From wherever Spring arrives, to heal the ground.
From wherever searching comes, the look itself.
A trace of what we're looking for, so be quiet now.... and wait.
The ocean...
... is growing...
The tide is coming...
... here it is...
Here is our King.
Here is our Love.
Here is our God whose come, to bring us back to Him!.
And what was said to the rose to make it unfold?
Was said to me here in my chest, so be quiet now... and rest.
The ocean...
... is growing...
The tide is coming...
... here it is...
Here is our King.
Here is our Love.
Here is our God whose come, to bring us back to Him!
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Instit. of Physics report on AGW
The AGW (manmade global warming) "crisis" is falling apart.
Al Gore is not happy about it, but he can console himself with the tens of millons of $$ he's made selling this "Sky is Falling" cockamamy. He puts on a mad face, but he's no doubt laughing all the way to the bank. See his mad face here in today's New York Times:
"I can't believe Fox News has ruined my scam!"
Here's the opening snippet. If you enjoy smarmy self-congratulatory vision-questing dressed up with hyperbolic paranoiac delusion, you'll enjoy the whole thing:
"It would be an enormous relief if the recent attacks on the science of global warming actually indicated that we do not face an unimaginable calamity requiring large-scale, preventive measures to protect human civilization as we know it."
You'll note - if you are able to read Gore's rant - his use of the word "consensus" to support the science. This will immediately reveal to you that Al is not doing science; he's pretending to play at science. Science is not done by consensus. That's called "politics". We build coalitions of agreement around our "take" on an issue. This is what Gore has been doing, and all he has done.
Unfortunately for Al, people (smart ones, really...people with college degrees in science, and everything!) are exposing the fraud.
Here's the latest I found today. It's a report to the UK Parliament by The Institute of Physics.
They are commenting on the CRU at The Univ of East Anglia's emails, and much more. The Institute notes the corruption of the science, and the failure by the CRU "scientists" to follow established scientific protocols (aka The Scientific Method).
Read it all... it's a quick read:
"Someone needs to shut these folks up!" - Al Gore
My take: Let's keep the planet as clean as possible. We can do that, but NOT if we put mandatory government imposed carbon restrictions and taxes on Americans.
That will make the world dirtier. Carbon demand will not cease; carbon production will simply shift overseas, along with most manufacturing.
Results?
But Gore will be fine... somewhere in the Caymans or Seychelles, enjoying the fruits of his labor.
Al Gore is not happy about it, but he can console himself with the tens of millons of $$ he's made selling this "Sky is Falling" cockamamy. He puts on a mad face, but he's no doubt laughing all the way to the bank. See his mad face here in today's New York Times:
"I can't believe Fox News has ruined my scam!"
Here's the opening snippet. If you enjoy smarmy self-congratulatory vision-questing dressed up with hyperbolic paranoiac delusion, you'll enjoy the whole thing:
"It would be an enormous relief if the recent attacks on the science of global warming actually indicated that we do not face an unimaginable calamity requiring large-scale, preventive measures to protect human civilization as we know it."
You'll note - if you are able to read Gore's rant - his use of the word "consensus" to support the science. This will immediately reveal to you that Al is not doing science; he's pretending to play at science. Science is not done by consensus. That's called "politics". We build coalitions of agreement around our "take" on an issue. This is what Gore has been doing, and all he has done.
Unfortunately for Al, people (smart ones, really...people with college degrees in science, and everything!) are exposing the fraud.
Here's the latest I found today. It's a report to the UK Parliament by The Institute of Physics.
They are commenting on the CRU at The Univ of East Anglia's emails, and much more. The Institute notes the corruption of the science, and the failure by the CRU "scientists" to follow established scientific protocols (aka The Scientific Method).
Read it all... it's a quick read:
"Someone needs to shut these folks up!" - Al Gore
My take: Let's keep the planet as clean as possible. We can do that, but NOT if we put mandatory government imposed carbon restrictions and taxes on Americans.
That will make the world dirtier. Carbon demand will not cease; carbon production will simply shift overseas, along with most manufacturing.
Results?
- Dirtier world. Both energy development AND manufacturing of goods and services will move to less environmentally-stringent areas of the world.
- America will lose much of its producer base, and therefore much of its REAL wealth-producing capacity. Impoverishment of America follows.
But Gore will be fine... somewhere in the Caymans or Seychelles, enjoying the fruits of his labor.
Saturday, February 27, 2010
VDH... Read him and reap!
Over on the side bar there you'll see a link to Victor Davis Hanson's website. He's a Classicist and resident Historian at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
He is grounded in history going back to ancient times, specializing in Classical Greece.
It really is amazing how history repeats itself, and VDH brings this to life. Unfortunately, we're living through a predictable moment in human history.
Here's a snippet from his most recent:
In other words, Greece is the canary in the mine of the impending crack-up of the modern welfare state. It is a great gift to us all, this example. A year ago, the socialists, even as they were juggling and falsifying their books, were bragging that the Wall Street meltdown was a referendum — and capitalism was doomed. Now, the entire socialist dream is exposed and even the most ardent statist knows that there is no longer enough “others” to pay the tab.
Read the whole thing here:
Where Did Our Real Wealth Go?
He is grounded in history going back to ancient times, specializing in Classical Greece.
It really is amazing how history repeats itself, and VDH brings this to life. Unfortunately, we're living through a predictable moment in human history.
Here's a snippet from his most recent:
In other words, Greece is the canary in the mine of the impending crack-up of the modern welfare state. It is a great gift to us all, this example. A year ago, the socialists, even as they were juggling and falsifying their books, were bragging that the Wall Street meltdown was a referendum — and capitalism was doomed. Now, the entire socialist dream is exposed and even the most ardent statist knows that there is no longer enough “others” to pay the tab.
Read the whole thing here:
Where Did Our Real Wealth Go?
The Skeptic's Prayer
Deep in our hearts and at our most honest moments, we all confront the fact that the existence of God is at least possible... and maybe even likely and probable.
Still, the ability to conjure up faith in God (however God is conceived of) escapes many of us.
To those who have this faith, it is a gift. They can't explain it, or locate its source tangibly and empirically.
They consider it a gift because it is an unexplainable resource that gives them hope and strength to live their life. They wouldn't be without it, yet they can't explain it AND they can't convey to those without it how powerful a force - and real a force - it is.
For some, this faith is just a tiny spark, barely noticeable. For others, a raging bonfire.
Those without this kind of faith don't understand it, and don't feel the need for it, yet even they will admit it appears real to those who do have it. And probably (deep down in their hearts) they would like there to be a God who cares about and loves them, and who will walk with them through "the valley of the shadow of death".
Then of course, there are those without faith who could care less. They are perfectly content, and ultimately have no fear or concern about the end of life; after all, why fear "sweet nothingness"? Makes sense!
But what does the honest skeptic do? After all, he's stuck. The honest skeptic is stuck in limbo between belief and unbelief. The result? The honest skeptic typically abdicates choosing between the two because there is no proof. He wants to know Truth, but lacks proof.
No proof = no commitment either way.
But there's a truth that must be confronted. They never will have proof (empirical, worldly, scientific).
If they are honest with themselves, they'll acknowledge that.
They will also acknowledge that "not doing" something is a form of inactive "doing". They have chosen to not decide, and this - when it comes right down to it - is the choice of unbelief.
But what if there are eternal consequences to our choice of belief or unbelief?
And what if our choice of unbelief (whether through omission or commission) is honored by the God who gave us the choice in the first place?
We don't want Him, so he doesn't impose Himself. He is all-powerful and perfect. He perfectly respects our freedom to not choose Him.
But what if He is the "fuel" we were made to run on. What if nothing else really works to make our engine hum? Oh sure...we might limp along, sputtering and stalling throughout eternity, but what if we could have been a Formula One racer?
What if we missed out on being an eternal Jean Luc Picard, exploring God's infinite creation, doing God's infinite work, fueled by His infinite love and inexpressible joy?
This is what the God of the Bible offers us. It's an offer. He is humble so He doesn't force us to accept.
But what if you want to accept and you just can't? The gift of faith is simply eluding you?
You have to pray. You ASK God for the gift. "Asking" is powerful! (Test: Go ask your neighbor for help with something. I bet they do it!)
Here's a Skeptic's Prayer you can use. It's by the philosopher Peter Kreeft:
God, I don't know whether you even exist. I'm a skeptic. I doubt. I think you may be only a myth. But I'm not certain (at least when I'm completely honest with myself.) So if you do exist, and if you really did promise to reward all seekers, you must be hearing me now. So I hereby declare myself a seeker, a seeker of the truth, whatever and wherever it is. I want to know the truth and live the truth. If you are the truth, please help me.
Seek God with an open and earnest heart and you will find Him. Or He will find you.
He promises that.
Still, the ability to conjure up faith in God (however God is conceived of) escapes many of us.
To those who have this faith, it is a gift. They can't explain it, or locate its source tangibly and empirically.
They consider it a gift because it is an unexplainable resource that gives them hope and strength to live their life. They wouldn't be without it, yet they can't explain it AND they can't convey to those without it how powerful a force - and real a force - it is.
For some, this faith is just a tiny spark, barely noticeable. For others, a raging bonfire.
Those without this kind of faith don't understand it, and don't feel the need for it, yet even they will admit it appears real to those who do have it. And probably (deep down in their hearts) they would like there to be a God who cares about and loves them, and who will walk with them through "the valley of the shadow of death".
Then of course, there are those without faith who could care less. They are perfectly content, and ultimately have no fear or concern about the end of life; after all, why fear "sweet nothingness"? Makes sense!
But what does the honest skeptic do? After all, he's stuck. The honest skeptic is stuck in limbo between belief and unbelief. The result? The honest skeptic typically abdicates choosing between the two because there is no proof. He wants to know Truth, but lacks proof.
No proof = no commitment either way.
But there's a truth that must be confronted. They never will have proof (empirical, worldly, scientific).
If they are honest with themselves, they'll acknowledge that.
They will also acknowledge that "not doing" something is a form of inactive "doing". They have chosen to not decide, and this - when it comes right down to it - is the choice of unbelief.
But what if there are eternal consequences to our choice of belief or unbelief?
And what if our choice of unbelief (whether through omission or commission) is honored by the God who gave us the choice in the first place?
We don't want Him, so he doesn't impose Himself. He is all-powerful and perfect. He perfectly respects our freedom to not choose Him.
But what if He is the "fuel" we were made to run on. What if nothing else really works to make our engine hum? Oh sure...we might limp along, sputtering and stalling throughout eternity, but what if we could have been a Formula One racer?
What if we missed out on being an eternal Jean Luc Picard, exploring God's infinite creation, doing God's infinite work, fueled by His infinite love and inexpressible joy?
This is what the God of the Bible offers us. It's an offer. He is humble so He doesn't force us to accept.
But what if you want to accept and you just can't? The gift of faith is simply eluding you?
You have to pray. You ASK God for the gift. "Asking" is powerful! (Test: Go ask your neighbor for help with something. I bet they do it!)
Here's a Skeptic's Prayer you can use. It's by the philosopher Peter Kreeft:
God, I don't know whether you even exist. I'm a skeptic. I doubt. I think you may be only a myth. But I'm not certain (at least when I'm completely honest with myself.) So if you do exist, and if you really did promise to reward all seekers, you must be hearing me now. So I hereby declare myself a seeker, a seeker of the truth, whatever and wherever it is. I want to know the truth and live the truth. If you are the truth, please help me.
Seek God with an open and earnest heart and you will find Him. Or He will find you.
He promises that.
Friday, February 26, 2010
My 2012 Darkhorse
Ok, I know... WAAAY too early. Still, this is my pick for our next President.
I think charisma (or what passes for it) will be a dirty word by then and Americans of all stripes will want one thing: pure, unequivocal competence and expertise.
Actually, I'm not gonna name this person. I'll list some of his/her recent accomplishments and you decide if he/she fits the bill.
Here goes...
He/she is not slick, but is low-key, witty and self-deprecating. He/she is very friendly and has never run a negative ad.
His/her state is a laboratory of successful conservative governance, utilizing Health Savings Accounts for health care reform, deregulation for telecom, and the biggest privatization in state history to upgrade infrastructure.
Sounds perfect, right?
(And by the way... you'll have to take my word on this, but I was hoping McCain would pick Palin 3 months before he did. I didn't think it would happen as it was so outside the box. Still, she was on my radar. I knew she was a great Governor of Alaska and was the foremost expert on American energy of any Governor. And since there were no Executives on either ticket, an Executive was needed.)
I don't think he/she will run...but I can dream, can't I?
I think charisma (or what passes for it) will be a dirty word by then and Americans of all stripes will want one thing: pure, unequivocal competence and expertise.
Actually, I'm not gonna name this person. I'll list some of his/her recent accomplishments and you decide if he/she fits the bill.
Here goes...
- elected Governor of his/her state in 2004. First Republican Governor in 16 years.
- took over a state with an $800 million deficit and turned it around to a $1.3 billion surplus in 4 short years
- passed the largest tax cut in state history
- cut no essential services, like education
- state government repaid $760 million to local governments that had been financing the state deficits
- hired 800 new child welfare workers and 250 state troopers
- cut the rate of increase of state spending from 5.9 to 2.8 percent annually
- won reelection in 2008 by 18 points (in a state Obama carried)
- margin of victory included 24% of Democrats, 20% of African-Americans, 51% of the youth vote, 57% of independents
- has successfully attracted business investment to the state: two Toyota plants, a Honda plant, a Nestle plant, a BP project
He/she is not slick, but is low-key, witty and self-deprecating. He/she is very friendly and has never run a negative ad.
His/her state is a laboratory of successful conservative governance, utilizing Health Savings Accounts for health care reform, deregulation for telecom, and the biggest privatization in state history to upgrade infrastructure.
Sounds perfect, right?
(And by the way... you'll have to take my word on this, but I was hoping McCain would pick Palin 3 months before he did. I didn't think it would happen as it was so outside the box. Still, she was on my radar. I knew she was a great Governor of Alaska and was the foremost expert on American energy of any Governor. And since there were no Executives on either ticket, an Executive was needed.)
I don't think he/she will run...but I can dream, can't I?
"bipartisan" healthcare summit
This is what I saw and heard, in a nutshell:
Democrats engaged in politics by anecdote. Republicans had the facts and substance.
Rep Paul Ryan of Wisconsin really got under Obama's skin. The President is not used to such strong, substantive, articulate opposition. In other words, Obama's "iron" is not sharp.
Quote of the day:
"Hiding spending does not reduce spending." - Rep Paul Ryan (R, WI)
Democrats engaged in politics by anecdote. Republicans had the facts and substance.
Rep Paul Ryan of Wisconsin really got under Obama's skin. The President is not used to such strong, substantive, articulate opposition. In other words, Obama's "iron" is not sharp.
Quote of the day:
"Hiding spending does not reduce spending." - Rep Paul Ryan (R, WI)
He is jealous for me...
Loves like a hurricane, I am a tree... bending beneath the weight of His wind and mercy.
David Crowder Band.... killer song and video. Click, watch and listen!
David Crowder Band.... killer song and video. Click, watch and listen!
Thursday, February 25, 2010
NO H8... Really?
So I see this image a couple of weeks ago. It's Cindy McCain with a duct-taped mouth and "NO H8" on her cheek.
It's a protest against the people of California's decision in the Fall of 2008 to pass Proposition 8, which affirmed the traditional definition of marriage as between a man and a woman.
McCain is not the only one sporting this snappy and stylish protest body art. There are a slew of celebrities... the "People of Tolerance and Diversity" photographed in various poses advertising their advocacy against Prop 8.
They're the Beautiful People. They're enlightened, tolerant, broadminded and... dammit... they want you to know it.
Okay, fine. I get it.
If you're FOR Prop 8, you're a hater.
If you're AGAINST Prop 8, you get to pose with duct-tape and pretend to be broad-minded and tolerant.
In fact, you're more than that; you're held hostage by your tolerance and enlightenment. You can't even speak. Your voice has been taped shut by the forces arrayed against tolerance and enlightenment.
You can only look winsomely and forlornly at the camera while your pain is recorded for all to see and share.
Talk about smug.
The irony is that NO H8 is all hate. It's a hate-based campaign that assumes the worst about the proponents of Traditional Marriage.
A tiny percentage of opposition to Gay Marriage is based on hate; the vast majority is based on a combination of things... none of which include hate.
Assuming the worst about those you disagree with is a form of hate. So (to repeat myself) the NO H8 Campaign is using hate to campaign against hate. Are they just too obtuse to see that?
Hmmm...
The NO H8 folks have gone out of their way to hate those they oppose. Why is that?
Are they insecure about their belief? Can they not "win" the argument on its merits? Do they not care to find the common ground, of which there's plenty?
Are they empowered by the "Culture of Aggrievement" they promote?
John McCain supports Traditional Marriage. Does Cindy think her husband is a hater?
Seriously?
The NO H8 people suffer from a serious case of "Plank in the eye". It's an awfully common malady.
NO H8 is in reality MO' H8.
Hammer meets Nail on Obamacare
From the blog Legal Insurrection:
The Obama plan contains fiscal gimmicks and gamesmanship which will lead to crushing deficits and debt; sanctions government intrusion into our lives unlike anything we have seen before; will lead to the destruction of a private insurance system which, while not perfect, delivers coverage to the overwhelming majority of Americans in a satisfactory manner; will result in the demoralization of our most honored profession, reducing medical care to the lowest common denominator in the cause of a false sense of fairness; and reflects the ultimate hubris of ideological, power drunk people who have proven themselves unworthy of our trust and who express, time and again, their disdain for the people they claim to serve.
Read the whole thing here:
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/02/now-is-not-time-for-weakness.html
My comment: This thing is like The Monster That Wouldn't Die.
Time for the final kill shot.
The Obama plan contains fiscal gimmicks and gamesmanship which will lead to crushing deficits and debt; sanctions government intrusion into our lives unlike anything we have seen before; will lead to the destruction of a private insurance system which, while not perfect, delivers coverage to the overwhelming majority of Americans in a satisfactory manner; will result in the demoralization of our most honored profession, reducing medical care to the lowest common denominator in the cause of a false sense of fairness; and reflects the ultimate hubris of ideological, power drunk people who have proven themselves unworthy of our trust and who express, time and again, their disdain for the people they claim to serve.
Read the whole thing here:
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/02/now-is-not-time-for-weakness.html
My comment: This thing is like The Monster That Wouldn't Die.
Time for the final kill shot.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
"Hey...Mr. Science Guy..."
"Could you please stand over there in your assigned area? We're discussing faith and the non-empirical over here. Thanks a lot!"
So I'm reading a terrific book right now: "What's So Great About Christianity" by Dinesh D'Sousa
A gem of a book! Here's a tiny, TINY nugget (mostly my synopsis of some interconnected thoughts):
The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein stated that "even if all possible scientific questions are answered, the problems of life have still not been touched at all."
Wow! How true is that?!
Imagine EVERY possible science question being answered; we still have the most fundamental questions of all facing us!
The most important questions of life - Why am I here? What should I love? What should I live for? What lies beyond death? - are NON-empirical! They lie outside the field where science is conducted. It is impossible for science to answer those questions.
Faith is an attempt to reach beyond the empirical realm (the realm of science) and illuminate those questions.
When people (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, etc.) use science to make claims about this non-empirical realm, they are making the fundamental mistake of trying to apply the empirical to the non-empirical (philosophers call this a "Category Mistake").
Science is a good... no, great!... thing. But, scientists are people too. They often take their expertise into non-science areas and claim expertise and special insight there. Classic act of pride.
When they do this, they've succumbed to that great temptation we all face: self-worship.
The New Atheists reek of self-worship. They are ignorant in their claims, yet evangelize nonetheless.
Remember this when some scientist/rationalist makes claims about the non-scientific/extra-rational:
They have jumped into deep waters... and they don't know how to swim!
So I'm reading a terrific book right now: "What's So Great About Christianity" by Dinesh D'Sousa
A gem of a book! Here's a tiny, TINY nugget (mostly my synopsis of some interconnected thoughts):
The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein stated that "even if all possible scientific questions are answered, the problems of life have still not been touched at all."
Wow! How true is that?!
Imagine EVERY possible science question being answered; we still have the most fundamental questions of all facing us!
The most important questions of life - Why am I here? What should I love? What should I live for? What lies beyond death? - are NON-empirical! They lie outside the field where science is conducted. It is impossible for science to answer those questions.
Faith is an attempt to reach beyond the empirical realm (the realm of science) and illuminate those questions.
When people (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, etc.) use science to make claims about this non-empirical realm, they are making the fundamental mistake of trying to apply the empirical to the non-empirical (philosophers call this a "Category Mistake").
Science is a good... no, great!... thing. But, scientists are people too. They often take their expertise into non-science areas and claim expertise and special insight there. Classic act of pride.
When they do this, they've succumbed to that great temptation we all face: self-worship.
The New Atheists reek of self-worship. They are ignorant in their claims, yet evangelize nonetheless.
Remember this when some scientist/rationalist makes claims about the non-scientific/extra-rational:
They have jumped into deep waters... and they don't know how to swim!
Al Gore shoulda taken Latin
“We can build a collective civic space large enough for all our separate identities, that we can be e pluribus unum — out of one, many.”–Al Gore, getting the National Motto bassackwards, 1994
(Source: January 1994. From a Milwaukee speech to the Institute of World Affairs as quoted in Investor's Business Daily, October 25, 1996.)
Maybe Al is Latin deficient... or maybe this is just the logical outcome of the Identity Politics game he and his ilk like to play. After all, if we Balkanize our country, we can set ourselves up politically to play one group off the other for political power.
As I've noted, there are no little things. Words mean things. So does sequence.
(And by the way, where's Gore been since November 2009? Funny how the corruption and fraud of Global Warming "science" revealed by the CRU emails seems to have resulted in a hiatus from the public scene by Mr. Gore. That debating stuff is HARD!)
(Source: January 1994. From a Milwaukee speech to the Institute of World Affairs as quoted in Investor's Business Daily, October 25, 1996.)
Maybe Al is Latin deficient... or maybe this is just the logical outcome of the Identity Politics game he and his ilk like to play. After all, if we Balkanize our country, we can set ourselves up politically to play one group off the other for political power.
As I've noted, there are no little things. Words mean things. So does sequence.
(And by the way, where's Gore been since November 2009? Funny how the corruption and fraud of Global Warming "science" revealed by the CRU emails seems to have resulted in a hiatus from the public scene by Mr. Gore. That debating stuff is HARD!)
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
A Happy Warrior... um.. Warriorette
I have no idea if Sarah Palin would be a good President. I do know she's qualified, as she's been a Mayor and a Governor, and accomplished quite a lot in both those offices.
Is she "fully" qualified to be President? Not sure how you define that... is anyone, really?
Compared to Barack Obama, is she qualified? Yes... (I know; low standard by which to evaluate, based on Executive experience. Zero for Obama.)
Better comparison: John Edwards. Both running for the same office. Edwards' credentials (ZERO Executive experience) rarely questioned. Palin's credentials constantly questioned.
Hello? Sexism anyone??
She didn't ask to be John McCain's running mate, but said "Yes" when asked.
The result? Instant vilification. Personal, over-the-top character assault. Vile name-calling (the "c" word, etc.).
Substantive debate on her positions on the issues? Not really. She's been pegged as a hick, and as an "inauthentic" female. Huh?
I guess if you differ from the leftist/feminist template for "women's issues" you're just a tool of the Patriarchy.
The "People of Tolerance and Diversity" don't know what to make of someone who diverges from the feminist groupthink. So be it.
Palin just keeps pluggin' away, happily pointing out the truth as she sees it, and articulating a message of faith and personal responsibility that resonates with millions of Americans.
She draws out irrational hatred and misogyny. This is a great service she performs, albeit unwittingly.
She exposes and reveals poison and hatred just by being who she is. She reveals the specific people we should shun from civil public discourse.
She's our canary in the coal mine.
Is she "fully" qualified to be President? Not sure how you define that... is anyone, really?
Compared to Barack Obama, is she qualified? Yes... (I know; low standard by which to evaluate, based on Executive experience. Zero for Obama.)
Better comparison: John Edwards. Both running for the same office. Edwards' credentials (ZERO Executive experience) rarely questioned. Palin's credentials constantly questioned.
Hello? Sexism anyone??
She didn't ask to be John McCain's running mate, but said "Yes" when asked.
The result? Instant vilification. Personal, over-the-top character assault. Vile name-calling (the "c" word, etc.).
Substantive debate on her positions on the issues? Not really. She's been pegged as a hick, and as an "inauthentic" female. Huh?
I guess if you differ from the leftist/feminist template for "women's issues" you're just a tool of the Patriarchy.
The "People of Tolerance and Diversity" don't know what to make of someone who diverges from the feminist groupthink. So be it.
Palin just keeps pluggin' away, happily pointing out the truth as she sees it, and articulating a message of faith and personal responsibility that resonates with millions of Americans.
She draws out irrational hatred and misogyny. This is a great service she performs, albeit unwittingly.
She exposes and reveals poison and hatred just by being who she is. She reveals the specific people we should shun from civil public discourse.
She's our canary in the coal mine.
Big things and little things.
One of my favorite stories is about the life of Therese of Lisieux (Catholics know her as St Therese).
She was a young girl in France who entered the convent at the age of 15, and died 9 years later at the age of 24. She had no special talent or gift (that she could discern) and despaired over her "lack"... she wasn't a great theologian (though she turned out to be!) or academic or writer or healer, etc. She was disconsolate that she couldn't do great, big things for Christ.
One morning in prayer she was pouring her heart out, and heard God ask: "Can you do little things for me?"
"Yes", she thought... "I can do little things". She joyfully responded with a "Yes!" to God's question.
God told her to go, and do little things. And that's what she did with the rest of her short life. She developed what she called "the little way" and became known as "The Little Flower". She believed in and lived out a childlike focus of love of whoever and whatever was right in front of her.
"What matters in life," she wrote, "is not great deeds, but great love."
Why do I like Therese so much?
Because I can do little things also. I might do big, great things someday... or maybe not. But I know I'll do little things every day.
I'll send a card... let someone merge in traffic... pick up some extra food for the Food Bank... buy a cold, homeless alcoholic some hot coffee... make my wife peas (yuck) for dinner.
I'll do those things... and I'll also NOT do them (sorry to say). Still, I can do little things, and the more I do the better at them I get. And then I realize a deep truth. It's the truth Jesus talked about when he compared the Kingdom of God to a mustard seed:
There are no little things.
She was a young girl in France who entered the convent at the age of 15, and died 9 years later at the age of 24. She had no special talent or gift (that she could discern) and despaired over her "lack"... she wasn't a great theologian (though she turned out to be!) or academic or writer or healer, etc. She was disconsolate that she couldn't do great, big things for Christ.
One morning in prayer she was pouring her heart out, and heard God ask: "Can you do little things for me?"
"Yes", she thought... "I can do little things". She joyfully responded with a "Yes!" to God's question.
God told her to go, and do little things. And that's what she did with the rest of her short life. She developed what she called "the little way" and became known as "The Little Flower". She believed in and lived out a childlike focus of love of whoever and whatever was right in front of her.
"What matters in life," she wrote, "is not great deeds, but great love."
Why do I like Therese so much?
Because I can do little things also. I might do big, great things someday... or maybe not. But I know I'll do little things every day.
I'll send a card... let someone merge in traffic... pick up some extra food for the Food Bank... buy a cold, homeless alcoholic some hot coffee... make my wife peas (yuck) for dinner.
I'll do those things... and I'll also NOT do them (sorry to say). Still, I can do little things, and the more I do the better at them I get. And then I realize a deep truth. It's the truth Jesus talked about when he compared the Kingdom of God to a mustard seed:
There are no little things.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Just a speck?
That's all it takes to either get us in serious trouble, or to get us in accord with our Creator. And really... how much "will" do we have? How much of our "conscious choice" is really conscious? How much of what we think of as "will" is actually programmed into us by heredity, family, culture, etc.?
Question: How much of what we Think, Believe, and Do is basically an autopilot jumble of habits, likes and dislikes, conditioned responses, kneejerk reactions, stereotyped assumptions, and even some "will"?
Answer: I don't know. My theory is that we have just a speck of will operating outside (or apart from) that jumble. But that's enough!
A speck of will is all it takes to choose wisely and with discernment.
A speck of will is all it takes to love God, even though His ways are incomprehensible.
A speck of will is all it takes to love people.
A speck of will is all it takes to love people you have nothing in common with, and with whom you perhaps disagree vehemently! (Well... maybe an extra speck for that!)
A speck of will is all it takes to not let injustice pass by uncommented upon or unacted on.
A speck of will is all it takes to give grace. After all, we wallow in it. Why not give some?
Question: How much of what we Think, Believe, and Do is basically an autopilot jumble of habits, likes and dislikes, conditioned responses, kneejerk reactions, stereotyped assumptions, and even some "will"?
Answer: I don't know. My theory is that we have just a speck of will operating outside (or apart from) that jumble. But that's enough!
A speck of will is all it takes to choose wisely and with discernment.
A speck of will is all it takes to love God, even though His ways are incomprehensible.
A speck of will is all it takes to love people.
A speck of will is all it takes to love people you have nothing in common with, and with whom you perhaps disagree vehemently! (Well... maybe an extra speck for that!)
A speck of will is all it takes to not let injustice pass by uncommented upon or unacted on.
A speck of will is all it takes to give grace. After all, we wallow in it. Why not give some?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)