to exist in the US, so apparently your self-evident right to life lasts as long as you don't have to provide docuementation for it. Or you are unborn, and have yet to draw your first breath, then you have more rights than many who are living, according to some. There is no law stating what is life and human, thus, anything could be life, animate or inanimate.
However, there are several federal and state laws that say when a life can be extinguished. Like in the event they are charged with some heinous crime against themselves or society (death penalty), or if they just don't have the money to keep themselves alive, or someone says that a life is not worth using life-sustaining measures (yes, it is a law in Texas, so Terry Shiavo's parents should be grateful they didn't live there or she'd only have 10 days).
So, LIFE is an American Value, as long as that life has some type of worth according to the powers that be.
Liberty
Again, with limits. Liberty is like freedom, so check out the value of freedom below, too. If you have enough $$$ to push your weight around, you can impose on other's liberties so that you can gain more liberty for yourself. It's fairly easy to buy off local governments, and even state and national ones, if you have enough $$$, know the right people, are related to the right families, and rub the right people the right way.
Sure, some people say that liberty can be saved by speaking up for your rights and liberties. Well, reviewing history and personal experiences, that doesn't always happen. Most of the time liberties happen because of $$$. This is a capitalist society. The value of $$$ trumps all other values, really.
A search for "American value liberty" brings up a vehicle blue book website, and two websites about money. That certainly explains a lot.
Pursuit of Happiness
With limits, of course. This is a very subjective value, really, and pursuing happiness in our capitalist society entails money. True happiness, of course, is an intrinsic concept, and only happens when one is content with who they are and what they possess inside. But that doesn't help our capitalist economy, so the pursuit of happiness has been translated to purchasing whatever it takes to make one feel happy. Sometimes that means purchasing a diamond for that special someone in your life, or getting the right clothes and style to fit in with a certain social group. It is all about what you can get to make you happy, that is the American way.
Defenders of the US Constitution
As long as it doesn't impede on anyone, especially the executive branch these days. The US Constitution must yield to our capitalist society, so if it doesn't, we'll just make some minor adjustments so it will.
Governed by the People, for the People
As long as those governing have incentive ($$$) to govern, whether that be from individuals, special interest groups, or companies.
Separation of Church & State
Separate as long as it doesn't offend anyone, but necessary to sway the people one way or another. Also, great backup for state to help faith-based (church) organizations when the state help just doesn't cut it.
Conglomeration of Corporation & State
I don't think it is fair to talk of the separation of church and state, and not mention the flip side of the coin with the cooperation of big companies and large special interest groups with their large coffers of money and government. Hey, it's that mentality of "if you rub my back, I'll rub yours" as long as there's no direct link from the government to a specific company. Or in the cases of Enron and Haliburton, direct links make for great $$$. Hey, this is a capitalist society.
Freedom
Of course, with limits. You can't allow one man's absolute freedom when it impedes another man's freedom, right? See liberty, above.
Oh, there was the issue with slavery over a century ago, but wasn't that taken care of with the civil war? What about women's freedoms? Ah, a woman is not a man, right? Oh, they are people, too? Women aren't slaves to their fathers or husbands? Women get individual rights and freedoms here, too? Oh, great, what are all these new Muslim immigrants going to do now? Oh, separation of church and state, right.
Equality
As long as someone is human and on US soil, they are apparently equal, regardless of race, ethnicity, creed, gender, handicap, etc. Oh, that's not the case, you say? There's a class system in the US? What's that? Rich people get more tax breaks than poor and middle class? Rich people get better health care? Rich people's lives are saved more than poor and middle class? Even natural disaster, which used to be the great equalizer, now still can wipe out the poor and middle class, while leaving the rich virtually unscathed? It's not about you, as much as it about who you know and how much $$$ you make.
Add your ideas of American Values
This is definitely not an exhaustive list of American Values. Please feel free to add your ideals of American Values by commenting to this post. Thanks!
Abstract List of American Values:
I want to also add this website for you to right-click and link in new window to read: American Family Values, a very altruistic view of values, which, from my experience, doesn't quite match with reality in the US. If you were truly to espouse those values and principles, you would easily get trampled on by the masses. Sure, you can make a noble attempt to live and pass such ideals to your children and grandchildren, but when you take these ideals to heart and use them in your daily life, you will see that all of these ideals are easily used against you.
These ideals make you weak in our society because they all (integrity, self-discipline, proactivity, empathy, humility) reveal your passiveness and honesty. If you want to get ahead, you will learn that integrity will not get you there, because the dishonest resume and interviewee will likely get the job and/or the sale. Self-discipline is good only to a point, because there will always be people who throw self-discipline to the wind to get their point across or to make sure they trample on you. If you don't throw some of your restraints away, they will continue to walk all over you. Heck, there are very few businesses out there that are proactive, so if you try to get them proactive, they will react, because that is just not the way it happens in the real world. Then, there's empathy--oh, I feel your pain. Sure, as long as feeling your pain can get them ahead in some way, otherwise you are just showing how gullible you are in our society. Finally, humility. The ability to fess up to your weaknesses and blunders, if you should ever acknowledge them. A noble trait, indeed, and one big NO-NO in our society if you don't want them to come back and haunt you for the rest of your life. Success in our capitalist society will always be given to someone else, if you don't stand up for yourself and lose these notions of congeniality.
Not all places in our society and business world work to keep those principles/values from being valuable. But, most do. Just look at our government for starters. Sigh.
American Democratic Values, as taught by the Michigan Board of Education. Great link for black and white ideals of our values, presented for youth of just about all ages.
Stale Conclusion:
Our American Values are not absolute, nor are they set in stone. They change like the ebb and flow of the ocean. The United States is not the utopian mecca that we all claim it is to be, and as we are all human and prone to error, that utopian society may never be met until we meet our Maker in heaven.
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Christmas Tale of Two Worlds
This holiday season, as it is every year, is a tale of two worlds. I daily hear the beautiful carols and melodies ringing with precious words of life, hope, love and charity. Songs of a utopian life we sometimes think we live in. They almost make me cry sometimes. Not because they are such moving tunes, but because they lie in stark contrast to the harshness of the commercialism and materialism of this precious holiday and the terrible meanness of deliberate activities that take such precious life and moments away from people.
I am sitting here in my office chair, hearing gorgeous voices singing, peace on earth, good will to all, yet seeing the effects of war, torture and violence around the world. It is dismal and almost sickening to sing those holiday songs, knowing that what we are singing about is not passed along to the rest of the world.
A similar tale rang almost two thousand years ago. A beautiful, precious child was born into our terrible world, just as all of us come into this world. But this was no ordinary child. This was Jesus, God's own Son, our Savior. A precious and sacred child came into the world, and showed us how to live in peace. We killed him in violence. And, Jesus overcame death, and returned to His father so that we, too, can overcome the violence and death that shadow our existence on earth. And through Jesus, we can find Peace. Precious peace, on earth, as it is in heaven.
Jesus is a great equalizer. Oh, make straight what once was crooked. Make the rougher places plain. Make our hearts, minds, and souls a resting place, a quieting spot from the worldly battles that bombard our senses. Help us smile, and do all we can to bring Your peace to all we meet, and, in a small way, conquer the violence in the world.
I am sitting here in my office chair, hearing gorgeous voices singing, peace on earth, good will to all, yet seeing the effects of war, torture and violence around the world. It is dismal and almost sickening to sing those holiday songs, knowing that what we are singing about is not passed along to the rest of the world.
A similar tale rang almost two thousand years ago. A beautiful, precious child was born into our terrible world, just as all of us come into this world. But this was no ordinary child. This was Jesus, God's own Son, our Savior. A precious and sacred child came into the world, and showed us how to live in peace. We killed him in violence. And, Jesus overcame death, and returned to His father so that we, too, can overcome the violence and death that shadow our existence on earth. And through Jesus, we can find Peace. Precious peace, on earth, as it is in heaven.
Jesus is a great equalizer. Oh, make straight what once was crooked. Make the rougher places plain. Make our hearts, minds, and souls a resting place, a quieting spot from the worldly battles that bombard our senses. Help us smile, and do all we can to bring Your peace to all we meet, and, in a small way, conquer the violence in the world.
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
Why do we find it hard to state the obvious?
Originally penned Thursday, June 30, 2005
Why do we find it so hard to state the obvious? Conservative Republicans are pro-war, pro-death and pro-violence. Regardless of what they tout from their lips, their actions are far from those words of “culture of life” and “pro-life.”
We’ve been through a major terrorist attack before 9/11 on American soil. That was Oklahoma City in April of 1995. We did not declare war like savage beasts in 1995. No, our police forces, FBI, and CIA did the job that they were supposed to do and found the individuals primarily responsible for carrying out this horrendous act, they were tried and found guilty, and paid the consequences for their actions.
Karl Rove touts that the Democrats were insane for thinking that the 9/11 terrorists should be treated the same way the Oklahoma City terrorist bombers were, and that declaring war on several countries is the better option.
Why do we find it so hard to state the obvious? Conservative Republicans are pro-war, pro-death and pro-violence. Regardless of what they tout from their lips, their actions are far from those words of “culture of life” and “pro-life.”
We’ve been through a major terrorist attack before 9/11 on American soil. That was Oklahoma City in April of 1995. We did not declare war like savage beasts in 1995. No, our police forces, FBI, and CIA did the job that they were supposed to do and found the individuals primarily responsible for carrying out this horrendous act, they were tried and found guilty, and paid the consequences for their actions.
Karl Rove touts that the Democrats were insane for thinking that the 9/11 terrorists should be treated the same way the Oklahoma City terrorist bombers were, and that declaring war on several countries is the better option.
Monday, August 01, 2005
Value of Life
Originally penned Friday, June 10, 2005
It seems like the new catch-phrase in political and religious areas seems to be the “culture of life,” especially in the Republican Party and what is termed ‘Christian right’ groups. Current events like the Terry Shiavo case and pro-life stance on abortion rights seem to echo this view of the culture of life. Or maybe they are serving as a camoflauge for the Republican Party’s true ideology behind their front of the culture of life.
Where did the thought of the culture of life originate? Actually, it was Pope John Paul II’s idea. Pope JP II had developed his campaign of the culture of life, reflecting the value of life Jesus gives to all people.
I think the primary push for me to begin blogging is the growing rate of so-called pro-lifers doing anti-life activities. As a Catholic voter, I have a very difficult time voting because neither the Republican nor the Democratic Party truly support all pro-life policies from pre-birth to death. The Republicans seem to support that some lives are way more important than others, especially those with more money or clout. The Democrats, claiming to be pro-choice, has been tagged at anti-life proponents by the opposition because they want to keep abortions legal.
There are a variety of government policies and laws that contradict the culture of life. The main policy currently in place now is the pre-emptive strike against Iraq and the war that has shattered many lives in that country and the soldiers that have lost their lives for a moot cause. This war is not saving any lives and is in fact putting more lives in jeopardy as these people show their animosity toward the US and this unjust war the US declared on their people. These citizens of Iraq did nothing wrong, yet, they are being punished by this war for the apparent actions of their leader Sadam Hussein for hiding WMDs, his mass killings of his own people, and other atrocities. Since the Bush regime did not find these WMDs, they have taken on the theory that this war is a humanitarian war.
What war is ever a humanitarian war? Wars do not usually hurt those in power, it hurts those (many of them innocent of whatever reason the war is being waged) that have to fight it and be in the thick of it. But wars are declared and fought precisely because of the dictates of a leader. In this war, however, the US did something that Geneva Convention does not condone, they took out the leader, too. Sadam Hussein is now out of power and who knows what’s up with that now.
Now, Iraq is in a state of chaos because not only are they rising up against their US-imposed military state, they are battling for their views of what is right for them, with Sunni, Shia, and Kurds each thinking that they ought to lead the country.
In the Bible, Jesus says that what you do to the least of these, you do for me. If the Republican policy to decrease the funding for title 19 and limit Medicaid coverage says anything, it’ll have the least of these (er, Jesus) sick and dying without any way to pay for the expenses of getting them better. That’s ok because the Republicans are also the big anti-drug pushers, so these sick people will have no way to die painlessly. Maybe this is just the way, since Paul was such a big advocate of suffering in the New Testament. Hmmm, if that’s the case, then why aren’t all these Christian-right people wanting to suffer, too?
It seems like the new catch-phrase in political and religious areas seems to be the “culture of life,” especially in the Republican Party and what is termed ‘Christian right’ groups. Current events like the Terry Shiavo case and pro-life stance on abortion rights seem to echo this view of the culture of life. Or maybe they are serving as a camoflauge for the Republican Party’s true ideology behind their front of the culture of life.
Where did the thought of the culture of life originate? Actually, it was Pope John Paul II’s idea. Pope JP II had developed his campaign of the culture of life, reflecting the value of life Jesus gives to all people.
I think the primary push for me to begin blogging is the growing rate of so-called pro-lifers doing anti-life activities. As a Catholic voter, I have a very difficult time voting because neither the Republican nor the Democratic Party truly support all pro-life policies from pre-birth to death. The Republicans seem to support that some lives are way more important than others, especially those with more money or clout. The Democrats, claiming to be pro-choice, has been tagged at anti-life proponents by the opposition because they want to keep abortions legal.
There are a variety of government policies and laws that contradict the culture of life. The main policy currently in place now is the pre-emptive strike against Iraq and the war that has shattered many lives in that country and the soldiers that have lost their lives for a moot cause. This war is not saving any lives and is in fact putting more lives in jeopardy as these people show their animosity toward the US and this unjust war the US declared on their people. These citizens of Iraq did nothing wrong, yet, they are being punished by this war for the apparent actions of their leader Sadam Hussein for hiding WMDs, his mass killings of his own people, and other atrocities. Since the Bush regime did not find these WMDs, they have taken on the theory that this war is a humanitarian war.
What war is ever a humanitarian war? Wars do not usually hurt those in power, it hurts those (many of them innocent of whatever reason the war is being waged) that have to fight it and be in the thick of it. But wars are declared and fought precisely because of the dictates of a leader. In this war, however, the US did something that Geneva Convention does not condone, they took out the leader, too. Sadam Hussein is now out of power and who knows what’s up with that now.
Now, Iraq is in a state of chaos because not only are they rising up against their US-imposed military state, they are battling for their views of what is right for them, with Sunni, Shia, and Kurds each thinking that they ought to lead the country.
In the Bible, Jesus says that what you do to the least of these, you do for me. If the Republican policy to decrease the funding for title 19 and limit Medicaid coverage says anything, it’ll have the least of these (er, Jesus) sick and dying without any way to pay for the expenses of getting them better. That’s ok because the Republicans are also the big anti-drug pushers, so these sick people will have no way to die painlessly. Maybe this is just the way, since Paul was such a big advocate of suffering in the New Testament. Hmmm, if that’s the case, then why aren’t all these Christian-right people wanting to suffer, too?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
