Category Archives: Culture/Politics

Culture/Politics

Concerned

Leave a comment

Let’s play Mad Libs: the 2020 Politics edition.

“I can’t believe you support (political opinion)! So I guess you hate (group of people) and anyone who thinks (other political opinion) now, or something? I thought you were a (political affiliation), but now I’m not sure what you are or what you believe.”

Fun, right? Laughs a-plenty.

So much of today’s American politics feels like an all-or-nothing fight, a game of extreme positions with no in-between. If you say you support X, people assume you must completely support Y, and are 100% opposed to Z.

Yet politics—and pretty much everything meaningful in life—is more complex than that. We’ve been fed a steady diet of Either/Or and false dilemmas, so it seems like some of us have forgotten what it’s like to find common ground or work toward a compromise.

Ooh, they have graphics for cognitive biases as well!

If I post something that relates to Black Lives Matter, unless I write an additional paragraph of explanation and caveats, people assume I’m 100% in agreement with all of the organization’s stated political and cultural goals, and must therefore hate all police officers.

If I argue against someone’s interpretation of something President Trump says or that his administration does, people assume I believe everything the President tweets and support every action the Republican party takes.

Sometimes I question the more extreme folks on the Right, or challenge the assertions they make when it seems like their position is unfounded or disturbing. Immediately, commenters jump to the conclusion that I must be a bleeding heart liberal or some freedom-hating socialist. It’s as clear as day to everyone; obviously anyone who questions The Narrative is one of them, and not us.

Sometimes I question the more extreme folks on the Left, and challenge their assumptions about how our society should be organized or corrected. That leads to assumptions that I’m going to rallies along with Nazis and racists and calling them “good people.” Once again, obviously anyone who questions The Narrative is one of them, and not us.

I’ve been told that I hate America, and asked why it seems like I care so much about American politics since I don’t live in the States… even though I am a citizen and a veteran who served America’s interests in the military for 24 years.

I’ve been asked whether I’m struggling with some burden of white guilt, and have been told that I hate the groups I identify with. I’ve been asked “What happened to your logic and critical thinking” when I didn’t blindly go along with one side or the other, and have had my religious faith questioned for taking positions that don’t match what someone expected.

I’ve been told that it seems like I’m virtue signaling when I post so much, since someone didn’t see enough posts from me on a given subject in the past… but I am somehow also criticized for always and only posting about the same old subjects.

And of course, if you post something that seems to even tiptoe over the line to the Left or Right, people on the other side will assume you dove into the deep end and started drinking up the political pool water like Kool-Aid.

There are two boxes, only two, and you must be completely in one or the other. Nothing else exists… to the extent that we can become blind to any evidence or reasonable argument from the other side.

Well. That’s a probably too-long intro to a post no one will likely care about, but it’s a chance to get things off my chest.

So.

I’m concerned.

I’m concerned and grateful for the police—for people who I believe are generally putting their lives on the line to do an often thankless and dangerous job in order to keep people like me safe. I don’t walk in their shoes or claim to know the stresses they deal with on a daily basis, and I wouldn’t want to.

AND I am also concerned and disturbed when it seems like there is a significant pattern of excessive use of force against the civilians they protect and serve. The police act as agents of the government authorized to use lethal force. When there are so many instances of unwarranted force followed by false reporting that require civilian video footage to expose, it erodes trust and causes deep concern for how the authorities are exercising the power they wield.

Similarly, I’m concerned that “black lives matter” is a necessary affirmation in our country. There are too many videos and reports of lives needlessly and violently cut short, too many instances where there was no opportunity to comply with the police, too many situations where “don’t break the law and you’ll be fine” wasn’t good enough.

I think these views are valid and non-contradictory. I don’t have to choose one or the other.

I’m concerned about violence and riots, damage of property, and most crime. I think societies flourish when there are just laws and harmonious order, and so I worry when people are allowed to create and continue a state of destructive unrest.

AND I am also concerned when unidentified agents of the government roll up in unmarked vehicles, detain citizens without any charges or explanation, drive around with these citizens for an hour or more, and pressure them to waive constitutional rights. I am concerned when representatives of our government say, “That’s been working well, so we want to do the same thing across the country.”

I think you can be concerned about riots and unrest, and also concerned about governmental overreach and abuse of power. These aren’t mutually exclusive. It turns out there are lots of options and degrees of concern to choose from.

I’m concerned by a trend of vilifying and canceling anyone who dares dissent with conventional cultural wisdom. There are certainly vile opinions out there deserving of condemnation. However, it seems like some folks learned that if you can just label someone a Nazi or a racist—even when, or especially when it makes no logical sense—then you can ignore anything they say and make everyone want nothing to do with them.

AND I am also concerned by the ease with which so many brush aside the scars and any discussion of America’s checkered past regarding race. I am troubled by the seeming inability of many on the Right to even consider the possibility that there is a discussion to be had or that there are hurting voices to be heard.

I don’t think we should be holding our fingers in our ears pretending not to hear … nor do I feel like we should be screaming louder than someone else in order to shout down or ignore what they’re saying. It’s possible to hold both those views. Neither method helps us move forward as a people together.

Let’s speed this up.

I’m concerned about government taking too much control of Second Amendment freedoms, AND concerned about our society being the only developed country in the world experiencing waves of gun violence. Surely there is some middle ground.

I’m concerned about the ability of our country to maintain control of our borders and handle a large influx of aspiring immigrants, AND concerned about the ways we treat the powerless while they are in our custody.

I’m concerned about the ability of our citizens to exercise their faith AND concerned about the effects of prejudice upon the ostracized.

I’m concerned about our ability to maintain American interests abroad AND concerned about our seeming inability to handle some of the basic needs of our citizens.

I’m concerned about bias in media AND concerned about rejection of or politicization of science.

I’m concerned about dealing with prejudice and recognizing bias…

AND concerned with perspectives on the issue that go to wild extremes like rejecting the scientific method as “white culture.”

AND concerned with a bunch of people that cling to the monuments and flag of those who fought to stop people of color from being recognized as fully human, yet seem unable to understand why that might be upsetting.

AND concerned with identity politics and ideologies that claim “if you are a part of this group, you MUST feel X, and believe Y, and you are automatically considered Z. Otherwise, you’re not REALLY one of us.” In other words, you better get in a box.

I’m concerned about a lot of things.

I’m concerned that most of what we need to address in our society are issues of the heart… ideologies and mindsets that exist beyond the power of the pen that signs a law or the threat of government power to enforce that law.

I don’t have a solution for that concern, but it seems like a little empathy, humility, and respectful discourse go a long way.

The world is messy,
and complicated,
and colorful,
and multifaceted.

Societal issues are troubling,
and complex,
and galvanizing,
and heart-breaking.

America is beautiful,
and scarred,
and aspirational,
and flawed,
and always striving for better,
never satisfied.

I’m concerned… and I’m still proud to be a part of it.

Culture/Politics, Poetry

Sides

Leave a comment

I’d like to think that I maintain an open mind
Or at least I am not shy to take in what I find
But no matter how I’ve tried to see a view larger than mine
“It seems like you have picked a side,”
They say of me sometimes.

The comment leaves me wondering,
Who determined what sides exist?
Who set up the boundaries?
When did they announce all this?
Maybe there’s some information,
some important tweet I missed
That settles the determination
Of who’s for and who’s against
And what the issue really is.

In life it seems that so few things
Are cut so clear as A or B
But so many refuse to choose
To see all these complexities
And so we shout down any views
With which we feel we disagree
And paint them not as they communicate
But as unsafe extremes

It’s easier to reject than it is to reflect
It’s easier to ignore than it is to learn more
It’s easier to smear or sneer than take the time to truly hear
It’s easier to shut out than to pause and think about
And while I’d like to think that my own views are still quite fair
I must admit, I’ve found a side that I would like to share.

I choose the side that says the ones we authorize
To handle lethal force while risking their own lives
Should be respected, yes, of course,
But it should come as no surprise
That those trained and equipped with more
Would have a standard strict and high

I choose the side that sees a disconcerting pattern
Of deadly tragedies and lives that should’ve mattered
Dying doing things that I and my kids can do every day
Like driving,
gaming,
jogging,
sleeping,
going to the park to play.

I choose the side not satisfied to look some other ways,
Who don’t decide that they’re just tired of Facebook posts on race
Who don’t reply with “What about—” deflecting conversation
Who won’t sit silent with their doubts and worries for our nation
Who call out the hypocrisy when one side does what’s wrong
When just a few years earlier they sang a different song

I choose the side that says that we can look at more than one
Issue that’s dividing us from what we could get done.
We don’t have to act like we can only focus on one problem
When there’s plenty we could do if as a group we tried to solve ‘em

I choose the side that says we ought try to empathize
I think it’s worth a thought to see the struggle from another’s eyes

I choose the side that says that I know I don’t have it figured out
But listening to different voices and learning to shut my mouth
Has made some space for growth and maybe even fostered doubt
Where compassion and humility can find some fertile ground

I choose the side that doesn’t jump to find justification
And lose my mind when I see facts enduring alteration—
Obscured interpretation of a hurtful situation
And the sure perpetuation of unfounded allegation
And immediate assumption of some disqualification
That allows us to negate the arguments and proof we’re facing—
“Why, any lie is better than to be confronted by
The possibility that I could have to change my mind!”

It was not too long ago that I suppose I chose a side
When I watched all those before my eyes start drawing battle lines
When they dug their trenches and, with thoughts of war preoccupied,
They hunkered down into the ideologies they fortified

I recall an ancient tale of a city become battleground
One army huddled in their walls, the other army circled ‘round
Their leader then encountered one who called himself Commander
And he questioned this Newcomer with a single-minded manner
“Are you for us, or for our enemies,” he asked
“Neither,” came the answer that he never would’ve guessed

We might think it’s binary, every issue black and white,
Only options A or B, there’s a wrong and there’s a right
But I shall not be beholden to this warlike apparatus
And I will not offer loyalty to those seeking more status

Those who walk with certainty that it’s their camp that God inhabits
Think it fair to challenge me, “Why have you turned your anger at us?”

I do not stand my ground with pride, but I consider this:
I do not claim, “God’s on my side,” but ask, “Am I on His?”

Culture/Politics, Poetry, Writing

Sides

Leave a comment

I’d like to think that I maintain an open mind
Or at least I am not shy to take in what I find
But no matter how I’ve tried to see a view larger than mine
“It seems like you have picked a side,”
They say of me sometimes.

The comment leaves me wondering,
Who determined what sides exist?
Who established the boundaries?
When did they announce all this?
Maybe there’s some information,
Some important tweet I missed
That settles the determination
of who’s for and who’s against
And what the issue really is.

In life it seems that so few things are cut so clear as A or B
But so many refuse to choose to see all these complexities
And so we shout down any views with which we feel we disagree
And paint them not as they communicate but as unsafe extremes

It’s easier to reject than it is to reflect
It’s easier to ignore than it is to learn more
It’s easier to smear or sneer than take the time to truly hear
It’s easier to shut out than to pause and think about
And while I’d like to think that my own views are still quite fair
I must admit, I’ve found a side that I would like to share.

I choose the side that says the ones we authorize
to handle lethal force while risking their own lives
Should be respected, yes, of course,
But it should come as no surprise
That those trained and equipped with more
Would have a standard strict and high

I choose the side that sees a disconcerting pattern
of deadly tragedies and lives that should’ve mattered
Dying doing things that I and my kids can do every day
Like driving, gaming, jogging, sleeping, going to the park to play.

I choose the side not satisfied to look some other ways,
Who don’t decide that they’re just tired of Facebook posts on race
Who don’t reply with “What about—” deflecting conversation
Who won’t sit silent with their doubts and worries for our nation
Who call out the hypocrisy when one side does what’s wrong
When just a few years earlier they sang a different song

I choose the side that says that we can look at more than one
Issue that’s dividing us from what we could get done.
We don’t have to act like we can only focus on one problem
When there’s plenty we could do if as a group we tried to solve ‘em

I choose the side that says we ought try to empathize
I think it’s worth a thought to see the struggle from another’s eyes
I choose the side that says that I know I don’t have it figured out
But listening to different voices and learning to shut my mouth
Has made some space for growth and maybe even fostered doubt
Where compassion and humility can find some fertile ground

I choose the side that doesn’t jump to find justification
And lose my mind when I see facts enduring alteration,
Obscured interpretation of a hurtful situation
And the sure perpetuation of unfounded allegation
And immediate assumption of some disqualification
That allows us to negate the arguments and proof we’re facing
“Why, any lie is better than to be confronted by
The possibility that I could have to change my mind!”

It was not too long ago that I suppose I chose a side
When I watched all those before my eyes start drawing battle lines
When they dug their trenches and, with thoughts of war preoccupied,
They hunkered down into the ideologies they fortified

I recall an ancient tale of a city become battleground
One army huddled in their walls, the other army circled ‘round
Their leader then encountered one who called himself commander
And he questioned this newcomer with a single-minded manner
“Are you for us, or for our enemies,” he asked
“Neither,” came the answer that he never would’ve guessed

We might think it’s binary, every issue black and white,
Only options A or B, there’s a wrong and there’s a right
But I shall not be beholden to this warlike apparatus
And I will not offer loyalty to those seeking more status
Those who walk with certainty that it’s their camp that God inhabits
Think it fair to challenge me, “Why have you turned your anger at us?”

I do not stand my ground with pride, but I consider this:
I do not claim, “God’s on my side,” but ask, “Am I on His?”

Culture/Politics, Writing

Tweet Crossing

Leave a comment

The President needs a public relations rep to lock down his Twitter account.

Ok, at least someone needs to vet his messages before he tweets them.

Writing is hard; we all can use some constructive feedback and added perspective when we’re putting thoughts into words.

I mean, I know I’m not the first to think so, and I’m not saying anything profound or new.

A lot of people on the Left think he’s the worst; he can’t possibly do or say anything good; he should resign and go to jail, and so on. I think that’s extreme, but I don’t expect them to listen to me.

However, I also have a lot of friends who think that President Trump is God’s gift to America, freedom, and the world. So maybe I can speak to them and help them see something with a little more complexity than the all-or-nothing views of the Left and Right in America.

I’ll use a self-deprecating example and tie it to a popular game to gain sweet relevance points.

I started playing Animal Crossing: New Horizons a few weeks ago. My kids were playing it. My daughter (married and in the States) was playing it. She finally convinced my wife to play it. Video games aren’t really my wife’s thing, so it hit me that this was something we could all do which she wanted to do, instead of the usual situation where she does something (like play D&D) because I’m doing it.

Bonus! Count me in.

I had seen a little bit of how the game works—Tom Nook is this raccoon guy who keeps giving you upgrades to your house or island, but you keep owing him a ton of money and have to do a bunch of work for him while he stands around talking about how great the island is.

He has a couple of servants—err, co-workers? children? employees?—who run a store for him and do various tasks, and he delegates most responsibilities to you or them.

Almost everything on the island bears the company label.  

I laughed at the thought of him standing there like some despotic “Dear Leader” while his people toiled for the greatness of their newly settled island.

Maybe like Tom Jong Nook. Hmm… North Korea… Tom Nook… Nook Korea…

It sounds close, when you think that Nook rhymes with took or book.

They seemed so happy at first…

The double-o of “Nook” also looks like boot, toot, hoot, etc.

You can quickly see where this is a problem, even if I didn’t at the time.

If only I had an extra set of eyes or someone who could’ve said, “Dave, do you realize what it sounds like you’re calling your island?”

To be fair, I didn’t ask anyone first. I understood my joke. I knew what I meant. I had the best words.

(I restarted the island and used the name of the fictional country from Papers Please because my 9-year old has been running around saying, “Glory to Arstotzka” every so often. Which is its own long story.)

So, what else has the same double-o sound as boot… Loot? Shoot?

I’ve had conservatives try to explain this away and claim that it couldn’t possibly mean threatening violence. “It’s just stating a fact. When people start looting, sometimes people get shot. No threats intended. And isn’t the real problem the crime taking place? What about—“

Let’s be serious.

At absolute best, “benefit of the doubt level 100,” the tweet in question is poorly written if you want to avoid misunderstanding.

In the same sentence, there is a promise that military intervention will take place if there is any difficulty, followed by the clause “but when the looting starts, the shooting starts.”

That connects those thoughts and subjects, even if the connection was unintentional.

That’s basic grammar.

If someone wanted to bring up a connection between looting and shooting as an inconvenient truth, and a warning that these situations are dangerous, or whatever innocent meaning the Never-Wrongers believe was intended, then he could have just written that thought in a completely separate tweet.

Tweets are free.

Some people clearly know that and use that to their advantage to make their voice heard. All. The. Time.

What’s the lesson here?

A moment of introspection can sometimes answer the difficult question of “How could what I am saying be taken? Is that how I mean for it to be taken? How can I say it so that my meaning is more clear?”

However, we’re notoriously bad at seeing beyond our own perspective. That’s where it helps to get input from professionals. Ancient wisdom tells us that “Where there is no counsel, the people fall; but in the multitude of counselors there is safety.”

Maybe at least one or two.

A writer should probably work with an editor before publishing a book. A corporation or public figure should probably get some input before putting an off-the-cuff statement out there.

Also, remember, tweets are free. You can post a lot of them! Like, so many.

If all that fails, get Animal Crossing and start working to pay back Tom Nook. You get in a lot less trouble that way.

Culture/Politics

Burned Out

Leave a comment

I came across this post while browsing the Facebooks, and I was already thinking about how often anyone who doesn’t agree with the Right on my friends list gets called a sheep or treated as though their one and only motivation for everything they do is fear.

https://mariomurilloministries.wordpress.com/2020/05/16/christians-who-blindly-put-their-trust-in-state-officials-are-going-to-get-burned/

Mario Murillo has this post about responding to the government response to the pandemic. While I can get behind a little bit of it, most of it feels like skepticism and fear peddled as “the true faithful’s viewpoint.”

He does say fairly that, whether you feel like you should re-open your church or keep your church closed, the important thing is that you are doing what you feel led by God to do, and not just trying to appease some government or politicians. The person keeping their church closed should be seeking to please God, and the person opening their church should be honoring God and following His lead, NOT thumbing their nose at politicians or trying to rebel against authority.

I can appreciate that as a sort of reasonable olive branch extended to people on both sides. He even implies that pastors who seek to follow God might keep their church closed as an act of obedient faith.

But then he descends into all his reasons why we should re-open, making arguments that I feel work just as effectively against his case as they provide support.

First, anything less than “re-open everything now” is falling into the evil plans of the Left.

The funny thing to me is that while everyone on the “re-open now” side is accusing the other side of fear, they’re operating out of fear just as much. Oh, they call it wisdom. “Never trust the government! Or Big Pharma! Or science!” But it looks and feels like paranoia.

It’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you! I saw a YouTube video about this. (/sarcasm)

Murillo claims that the goal post was moved, that we all were lied to, that the new end state requirement is “having a cure.”

No one is anticipating having a cure, but they do want to try to develop an effective vaccine. Those are different things. Vaccines don’t always work for everything; Dr. Fauci even warned Congress about this just recently, though I feel like the headline is misleading.

Developing the right vaccine is a process, and they’re trying to end up with something that can help counter the spread and the danger of the disease. But no, it’s not a cure, so maybe be more careful with your choice of words.

Murillo also says, “What about the flu?” as if that’s not the most tired argument. “The flu kills about 40K a year and we aren’t shutting down for that…”

But we’re already at 90K dead in about 4 months at most since corona came to the US. So, since we’re already more than double the number of deaths in less than half the time all while taking the most drastic preventative measures to stop the spread that any of us can probably remember within our lifetimes, can we shut up about comparisons to the flu?

But yes, it’s the Left that’s exaggerating everything. You know, as they do. Thankfully the Right is ever the bastion of truth. (sarcasm again. They should make a font for it.)

No, actually, most of what I hear from the panic-stricken Right is an exaggeration as well. “Our coronavirus response? It’s so good. We’re doing really well. Everything is great. We’re the best. We’re the reasonable side.”

When facing an unknown and dangerous situation, most people aim to err on the side of caution, because you can regret overreacting to a thing, but can’t really take back under-reacting to a global pandemic. There isn’t a reset button on this game we’re playing.

Murillo says that our witness will be ruined because so many people feel as though government tyranny is upon us, and some churches will have gone right along with it. “How do you think people will view us when they realize that their freedoms are being taken away?” (Sure, no fear on this side of the debate, just wisdom.)

I’ve seen plenty of witness ruined when people look on dumbfounded as church-goers flout the restrictions and demand to meet in large groups. We look bad to a large portion of the population when we can’t comply with restrictions for safety; to them, it seems like we’re content to put our neighbors and friends at risk, which is generally considered “not loving” behavior.

Some don’t get upset at us, however. They laugh and eagerly anticipate the faithful catching the virus, something they then use as an emotional appeal to “Where was your god when you were meeting to worship him?” It’s a weak logical or philosophical argument, but it plays well in the soundbites and memes of social media.

Murillo says the courts are striking down some elements of these lockdown orders.

Great news! Isn’t it?

It’s like the system of checks and balances in government still functions just fine. I was assured this was tyranny on the rise in the previous paragraph but now you’re telling me that tyranny is being stopped by the tyrannical government. Well, thank goodness!

Oh, but the clincher is “the litmus test” for reopening or not. “Find me one single avid fan of America remaining closed who does not also hate Trump.” These people would rather see thousands die than see Trump reelected! (In other words, here’s a dose of fear of the other side, mixed with politics, because we know that politics is the most important thing when we’re talking about your faith.)

“There’s no way God is in that—and you are going to get burned.”

But what about the stories of churches suffering losses of members or even pastors who got coronavirus after pushing back on the restrictions? A quick Google search brings up dozens of results of pastors dealing with the physical, immediate consequences of their stance.

(I tried re-finding the stories I read, which are described below, but I couldn’t pull them out of the wide range of similar stories with pastors who are more blatant or belligerent in their insistence that yes they must hold church and no little virus is going to stop them.)

Many churches are experiencing needless pain and regret. There’s a pastor in Canada now saying, “I wish I could go back and do it different” after two members of the congregation are dead and a few dozen got covid. Their group actually practiced some level of precaution and social distancing. There’s a choir of over a hundred members that went on meeting in the Pacific Northwest, and (if memory serves) 81 of the 120 or so got covid.

You’re telling me God is in that? You’re telling me those people didn’t get burned by a willful insistence to keep on doing normal things in the face of a pandemic?

Murillo throws in that the courts consider some of these governors and politicians “criminals.” Again, his word choice is incendiary and meant to elicit a reaction from the base. These politicians are not being charged with crimes. The judicial branch is exercising its authority to put a check on the executive branch by saying, “No, you don’t have the right to do that.” That’s how our system of government is designed to work. But ok, the Left are the ones always exaggerating everything.

All that aside, let me get back to this idea that anyone who disagrees with or opposes re-opening does so out of hatred for President Trump.

I have better things to do than to hate him, although I have a lot of issues with how he has handled the job. I also don’t consider myself an “avid fan” of America remaining closed.

See, that’s the problem with all of this. It’s all described in extremes, either because they know a highly polarized audience will rabidly consume fresh meat and keep the support going strong, or because they will then have the wiggle room to say, “Oh, I wasn’t talking about anyone who is being rational about this… I was merely talking about the vocal fringe on the other side of the American political spectrum.”

In so many of the posts and views shared on socials, it’s all-or-nothing, acting like only two options exist. Either you support opening everything and returning to normal with no restrictions or changes… or you’re a fear-mongering sheep trying to destroy the economy! Either you support closing everything and staying indoors until the end of forever, or you are literally trying to kill everyone’s grandma!

A rational person might conclude, “These are complex issues, with a lot of factors, some of which we may not even be aware of at the moment. We have to make careful decisions that try to take all these considerations into account.” That usually leads to some middle-of-the-road, common ground, “I respect your stance but I hope you also respect mine, and together we should respect these facts.”

Not with the current state of the Republichurch party.

It all feels like a big game–maybe a little too much like a televangelist’s pitch. “Don’t trust THEM, they’re out to getcha! Trust me, and pray about sending me support money. They’re trying to make you afraid! I, however, am merely a humble servant sharing truth as I know it.”

Yeah, no thanks.

Yes, I see fear from the Left in the media and on socials. But I see so much more fear from the Christian Right – the very ones who in the same posts proclaim how much everyone else is motivated by fear.

“Do you know what George Soros said? Do you know what Bill Gates did? Do you know about the shadow conspiracy that’s working to take over the world and strip us all of our freedoms? YOU’RE PLAYING RIGHT INTO THEIR HANDS BY GIVING IN TO FEAR! Whereas I am sane and calm and Aware of Things.”

I like Murillo’s point that the church should be a beacon of hope for America. Would that we had more Christians in America and less political pundits—people sharing a Gospel that transforms lives instead of a diatribe that secures votes, showing the love of a transcendent God instead of blind devotion to a party or movement, souls sold out to Jesus instead of selling out to win another election.

I’m not feeling burned; I look at the Right, and I feel burned out.

Culture/Politics, Worship

Dear Me by Nichole Nordeman

Leave a comment

I bought Nichole Nordeman’s recent album, Every Mile Mattered, as a gift for my wife. We both love her depth and probing questions implied or directly stated in her lyrics from previous albums, so it was an easy decision.

I bought it, but I didn’t actually listen to it. The songs sat on my iPhone and iPad, untouched, although I occasionally placed them in to playlists for Christian music or perhaps nice background music for writing.

I had the latter on shuffle when “Dear Me” came up. It caught my attention–demanded it, really. I stopped what I was doing, googled the lyrics, and felt the message resonate with my being. Her mixture of idealism and sorrow stirred up some old things in the kettle of my heart.

The song captures what I want my faith to look like, and hits me hard because of how often I know I haven’t measured up, how often I believed the convenient party line about God’s blessings for me, instead of the messy and difficult stuff involving loving others sacrificially.

Growing up in church, how many times have I seen the “magic words” of Christian marketing pass like a wave through American middle-class suburban church culture? Whether it’s a WWJD bracelet, or a Prayer of Jabez keychain, or a Purpose-Driven Life merchandise blitz, or some new study or some new worship album or some new website that is the cutting edge of everything God is doing…

How often has the mystery and the transcendent sacred been distilled into the merchandise and the catchy slogan? How often have I gone right along?

When has my faith looked beyond what Christ is and does for me? Do I believe He came so I could live my best life now, or do I believe He called me to live His life in the here and now?

Time and again in Scripture, we see a God who is concerned about the orphan and the widow, the homeless and the prisoner. We see His people judged, not simply because they broke some religious law or strict code, but more often because of how they treated–or ignored–the plight of those less fortunate.

The prophets tell the people of Israel that God is sick of the rituals, the displays of so-called worship, the sacrifices and the religious checklist they maintain. Isaiah 58 is a prime example. “Is this not the fast I have chosen?” God declares, then lists off what He considers real worship: fighting injustice, breaking oppression, feeding the hungry, sheltering the poor, clothing the naked, reaching out to others.

I don’t want to get political here, but maybe if we hear those things and think, “Now we’re getting political,” then it says something about our politics and how they line up with Scripture.

Dear me:

Maybe what you’ve been told to believe about Jesus and what He would or wouldn’t do isn’t the same as what your book says He did.
Maybe there are no magic words in there, but there are life-giving words instead…
Ones that aren’t just meant to bless you, but to extend the blessing to the ones God says He cares about the most.

Culture/Politics

A Tale Of Two Interviews

Leave a comment

I saw this pop up on my Facebook feed today.


Though I didn’t care for all his politics, I enjoyed listening to President Obama as a public speaker. I’m sure some of that credit belongs to good speech writers, but still… I felt like here’s a guy who can make a coherent case for the position he holds, even if I don’t agree with him.

I tried to imagine how this interview might go with the current administration:

“Have you ever read Reinhold Niebuhr?”
“Who?” Trump smirked. “Is that an op-ed guy from some fake news media site? I don’t—“
“He’s a philosopher, Mister President.”
“Oh.” Trump shakes his head. “The thing with those guys is—I mean, it’s great to have people who sit around thinking really deep about stuff, but in business you don’t have time for, you know, I’m going to—what about the human condition and how does it play into—you’re there to win, and be great, and make good deals.”
“Of course,” I respond. “But wouldn’t you say there’s—“
“You know, we have a lot of guys that want to read this or that guy, what does he think about, I don’t know, poverty or diplomacy or whatever. But as a successful businessman, I learned the value of fast action—you just go after it and get it done, which—I think that’s kind of a philosophy of it’s own. Maybe the best philosophy. I wrote a book about it, you know. The Art of the Deal. Have you read it?” 
He flashes a grin. “I’ll turn the tables on you. What do you think of Donald Trump?”
Before I can come up with an appropriate response, he laughs, waves me off with one hand, and goes on. “Not that it really matters. I know how many copies it sold. One of the best books in America, the best. What was your question again?”

To any of my friends on the Right, #sorrynotsorry and I hope some day the President proves me wrong. I look forward to that day like a thirsting man in the desert crawling toward an oasis.

To my friends on the Left, don’t become what you hate about the Right—because there’s a lot of mindless groupthink on your side too.

I long for the return of politics where we can communicate with one another and actually discuss the merits and concerns of any given policy or change. 

I’m beyond tired of party-line foul-atics, where all that matters is your slavish devotion to whatever your party’s gods and goddesses deem correct. “I support this initiative.” Why? “Because it’s what’s best. I saw a piece by (Alex Jones / Rachel Maddow), so I know this is what the country needs.”

Whether it’s Tomi Lahren getting fired on the Right because she disagreed with the party norm about abortion, or people dog-piling something Bill Maher or Jon Stewart says which goes against the flow, tribalism fuels this kind of “politics” instead of thought.
We have had eloquent Presidents in the past, and we can again. Fair point. 

More importantly, we also have been an eloquent, educated, considerate people in the past. We can become that again.

Culture/Politics

Knock It Off

Leave a comment

In my time as an aircrew member in the Air Force, the most valuable training I received is a course called Crew Resource Management, or CRM. The short version is “this is how you talk to people so that you probably don’t die.”

Put multiple humans together on an airplane (or a flight of single-seat aircraft working in conjunction) and communication becomes essential, vital to both mission success and safety.

Even though we’re all in the same metal tube hurtling through the sky, getting this many people to communicate in a critical situation is more difficult than it seems. (This crew was awesome at it.)

In CRM, we learn the common causes of human error, the contributing factors in safety accidents and incidents, the price of breakdowns in communication, and the expensive cost in equipment and human lives when someone doesn’t take the time to listen to and recognize the importance of information that could avert disaster.

All too often, a jet slams into a mountain or wanders into an unsafe situation even despite the fact that people on board were aware of the problem and vocalized the impending danger. That’s the other side of this training—learning that you might be the one standing in the way of safety, ignoring the information that could keep your mission from failing or save your life.

We must be able to talk and get each other’s attention. We have to be able to focus everyone’s minds on the key bits of information that might mean life or death.

To that end, we learn key words and phrases that every aircrew member knows. “I am concerned about what we are doing right now. I feel unsafe because of this situation. I don’t have a clear picture of what is going on and where we are headed as a crew.”

The phrase to trump all others? “Knock it off.”

In a training environment, that means “Stop playing whatever game or exercise we’re doing, everybody shut up a minute, and let’s make sure we’re doing the right thing.”

When a crisis develops, it means “everybody, cease all the distractions and focus on the critical situation taking place right now.”

One might think that the training solves all our problems, but that’s not the case. Despite every aircrew member receiving the same recurring briefings and classes, some people still don’t get it and drop the ball when a moment of miscommunication arises.

I’ve said all these terms to an aircraft commander on behalf of a dozen peers in the back end of the jet, in conjunction with support and agreement from other officers onboard, only to watch the guy in charge ignore what’s an ingrained response. Sometimes we get stubbornly convinced of how right we are and nothing can dissuade us, no matter how many people say it, no matter how they put it into words.

CRM and Knock-It-Off are designed to help us see those weaknesses, but they can’t fix everything.

This morning I read headlines about George H. W. Bush and some of his negative thoughts on President Trump’s performance. Apparently, George W. Bush has also expressed some disapproval about this administration’s performance.

Judging by the comments section, both the Bushes are traitors, or political hacks, or so arrogant as to presume that the Oval Office was owed to one of their family members. It’s an all-too-familiar turning upon and tearing apart a member of the pack when they go against the grain.

I used to be amazed watching conservatives eat their own—shifting from “they’re awesome” to vilifying and condemning as traitors anyone that didn’t support the party’s pet issue or candidate.
No one is safe from this shifting allegiance. Go against the accepted view, and you’re a RINO, you’re the swamp, you’re bleeding from your whatever, you’re a hack, you’re a liberal in disguise, you’re finally revealing your true colors and you should have been hated all along.

Whatever you are, you’re never a person expressing your convictions or concerns out of faithful devotion to what you understand as conservative ideals. You’re never a person asking serious questions because you want your political party to succeed and do well.

I guess let’s add both George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush to the ever-growing list of people not Right enough for the Right.

Reagan himself could rise from the grave today, declare his disappointment with what the Right has become, and yet people would say, “I always knew he was just another big-mouthed Hollywood blowhard actor who thinks their movie career means people should listen to them.”

(President Reagan speaking in Minneapolis 1982, by Michael Evans. Public Domain.)
Well, Hollywood, there you go again… 

This is why I can’t identify with anything coming from the Right Wing anymore… because for so many of them, it’s a one-strike, you’re-out system demanding mindless devotion to whatever the core of the party does or says. Agree or get out of here, you faker.

We have to be able to talk in order to succeed. We have to be able to raise concerns and those need to be addressed in a serious manner if there’s going to be a foundation of mutual trust within the party’s ranks.

We make fun of the Left for expecting everyone to fall in line on certain issues (try surviving as a pro-life Democrat, for example). We’re just as guilty if not worse.

Conservatives, I am concerned about what we are doing right now. I feel that our party is moving into unsafe territory, putting ourselves at risk. Many of us in the base don’t have a clear picture of where we are headed as a party.

Conservatives, knock it off.

Culture/Politics, Poetry

Remember Your Training

4 Comments

I’m trying to process the verdict in the case of Philando Castile’s death. With the dashcam video now publicly released, I can only shake my head and wonder how anyone can justify or explain away his shooting.

I’m not a trained officer. I’m totally an armchair quarterback. I’m not privy to all the details revealed in court. It’s easy to second-guess and hindsight is 20-20 and all that

I know every situation is different and no two officers might respond the same to a given encounter. I understand that an officer is at risk and is naturally going to be thinking about how to protect themselves. I am deeply grateful for those who are willing to wear a badge and place themselves in harm’s way to maintain law and order in our society. I want police officers going home to their families at the end of their shifts…

…But I want civilians going home to their loved ones too.

Every situation is different and yet there are videos of white dudes walking around waving guns at police officers, and they don’t end up shot… videos of white guys wrestling cops and reaching for their guns, but they don’t end up choked to death or gunned down at close range… instances of white guys shooting up churches or movie theaters and ending up in cuffs to face trial when other people are sitting in their cars complying with an officer’s instructions and that’s a life-threatening situation.

Again, every situation is different, and I’m not privy to all the details. But I would have to be intentionally blind or ignorant to pretend there’s not an obvious trend toward increased use of force against minorities. Studies show higher use of non-lethal force against minorities is a fact. Incidents of lethal force by the statistics may not be higher but the perception certainly exists and it’s causing distrust between police and the communities they serve.

I saw a video marketing a cheap sleeve that holds all one’s identification and vehicle paperwork. Before an officer approaches the car, you can place that over the door so that everything is readily available, and no reaching for anything is necessary, thus preventing any fear or misunderstanding when you comply with the direction to produce paperwork or identification.

It sounds like an unfortunate necessity after what was done to Castile, who seemingly tried to do everything right.

At some point I feel like we need to ask, how much fear is enough when dealing with a police officer? How compliant must one be? How deferential, how cautious, how meticulous in every response, every motion, every action?

Do civilians – particularly civilians of color – have to behave as if professionally trained for encounters with police? It sure seems that way… and it makes me wonder why it’s not the other way around.

—–

“Remember your training and come back safe

to the land of the free and the home of the brave”

It’s a speech that we save for those fully grown

For soldiers deploying into a war zone

For young men and women just over eighteen

Who experience challenges we’ve never seen

But for far too many, that’s not the first time they’ve heard

Someone giving them warning with similar words

We say all lives matter but it’s clear that they don’t

And we say it gets better but it looks like it won’t

And we hush down the voices loud and outspoken

And we tell them relax, let’s not fix what’s not broken

And we say each encounter has some subtle difference

And we remind the protesters to presume others’ innocence

But the man in the car who did all that was asked of him

Got shot with his daughter in the back seat to witness it

Seems to me there’s a pattern anyone can make out

Clear enough to see beyond all reasonable doubt:

Out playing? Get shot.

Obeying? Get shot.

Run away? Get shot.

Wedding day? Get shot.

Ask why? Get shot.

Comply? Get shot.

Justified? It’s not!

It’s a speech that some give to their kids ‘cause they have to

If you want to live through this, better know what to do

Hands in sight, Sir or Ma’am, be polite, watch your tone

And if you can help it don’t get stopped alone

But maybe live-stream everything from your phone

Otherwise your side might never be known

If it’s your word or theirs, you’re going to to lose

But remember, take care with the actions you choose

‘Cause all they need to say is they feared for their life

And then anything that they do’s justified

So remember your training and come back safe

In this land of the “free” and this home of the “brave”

Culture/Politics

Christian Stars vs. the Forces of Evil

Leave a comment

There’s a movie coming out soon that–from a Gospel perspective–has an awesome story of love:

…love that does not judge based on the outward appearance but looks into the heart… 

…love that sacrifices, that willingly leaves comfort and wealth behind, accepting separation and lowered status… 

…love that is powerful enough to break a curse and redeem the soul everyone thought lost….

What an opportunity to point out the parallels to Christ and the Good News. 

But two minutes of questionable content can ruin all of that, if someone is so inclined.

If you haven’t heard all the hooplah, there’s a scene in the new live-action Beauty and the Beast which shows a man having feelings for another man, thus inviting a firestorm of judgment by concerned Christians on social media. Some are even going so far as to say that Belle’s love for Beast is an encouragement toward bestiality, further proof of the Magic Kingdom’s depravity! (/sarcasm)

Numerous Christian leaders have come forward to condemn the inclusion of a gay man having a romantic interest in another male character. It doesn’t help Disney’s cause that this news broke alongside another boundary-pushing moment, this time in a cartoon on Disney XD.


During a scene depicting a school dance, at one point all the pairs of students kiss. If you look away from the main characters and pay attention to all the shaded characters included as props for the scene, you’ll see that there are some same-sex couples mixed in with all the heterosexual couples. 

This didn’t escape the Religious Right’s notice, and–coupled with the scene from Beauty and the Beast–a number of big-name leaders are calling for a boycott of all things Disney. (Good luck. Run down the list of all their affiliates and companies they’ve absorbed, and there’s a high chance you’re enjoying some Disney entertainment without realizing it.)

The biggest fear all these leaders have? We can’t have Disney pushing an agenda of “normalizing” homosexuality. 

Here’s the thing: When we’re talking about between 2% and 10% of the population, it may sound small, but that’s a pretty sizeable group. That’s between 7 and 35 million people in the US.  (Here’s a good break-down on that controversial 10% number.) 

Not good enough? Not a big enough population to deserve any sort of attention?

Imagine someone claiming that every leftie on TV or in a movie was part of an agenda to “normalize” being left-handed. Picture a public figure claiming we should boycott a company because of their agenda of normalizing red hair. The population demographics are roughly the same. (2% average for red-heads, with some populations like Scotland and Ireland boasting 13% and 10% respectively. 10% for left-handed people across the board.)

Including a group, putting a token character or token couples into a scene–that’s not an agenda of normalization, that’s recognizing their existence.

Do we consider Uhura and Sulu in Star Trek as part of some aggressive agenda? African-Americans make up ~12% of the US population, and Asian-Americans make up ~5%. 

I think rationally we can look back and say, yes, Gene Roddenberry was pushing boundaries. But he was displaying the reality that yes, there are people who are black or Asian. At the time, it may have riled some viewers, but now we generally look back and applaud his forward vision and inclusive casting. 

I can already hear the argument coming: “Well, it’s different with homosexuality, because I believe it’s a choice.”

Let’s go with that. A lot of things are choices, and we see them normalized if not glorified all across media, yet there’s little outcry against it.

Sexualized characters? Heterosexual relationships outside of marriage? Infidelity? Promiscuity? Where are all the boycotts for all the companies that engage in “normalizing” this behavior?

Greed? Jealousy? Pride? All of these character traits are constantly on display–quite often it’s the hero or heroine who engages in these sins. Sometimes there’s a moral to the story and the downside is shown, but quite often, there are no consequences to this kind of behavior. Is that the good Christian message we want?

What about overweight characters? Perhaps we let the “agenda of gluttony” slip by under the radar because most often, fat characters are used solely as comic relief–an issue that merits its own post. Or perhaps we can look at the congregation filling the pews in real life and so we shy away from this one… it hits too close to home, or too near to the all-you-can-eat place we’re going to after the service.

Violence is the biggest one of the bunch. Some movies make it a point to display the horrors of war or the cruelty and heartlessness of criminals or villains, and maybe there’s an argument for why those depictions matter in the context of those stories. (Saving Private Ryan, for example, would probably not be as hard-hitting without the hyper-graphic rendition of the Normandy landing on D-Day.)

But how often do we watch entertainment that includes graphic violence? How often are our children exposed to such movies or TV shows? Some studios avoid all the gore and blood, or present enemies that are probably more tolerable, like armies of Ultrons or robotic aliens. But having visited the theater for a number of recent movie releases that fall under the Disney umbrella, I can say that our culture sees no serious problem with kids watching a ton of violent content. 

Why aren’t we protesting the normalization of violence–something we all hope our children will never witness in their entire lives? And yet a movie with positive messages and powerful potential allegory is subject to boycott because “oh dear, it has one of the gays in it, and I wouldn’t want my kids to think that’s normal even though they’ll likely encounter actual gay people all throughout their lives.”

It’s a fact. Redheads exist. So do lefties. And so do homosexuals. Pretending they don’t is a foolish plan. Actively protesting anything that acknowledges their existence or recognizes them as fellow human beings?

The only agenda we’ll impact that way is our own.