Category Archives: Religion

Among the People

Posted on by
2

The mariner had the privilege of visiting an adult Sunday school class. The class, however, met on Monday. Why can’t things just remain as they always have? There’s a reason Sunday school is called Sunday school! This disregard for tradition, however, is the hallmark of the class. It is a small class of about six to eight members; the class members typically are women. Instead of studying the Bible, the Monday school studies contemporary thoughts provided by religious authors and speakers.

Having just written a couple of posts on church and state, the mariner visited the class to observe the subject discussed in a real environment by real people. Being a new visitor, the mariner didn’t say too much. The dynamic for discussion is provided by a retired professional from the national Methodist Church, a reformed Texas Baptist, two existentialist Christians, a skeptic, an ontologist, and a traditional Bible-based Christian. On second thought, perhaps their church insists they meet on Monday. . .

The combination of excellent congeniality and disparate backgrounds allows for creative discussion. The DVD played on this occasion was a lecture about the conflict raised between a Christian and a US citizen. The speaker accepted that one had to survive both in God’s Kingdom and in man’s existential world at the same time. The primary point was that the existential world depends on the influence of Christians for society’s morality and purpose. The mariner would have liked to hear more about the state as juxtaposed to Christianity.

He observed that the class had difficulty sorting out the balance between church and state because the speaker framed both in the context of religion. Perhaps the class would have had an easier time if the speaker had provided more about the state side of things. In his May 25 2013 post, the mariner cited Christianity and the Encounter of World Religions by Paul Tillich. The world religions are capitalism, communism, socialism and authoritarianism. Tillich said that Christianity morphs into a hybrid combined with the prevailing form of society. In the US, the prevailing society is capitalist. Hence, a balance of behavior evolves accommodating the two religions.

In this age of information, Paul Tillich can add another world religion: secularism. Secularism is void of religious reason. It is the mariner’s opinion that the emergence of secularism is reworking the definition between church and state – a definition which was more or less adequate until Norman Rockwell stopped painting and Pablo Picasso, Marcel Duchamp and Henri Matisse popularized the Cubist movement. Stretched across fundamentalist Christians, traditional Christians and existentialist Christians, it will take a couple of generations to sort the balance between Christianity and secularism.

Ancient Mariner

Behind the Headlines

Posted on by
Reply

The mariner is working hard to avoid the mindless traps of television pundits, mindless presidential candidates, old-fashioned attitudes about major professions and institutions (old-fashioned meaning since 2005), and mindless bickering about cultural icons. One almost must turn off communication with the commercial information world and search the back roads to find reasoned evaluations of the real world today. What follows are a few counterpoints to the common press insights that most of us live by. Certainly, we must always remember that thoughtfulness is washed away by the race to have the most viewers, the most readers, and the most acceptable opinions.

Economy

The mariner has reviewed several respected economic journals and even a few foreign reports to determine how the US is faring economically on the world stage. It turns out the US is not doing too bad. In fact, compared to the Euro zone, the BRIC nations, and the Middle East, even Mexico, Japan, India and other trading allies, the US has grown in economic power around the world. The US has come out of the recession faster and with more growth than any other nation on the planet. This opinion does not dismiss the disparities of oligarchy, wage suppression and blatant pressure to diminish citizen rights nor does it take into account the environmental cost that grows by the year. Still, Donald is wrong. America is already great and beating other countries in the game of economics.

Middle East

All the Middle East nations comprise very much a hodgepodge of foreign policy issues. The Iran nonnuclear agreement appears to be accepted by citizen majorities in both the US and Iran. Those objecting to the deal are the US hawk conservatives and the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran. Reports indicate that the agreement will survive resistance.

The Syria/Kurd/Turkey/Iran/Iraq/Isis/US/Russia/Shiite/Sunni/mass emigration conflict is in free fall, obviously. Russia has come into Syria to support Bashar al_Assad, which suggests Assad is weakening. Russia’s presence puts a new spin on speculation about escalation of war. The mariner suspects that Russia does not want escalation but somehow must sustain influence with Syria and indirectly, demonstrate that Russia can’t be forgotten as an influence in the region. Again, the Obama administration remains publicly silent but US intelligence is active.

The emigration into Europe is an issue all its own, acknowledging that the migrants are fleeing the aforementioned war zone. The United Nations count is 4.1 million refugees. Germany may benefit more because it took a large number that will offset aging population in Germany. Other European countries also have aging populations and aging economies. Perhaps this is the reason Europe is more willing than not to receive large numbers of Syrian immigrants. Perhaps, as well, the US should bump its number significantly since the United States also has an aging population. It should be noted that the US is the largest contributor of funds to the migrant crisis.

Proper Leadership is Lacking in US Culture

The mariner was checking out the book The Silo Effect, The Peril of Expertise and the Promise of Breaking Down Barriers by Jillian Tett (Simon and Shuster). Today on Global Public Square, Fareed Zakaria featured the same Book and Chris Hayes, MSNBC anchor, reviewed the same on his website. Great minds. . . .

The mariner is intrigued because so much of the text reflects his own career experience as a consultant who, by the nature of his assignments, was constantly battling highly territorial departments that did not want to change or share their information. Tett calls these vertical departments ‘silos.’ Tett’s point is that specialization – both of organizations and personal ambition – prevents innovation, creativity, and intelligent interpretation of reality. Historically, these open-minded attributes are the edge that made the United States a premier nation among nations. (Reference mariner’s posts about the demise of liberal arts education.)

Tett cites a number of institutions that deliberately reorganized to improve corporate functionality, customer service, innovation, and efficiency. Tett is a PhD anthropologist; her explanations tend toward behavioral modification rather than the management modification prominent in Deming, Drucker, and others popular in the 60’s and 70’s. An example at the Cleveland Clinic is not only to reorganize medical departments but also to renovate the building so that meeting spaces, casual spaces, and medical processes draw mixed teams and managers into an open space concept. Tett uses SONY as an example of death by specialization; the company was tightly organized and highly specialized at the worker level. SONY lost its top-of-the-heap position selling SONY Walkman music devices – failing to read new market pressures. In the meantime, Steve Jobs stepped in with the IPod. SONY hasn’t been at the top since.

Politics, Religion and Economics

Thinking about Jillian Tett’s book and its emphasis on creative problem solving, and the desire to integrate values to better predict future reality, turns the mariner’s mind to the battles of church and state, conservative right versus progressive left, oligarchy versus democracy, etc. All these issues and many more are bound by their belief systems. One cannot share absolute principles – only defend them. One cannot merge polarized attitudes – only seek to destroy opposites. Today, suffering our dysfunctional governments, our religious institutions that long ago forgot Christian principles, and our descent into greed, we are at a huge intersection in the nation’s history. An open question: How can we introduce innovation into an age of specialization?

Ancient Mariner

Marriage

Posted on by
2

Marriage. A cause for war or peace, a furtherance of power, an icon for the act of proliferation, a guarantee of lineage and wealth, something nice if it is affordable, a device of psychological need, a hobby – perhaps an act of genuine love.

Marriage is much in the news recently with an abundant set of examples that suggest marriage has its own niche aside from church versus state bickering. The mariner read an extensive book review of The Marriage Book, Centuries of Advice, Inspiration and Cautionary Tales from Adam and Eve to Zoloft, edited by Grunwald and Adler, published by Simon and Shuster. The Marriage Book is a deep collection of marriage history, photographs, charming and entertaining examples of marriage by famous couples in history, and some serious thoughts that marriage as an institution is becoming class centric.

There is no need for the mariner to recite the details of several marriages in current events, he will just name the keyword; the reader will remember. There is a set of Monarchy weddings: Andrew, Charles, William (Great Britain), Madeline (Sweden), Philippe, Laurent, Armedeo (Belgium), Frederik (Denmark), Sophia (Greece)……

There is a set of Hollywood marriages. No, there is a superset of Hollywood marriages, second marriages, third marriages, etc. There are even remarriages.

There are notable marriages in families like Clinton, Kennedy, Nixon, Eisenhower and too many iconic wealthy marriages to note.

There are religious marriages. Roman Catholic, Fundamentalist Protestant, Baptist, generic Protestant, Jewish, Muslim Sunni, Muslim Shiite, Greek Orthodox, Latter Day Saints, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist, and Scientology.

There are nationality weddings. Polish, Israeli, Greek, Italian, Icelandic, Sudanese, American courthouse…..

There are shotgun marriages, good idea when drunk marriages, underwater marriages, skydiving marriages, “The baby is two years old; should we consider marriage” marriages…..

There are minority marriages: interfaith, interracial, homosexual, international and underage.

Finally, there are non-marriages. Statistically, the number is far larger for African American women and senior citizens. Next in line are young people under the age of 27.

Increasingly, there is no marriage. This is the point of discussion. In the United States, the median age at which women marry is now 27, the highest it’s been in a century. The same trend exists in Europe. That’s according to a new report by Bowling Green State University’s Julissa Cruz, published by the National Center for Family and Marriage Research. Not only are marriages occurring later, marriages are occurring less frequently. Note the table below.

 

Year Marriages Population Rate per 1,000 total population
2012 2,131,000 313,914,040 6.8
2011 2,118,000 311,591,917 6.8
2010 2,096,000 308,745,538 6.8
2009 2,080,000 306,771,529 6.8
2008 2,157,000 304,093,966 7.1
2007 2,197,000 301,231,207 7.3
20061 2,193,000 294,077,247 7.5
2005 2,249,000 295,516,599 7.6
2004 2,279,000 292,805,298 7.8
2003 2,245,000 290,107,933 7.7
2002 2,290,000 287,625,193 8.0
2001 2,326,000 284,968,955 8.2
2000 2,315,000 281,421,906 8.2

Despite an increase of 32.5 million in population, there were 184 thousand fewer marriages. Generally speaking, upper classes are marrying late, while poorer women are deciding that they’re better off single.

Consider the following:

The decrease in the divorce rate reflects later marriages more than anything else. However, the later average age of marriage rising to the late twenties and thirties is more controversial. Economists note that the increase in the age of marriage and falling divorce statistics are only a small part of the phenomenon. Economists say these statistics reflect the increasing tendency of the well-off to marry similarly well-off partners; those marriages are more likely to last at any age.

Class-based behavior is the dominant factor driving the statistics. On the one hand, male and female college graduates will marry and stay married. On the other hand, marriage is disappearing from the poorest classes. Also increasingly, women across the board are marrying men who aren’t the natural fathers of their children.

The later age of marriage for college graduates is caused by a new middle class behavior: Women are investing in their own education and earning potential, which extends the age of marriage and childbearing. For men, it takes a two income family to live a middle class life. Further, men must pursue not only college and post graduate education, career success often depends on relocation, job changes and personal investment in qualifications beyond college. Once established, men, and the women who wait to marry them, are ready for a stable family life. As the economy becomes more difficult for any working adult, early marriage is inconvenient until as late as the thirties. Commonly, children aren’t born until the early forties.

Changes in the last quarter century indicate that marriage is increasingly becoming a marker of class — the delayed marriages of the middle class produce steadily lower divorce rates, very few non-marital births, and substantial resources to invest in a falling number of children. For the rest of the country, the statistics may simply confirm a greater move away from marriage altogether.

The conflict between church and state in Kentucky provides volatile news and skirmishes among advocacy groups but the larger scope of marriage as a social phenomenon is not about church and state – it is about economics and the future job market for all young adults.

[Some contribution to the above analysis is provided by June Carbone, the Edward A. Smith/Missouri Chair of Law, the Constitution and Society at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.]

—-

Just a side note on the series about achieving the reader’s liberal art education online: CNN often is criticized for chasing time-filling non-news instead of working harder to produce genuine news that affects everyone more directly. However, amid the Tower of Babel produced by pundits, there is one journalist who produces top-drawer information, explains more deeply the what, how and why of events, and offers opinions for those who think a bit more than others. His name is Fareed Zakaria. The mariner admits he is a fan and counts Fareed among his favorite authors. Nevertheless, Zakaria is college and graduate level in his presentations. A self taught liberal art major will have an excellent sense of current events that will lead to mysteries for the search engine. See:

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com

Watch his Sunday morning show, Global Public Square, at 10AM Eastern on CNN. Definitely worth copying to the DVR for more convenient viewing. Of importance to those tracking Presidential candidates, Fareed had an opening opinion piece on the Sunday, September 13 broadcast. If you missed it, check his blog.

Sharing Fareed’s investigative style is Frontline on PBS. This series covers larger, substantive issues in many subject areas. Many topics relate to the wellbeing of each of us in an often conflicted world. See:

http://www.pbs.org Frontline.

Finally, California passed legislation that makes physician-assisted suicide legal. California joins Oregon, Washington, New Mexico, and Vermont. Montana has legislation that protects physicians from liability when providing assistance at the patient’s request. The mariner suspects age has a lot to do with one’s opinion about euthanasia in ways that may surprise us. Replies are welcome on the mariner’s website.

Ancient Mariner

 

Weekend News

Posted on by
Reply

Occasionally, weekend news shows fill empty air time with meaningful coverage. On Saturday, two pundit panels actually discussed topics using first hand information and intellectual value. The first is about Donald and whether the religious right will support him (Tony Perkins from Family Research Council is interviewed). The second, perhaps more substantive, is about the county clerk (Kim Davis) who was jailed for contempt of court. Her attorney, Matthew Staver, is interviewed.

Several video clips were run of Donald that implied he wasn’t too religious. One clip showed Donald being very uncomfortable when asked if he had ever asked God for forgiveness; Donald hemmed and hawed finally saying he doesn’t ask for forgiveness, he tries to make it right. Another clip from 1999 showed Donald clearly supporting pro-choice; today he supports pro-life. The questions posed to Tony Perkins wondered whether the religious right would support Donald.

Perkins’ answers dodged the heart of the questions. Instead, he took the position that evangelicals were so frustrated with failed politics and politicians who refuse to take action that they are attracted to anyone who demonstrates a different approach to leadership – even if the politician’s record is less than perfect. Perkins said that religious conservatives understand that a person’s heart can change over time. In the end, however, Perkins had to acknowledge that Donald’s dismal religious commitment likely will be his downfall with evangelicals voting in the primaries. The mariner felt that Tony Perkins, both a republican leader and an evangelical leader, was caught in the middle trying to defend a republican candidate and evangelical principles at the same time. Due to good interviewing, Perkins finally had to sacrifice Donald.

The refusal of Kim Davis to issue government marriage licenses to homosexuals raises conflicts on several levels. One level is the interpretation of the first Amendment as a genuine separation of church and state not to be in conflict – the position Thomas Jefferson took (see mariner’s post “Church or State?” for a review of secularism versus religious opinion). In his interview, Matthew Staver avoided this interpretation. Instead, he talked about the legal shutdown caused because Davis cannot be fired and will not quit – which is legal regardless of the contempt of court citation.

This level of argument is not broad enough to revisit the historical trends that have allowed government to perform what the church calls sacraments but which are performed by the state without religious opinion. Precedent for recognizing civil marriage was justified early in the 1800s because a couples’ relationship with the state changes due to race, different tax law, divorce settlement, child ownership, citizenship, abuse and many other legal acts managed by government. The government also manages equal rights.

Tony Perkins also was asked about this issue and took the point of view that there are many occasions where the state grants leniency through local law and regulations when there is a conflict in roles, that is, the line of separation between church and state is smudged. The mariner believes “smudging” does not resolve the oil and water relationship between religion and secularism.

The Founding Fathers knew from personal experience that there are many religions – some demanding both civil authority and religious authority, some with different definitions of God, some preferring different opinions from others about polygamy, race, etc. – but there can only be one government guaranteeing freedom for all religions to have their religious opinions and at the same time assure equal justice for all citizens. The Founding Fathers chose a government run by the people, by all the people. One nation, one set of laws, thereby bestowing liberty for all people in their opinions about religion and bestowing equal liberty for all through democracy. One person, one vote. Religious opinion does not work this way hence the separation of church and state as expressed in the Bill of Rights.

It has been a good weekend for meaningful news.

Ancient Mariner

 

Church or State?

Posted on by
Reply

The mariner thought he understood the legal and philosophical intent of the separation of church and state. However, when he reads the news of the day, confusion seems to reign over the subject and affects everything from getting married, to pro-choice or pro-life, to the rights of execution and euthanasia – not to mention many other conflicts between citizenry and the Constitution of the United States. Consequently, the mariner is confused as well.

For the benefit of the reader as well as the mariner, he will go back to the beginning. As a legal basis, the Constitution of the US, written in 1787 and the Bill of Rights, written in 1788, says exactly:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Denis Diderot was a French philosopher, art critic, and writer. He was a prominent figure during the Enlightenment and is best known for serving as co-founder, chief editor, and contributor to the Encyclopédie. Diderot was a partisan of a strict separation of church and state, saying in 1747, “the distance between the throne and the altar can never be too great“.

In English, the exact term is an offshoot of the phrase, “wall of separation between church and state”, as written in Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.

Jefferson was describing to the Baptists that the United States Bill of Rights prevents the establishment of a national church, and in so doing, they did not have to fear government interference in their manner of worship. The Bill of Rights was one of the earliest examples in the world of complete religious freedom. [Wikipedia – church and state]

For our purposes, make note of the phrase, “…that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions…” meaning that the government will not interpret or reinforce religious definition and will limit government action to matters of governance. The inverse of this, applying the intent to religion, means that there is freedom for any religion to practice and believe as they choose but religious opinion will not apply to matters of governance.

On the surface, the separation appears to be clear and distinct. Why, 277 years later, is the citizenry having so much difficulty?

At this point, the reader must tolerate the mariner’s meandering. To state the conflict succinctly, the confusion is caused by secularism. Secularism excludes religious opinion. This seems to be in concert with the 1st Amendment and Jefferson’s letter. But this is simpler said than understood. If we can travel back to the time of the Mayflower landing at Plymouth Rock (1620), we would be in the midst of the Reformation (1517-1685). The established church still was the law of the land in most intra-human activities. In fact, the Pilgrims combined religious opinion and governance into one authority. The political leader also was the interpreter of the faith.

Ever so slowly, it became clear that there must be some separation so that government could govern without having to judge every opinion raised by the common folk. There had to be rules applied to situations that were stolid and did not change with every change in opinion. This slow, evolutionary process continues today. We are not finished with the separation of church and state.

The role of government, with its authority to govern without opinion, has expanded to include virtually all elements of intra-human activity. One can get married in a government agency – without opinion, mind you. But one may also be influenced by opinions of faith. The religious element takes umbrage that the government can perform the same ‘action’ as the religion but without the religious opinion.

The mariner now understands why there is conflict. For the conclusion, we must wait for the movie version – perhaps released in 2150.

Ancient Mariner

 

Reverence is not Advocacy

Posted on by
1

Tim Pitt, City Council member in Knoxville, Iowa, recently wrote an angry article on facebook denouncing the intent of Americans United for Separation of Church and State. The atheist organization was challenging the decision of the City Council to place a memorial art piece in Young’s Park – a government sponsored park – that included a cross similar to the crosses familiar in military cemeteries.

Knoxville

In Part, Councilman Pitt wrote:

Knoxville IA

Concilman Pitt continued at length to berate the organization for its disrespect of valid and reverent feelings for fallen soldiers. There is conflict in the atheists’ case because similar crosses are in many government cemetaries around the Country – including Arlington National Cemetary. Clearly, this is headed for the court system – if the courts choose to hear the case.

Broadly speaking, the atheists are a counterpoint to those who would establish a Christian theocracy, primarily religious conservatives fighting similar battles from the opposite side of the issue. Similar conservative events are Chick-Fillet, Hobby Lobby, the clerk in Kentucky who refuses to grant marriage licenses to homosexual couples in spite of high court injunctions against the clerk, the insistance of creation history as valid history in public school books, vocal prayer in schools, etc.

The mariner believes those tangled in symbolic issues like crosses, Stars of David and even secular memorials, are distracted by irrelevant idol worship. Memorials, regardless of their shape, are simply memorials, perhaps suggestive of a legitimate association with religious reverence but certainly not a tool of proselytizing and, as Tim Pitt contends, not representative of a state church.

It is insane to separate church and state with a cataclysmic act like removing crosses from graves or religious icons from past sites of remembrance. Such an act would be comparable to ISIL destroying temples and historical artifacts. The rows and rows of white crosses only speak loudly of a long age of human desecration.

In 1982, a Vietnam Veterans Memorial was built in Washington, D.C. commemorating 58,272 killed in that war. There is no cross, yet the “wall” is one of the most powerful commemorations ever dedicated to soldiers killed in action. When it was built, a mother refused to believe that her son would be remembered among the tens of thousands who died. Her friends traced his name from the wall and took it to her; she clutched the drawing as if it were the American Flag at a military funeral. A simple wall as powerful as 58,272 crosses.

The point is this: The role of religion in society is changing as secular awareness grows in an age of information. There is no blame in this transition nor is there permanence in religious beliefs – else we still would worship the Gods of the Pantheon. The separation of church and state is a Constitutional requirement assuring religious freedom for all – and thereby preventing a “State Church” from existing.

It is not the crosses or Stars of David that are sacrosanct. It is the soldier buried in his time, in the way of his faith. The crosses, Stars of David and non-religious memorials are for us to remember the heavy price we asked them to pay.

Ancient Mariner

Abortion

Posted on by
1

The mariner lives with a number of neighbors who advocate every aspect of the abortion issue from “no abortion under any circumstance” to “no one owns my body but me.” As he visits with one neighbor or the other, he must remember to whom he is talking regarding their conservative/liberal stance on any number of social issues.

The fetus is emerging as a viable living being about which more and more can be determined before birth; medicine is on the verge of applying gene therapy for certain genetic deficiencies. The increasing ability to interact with the fetus reinforces the pro-life idea that the fetus is indeed a living being. The pro-choice side believes that no one has the right to impose physical use of a female’s body against her will. It may be that violating a woman’s use of her own body is tantamount to torture or slavery. In recent decades, the use of birth control devices and pharmaceuticals has become more acceptable than in the past but religious advocates and pro-lifers still cast a wary eye lest conception occurs first. The use of contraceptives eases the situation of women who choose not to be pregnant. A significant majority of unexpected pregnancies occur in situations where contraceptives are not considered necessary, e.g., younger girls or older women presumed not to be fecund, rape of any kind, ignorance, or negligence.

It is the treatment of unexpected pregnancies that is an issue all its own. Hard line pro-lifers refuse any interpretation other than carrying the fetus to full term. Less adamant but still pro-life, some may allow abortions for the mother’s life, rape or, for a few pro-lifers, extreme deformity or incest. At first glance, the reader may think that the definition of exceptions may offer a better opportunity for negotiation; this is unlikely. Pro-lifers will claim that any exception can be stretched. In the gay marriage debate, it was popular to suggest that humans could legally marry a plethora of non-human animals and even non-living objects. Pro-choice advocates will raise social and economic arguments, e.g., “Who will pay for raising unwanted or unaffordable babies?” “Must a woman carry a fetus she does not want?” A recent case where a stepfather raped his 10-year-old stepdaughter is a classic example of social circumstances. A pro-life friend of the mariner would not consider any solution except full term delivery citing the fetus was innocent and had standard human rights to exist. Many who have less extreme views on both sides wrestle with the future impact of the heinous event versus abortion of the fetus. The mariner was asked, “Do two wrongs make a right?” Definitions of right and wrong are sorely overlooked. The oblique question shows that a logical foundation for debate is missing.

One argument the mariner will cast aside as irrelevant is the case where a fetus was considered for abortion but in the end was not aborted. “This person grew up to be [insert a wonderful leader].” Had the fetus been aborted, some other wonderful leader would play the role. This argument is both hypothetical and unpredictable.

That the abortion issue is irreconcilable is a shame. There is prejudice on both sides that has nothing in common with the opposite side. Then there is the law, which is inadequate to mediate differences. Abortion or no abortion is an intimate event. Yet, it is important to many people as a prerequisite to deciding church versus state issues, growing population, personal and government expense, medical and insurance policies, and class privilege.

Eventually, it may be that a legal procedure will be developed that assures the best interest of the fetus before abortions can be authorized. Such a procedure will require endless haggling over the wording but it moves the debate away from the “all or nothing” standoff between pro-life and pro-choice; it also lessens the tendency to mix church and state. In the end abortion, like euthanasia, will become a case-by-case court issue – or if one can afford it, a discreet arrangement.

Ancient Mariner

 

 

Keeping Up with the World

Posted on by
1

Some readers may be interested in why the world is the way it is today. For example, the Atlantic magazine has a truly insightful article about ISIS, its driving principles and interpretation of the Quran. See:

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

For a thorough, apolitical review of all aspects of global warming, population and impact on the biosphere, Live Science is an excellent source not only for global warming but a full rainbow of scientific insights about the world today. See:

http://www.livescience.com/topics/global-warming/

In order to produce both volume and profit in livestock corporations, animal abuse is rampant – including human animals. See:

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=john+oliver+chicken+farmers&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=FB1EA7E99500750DC9B2FB1EA7E99500750DC9B2

A few books are benchmark publications that bring to light the subtle phenomena that shape our lives. For example, a book everyone should retrieve from a library is The Sixth Extinction by Elizabeth Kolbert. It is an entertaining read recounting Kolbert’s travels around the world with scientists and researchers. She discusses how viruses and bacteria are carried around the world affecting everything from frogs to bats. The book focuses on human activity that destroys the biosphere. There is an alarming account of the huge number of extinctions that have occurred since 1900 and what that means to human survival.

The Road to Character, a new book by David Brooks, PBS commentator, is an introspective review of his life by comparing the lives of others against his own life. Brooks discusses foibles and successes and how others overcame their shortcomings to become people of high character.

Lyndon Johnson and the American Dream, written by Doris Kearns Goodwin, was published in 1977 but is a tour de force of Johnson’s personal and public life. Many today can recall (and observe) the cultural shift engineered by Ronald Reagan. Fewer remember the “guns and butter” policies of Johnson. Johnson launched the greatest cultural shift since FDR – including the Civil Rights Act. Goodwin was an intimate friend to whom LBJ revealed his inner struggles and his aspirations. Good for a summer long read.

Zealot: The life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth, by Reza Asland, is a fascinating study of the time of Jesus – without focusing on the Christian ramifications of Jesus. It is a sociological look into that time; it provides a fresh perspective by which to understand Jesus and his role as a proselytizer and as a zealot. Reza Asland is a world renowned expert on world religions and has published several important works. For what it’s worth, Fox News vehemently denounced this book and assassinated the character of Asland.

 

Communication moves a lot faster today than even a couple of decades ago. Within minutes, we know about beheadings in Iraq, or a tsunami in Japan, or a volcanic eruption in Peru, or a giant explosion in China, or denying funds for America’s infrastructure and the jobs it would provide, or the disappearance of the Monarch butterfly. We know more about what is happening in real time. The added responsibility is to know why these events are happening. One can no longer speak blindly from old prejudices and unfounded privilege. Every day is a day at school maintaining our education about what is really happening and, knowing why, make the right decision to improve the plight of our real-time world.

Ancient Mariner

Just Some Odds and Ends

Posted on by
Reply

A social earthquake occurred in the United States beginning last Thursday and aftershocks continued until today. It was caused by the Supreme Court’s rulings in favor of homosexual marriages, reinforcing the permanence of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), blocking Texas legislation that will close abortion clinics, indirectly making it simpler in the future to declare the death penalty cruel and unusual punishment regardless of the manner by which States choose to execute felons, and last but not least, voting against an appeal by the Arizona republican party to allow more party input into the State’s redistricting process. It turns out Arizona is one of only three states where redistricting is defined by an independent commission – not by party politicians.

The extreme right has been pressing for a one-religion nation since 2009 when the tea party was created. It was an opportune time for the tea party to press its political/religious mores because republicans had gerrymandered state districts to guarantee republican legislatures no matter how the popular vote turned out. The conservative legislatures were permissive to tea party requests. The homosexual marriage ruling, in particular, which requires all fifty states to allow, perform and recognize such marriages, was a heavy blow to the extreme right. From Alabama to Texas, state court systems are trying hard to fight off the Supreme Court’s ruling but the die has been cast. In short order, every state will have to conform.

Senator Bernie Sanders, running for President against Hillary Clinton, shows poorly in national polls. However, it turns out he is drawing the largest crowds to his events – larger than everyone else running for President!

Pope Francis has invited Naomi Klein to sit on a panel about global warming. The Vatican is putting on a panel Wednesday to draw attention to a conference in Rome later in the week being organized by the Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace and by Catholic groups that work on development issues.

You may remember that the mariner has cited her works on several occasions. Klein’s latest book, This Changes Everything, Capitalism versus the Climate, takes the position that capitalism is the cause of climate change and further, capitalism cannot solve the climate issue.

Australia has raised concern about the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). The nation is one of the participants and the public has had more access to the agreement than we in the US. Australia is concerned about the same things Americans suspect about the agreement: it is heavily cast in favor of corporations, allows corporations to disregard labor and civil rights legislation, and does not, in fact, create more jobs because corporations are not bound by location and can relocate at any time to the least expensive labor market. Obama slipped us a mickey on this one.

Happy Independence Day!

Ancient Mariner

A Moment to Remember

Posted on by
1

The Reverend Clementa Pinckney eulogy by the President was one of those moments that will hang around like FDR’s “We have nothing to fear but fear itself,” FDR’s first inaugural address to a nation struggling with a collapsed economy. The speech rallied enough confidence that FDR was able to implement his aggressive recovery program.

It will hang around like John Kennedy’s inaugural “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country”; and his speech in Berlin in the midst of a turbulent period of the cold war: “Two thousand years ago the proudest boast was “civis Romanus sum”. Today, in the world of freedom, the proudest boast is “Ich bin ein Berliner”.

No list of timeless speeches is complete without Martin Luther King’s words, “I have a dream…” Another that has become forgotten – except that it is played once each year for West Point cadets, is General MacArthur’s speech about Duty – Honor – Country – a farewell to West Point shortly before he died. He was a magnificent public speaker and his entire speech is worth a listen. He ended:

“Today marks my final roll call with you, but I want you to know that when I cross the river my last conscious thoughts will be – of The Corps, and The Corps, and The Corps.”
 I bid you farewell.

We can find many momentous speeches – speeches that are more than words, more than inspiration – they are speeches that brought to one point in time great emotion, powerful leadership, and a unique quality to create new history.

As the eulogist at Reverend Pinckney’s funeral, only Barack Obama could have delivered a speech that will have a place in the annals of US history:

He is African American – any other race could not authentically share the gravity felt by the congregation.

He is familiar with the manner and practice of African American worship services – his delivery was absorbed by the congregation as if in a spell.

He is an African American President of the United States; what he said could not be refuted by any lesser political group – and he was one of them.

He is a liberal. His political profile against segregation, guns, and political abuse rang true to the congregation.

He wrote this speech himself. It was from his heart, from his life experience as a person of color. His words were words that nuanced the long suffering history of African Americans.

And quite beyond normal expectations, he sang Amazing Grace in the gospel style of African Americans. That clinched the speech as personal, standing in the light of God’s Grace, and although the song is a tribute to God’s Grace, it is also a unifying and strengthening song that unified the congregation in common cause.

The words above constitute the mariner’s perception of the chemistry of the event – certainly potent. Intellectually, he was pleased that the President understood how God’s Grace works and how the individual should respond. Quite often, the most learned pastor will interpret Grace backwards, treating Grace as a reward after the fact. The President had it right: Grace is God’s “pass it forward,” not a self-serving gratification.

Ancient Mariner