D-O-N-E! DONE!

I just submitted my final paper for my last class of my master's degree. What a feeling. If I wasn't so tired and I didn't have to get up at 6:30 tomorrow morning I'd go out for a few, but I'm headed to bed. The paper was on homosexuality, which I wasn't too thrilled about, but I tried to balance the fact that it is wrong, unnatural, and dangerous with the fact that we need to love these people as Christ would. One particular quote in my research I feel really portrayed the conundrum we Christians are in on this topic. It comes from Jeffrey Satinover, M.D. and his book "Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth":

Gay politics arouses in me an exasperated, somewhat stifled, outrage, exasperated and stifled because of the tangle of conflicting emotions that arise when ‘political power’ is joined to ‘victim’ status; outrage because gay activism distorts the truth and harms not only society but homosexuals themselves, especially young people.

Yet...

How can our hearts not go out to the young, pre-homosexual boy or girl who is already shy, lonely, sensitive, and who surely suffers taunting rejection and maybe even beatings by the very peers he or she envies and most longs to be with? Can we really blind ourselves to the presence of that still-suffering child within the adult, however bristling and exotic an exterior with which he protects himself? And finally, just how different is ‘the homosexual’ from ourselves? We so easily see-and then look down on-the self-protective maneuvering in others, which is far less painful to admit it in ourselves. (20-21)

I fell for an appeal to pity a few weeks ago on a fellow blogger's site. His post discussed his research regarding abortion and the idea from wikipedia that "the main reason for abortion is economics. I disagreed since if you look at the stats, economics is the second leading reason (only 1 in 5) and the fact that with the social service opportunities present in America, I find it hard to believe that one who wants assistance cannot find it.

Anyway, in my response to his post I failed to mention what J.P. Moreland properly points out in "Love Your God With All Your Mind" when he writes, "But the question of the moral responsibility of abortion is an issue of the moral status of the fetus, not a question of how we feel about the rich or poor in this context" (121). I believe abortion is morally wrong, that life begins at conception, I find it hard to believe that anyone who has had a child and seen the life present at ten weeks would disagree for anything other than alterior motives. I know the obvious rebuttal argument is that if Christians are so opposed to abortion, then they need to do more to help the mother and baby when it is born. While that may be a good and smart idea, it's another fallacious argument of the ad hominen tu quoque variety. It shifts the blame from the aborter to the arguer.

You won't see me protesting at an abortion clinic with a sign "God hates those who abort" but I do believe VERY STRONGLY in the right to life.

I think Sojourner's takes this a little far:

...Abram and Sarai, the mother and father of Israel, are now planted in my imagination as possible protestors and rabble rousers. Their act of potential civil disobedience is found in Genesis. Abram's welcome of three strangers is the quintessential hospitality story in the Bible. It is marked by a flurry of activity as Abram rushes about ordering food, cleaning up the tent and entertaining the mysterious newcomers.

But Abram welcomes the three without knowing where they came from or where they are going. He asks for no identification and requires no answers about the strangers' country of origin. As such, if Abram lived in the U.S. in 2007, these actions would have made him a potential crime suspect. If the strangers turned out to be undocumented workers a bill passed by the House in December would have allowed law enforcement to arrest the holy couple for harboring illegal aliens.

I see this as a situation, at first glance, of taking a biblical example out of context for the purpose of proving one's point, the Religious Right doest his all the time and the left bemoans it, now the left is getting savvy at the same thing.

I'm all for people coming to America to make a better life for themselves, I just want it done legally, and it sounds like that may mean the laws need to be changed, I'm fine with that.

Being a girl's basketball coach, this quote from the SG couldn't be truer,especially the missed shots resulting in a scramble for the ball followed by the alternating possession:
When women's college basketball gained exposure in the 1990s, the sport stood out for three things: coaches who walked awkwardly in high heels; an astonishing number of missed shots directly resulting in multiple players grabbing a rebound, followed by everyone excitedly glancing at the possession arrow; and, of course, the gratuitous sobbing. As soon as the outcome was decided in any game, everyone on both sides would wail like they were attending a funeral.

Christina, who happens to be there, posted an interesting comment about the riots in France:
the French aren't really starting revolutions because they aren't trying to change the way things are but rather they are striking so that things stay the same. Huh.

Another sign that the Apocalypse is upon us:
Peter Gammons has an iPod!
(Note the March 28 entry)

A word from one of my profs:

The Changing Church
George Barna claims that in recent years 20 million people have left mainline and mainstream churches in the USA in pursuit of alternative faith experiences (home churches, cyber churches, etc.). By 2025, he estimates, 30-35% of Christians in the USA will be in traditional churches, 30-35% in alternative contexts, and 30-35% will depend on media, arts, etc for deepening their faith.
In short, Barna expects traditional church attendance to halve over the next 20 years! These projections, if true, will dramatically change the landscape of Christendom in America and the West. How should we respond?

Some leaders in mainstream churches will simply ratchet up their programs and services to win back the "lapsed." This approach, however, fails to realize that the mass exodus is not over poor programming but superficial spiritual experience. People are not seeking more excellence but greater authenticity. Intimacy drives them, not entertainment.

Other leaders will choose to sit back and criticize the “faithless.” They will expend much energy justifying their structures and defending their relevance and faithfulness. Their attitude towards the departed will reflect resignation and shades of resentment. They’ll deny the reality of what is happening, hoping it will pass and people will return. Let’s hope they don’t suffocate with their head in the sand.

Finally, a few leaders will take the trouble to ask questions and converse with those who are opting elsewhere. These leaders will not antagonize or blame the "dearly departed" but will bless them and seek ways to partner with them in building a network of alternative faith communities. But this will be at some personal cost.

Historically, Sunday attendance figures or the numbers of small groups have been the primary indicators of success or failure. These statistics have, in turn, become central to our identity. I don’t just pastor, but I pastor a church of 250. Or, I pastor a church with 29 small groups. Too often we assess our personal value based on the statistical rather than the vocational.

The dramatic rise of alternative faith communities, however, will force many of us to rediscover the joy of our calling rather than the joy of our achievements.

We have no power over the momentous shifts happening in Christendom. But we do have several choices we can make. First, we can give fresh and creative focus to authenticity, intimacy, and community within the mainstream churches. Second, we can support and prepare people for alternative faith communities, rather than fear or resist this development.

If Barna is correct, and he probably is, we face enormous changes in the next 10 years ... changes that are already well underway. These shifts, although unsettling for many of us, have the potential to breathe exciting new life into the Kingdom. Revolutionary faith is ushering in a fascinating new era.
In HOPE -

I'm torn on this issue. I am all for immigrants coming into this country to make a better life for themselves and sending money back to their friends and families in the home country. My problem is that we have a system for allowing them in, although I hear that it is still very hard for them to get in legally. I am concerned about the tax it puts on our social services when they don't pay taxes and drain the funds of our communities. I also see the biblical mandate to "protect the alien among you." It's sure more of a gray issue.

Some stats from International Teams Refugee Ministry:

• There are more than 30 million forefully displaced people world-wide - that's 1 in every 200 poeple on Earth (USCRI, UNHCR)
• In 2004, 52,868 of the world's refugees resettled in the US
• Afghanistan is the origin of the largest refugee population - 2.1 million. They seek asylum mainly in Pakistan, Iran, Germany, The Netherlands, and the UK (UNHCR)
• 37% of the world's refugees are living in the Middle East; 29% live in Africa; 24% in Asia/Pacific; 5% in Europe; and 5% in the Americas (USCRI)

I've discovered pet peeve number 4596: that person who sits down in a restaurant, orders water, receives the menu, and 15 minutes later when the waiter/waitress comes back to take the order has no idea what they want to eat, making everyone wait for them in uncomfortable silence. To make matters worse, they have no idea what side items come with their order ("Oh, I get to pick two sides, what are they?") or what salad dressings are offered even though the waiter/waitress just rattled them off for the previous three people who ordered! And yes, this has been happening to me a lot lately.

I just watched “The Constant Gardener,” for the fourth time in the past three weeks.

One particular theme from the movie captures what I have been saying for the past two years, at least to myself. A short time into the film, after the main character, Tessa Quayle (played by Rachel Wiesz), loses her baby, her husband and she are leaving the hospital in the Kibera slum when they notice a young boy, his mother, and his niece walking down the road. His name is Kioko Kilulu, the baby is his sister’s, Wanza Kilulu, she was 14 when she gave birth and died a short time later, presumably from AIDS or TB. Tessa wants her husband to pull over and offer them a ride home, as they walked over 40 kilometers to get to the hospital, they will have to walk all night to return home. Justin, her husband tells her to be reasonable, he needs to watch out for her and protect her, there are millions in need, we can’t help them all, “that’s what the agencies are for…” I love her response as it summarizes what I feel the solution is to many of the problems in the world, and what I believe our Christian response should be: “but these are three people we can help!”

Toward the end of the movie, things begin to make sense to Justin. His search for her killer leads him to northern Kenya, north of Lokichogio, I believe southern Sudan. As the bandits begin to raid the area, lighting fire to the huts, kidnapping the children, killing some, Justin and the others flee to the UN plane about to depart. A young girl tries to get on the plane but is not allowed, the pilot tells him that there are thousands of children out here, we cannot help them all, the rules are to protect them. Justin, learning from his late wife, responds, “but this is one we can help…” though to no avail as young Abuk is sent away, to "find a refugee camp, if she is lucky."

The point here is something I have been saying for a long time. If we want to save the world or at least make a difference, we have to start with those we can help. I can't save every one of the two millions orphans in Kenya, the effects of last year's tsunamai still linger in much of Asia, there isn't much I can do. Though homelessness isn't much of a problem in my community, it exists, I can't help them all. I am inundated with students in my classes that come from homes I can't even imagine and if I could build a house and provide a staff that would provide for these kids I would, I can't. However, what I can do in all of these cases is help those in front of me, offer an encouraging word to my students and show them that I care and do for them what they need when I can. If I encounter a homeless person, I can buy them lunch, maybe a night in a hotel if necessary. There are 404 orphans being fed, clothed, educated, and loved in Kenya right now due to Tumaini, it's just a dent, but it's more than that to each of them.

We must do what we can when we encounter those in need, not rely on the agencies.

I realize today that I'm not against big business. I know they get a bad name in the press and from the liberal crowd, but I'm not a hater. Any business, whether Wal Mart or the local grocer is in business to make money and there is a great deal of risk involved. While I would like to make a lot of money but don't want to incur the risk, I am not a business owner and probably never will be.

What does bother me is when they bring in record profits at the expense of their consumer. Oil companies bother me when gas prices soar out of the atmosphere, yet they show record profits for the third and fourth quarter last year. It will cost my school district almost $12000 next year to provide my insurance benefits, yet the local insurance affiliates are reaping in record profits. I could go on.

If a hurricane strikes an area that is a major source of oil for the nation and the consumer can't get the oil so there is a supply and demand problem, the price will rise, a company may risk a quarterly loss, I have no problem with that, hike the prices. If an effect of Americans living longer while requiring more expensive medications and health care and premiums need to rise to keep the companies going, no problem, rise them as high as they need to be. But don't take advantage of the consumer, don't post record profits when prices have soared. I'm not a student of economics, but isn't there some rule for this?

Great trade, the BoSox just got Willy Mo Pena for Branson Arroyo, great move! I see ya working Theo!

There was an error in the article that ran on the ooze last week. The divorce rate is not close to 50% for either Christians or non-Christians, more like 33-34% for each. I stand corrected and thankful to the person who pointed that out to me. Check out the links below for more info:
barna.org
http://www.christianitytoday.com/mp/7m2/7m2046.html

I've published another article on theooze.com It's under the reviews section. Your comments are welcome.

Book Review: “Urban Tribes” by Ethan Watters

I’ve been waiting a while to get this review out. I finally finished the book this weekend and will highlight the main points below:

The premise of the book is that while twenty and thirty somethings are delaying marriage and forsaking family at alarming rates, all is not lost. They survive by forming tight-knit circles of friends (tighter than any family I have encountered) which them becomes and replaces their family. The friends understand them better, provide more support, and are not as judgmental as the family.

He makes a comment that supports a comment I made a while back here that challenged a popular author’s comments of the amount of classism that exists in America. Watters writes, “ Raised during a time of remarkable wealth, our potential has always felt unlimited. We could be anything we wanted, our parents had told us from birth, and we believed them almost too well…Not long ago, the course of one’s life would, in all likelihood, be an expression of one’s class and group membership. How exciting that we had the freedom to shape our lives to be an expression of personal character.” (9)

Much of his study revolved around the functioning of the tribes, how did they live and what did they do? I couldn’t help but think throughout how the Church, in reality, needed to function as a tribe. Look at the following traits:

- Every tribe member has their role. While one member may become sort of a de facto leader, it is not a hierarchical sort of membership at all, this leader’s role is simply more of an organizer and is no more important to the tribe than any other member – see senior pastor
- Many tribes told stories of pooling money together to send another member on a vacation, send them home to visit family over the holidays, staying over at a house to watch them in time of need, visit in the hospital, attend funeral as show of support, etc. Aren’t we called to take care of the body of Christ as such?
- A man named Nikolas was a member of his tribe in San Francisco and was sort of an expert at blown glass creations. He had received a large contract to create some glass figures for a large hotel in the city, though the technology he was counting on had not been created, it was up to him to create it. Obviously throughout that year Nikolas endured a lot of stress and failure was right around the corner. However, Watters writes, “If he had lost his gamble-lost his enormous investment and failed at his shot in the big leagues-he could have come back into his group of friends every bit as valued as he had been before. How often do we value members of the local body simply on their job or what they offer to us rather than their inherent value as a creation of God?
- He talks about the Critical Mass movements that happened across San Francisco and other large cities around the world where large masses of bicyclists would gather and ride the city to protest something, bring the city to a halt in some cases. It was also frustrating to the city bureaucrats who wanted to appease the protestor’s demands or set out a route for them to follow. There was no leader and it spread through word of mouth or mass emails inviting all to attend. This reminds me of the post-modern church, no leaders, kind of a hodge-podge of ideas, outsiders trying to organize it, yet we won’t let it happen. Our goal is to stay true to the calling of Christ and love Him and His people as best we can.
- Toward the end he begins to write more on connectedness and love, and his travels take him to the American Association of Single People where he meets a man named Coleman who was it’s President. Through the course of his interview with Coleman he notices a grossly overweight man named Cliff stuffing envelops with a few others at the table. He got involved because he was lonely and saw an ad in the paper for the organization, called, found out they could use some help, so he joined in. He also helped with a smokers rights group and he didn’t smoke. But the big thing Watters noticed was that though Cliff would “never be the poster boy for the AASP, Coleman, Michael, and Kat were kind to him, and so as least for today Cliff might feel the stereotype of his single life lift a little.” The people at AASP made Coleman feel welcome, feel special, isn’t that the role of the church? Do you think Cliff ever dreamed of going to the church to feel special? Why not?
- Finally, Washington Post columnist Jeanne Marie Laskas wrote about her experience in the tribe, noting that she “saw that the possibility for humiliation existed in every aspect of her life except for one: her tribe of friends she called ‘the Babes.’ Within that context, she felt no expectation that she had to be continuously smart or attractive or ‘on.’ In fact, when she was around her friends, she felt she didn’t have to do anything at all… ‘No one is going to going to judge me if I just sit here daydreaming.’ That is what the Babes are all about. The freedom to just be.” May the church accept God’s people and love them in this way.

I have to add one more funny note from this book. Watters goes on this tangent about evolutional psychology and how it explains the differences between men and women when it comes to commitment and marriage. One thing I found interesting is how the two sexes differ in this views on sex and multiple partners. He notes that on average, women prefer eight-tenths of a sexual partner per month, one over a year, two in three years and five in a lifetime. Men prefer two partners a month, five in a year, ten over three years, and twenty in a lifetime.

When it comes to how long you have to know someone before having sex, the studies show that women had to know someone six months before having sex. For men it was a week.

Finally, the “amount of time before sex for women bottomed out at a week, meaning no woman reported wanting to have sex with an attractive man after knowing him for less than one week. The men’s curve, on the other hand, never bottomed out. There were many men who reported than they would be willing to consent to sex at the one-hour mark.” Even more funny is that Watters then theorizes that the one-hour mark was too long, why not go down to a second or increments thereof. In fact, he thinks that some men might agree to sex before having met an attractive woman, or even “some men would have consented to sex with an attractive woman, unilaterally and for all future time, somewhere back in high school.” CRAZY!

Watched "The Constant Gardener" again last night, caught something new this time. Earlier in the movie when Tessa and Justin are leaving the movie, she wants to give Kioko and his mother and niece a ride back to their village, 40 km away. Justin says no, he has to watch out for her, there are millions in need, that's what the agencies are for. She response that these are three WE can help, to no avail.

Later in the movie when Justin is up in Loki fleeing the bandits, he wants to bring Abuka (sp?) on the plane with him but the pilot won't let him. He offers a bribe but the pilot says there are thousands out there, we can't help them all. In perfect irony, Justin responds, "but this is one we can help."

These two scenes could not summarize my worldview any better. I am writing an deeper article on this to submit to theooze again and will post when completed.

I'm really looking forward to seeing this Sebastian Telfair doc, the SG writes about it:

But here's the thing: When the climax of the movie happens (Telfair getting drafted by the Blazers), it's much more affecting than you can imagine, with an entire room of family and friends practically falling down in delight. The defining moment is the sight of Telfair's little brother uncontrollably sobbing with joy; if you ever wondered why basketball means so much to the African-American community, just watch that scene. From day one, ever since I could walk and talk, I've loved basketball as much as any middle-class white kid could love it. But it was never a potential savior for me. I never looked at basketball as my one chance to escape my current situation and provide a better life for my family. I never looked at basketball as my own personal lottery ticket. I never worried that, if I failed in some way as a player, my family and community would be failing with me. You watch Telfair's brother in that final scene and everything hits home: It's not that basketball means so much to the people from Coney Island, but that basketball means too much.

"The present Western policy of playing down genocide and hoping it will peter out has proved to be bankrupt practically as well as morally. Granted, there are no neat solutions in Darfur. But ignoring brutality has only magnified it, and it's just shameful to pretend not to notice the terrified villagers here, huddling with their children each night and wondering when they are going to be massacred."
- Nicholas Kristof, columnist, writing from the Chad-Sudan border of increasing violence by Sudanese militias in the region, including cross-border raids against villagers in Chad.

I don't know Kristof, I've heard the name but I don't know where. I don't know if he is liberal or conservative, religious or not, etc. All I know is that I agree with the statement he just made and the truth thereof. Can you imagine living under those circumstances?

I'm now 0-2 on flights this year. My scheduled 11:58 flight from ATW to MSP this morning got onto the runway where it was discovered that the right engine (with was a propellor, haven't been on one of those in a while) wasn't gauging correctly, so we had to de-plane and reschedule. I made it to MSP, now waiting to get to LAX. At least they upgraded me to first class, it's been a while since I've sat up there.

I saw next to a gentleman in his mid to upper 30's on the way here and in the five talkable minutes he had before being shut down, I think he called every co-worker he had to tell them his Blackberry was down so if they had an urgent into to share they should tell him now. He said this loud enough for the whole plan to hear. I think even the guy with him was embarrassed. I swear this was his first business trip and he had to let everyone know he was out of the office and he may be missed. I'm sure he wasn't.

The other guy next to me acted like he was so above this all. He had also reschedule and just looked to be very arrogant. Dude, if you are that rich and you travel that often, you should be in first class or on a private jet, don't act like you are better than the rest of us! Yancy wrote about this in one of his earlier books, describing an elderly lady on her first flight playing with the lights, exclaiming "they give you peanuts!" and opening and closing the shades on the window, amazed at the scenery from 35000 feet. Most passengers rolled their eyes, Yancey appreciated her child-like outlook and attitude. I too often am the other passengers, may I be more like Yancey.

Finally, as I have a few minutes here and there I'm watching "Contact" for one of my classes. With the situation from this weekend and the fact that Jodie Foster's father dies early in the movie (and I am now 30) I seem more in tune with my mortality of late. Every little twinge in my chest warns me of a heart attack, I fear leaving my wife and children behind, I read articles in the paper that describe accidents far less catastropic than mine that resulted in the deaths of all parties involved. I don't know what to make of this, my prayer is "Lord, if you want me, I am ready, as much as I'd like to stay around here and enjoy your Creation for a while, I know that life with you is unimaginable and I do look forward to it. May your will be done."

My accident wasn't even 48 hours old and already two letters in the mail from some scumbag injury attorney's looking for business. I'm glad I'm not hurt because being burt sucks, but I'm also glad I don't have to deal with those people.

It's funny that just the other night I was watching "A Civil Action" with John Travolta. I like the part in the beginning at the first court hearing when he opens by saying that the defense lawyers are just trying to excuse him and acting like he's not a real lawyer. The judge, John Lithgow, says something like, "You're an injury attorney, you'll get used to it." Great line, great movie.

I think I used up my first of nine lives this afternoon. A fellow teacher and I were driving down to WI Dells for a conference and the roads were very slick. She was driving due to the fact that my car wouldn't start this morning, which I thought might be better as she had an SUV. We were merging onto I-39 South and when we got onto the Interstate we sought to merge to the left lane to pass a semi. As we did, we hit a patch of ice and began to spin. We probably spun three to four times when I thought we were going to make it, until we were perpendicular with the traffic and I turned over to my left to see a semi about to smash us. It did, we went into the ditch, down a large embankment, hit a fence, and stopped. Fortunately, neither of us were injured, we both walked away unscathed. I am now home after a nerve-wrecking two-hour drive home on the same icy roads, no conference for me this weekend.

A few thoughts on that whole incident:

First, the grace of God. If that semi hits the driver side five feet further up, she may be in very serious condition. It could not have hit us in a better place. No airbags went off, we didn't roll, the slide down the very steep embankment was gradual, etc. I continued to be humbled in His Presence.

Second, the idea of having one's back came to mind as Meaghan called her mother to pick us up. Just about a year ago I went to an At-Risk conference and heard the keynote speaker talk about the fact that the kids we deal with have no one who "have their back." Growing up, our parents always had our back. We needed homework done, they were there. We needed a project complete, they were there. Something went wrong at school or on the playground, they were there. The kids I teach don't have that, and they suffer for it. Had Meaghan not been able to call her mother, I could have called on countless family and friends who would have dropped everything to come and get us, I'm sure she could say the same. People have our back, as a teacher of At-Risk students, I have to have theirs, no one else does.

Finally, I was really struck at the number of people gauking, taking pictures, calling friends on cells as they plodded by in their cars looking at the two of us on the side of the road. Makes me think differently about reacting to accidents as I drive past them.

I think I've finally caught up on life. Just finished two assignments for school and I think I have built up some equity with the family again.

Speaking of family, here is sacrifice: Duke-UNC is on right now and I am allowing Maiya to watch "Lady and the Tramp" on the only TV we have...AHHHHHHHHHHHH!

I was going to post a couple of quotes from the Sports Guy's "Curious Guy with Malcolm Gladwell," I have no idea who this guy is but click on the link and check it out.