Okay I'm prefacing this with a few disclaimers.
First, I have many friends that are gay, and this is not intended to be read as an assault on the members of the gay & lesbian community.
Secondly, I think it should be well understood what my opinion of homosexual nature is. My opinion is this: like depression and alcoholism, homosexuality stems from a genetic predisposition for that condition. I will never argue that it is entirely one's choice as to what there basic preference is. However, just as we encourage those who live with depression and alcoholism to avoid those tendencies, we must, as Christians, acknowledge that it is an improper lifestyle, and something we should work to, overcome, or at the least control. I don't agree with the idea that "God made me this way," because God would not contradict himself. It is my belief that Satan intervened in the developmental processes, just as he does with alcoholism and depression.
I understand that whether you are for or against homosexuality my second disclaimer won't be popular, I stand firm in the my belief, given what I know, that it can't be so black & white as to say it is either a choice or genetics, with no other chemical mental occurrence do we make that argument. I don't write this to try to force this line of thought on you, but so that you understand where I am coming from and I would hope that anyone else writing on such a controversial issue would do like wise.
Now that I've done best to make clear my stand point on the issue of homosexuality it is time to move on to my primary topic for this article.
That topic is gay marriage. It has been in the news lately. Mostly in the realm of talk concerning Proposition 8, which across the board was put into place in every state constitution. But this ban is for marriages not civil unions.
Now it is not my goal to argue against civil unions, as far as the state is concerned a civil union is just as good as marriage, it allows all the same rights and privileges that a marriage affords, so far as the state is concerned.
So the argument that homosexuals should be allowed to have gay marriage in order that they might have the same rights as a married couple (joint custody of a child, shared insurance, etc.) is a straw man since they are arguing for something that is available through other channels.
Many comedians have made the joke that we should, "Go ahead and allow gay marriage so that the gays will be as unhappy as the rest of us." That's part of the problem, marriage isn't being treated with the proper respect. In fact I would argue that many people who get "married" are doing nothing more than signing a contract, as far as their concerned. Few people consider the full weight of marriage. It isn't some contract that is legally binding until your lawyer's can find you a way out of it. It's supposed to be a one time shot. "From this day forward," "Til death do you part," "Now and forever," do you know what that means? FOR-EV-ER to quote Outkast, "Forever never seems to be to long until your grown."
SIDE NOTE: Polygamy... I could careless I have found no sound doctrine in the bible that speaks out against multiple marriages in fact it seems to be endorsed by the Old Testament.
The problem stems from a lack of respect for the term "marriage". Most people today, regardless of their sexual orientation, are entering into "civil unions," not marriages. The difference being the inclusion of God in that relationship.
Now those of you who know me saw this coming, but... let's look at the first marriage the model for all marriages that have since existed, Adam and Eve. Now if you don't believe in Adam and Eve, as I'm sure some do not, then if you believe in a God of any kind look for the point I'm trying to make with this example.
God brought Adam and Eve together. Their relationship flourished under God's care in the garden. It was when they focused on themselves that marital difficulties ensued. Now I'm sure that some of you can imagine the kind of bickering that occurred after they were cast out of the garden. All of the "this is your fault" "no its your fault" that would have gone on and yet they stayed together. They returned their focus to God doing as he had commanded them. They had many children and taught them about God. And they lived on to incredibly old ages. Together.
Their are several examples of marriage in the Bible, some good some bad some that started out rocky, but ended well, but the key to every example of marital success in the Bible is a focus on God.
Returning to my point, some of you may misunderstand me to say that if homosexuals have a clear love for God, as many I know do, then marriage should be allowed for them. No. My point with that little offshoot is that Marriage should be respected for what it is, and what is was established as, not what we think of it as. Marriage is the joining together of a man and woman into one flesh, by God. Again, God's nature does not contradict itself. He would not castigate homosexuals, but then give them credence to found a relationship in his name that was against his design.
Does it happen, yes, adulterers and homosexuals get married, but its not true "marriage." It is a grasping at what God has designed as good. Just as God created attraction as a good thing, but lust (as Dietrich Bonhoeffer describes it) is attraction apart from God, and a homosexual marriage is a marriage apart from God.
In summation, God established marriage as a loving relationship between a man and woman with him as the focus. Anything apart from that is not marriage. This isn't just true for Homosexuals but any so union that doesn't have these three ingredients is not marriage. If a man and woman are married and focused on God but don't love one another it is a fool's errand, not marriage. If a man and woman love one another but don't have God as their focus, it is a ship doomed to sink, it is not marriage. If it is two men or two women who love one another (as true as that love can be) and are focused on God, then it a silhouette, a phantom, a mirage, but is not marriage.
You may not agree with what I have to say. In fact I'm fairly certain most people won't like what I've said here, at least not in its entirety, but no writer's purpose should be for their audience to hail and praise him; a writer's goal should be to make his reader's think and think critically. There would be no need for men to write if all people were in agreement about the issues.
-matt
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Saturday, August 2, 2008
Gossip Whirls
Ok now in theory, I should try my hand at religion before moving straight to the whatever else.
However its the whatever I'm concerned with today. Recently, as I opened a browser on my computer and it pulled up Yahoo's home page, and among the clickables including "7 Desserts You Can Eat Without Guilt," and "The Top Ten Ways to Guarantee a Divorce," was an article discussing the goings on in the celebrity world, entitled "Miley and Christian's Scandals."
The article splintered into to sub-articles one went on to discuss Miley Cyrus' feud with some other little 14/15 year old Disney-bred mini-diva, while Christian Bales' half discussed the recent domestic dispute he was involved in after he hit and roughed up his sister and mother after they spoke badly about his wife. Thats right the people at Yahoo seemed to find it fitting to put these two topics under an equal heading with a nice little side-by-side of Cyrus' and Bales' faces.
Is this what a word like "Scandal" has come to mean in America? Monica Lewinski? now that was a scandal." Watergate? Scandal! However a cop calling Lindsay Lohan gay? not a scandal, kind of funny but not necessarily a Scandal.
A "Scandal" might involve a certain level of deformation of Character, but how many celebrities do you hear about in those kinds of articles do you think of as those with Character. You know those of good moral fiber, the fine upstanding men and women of film and screen. You probably can't name many because they stay out of the lime light. Most of the ones you can name have some history of this or are just starting down that road.
My concern is this, why are we as a people so obsessed with the goings on of people's lives merely because they are performers? what makes them so different? I mean most of what you hear about isn't too dissimilar to what happens on hundreds of High School Campuses all the time. Two people are dating they break up, and the (now) ex-gf immediately dislikes the new one.
I think an even bigger concern is why do even those smaller... lets call them feuds... concern any of us enough to purchase any number of magazines dedicated to such gossip, or tune into any number of TV shows, (or heck) even entire channels designed around discussing the petty, nonsensical irritants of other peoples lives?
I don't just mean in school, or at work, but even in the church we can't help but discuss the business of others, even the outcome of their business couldn't have less of an affect on us. I mean whose business is it when a couple is getting divorced? That couple's, and their family. Whose business is it when a man loses his job and has to ask the church for help until he's back on his feet? His and the ministers of that Church.
So why are we as a society compelled to get in other's Kool-aid? why do we care what any of these entertainers do in their off-time, after all, with very few exceptions, it has no affect on us.
I can't say for my own part that I have never partaken in the inane chatter that occurs, but with one exception all preachers, teachers, and speakers, no matter how true their sermon, is not above succumbing to the evils they so passionately speak against.
I think the best explanation comes from the movie Mean Girls, a film whose casting proves my previous point. When a book trashing all the girls in school is revealed it alleges that a teacher might have been peddling drugs to students (which we, the audience, know to be a falsehood), and the primary male character, Aaron, says that, "That book was written buy a bunch of girls who make up rumors because they're bored with their own lame lives."
That last part is the crucial piece, its because we're bored with our lives. We know all the details (as best we can) of our own lives there's nothing new or interesting about our lives so we seek out the facts of others lives, usually the negatives.
Even knowing this flaw, there is no definite way to stop it. My suggestion? consider that the life you are living no matter how mundane it may seem is part of a masterpiece The Lord is creating, and he has chosen you to help him co-author it.
I think remembering that will help us all
-matt
However its the whatever I'm concerned with today. Recently, as I opened a browser on my computer and it pulled up Yahoo's home page, and among the clickables including "7 Desserts You Can Eat Without Guilt," and "The Top Ten Ways to Guarantee a Divorce," was an article discussing the goings on in the celebrity world, entitled "Miley and Christian's Scandals."
The article splintered into to sub-articles one went on to discuss Miley Cyrus' feud with some other little 14/15 year old Disney-bred mini-diva, while Christian Bales' half discussed the recent domestic dispute he was involved in after he hit and roughed up his sister and mother after they spoke badly about his wife. Thats right the people at Yahoo seemed to find it fitting to put these two topics under an equal heading with a nice little side-by-side of Cyrus' and Bales' faces.
Is this what a word like "Scandal" has come to mean in America? Monica Lewinski? now that was a scandal." Watergate? Scandal! However a cop calling Lindsay Lohan gay? not a scandal, kind of funny but not necessarily a Scandal.
A "Scandal" might involve a certain level of deformation of Character, but how many celebrities do you hear about in those kinds of articles do you think of as those with Character. You know those of good moral fiber, the fine upstanding men and women of film and screen. You probably can't name many because they stay out of the lime light. Most of the ones you can name have some history of this or are just starting down that road.
My concern is this, why are we as a people so obsessed with the goings on of people's lives merely because they are performers? what makes them so different? I mean most of what you hear about isn't too dissimilar to what happens on hundreds of High School Campuses all the time. Two people are dating they break up, and the (now) ex-gf immediately dislikes the new one.
I think an even bigger concern is why do even those smaller... lets call them feuds... concern any of us enough to purchase any number of magazines dedicated to such gossip, or tune into any number of TV shows, (or heck) even entire channels designed around discussing the petty, nonsensical irritants of other peoples lives?
I don't just mean in school, or at work, but even in the church we can't help but discuss the business of others, even the outcome of their business couldn't have less of an affect on us. I mean whose business is it when a couple is getting divorced? That couple's, and their family. Whose business is it when a man loses his job and has to ask the church for help until he's back on his feet? His and the ministers of that Church.
So why are we as a society compelled to get in other's Kool-aid? why do we care what any of these entertainers do in their off-time, after all, with very few exceptions, it has no affect on us.
I can't say for my own part that I have never partaken in the inane chatter that occurs, but with one exception all preachers, teachers, and speakers, no matter how true their sermon, is not above succumbing to the evils they so passionately speak against.
I think the best explanation comes from the movie Mean Girls, a film whose casting proves my previous point. When a book trashing all the girls in school is revealed it alleges that a teacher might have been peddling drugs to students (which we, the audience, know to be a falsehood), and the primary male character, Aaron, says that, "That book was written buy a bunch of girls who make up rumors because they're bored with their own lame lives."
That last part is the crucial piece, its because we're bored with our lives. We know all the details (as best we can) of our own lives there's nothing new or interesting about our lives so we seek out the facts of others lives, usually the negatives.
Even knowing this flaw, there is no definite way to stop it. My suggestion? consider that the life you are living no matter how mundane it may seem is part of a masterpiece The Lord is creating, and he has chosen you to help him co-author it.
I think remembering that will help us all
-matt
Sunday, July 13, 2008
No Respect
I usually like to start any of my blogs with a mission statement.
For this one my goal is this:
To share with you one guy's opinions of the goings on of life on this spinning blue orb of ours.
I promise to:
1) Deliver my opinions in a educated (though not entirely politically correct way).
2) To share with you unabashedly my feelings, as they relate to my faith as well as all aspects of my personality to which they apply.
That being said, I'm sure some of you may wonder why I choose to voice my opinions of life in a separate blog from the discussions of my life. Its because this is more of a newsletter, where my other blog is more of a journal. This is meant to be a more active place, the other blog is more or a reflective piece.
Now as to why do this blog at all, I must give credit where credit is due. Bethany Guersney inspired me to try my hand at this. Mostly because I had left a rant on a Facebook note of her's trashing the video contained therein, and during my subsequent apology she challenged me to find a more constructive outlet to express my own opinions, and thats what I'm doing.
And now my first official post...
"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
In 1789, with the ratification of the Constitution of the United States of America, came a new executive power among the states, The President of the United States, who by those words came into being. Now while the exact limitations of the office and its powers and responsibilities have changed over the years the basic rules have remained the same.
The video that began me down the road to this blog was from the site The Onion. This site, admittedly, does not limit the range of those it mocks, but all the same it does almost seem to make its goal to push the buttons of every member/group in American society. The video was making fun of George W. Bush, not a rare practice mind you, but one that has always bothered me. Not the mockery of him specifically,I mean he has had many memorable moments that are comic gold.
My issue, rather, is with the lack of respect the office garners. Going back to that day on April 30th, 1789, who would have expected that a position so highly revered in our country as the one held by our first President, another George, would fall so far in its public esteem. Some would argue that to be the cost of letting people choose their leaders, someone will always be left dissatisfied. Fair enough, but I must disagree. I feel like thats a cop-out, a sorry attempt at alleviating the stresses of finding the real root of this developed disrespect.
Overtime, almost every President has failed in certain aspects of their careers, those that were widely successful, are those we immortalize: Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and George Washington are quite consistently found in the top 5 best Presidents of all time, as ranked (in many polls of historians and political scientists over the years). It is interesting to note how these polls are conducted.
One such pole conducted by William J. Ridings, Jr. and Stuart B. McIver from 1989-1996 had more than 719 people took part in the poll, primarily academic historians and political scientists. Poll respondents rated the Presidents in five categories (leadership qualities, accomplishments & crisis management, political skill, appointments, character & integrity), and the results were tabulated to create the overall ranking.
Now I'm not planning on ranking the current Commander and Chief by these categories, because I wouldn't know what I was doing. I think its about the same as trying to compare Athletes from different eras of a sport. For example, if a big, cigar smoking, guy tried to play for the Red Sox today he'd be out of his mind, but in the early years of baseball Babe Ruth got his shot. How would you rank the severity of 9/11 against Pearl Harbor, or the Burning of Fort Sumter, or the British occupation of Washington, D.C. during the War of 1812? All of those were abhorrent crises in their times.
I think it is fair to say that at his current pace George W. Bush, won't go down in the books as the greatest strategist, or domestic caretaker, among the 43 men who have carried the title of President, but he may be unfairly ranked because of our ability to see every flaw so easily in the here and now. The problem, where respect for the office is concerned, comes as a result of those same 43 men.
Lets check out the Presidential "Top 10 Presidential Blunders of All Time" for a moment. Though this list is borrowed from an 2006 article, I tend to agree with it.
Number 10: Bill Clinton's Monica Lewinski Scandal, ranked as such because the affect it had on his Presidential Legacy.
Number 9: Ronald Reagan and the Iran-Contra Affair, the effort to sell arms to Iran and use the money to finance an armed anti-communist group in Nicaragua.
Number 8: John F. Kennedy allowing the ill-fated Bay of Pigs Invasion to overthrow Cuba's communist government that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Number 7: Thomas Jefferson's Embargo Act of 1807, a self-imposed prohibition on trade with Europe during the Napoleonic Wars.
Number 6: James Madison's failure to keep the United States out of the War of 1812 with Britain.
Number 5: Richard Nixon's involvement in the Watergate cover-up.
Number 4: Woodrow Wilson's refusal to compromise on the Treaty of Versailles after World War I.
Number 3: Lyndon Johnson allowing the Vietnam War to intensify.
Number 2: Andrew Johnson's decision just after the Civil War to side with Southern whites and oppose improvements in justice for Southern blacks beyond abolishing slavery.
The Number 1 biggest Presidential Blunder of All time is... President James Buchanan's failing to avert the Civil War.
So what is the common thread these events have? It can't be what we think of those Presidents, because Clinton, Reagan, Kennedy, Jefferson, and Madison, are all widely hailed as some of the greats, where as Buchanan, Nixon, and Johnson are consistently seen as some of the worst. The common thread, as I see it, is that they all deceived us: LBJ said we were on the verge of victory, Buchanan said it would resolve itself, Nixon was covering for the misdeeds of his subordinates, and yet by their actions all ten of these men as well as others, have chipped away at the respectability, and more over, the trustworthiness of the office of President.
Thats where the lack of respect comes from everyone. Its that we (Americans) have been trained over the past 200 years or so to distrust that man in the White House.
So what can we do to fix this cynical view of the President? I have a few thoughts on that, too. Consider for a moment that that man, who sits in that Oval Office is bombarded daily by threats to this nation, the weight of the world, as we Americans now it, is on his shoulders. Take a moment, when your done here, before you go back to Facebook, or websurfing or whatever brought you here and look at them at their first inauguration and as they left. You'll find that their bodies aged rapidly in an 8 year span. For example:
Isn't it astonishing every bit of color gone from his hair, wrinkles plague his face. Its mind boggling to me to thing how he went in as a healthy looking 46 year-old and left the office a 53 year old who vaguely reminds me of my withering great uncle who is well into his 60s. The stress of the job is taken lightly by the press (and by many of us), but I don't know of many people who would willingly take the job if they knew the extent of the stresses they'd be under for 4-8 years. Even going to far as to say that most candidates for the position don't really understand what their in for if they are elected. I think if we all seriously looked at that job, the pros and cons would show that we wouldn't want that kind of position ever in our lives.
In closing I'd like everyone to think of the most difficult thing you have ever attempted in your life, something where you tried your hardest and when you were done you had absolutely nothing left. Whether it was an academic feat, or a physical attempt, just really focus on it, and gather together in your mind all the stress, pain, exhaustion, and anguish you felt mentally and physically. Now imagine having a couple million people all telling you all at once how easy it really was and how much better they could do it. Ladies and Gentleman you've just gotten a small glimpse into the life of the American President.
-Flowers
For this one my goal is this:
To share with you one guy's opinions of the goings on of life on this spinning blue orb of ours.
I promise to:
1) Deliver my opinions in a educated (though not entirely politically correct way).
2) To share with you unabashedly my feelings, as they relate to my faith as well as all aspects of my personality to which they apply.
That being said, I'm sure some of you may wonder why I choose to voice my opinions of life in a separate blog from the discussions of my life. Its because this is more of a newsletter, where my other blog is more of a journal. This is meant to be a more active place, the other blog is more or a reflective piece.
Now as to why do this blog at all, I must give credit where credit is due. Bethany Guersney inspired me to try my hand at this. Mostly because I had left a rant on a Facebook note of her's trashing the video contained therein, and during my subsequent apology she challenged me to find a more constructive outlet to express my own opinions, and thats what I'm doing.
And now my first official post...
"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
In 1789, with the ratification of the Constitution of the United States of America, came a new executive power among the states, The President of the United States, who by those words came into being. Now while the exact limitations of the office and its powers and responsibilities have changed over the years the basic rules have remained the same.
The video that began me down the road to this blog was from the site The Onion. This site, admittedly, does not limit the range of those it mocks, but all the same it does almost seem to make its goal to push the buttons of every member/group in American society. The video was making fun of George W. Bush, not a rare practice mind you, but one that has always bothered me. Not the mockery of him specifically,I mean he has had many memorable moments that are comic gold.
My issue, rather, is with the lack of respect the office garners. Going back to that day on April 30th, 1789, who would have expected that a position so highly revered in our country as the one held by our first President, another George, would fall so far in its public esteem. Some would argue that to be the cost of letting people choose their leaders, someone will always be left dissatisfied. Fair enough, but I must disagree. I feel like thats a cop-out, a sorry attempt at alleviating the stresses of finding the real root of this developed disrespect.
Overtime, almost every President has failed in certain aspects of their careers, those that were widely successful, are those we immortalize: Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and George Washington are quite consistently found in the top 5 best Presidents of all time, as ranked (in many polls of historians and political scientists over the years). It is interesting to note how these polls are conducted.
One such pole conducted by William J. Ridings, Jr. and Stuart B. McIver from 1989-1996 had more than 719 people took part in the poll, primarily academic historians and political scientists. Poll respondents rated the Presidents in five categories (leadership qualities, accomplishments & crisis management, political skill, appointments, character & integrity), and the results were tabulated to create the overall ranking.
Now I'm not planning on ranking the current Commander and Chief by these categories, because I wouldn't know what I was doing. I think its about the same as trying to compare Athletes from different eras of a sport. For example, if a big, cigar smoking, guy tried to play for the Red Sox today he'd be out of his mind, but in the early years of baseball Babe Ruth got his shot. How would you rank the severity of 9/11 against Pearl Harbor, or the Burning of Fort Sumter, or the British occupation of Washington, D.C. during the War of 1812? All of those were abhorrent crises in their times.
I think it is fair to say that at his current pace George W. Bush, won't go down in the books as the greatest strategist, or domestic caretaker, among the 43 men who have carried the title of President, but he may be unfairly ranked because of our ability to see every flaw so easily in the here and now. The problem, where respect for the office is concerned, comes as a result of those same 43 men.
Lets check out the Presidential "Top 10 Presidential Blunders of All Time" for a moment. Though this list is borrowed from an 2006 article, I tend to agree with it.
Number 10: Bill Clinton's Monica Lewinski Scandal, ranked as such because the affect it had on his Presidential Legacy.
Number 9: Ronald Reagan and the Iran-Contra Affair, the effort to sell arms to Iran and use the money to finance an armed anti-communist group in Nicaragua.
Number 8: John F. Kennedy allowing the ill-fated Bay of Pigs Invasion to overthrow Cuba's communist government that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Number 7: Thomas Jefferson's Embargo Act of 1807, a self-imposed prohibition on trade with Europe during the Napoleonic Wars.
Number 6: James Madison's failure to keep the United States out of the War of 1812 with Britain.
Number 5: Richard Nixon's involvement in the Watergate cover-up.
Number 4: Woodrow Wilson's refusal to compromise on the Treaty of Versailles after World War I.
Number 3: Lyndon Johnson allowing the Vietnam War to intensify.
Number 2: Andrew Johnson's decision just after the Civil War to side with Southern whites and oppose improvements in justice for Southern blacks beyond abolishing slavery.
The Number 1 biggest Presidential Blunder of All time is... President James Buchanan's failing to avert the Civil War.
So what is the common thread these events have? It can't be what we think of those Presidents, because Clinton, Reagan, Kennedy, Jefferson, and Madison, are all widely hailed as some of the greats, where as Buchanan, Nixon, and Johnson are consistently seen as some of the worst. The common thread, as I see it, is that they all deceived us: LBJ said we were on the verge of victory, Buchanan said it would resolve itself, Nixon was covering for the misdeeds of his subordinates, and yet by their actions all ten of these men as well as others, have chipped away at the respectability, and more over, the trustworthiness of the office of President.
Thats where the lack of respect comes from everyone. Its that we (Americans) have been trained over the past 200 years or so to distrust that man in the White House.
So what can we do to fix this cynical view of the President? I have a few thoughts on that, too. Consider for a moment that that man, who sits in that Oval Office is bombarded daily by threats to this nation, the weight of the world, as we Americans now it, is on his shoulders. Take a moment, when your done here, before you go back to Facebook, or websurfing or whatever brought you here and look at them at their first inauguration and as they left. You'll find that their bodies aged rapidly in an 8 year span. For example:
Isn't it astonishing every bit of color gone from his hair, wrinkles plague his face. Its mind boggling to me to thing how he went in as a healthy looking 46 year-old and left the office a 53 year old who vaguely reminds me of my withering great uncle who is well into his 60s. The stress of the job is taken lightly by the press (and by many of us), but I don't know of many people who would willingly take the job if they knew the extent of the stresses they'd be under for 4-8 years. Even going to far as to say that most candidates for the position don't really understand what their in for if they are elected. I think if we all seriously looked at that job, the pros and cons would show that we wouldn't want that kind of position ever in our lives.
In closing I'd like everyone to think of the most difficult thing you have ever attempted in your life, something where you tried your hardest and when you were done you had absolutely nothing left. Whether it was an academic feat, or a physical attempt, just really focus on it, and gather together in your mind all the stress, pain, exhaustion, and anguish you felt mentally and physically. Now imagine having a couple million people all telling you all at once how easy it really was and how much better they could do it. Ladies and Gentleman you've just gotten a small glimpse into the life of the American President.
-Flowers
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)