The United States: A Flickering Flame?

The content of the discussion I've posted below is too rare these days. Hearing stuff like this is both disheartening and invigorating. I'm disheartened by it only because it's a conversation that is never had; lost in the hurricane of partisan bickering. At the same time however, hearing it just makes me want to jump up out of my chair and cheer like crazy. Do a back flip! Something! This is the kind of bipartisan discussion we SHOULD be having; the one we NEED to be having!

This was an interview done last night on Mike Huckabee's show with Richard Dreyfus. Now, if anyone knows anything about liberals, they know that Richard Dreyfus is about as liberal as they come. Yet what he had to say last night had nothing to do with partisanship, and everything to do with patriotism. I urge you to listen to this! At least listen from 3:25 on if you don't want to spend a mere 10 minutes, but I URGE you to listen:







Yes, yes, and more yes!

...or as I once knew it: Where the heck have I been?!

Busy.

No, "busy" is not a noun (although none of you would have caught that anyway).

I need to blog again, and again will I blog...again...someday.

Like when I have less homework.

Catch ya later.

PS. Oh, and just for the record: If she turns out to be nothing else...Sarah Palin is still hot.

Seven Years Later: Reflecting on 9/11

Yesterday could only be described as typical for me. I went to class, came home, worked on some homework, watched the news, left for junior high group, and then made my way over to Starbucks for some reading. I'd paid no real attention to the significance of the day until I came home that night. And then it hit me:

Today is September 11th.

I came home to my parents watching MSNBC's unedited news footage of the events that took place seven years ago. I sat down and watched it with them.

There just isn't much left to say about 9/11, and yet even after the seven years we've had to explain, research, exploit, and comprehend, what I found most frustrating about watching those images last night is just how incomprehensible they remain. In fact, when the time is taken to really reexamine that day, the events that took place seem to only grow in their level of disbelief. Today, whenever we hear the term "September 11th" or "9/11," we just sort of accept it as a tragic fact of life and don't think on it much further. I wish that we truly could do that. I wish that we could simply rise above and beyond what happened that day through understanding it, accepting it, and fighting to overpower it as a nation. After the reaction I had last night however, I'm not so sure that we can.

In seven years I've never felt more disconnected from that day than I felt last night; as if I was seeing it all for the first time. I was just old enough when it happened to remember witnessing it, but the significance would only register as I grew. Last night and throughout today it has continued to register, causing me to realize one of 9/11's tragic truths: that it will forever and always be an open wound for our country. I was deeply disturbed by what I watched last night, overcome with fits of emotion and tears. I thought maybe that reaction had died a couple of years ago, but here I was now after not having thought about the anniversary all day...crying and scrambling to understand just what I was witnessing all over again.

Wow. No doubt those men struck a deep and lasting blow to all of us. And while we've managed to come together as a nation in mourning, memory, and resilience, when we take the time to really stare it down again, the lasting and sadistically unique characteristic of 9/11 remains one of horror and unspeakable tragedy. How can we get past it? It can't be possible. Not an event like that.

Dostoevsky talks describes mankind as being "artistically cruel." That men don't simply do bad things, but that they strive to elevate horrific acts to artistic levels. What struck me last night was the fact that September 11th was as perfectly artistic an evil act as I will ever witness. How brilliantly sadistic it was to carry out the most significant act of terrorism in a way which forces the entire nation to watch it all unfold. It would have been one thing to set a bomb, or a series of bombs off killing thousands of people. Explosions are instantaneous. The news would have only been able to cover the aftermath. But to think that the entire nation sat and watched the first tower burn, and then saw as the second plane hit, and heard the reports of the Pentagon attack, and witnessed people jumping to their deaths, and finally, after 102 minutes, the towers and all those inside...fall to destruction. These men forced us into front row seats to watch the greatest single act of terrorism ever committed. Does it all seem real to you? To this day, can you really believe all of this took place?

I truly believe it's only a matter of time before we experience another act of terrorism against our nation. I don't say that to be a cynic, and I blame it on no one. I say it as a matter of fact. It's a matter of fact, that in spite of all the security measures we may take, there will always be men out there looking to stay two steps ahead of us in hopes of doing great harm. And so it must be only a matter of time. But I do not believe that we will ever again see an act as artistically cruel as this one. Possibly, many more people will die then than died on that day, but we won't be there to watch it all happen.

As something of a side-note, I discovered what bravery was last night. Groups of firemen walking toward the burning towers while everyone else was running from them. A somewhat off-topic statement, but certainly worthy of mention.

It's hard to believe that the only world I've known is the post-9/11 one. I don't remember America before, only after. Think about all the ways in which this event has changed the way we live, the rights we have, and the securities we once took for granted. Think about the fact that the greatest, most powerful nation in the history of the world...was forever altered in just 102 minutes. Think that the post-9/11 America is the only one you'll ever know.

We can't grow callous to 9/11. And if we choose - as we should - to face that day again on rare occasions, we never will. It's important to remember who we were before that day. It's important not to think about 9/11 as a poitical springboard alone. It will always be an open wound, and, as a result, the United States will always be a healing nation.

...and McCain/(Pay-lyn): To remember last name, just think "Van Halen"

Thursday evening was a great pleasure to witness. Barack Obama officially became the first major party candidate to receive the nomination for President of our nation. I had some misgivings about the event. Although I have no problem with Obama whatsoever, I was slightly offended by his choice to give the speech in the grand manner he did. It seemed arrogant and over the top. If you had tuned in to the firework finale at the end, you might have even mistaken it for the closing ceremonies of the Olympics. Anyway, I didn't the decision. It's as if Obama simply wanted to display how much of a spectacle he is. That being said I can understand it. It was a night that will easily make it's way into our nation's history. It was also a great attempt (and a successful one I think) to rally the Democratic Party and secure as many unsure Hilary voters as he could. There were few specifics in his speech, but that's to be expected. Was it mostly emotion and pomp? Yeah, but it needed to be. I'll give Obama the benefit of a doubt and believe that his grand show was put on to celebrate the historical significance of the night...not to place himself on his own pedestal.

Again, those are small tiffs compared once again to the undeniable fact that what the country witnessed Thursday night was momentously significant. It was a wonderful opportunity for both parties to set aside their biases and celebrate in the triumph that is Presidential Nominee Barack Obama.

Once it was all over however, my focus immediately went back to who John McCain had picked as his Vice Presidential running-mate. He made the right choice not to leak his pick that night, and even sent out a congratulatory add to Obama, allowing him his night to make history. Ever since McCain became the presumptive nominee, I was praying he would choose Mitt Romney. I liked Romney very much and voted for him back in the California primary, but of course he dropped out the very next day. I reasoned that there was absolutely no better choice.

I was absolutely...wrong.

I spent yesterday with the family at Universal Studios (fun place, I'd never been there), and headed straight to a junior high youth event when I got home. Before all that however, I had woken up at 6:15 AM to see if any of the news organizations had broken the pick yet. It reminded me of Christmas morning as a kid, I just couldn't wait. They hadn't, so I got my pillow, sheets, and comforter to hunker down on the couch until they had. To my surprise and dismay, Fox and CNN were confirming that Romney, Pawlenty, and Huckabee were not chosen. Then discussion began about this female Alaskan governor who had very possibly landed in Ohio near where McCain would appear with his nominee. Only about 45 minutes later was it confirmed that Alaskan governor Sarah Palin was McCain's choice for VP. The newscasters couldn't even pronounce her name, nobody knew anything about her, and everyone, including me, was shocked. I was also pissed, but after thinking through exactly all that this choice meant...my disappointment turned into full-fledged support and enthusiasm for this republican ticket. Let me list out the strategy for you.

Reasons why Sarah Palin was a brilliant choice:

-The first and most immediate reason being that this completely wiped Obama from the news. Just hours after making a historic speech that will be remembered for ages to come (yes, it will), McCain managed to obliterate all discussion of it from both sides. The truth is any pick would have done this to some extent. If he had picked Romney, it would have been top news, but only for a short time. The choice of Palin however, an unknown conservative governor from Alaska, demanded full attention from everyone at all times. McCain had to have known exactly what he was doing. Sending out his message to Barack the night before knowing that he was hours away from stealing all his thunder! Haha, it's brilliant, and it makes me laugh. Make no mistake however, it's a temporary snuff. Obama's speech will maintain it's stature in the long run.

-Palin is a woman! Obama just suffered through one testy week at the DNC as many of the Hilary supporters were threatening not to vote for him. Now, just as he's feeling relieved and confident in rounding up those supporters, McCain come out with a woman VP. If I'm Obama I'm nervous and pissed by the decision. It certainly won't capture the majority of Hilary supporters, but it can only help McCain and hurt Obama.

-It takes away the monopoly the democratic party seems to have had on being the party of change and reform; the party open to expanding the boundaries of traditional politics. Obama has been preaching change, and he picks an older, established liberal senator. McCain has been painted as being outdated and out of touch, and he picks a young, vibrant woman who many seem to identify with, making history for the GOP. Obama was the only one with history to be made on his side if the people voted for him. Now McCain joins him.

-It breaks from the notion that McCain is old-Washington. Palin is the furthest from Washington on both sides. Not to mention the GOP has no real bench, which means assuming Palin does very well, she could be the front runner for the republican party the next chance she gets.

-Perhaps most important, the choice pleases both independents and conservatives. How McCain managed to get out of this mess, I don't know, but he did. He was praised on one side for being a maverick and an unconventional politician. While on the other side he was torn apart for not being conservative enough. Palin greatly satisfies both parties. She's conservative, yet a very unconventional choice. He's satisfied the Republican base while maintaining his reputation as a maverick with the independents (who will ultimately decide who wins this race). It's McCain's way of saying, "Hey, I'm still John McCain here."

These are just a few solid points to be made at just how brilliantly executed all of this was. I was not enthused at all with McCain's campaign before this. Obama was capturing the votes of a lot of people while I felt he was just passively sitting back. His choice of Governor...er, former governor Palin proves however that he is a brilliant political player, and can out strategize Obama even in the face of the freshman senator making history just hours before. Not an easy task. I'm in full support of McCain/Palin. I'm ready to watch these two parties battle it out, and I think McCain waited until now to declare, "game on."

This race just turned into one giant chess match. Obama called "check" on Thursday night with the entire democratic party behind him. I think McCain may have managed in one move to call "check-mate."

Rendering to Caesar: The Church and Gay Rights

"To vote, or not to vote?"

That's certainly a question, although I'm not so sure it's the question (most likely since it's not an exact quote). And while I'm not quite suffering a crisis of conscience on the same level as dear Hamlet, I am struggling to come to grips with what biblical voting should look like for me come this November.

Ever since the California Supreme Court declared that same-sex marriage was lawful back in May, I've been wrestling with the decision more than I expected I ever would. This case is not cut and dry. There are many points of dispute, and I'm sure just as many rebuttals for each and every point, giving both sides fair ground to argue. On the one hand you have the "religious right" who won't stand for such a...desecration of morality, as they make it out to be. On the other, the left (and I imagine most moderates), view the ruling as a great civil victory, or, just simply don't care all that much; a "live and let live" attitude. So where does that leave me? An 18 year old male whose been raised in a conservative, christian home all his life, and belongs to a conservative, christian congregation. Even more, an 18 year old male who understands his former condition before God, and has repented at the cross to reclaim his Lord as the treasure of his life. The answer is obvious, isn't it?

Actually...no.

It isn't for me and I'm not so sure it should be for any believer.

I have some issues with all of this. I already posted my initial response to the court's ruling back in May, which was, for the most part, a complaint against legislating from the bench. Now with November approaching, things get a little more personal, and I've got to decide what biblical voting on this issue looks like, or if it even exists. And lemme tell ya...I'm scrambling.

So what are my issues? Let me first say that I love this country. It's nothing short of a great blessing to live in a nation whose first priority is (in theory) the protection of the rights of it's citizens. We have every right to live in any manner that we choose, so long as the manner of our living doesn't infringe upon the rights of others. Great! We have the right to believe and worship whatever we choose to believe and worship under that same, simple condition. Even better... Which leads me ask, "who does same-sex marriage hurt? what right of mine - or anyone else for that matter - does it violate?" I challenge someone to give me a solid answer. People will sit and argue bogus statistics: that homosexual couples have shorter life-spans, have a higher STD rate, or whatever ridiculous thing they manage to come up with, but that's foolishness. Statistics aside - viable as they may be (or not be) - nothing changes the fundamental fact that gay marriage hurts no one, and violates nothing. There's nothing you can use to directly link the ability for two people of the same sex marrying with the rights of someone else being infringed upon. All other arguments are indirect, because if they weren't, this debate wouldn't exist. Which means, considering there is no definition of marriage whatsoever in our constitution, gay marriage should absolutely be permitted. (It also means that should an amendment defining marriage ever be added, it simply should not be, but that's a whole separate post).

It's just as simple as that...in theory of course. But everything is simpler in theory. Now, there is a flip side to that wonderful coin of human liberties. I can vote in whatever manner I'd like for whatever reason I have to vote in that particular direction. Faith-enabled voting is fair game. That's a great freedom to own, but how far is too far? When it comes to the issue of same-sex marriage, the initial response is to take up arms against it any way possible...like a good christian. This both lines up, and doesn't line up with the freedoms given to us in our Constitution. I'm voting against allowing gay marriage because of a belief system I have. At the same time, I'm voting to withhold rights from a certain group of people who don't share the same beliefs as me. Both of those sentences are saying the same exact thing, they're just worded differently. Yet the first sentences lines up with our Constitution, while the second seems to raise some red flags. Isn't that a slight mistreatment of our voting liberties? I mean, really, it has no effect on me either way. Whether gay couples can or can't be married will have virtually no impact on the lives of all the people voting against it, and yet they're doing it anyway because their bible tells them it's not right. A bible the gay community (most I'm assuming) don't believe to be the word of God. A belief, by the way, they have every right to have. Yet we still play a huge hand in deciding as significant an aspect in their lives as marriage (or lack thereof), and don't think twice about the fact. Does that sit right with you? It certainly doesn't with me. The question still remains for me though as to whether I'm placing the United States Constitution above Scripture. I'm reminded of Colosians 2:8 every time I think through this, which states:

"See to it that no one takes you captive through hallow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ."

Is that what I'm doing here? Is there room for deceptive philosophy in our Constitution to ensnare me in all of this? I mean after all, the word of God is the word of our Almighty God, while our nations principles - great as they may be - stand as nothing more than flawed human tradition. If I'm wrong about this issue, then I think it's for exactly the reason stated in that verse. However I've not even really responded to the issue yet, so that's yet to be determined. I will say that if anything or anyone convinces me that I am placing human tradition above the guidance of Scripture in my life, then I'll do everything I can to change that. But since nobody has yet, I'll continue...

What really upsets me about this whole debate has nothing to do with constitutionality though. It's the force behind the debate in the first place; the one driving factor behind our collective vote against gay marriage...the church. More than any other issue - homelessness, poverty, even abortion I think - political public enemy number one in the church is homosexuality. I don't think the church goes after anything more fervently than we do the rights of the gay community. And the way in which we've done so is not only disgraceful, but has missed the Gospel completely. I haven't seen any compassion for the gay community. No attempts to understand the issue better, no appropriate outreach to a group of people who very possibly are confused and hurting. Instead it's become a virtual shouting match between the majority of the "religious right" and minority of radicals on the left. Homosexuality is the unforgivable sin in the church.

So how have we decided to solve this problem? Well, through voting of course! And we're told to vote! ...vote! ...vote! That's our battleground against the horde of heathens in the world and we have God on our side.

What?!

Are you kidding me?!

What is this nonsense?!

Someone tell me when our job stopped being to spread the Gospel through word and deed to all people at all times...in a loving fashion. Someone tell me why we're so surprised that that world is simply being the world. I'm not upset with the gay community at all. I'm not upset with the California Supreme Court Justices who gave this ruling. I am very upset with the church and it's reaction to all of this! There's no reason to be upset, and there's no reason to be shocked. If our God...the God of the universe, speaks...and in speaking says that the world will hate him...then maybe we should expect that. If Jesus Christ Himself says that the world hates Him and will hate all those who follow Him, then why do we get so offended when things like this happen? Why do we take it so personally?

I'll tell you why, because we feel like we're the morality police of the world. We have to keep things in check, and we're not going to stand for the world living in...sin. We forget that the government exists for one reason only, which is to protect it's citizens. We forget that in order for the church to function properly, we need the government to function separately. It's an establishment which allows us the opportunity to freely worship and freely express our faith to others, not a tool to force the Gospel through law. We've taken the Great Commission - Christ's call to go out into the world and make disciples - and decided to advance that work through legislative means, therefore holding an unbelieving world to believing standards. Then we can avoid the whole spreading the Gospel through God-honoring relationships stuff. And it's that...it's exactly that sick fusion of faith and politics that's choking out the Gospel. Now the level of one's Christendom is measured by how they vote. If you vote one way, you're justified before the Lord. If you vote the other...well, yeah, you say you're a christian, but c'mon man, who are you fooling? Nothing makes me more sick than to see these evangelical pastors - shepherds of the Lords sheep - telling their congregation that if you are God's, you must vote. And not only that...but you must vote this way, or that way, so that we can reclaim this godless nation.

Nonsense!

Separation of church and state baby! That's where it's at, and I'll tell you something, it doesn't fully exist. However, if we do anything...if the church leans in any direction at all, it's in the direction of fusing the two rather than keeping them apart. And we think we're all the holier because of it. I realize in thinking through all of this how blessed I am to be in the congregation I'm in. The teaching from the pulpit is nothing but solid, and my Pastor does an excellent job of rising up and hitting the misguided ideals and actions of the church head on, while dealing with nothing but the Gospel. And he certainly never abuses the pulpit by preaching politics or voting patterns.

Another issue... Most believers will bring up this thing we call the "sanctity of marriage." Well, what does that even mean? We live in a nation where half of all marriages end in divorce, with an equally alarming number existing in the church and we're going to play that card? Gimme a break. Most of the country cares nothing about the sanctity of marriage...most couldn't tell you what it is even. And in the church, to think about the divorce rate that exists there, and then to think that we have the gall to stand up and take a holy stand to protect marriage against the gay community...what a hypocritical ploy that is; what a gross mistreatment of the Gospel. I don't doubt that many feel the unique status of marriage between one man and one woman is worthy of protecting. After all it is a God-ordained relationship which points directly to the relationship between Christ and the church. I would love nothing more than to preserve it's sanctity, but we've not done an even decent job as a church, being the example for the world. And truth be told, marriage will always be a holy thing in the Lord's eyes. In 6-10 years on the day that my future bride walks down the isle and we're joined together in marriage, the sanctity of that ceremony for us, and before our God won't be tarnished one bit by the possible fact that gays too can be married. Let's fry bigger fish... Let's work on commitment.

So where does all of this leave me in the voting booth this November? As of now, it leaves me right smack dab in between a vote for either side. I'm not comfortable voting to allow gay marriage, and yet I don't want to contribute to the misguided motives of the church in attacking the issue. For a long while this kept me panicking until the answer hit me the other night...

...I just won't vote.

I think that's the best way for me to render to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to my God what is my God's. (For the record, could Christ have answered that question any worse than he did, and yet any better?) I think I'm turning into one of those "confused" Christians who thinks we should be more concerned with issues like poverty and homelessness and yes, abortion rather than spending all our time doing everything not to love the homosexual community. So does that mean I'm a democrat now? I hope not. Republican red all the way! But really, I'm increasingly unhappy with this attempt to press the Gospel through legislation, and I couldn't be more unhappy with this inseparable interlocking of faith and politics that exists today. I think we should do more as a church to utilize our time, energy, money, and prayer elsewhere...instead of yelling at a sinful world not to sin anymore...we aren't called to do so. Let's spread the Gospel, and do it with compassion. Conversion isn't our game, and neither is judgement, that job's reserved for a much more qualified candidate.

...and the 2008 Summer Olympics!

I am...so incredibly excited for this summer's Olympics games! What a joy they are to watch. Not the games necessarily (sports are always a bit silly), but the deeper social implications that the games bring about.

Last night, watching the opening ceremonies, I was completely blown away... It had to have been one of the single-most amazing cultural events I've ever witnessed. Allowing China to host the games is a fascinating decision, and adds a dynamic to this years Olympics which has been nonexistent in years past. For my money, it was a very good decision and one I hope will have a significantly positive impact on foreign relations. Regardless of whether one agrees with the decision to hold the games in a nation which has wrapped itself in such controversy, regardless of whether or not you think Bush should have boycotted last night, it would have been impossible for anyone to have sat through the opening ceremonies without experiencing that tingling feeling one gets when one realizes they're witnessing a momentous historical moment.


Now that's exciting.

This thought is completely out of place in this posting, but watching the entire world come together in the largest celebration of modern times made me ask: "I wonder what God thinks of all this?" Harmony was the theme of last night...and that's a futile hope, don't you think? There's a real sadness in watching the world rejoice in the hope of peace and unity, fully well knowing that we live in a broken world beyond repair. Harmony is far beyond our grasp. We want to make it our own reality through global song and celebration. To think it'll only come after global torment and judgement.

Anyway, sorry about that downer note. I've been very sick all week long (that's a whole separate post), and after three trips to the doctors, two sleepless nights, one trip to urgent care, two prescriptions, and the most painful shot in the behind...no, take that back. After receiving the most painful shot I've ever had in my life(!), the opening ceremonies of last night were just what the doctor ordered.

Pun...intended.

They tried to make her go to rehab, but she said "No. No. No."

I'm not sure how many of you know this little fun-fact about myself, but I'll just get it out there:

I dig Amy Winehouse.

I think her music is great. However, she's got some SERIOUS issues as most everyone knows. I knew about them of course, but I came across this little YouTube video the other day and it was very disappointing to see. Go ahead, take a look:

Now, I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, "Did she just...? Was that...? ...on stage?" Yes, yes, and sadly, yes. Everyone knows she does that nonsense, but to actually see it and right smack-dab in the middle of a performace...it all just adds to the bummer factor. Not to mention, it's just sad.

At least her daddy thinks she's fine.

My two cents:

Amy Winehouse...get some help, and go to rehab...

...go, go, go.