Participating

 Having taken a short hiatus I do feel a little distant from current events. It's a good thing. I feel like I'm just coasting along, disengaged from the drama. The news goes on however, and I am beginning to hear that drone. As I sit here typing away I am offering retorts in my mind. Some things just never change I guess, especially the foolishness of some people. The troubling part, and the part that draws me in, is when this dribble comes from what are supposed to be informed, intelligent people. The main stream media. I can't help but shake my head at times and wonder about that. I get the whole ratings thing, we have to pay the bills, but the slanting of world news and domestic policy just irritates me. It has just become such a blatant thing.
 Another aspect in all this I find troubling and amusing is all that feigned outrage. Every reaction has to be to the extreme. For instance, the other day at Walter Reed hospital there was a drill. Walter Reed is a Army hospital after all, and that is part of what the Army does, hold drills, there was a bit of a snafu. For the uninitiated the acronym SNAFU means, situation normal, all fouled up, some substitute a more, shall we say robust term in place of foul. The problem? It was a drill but it wasn't announced as a drill. While the drill was in progress it was being reported on the news as an " active shooter " is in Walter Reed hospital, details to follow. I'm immediately annoyed by that term anyway, active shooter. What does that imply? That there are shooters there and one is now active? Are there inactive shooters? And if there are, what can we do about that? But I'm getting off subject a bit. Procedure was followed, the lights were turned off in the hallways, doors closed and locked. People were told to shelter in place. It just so happened that Dutch Ruppersberger, a congressman from Maryland, yes he is a Democrat, was at the hospital at the time. He was among those that was in a room where the door was barricaded and it was scary! Later, Dutch is on the evening news saying he is demanding an investigation, he demands answers! How could this happen? People could have been hurt, some folks have been traumatized and require counseling. Hey Dutch, want to know how it happened? Some GI screwed up is how it happened. Don't really need an investigation do we? But to hear him tell it, it was a major breach of some kind. But that is how we must react to anything that doesn't go as planned, or that proves to be inconvenient. And anything that may be upsetting, OMG, that is to be avoided at all costs. Mustn't disturb the unicorns and fairies!
 On the national level I am uninformed. I heard something about using tear gas at the border, sounded reasonable enough to me. Hey I remember Kent State when kids, US citizens, began attacking the National Guard by throwing rocks, bricks, and anything else they could get their hands on. Several wound up shot! A tragic bit of history to be sure, but I wasn't surprised by it when it happened and remain unsurprised. Throw stuff at armed people, threaten their safety and guess what? Yes, it happens. Keep it up at the border and it will happen there too. I'm not advocating for that measure to be taken just predicting a result based on history and common sense. I also hear some folks don't like the Christmas trees at the White house. LOL, it's a national tragedy.
 Well the vacation is over and I'm easing myself back into the world. It is tempting to remain isolated and just tune it all out. It isn't that I feel like I can make a difference or anything, I'm not that vain. Still I do feel a certain obligation to at least comment and add my thoughts to the conversation. It is like I always say, it you don't vote, you can't complain. If you don't offer solutions, advice, or comments you aren't participating. I do feel the need to participate. Hey, who knows, these days I might even get a trophy for it! 

Slippers

 When I was a little boy I would go with my big sister in search of a particular flower. The elusive and beautiful lady slipper, Cypripedium Acaule, is a orchid that grows in the northeastern United States. It can be found in shady areas. usually at the base of a tree. They are quite rare, although we didn't know that, but had been told it was illegal to pick as it was endangered. In our minds that meant it was dangerous and we reveled in the adventure. Sneaking through the woods, trying our best to walk like an Indian, we watched for the police because we just knew they were watching. What we were going to do was illegal after all. It was the nineteen fifties and you didn't challenge the law. When you are eight or ten the danger is real. None of that mattered as Mom liked these flowers and it was Mom we were out to please. With the innocence of youth, the intent was to bring a smile to Moms' face, receive a thank you, perhaps a hug, and continue on with life. When you are young like that you often pause your life to please others.When you get older you sometimes hoard that time for yourself. Something I didn't understand then, and only recently discovered, was how precious sharing that time with my sister was. It is one of the strings that tie our hearts together. Secrets shared, we searched the wood for those flowers.
 It was such a small thing, something I hadn't really given thought too. It is that way with things from the heart. thought usually isn't involved, only feelings. It remains as a pleasant memory, occasionally making its' way to the surface. It was just something we did together in the spring, when we knew those flowers bloomed. Such a delicate flower, a pale shade of pink peeking from the shadows.The leaves of last fall would still be there, the leaves that acted as a blanket to keep the plants warm during the long winter months. Surely those plants were chilled, as frail as they appeared to be, but always persevering. And now, in reflection I see my sister in those buds. Rare and beautiful, elusive at times, delicate, but with an inner strength that endures.
 There came a time when we left that wood and went into the world. We traveled separate paths that rarely intersected. I was sailing in the Navy and she had married the Air Force. At times we were half a world apart. Children and grandchildren filling our lives the years have rolled by. Yet in my memories we walk together through the wood, dodging the law, in our quest together. The quest was for just a moments love, a simple touching of the heart. What was shared was the love of brother and sister, a love untarnished by time and growing still. We went in search of a flower but what we found was far more precious, far more rare than any orchid. We discovered love is perennial, always enduring, even during the longest winter. The spring will arrive and love will bloom once again.
 That rare and elusive flower, Cypripedium Acaule, the Lady Slipper is a symbol of that love. I've always thought that Angels were barefooted, but now I'm not so sure. I'm thinking my sister will be wearing slippers in heaven, when her times comes to travel there. I'll find her on a wooded path or perhaps she'll find me. Only time can write the story, only time will tell.   

Simpler times

 This morning I'm remembering a story from a Christmas past. I don't recall the year but it was when my boys were young. We had purchased each of them a small television for their room. They were just black and white televisions and were capable of being plugged into a twelve volt power source and operate that way. Quite the high tech devices for the time. It was a time before we had power ports in automobiles, we had cigar lighters. They were wrapped and placed under the Christmas tree. I was anticipating some excitement when those gifts were opened. The morning came and the wrapping paper was flying. Those televisions were indeed a hit. It wasn't long before they whisked them away to their bedroom to try them out. After a short time they came out of their room looking rather forlorn. I could tell something was the matter and asked, what's wrong? The response was, those televisions are broken. What, both televisions are broken, what is wrong with them? Well, there is no color! The picture comes on alright but it's not in color. It was then I realized they had never seen a black and white television. Yes, those little portables were black and white sets and I hadn't given that a thought. So, it turned out to be a black and white Christmas. I explained that to the boys and they went back in their room to watch their new sets. Neither of them said so, but I guess it was a disappointment.
 There was to be one more incident involving those portable televisions. We were living in Louisiana at the time. The wife and I enjoyed going crabbing and would leave early in the morning. We had decided to do just that and the boys weren't too thrilled with the plan. We just told them to bring along their televisions, remember you could plug them into the cigar lighter in the car, and some pop-tarts. Hey, cartoons and breakfast in the back seat of the car can't be a bad thing. That sounded like a good plan and the boys agreed. I'd go so far as to say they were a little excited about it now. They brought along blankets, pop-tarts and the television, only one because the car had only one port. When we got to the place selected to go crabbing it was barely light outside. The mosquitoes were out in full force and apparently hungry for their breakfast. I know they sure feasted on us. The boys kept the windows rolled up and stared at their little television. Surprisingly the reception was good and cartoons were on. As the morning wore on and the sun came up it began to get a little warmer. I noticed they had rolled down a window. Picking up a crab I removed its' claws. I walked over to the car and nonchalantly threw that crab right in the lap of my son Kevin. His head snaps up and he shouts *hit! I'm looking right at him and ask, what did you say? He says you " hit " me. I begin to tease him saying that isn't what you said. Well, I guess you had to be there but it was hilarious. You know the truth of the matter is I haven't heard him use that word since. Of course I haven't thrown any more crabs in his lap either.
 As with most things I don't remember what happened to those little televisions. I expect they went out in the trash one day. Funny I remember paying fifty dollars a piece for them! You do have to pay up for technology though. The boys got a lot of use out of them and later hooked the video games to them. Seems I recall Mattel making a system and we played baseball on it. Intellivision, that was the name. According to Wikipedia that would have been 1979 or 80. Now that was high tech stuff. Before that we had pong. This was all back in simpler times when things were black and white.  

I'm entitled

 We hear a lot about sacrifice these days. Everyone is making a sacrifice. Seems to me, sacrifice is trending, as they say these days about the popular thing. Well that and empathy. We are all empathizing these days as well. What I question in all of this is, when do we abandon sacrifice in favor of self preservation? Is there a proper time for that?
 It does seem like a contradiction. The right and noble action is to make a sacrifice. Things is, sacrifices are made for gain. At the least the hope is for a gain of some sort. Whether that is something for yourself, or for another isn't the point, the reason for that sacrifice is an expectation of  return. Additionally that sacrifice is supposed to be costing you something. A sacrifice is the surrender of one thing in exchange for another. How much should we sacrifice? What is the limit? I would say the limit is when the expected gain will not exceed the sacrifice offered. In other words, when  the worth doesn't exceed the price paid. It is at that point self preservation kicks in.
 I find myself thinking about this quite often. My conscience nags at me. We often think of conscience as a bad thing, but that isn't true at all. Let your conscience be your guide is an old axiom. It is one I don't hear used often these days. The establishment of your own self worth is paramount to this equation. I say that because when we make that sacrifice, on a personal level, we are offering a piece of ourselves. It is in that, that my conscience speaks. The difficulty lies in discerning the truth. When it comes to my own self worth I admit to being a bit biased. I call it self confidence, others may use different terms for that. But whatever the case may be, the value is what is being measured. Self worth and self preservation are equal partners. At least I believe that they should be. The trouble lies in measuring the worth of the expected return. That return is often tragically measured in disappointment. Our conscience determines worth. The question is what determines our conscience? Just how is that established?
 Our conscience is formed by the society in which we were raised. That is my thinking on the matter. It begins with what we are told and expands as we learn for ourselves. We subconsciously accept and reject matters of conscience. It is something I find myself examining, this consciousness. Conscience can be overruled by emotion, often with very bad results. I know that but emotion plays an important role in sacrifice and self preservation. So when do we reign in emotion? Attachments can be very powerful things, especially old attachments. Attachments can become so strong they become an obligation. Just how far does that obligation extend? Is that solely a matter of conscience? A familiar phrase to describe that is, the ties that bind. That tie would be a shared conscience. If the one that you are making the sacrifice for does not share the same conscience as yourself, the sacrifice will never provide the expected return. It is at this point self preservation is an acceptable choice.
 All of this is quite vague and that was my intent. I have no desire to hurt anyone's feelings. But what I am examining here is justification for my actions. Do I need to justify them? Yes, I believe I do, if only to satisfy myself. I do believe there comes a time when you have to quit making sacrifices in hopes for a return that is not forthcoming. I believe that is true even when the person may be incapable of that return. It is a matter of belief. Would you sacrifice to a God that you didn't believe in? I can see no reason to offer further sacrifice to someone that can not provide a return. Of course, this all may be a reaction to emotion, something to be considered. For now it's self preservation and I'm entitled to that much.     

hiatus

 Beginning tomorrow I will be taking a short hiatus. I will be absent from social media and no blogging either. It is easy to get caught up in things and so my intention is to do a little reset. As much as I enjoy interacting with those I know and ones that I don't solitude can be beneficial to the soul. Some time spent in reflection can often clear your thoughts. As I have said in the past if you want to see your truth, look in the mirror. It is advice I sometimes fail to heed. If you have lived a life and haven't experienced regret, you haven't really lived. A life of appeasement is no life at all. As the kids say today, it's complicated.
 I can't recall a time when I missed more than one day of posting something since I began this blogging adventure. It has been a journey of eight years so far. As Forest Gump might say, " I'm a little tired, think I'll go home now. " I am tired. My topics have run the gamut. I wonder what will become of all those words? I'm told things posted to the internet live forever. If that is the case my words will be there for generations, lying in some corner of a server, waiting to be discovered. Occasionally I see where some stranger has stumbled on a blog of mine. I wonder how that happens. Is it during a search of a particular topic? I can see where that might happen as I can google a single word and get pages of results. To post nothing will be a bit of a struggle. It has become a habit. I'm not certain that is a good thing, for the writing I mean. I can see where a lot of my blogs are more commentary than anything else. My intent was to share my random thoughts in the hope of making sense of them. There are times I find myself defending them. If you find yourself in defense, that should give you pause. I think that is good advice. Truth stands alone, whereas fiction requires supporting characters and witnesses.
 I do take solace in a couple quotes. Quotes are nothing more than someone else's random thought. Henry Adams said, " No man means all he says and yet very few say all they mean, for words are slippery and thought is viscous." I spend a great deal of time and energy attempting to say all I mean. I find the meanings of words are especially shapeshifting and it is that, that causes so much confusion. As far as what will happen to all my writings, thoughts, memories or whatever you call this effort of mine I find comfort in words that William Shakespeare penned. " No legacy is so rich as honesty. "   

where once we prayed

 Where once we prayed now we cower in fear and anxiety. America has always been a praying nation. It was written in our founding documents, divine providence and by the grace of God. We once fought a civil war over power and economics. A nation divided against itself can not stand. We all know those words. Now I see America being divided from prayer. America used to pray together, now that prayer is directed in a hundred directions, babel once again. The excuse is separation of church and state. That's what is being said. The reality is it is that separation of church and state that allowed the prayer to take place! You can not legislate prayer, a persons belief in the divine is not open for that. All legislation can do is regulate that in the public domain. That's certainly what I see happening today. The removal of statues, plaques, monuments and other symbols of faith disallowed in the public. I've seen the ten commandments removed from a courthouse. I've seen the barring of Nativity scenes and Menorahs on public property because it violates legislation. Prayers and the Pledge of Allegiance are being challenged at public meetings. Elected representatives of the people are refusing to stand in respect for the very people they are representing.
 Prayer is an individual thing. Individuals make communities, communities make towns and cities, and that forms nations. This nation was founded on prayer. It has been held together by the power of prayer. But that glue, is weakening. Our nation is suffering as a result of this. Many pray still, that is true, but they are being outnumbered by those that refuse. And what is it that they refuse? Is it God? No, it isn't God, Allah, Jehovah or whatever name you wish to apply. What they are refusing is to believe. They refuse to believe in the power of prayer. There is the separation of church and state. That exists solely to prevent the government from telling you who, what, when, when or why to pray. It does not mean we shouldn't pray! It was that prayer that formed this nation and it will be that prayer that will keep her together.
 This may be controversial but it is something not lost on me. Nations that identify as a Religion find little peace and their citizens suffer. Consider the Muslim nations. In those countries it is an ideology posing as a religion that rules them. Those countries are often in turmoil, fighting among themselves and their neighbors. The middle east. Can no one else see that? The middle east has always been in turmoil. The other Nation is what? The Nation of the Jews. That religious group has sought a land of their own for centuries. So it seems obvious to me that the Muslims and the Jews just can't get along. A third group entered the picture about 2018 years ago, the Christians. The Christians formed their nations as well, nations in conflict with the Muslims and the Jews. The Christians even began fighting among themselves. The protestants emerged. We know them as puritans or pilgrims. Prayer was the foundation. We did not declare ourselves a Christian nation. We having founded this nation on the Judeo-Christian tradition, separated church from state. The intent was not to separate prayer from the nation. There were Muslims, Jews and others living in our land even then and the government left them unmolested. Those folks were free to pray, build temples or whatever they wished to support their worship. And you know what, they all included prayer. Yes, everyone was expected to pray, prayer was not forbidden. And now, now I see a prohibition on prayer, not by government, but by those that wish to destroy the nation for their own gain. And how is this being accomplished? By division. Divide the people, divide the nation. One way is to divide God or the concept of God to create a division there as well. Every soldier prays to his own God for safety during times of war. He does not question the ideology of that God. No, he simply prays. Prayer is the glue that binds nations together.    

coincidence?

 Could just be a coincidence. For some time those on the left have been comparing Trump to Hitler. They started with changing the meaning of Nationalism to Nazism, That got related to walls and genocide. Those that even tacitly support Trump must be white nationalists that want to control everyone else. And now that is being related to anti-Semitism. Could it also be coincidence that the narrative has increased since a madman shot those folks at the Synagogue? It's all Trumps fault! Trump has inspired this fervor among his followers, the white nationalists, to attack! Just yesterday a man shouted Seig Heil during intermission of a performance of Fiddler on the Roof. Coincidence? I think not. I think the propaganda machine of the left is doing exactly what they have hoped, causing further divide, more hate, more unrest and blaming the opposition for that. I have seen a photograph of a group of boys doing the " Hitler " salute. It's gone national why? Because it will serve to inflame others is the only logical answer. Let's keep the pot stirred up shall we. What other purpose could it serve?
 I think any reasonable person that has been around for the last ten years or so, and paying attention, could see this. The so-called white nationalists ( conservatives ) were not in power for eight long years. Yes, it was the Obama administration. There were no demonstrations, no marches, no screams from the media about impeaching him. Oh, there were many questions about him. How many years did it take to produce a birth certificate? Why are his school records sealed? The list goes on. Yes there was much complaining and bickering between the parties in congress. Executive orders were flying out the oval office! He himself stated, I have a pen! The whole time you didn't hear about Nazi's or anti-Semitism. Then, coincidently as soon as Trump wins the election it begins.
 Well first it was the election was corrupt. Then the electoral college needed to be banned. That was followed by a litany of excuses. Clinton is destroying e-mails, servers are being washed clean and cell phones smashed with hammers. No problem though, no protests, no cries for justice from the media. A video is released, Trump is saying vile disgusting things about women, he's a misogynist! A new word enters the vocabulary of the left and they love repeating it.The obedient students of Saul Alinsky, er Barack Obama, follow suit. And finally it's the Russians! The Russians made a deal with Trump in some giant conspiracy involving billions of dollars. No mention of the millions Obama funneled to terrorist groups though, hey that's cool. It has become obvious that the Russian thing isn't working, we need a new strategy. Just who would be the most likely to be ousted from office? Hitler, Hitler is hated by everyone. Perfect, we will call Trump Hitler and rouse the people to impeach him. We will tell the people how their free stuff will be taken away! We will tell the people they have to be accountable! In that way we can not only incite the poor people depending on the government for handouts, we can incite the Jewish people too. The Jewish folks really hate Hitler! No one can dispute the fact that they are justified in that! It's perfect, anyone now supporting Trump, his administration, or policies can now be labeled anti-Semites! That's just perfect, thank you Saul Alinsky for the strategy. We can put the " refugees " on the back burner for a while, they will come in handy a little later on. They really didn't help with the mid-term elections but can be useful two years from now.
 Yes, it is all just a coincidence. In my opinion to anyone paying attention the intent is obvious. It has been since the beginning. The left wanting to elect a socialist. They did that by using a black man. They had hoped to continue that agenda with a woman. But the wheels fell off. The people are waking up. Now there is a growing sense of urgency. We have to get this socialist agenda back on track. We can stuff the ballot boxes but the Republicans are catching on to that. We need a new strategy. In the meantime we can just blame everything on those pesky white nationalists. And guns, guns are violent. Well and Christians too, they are becoming a problem. You can be a Christian, you just can't apply Christian values or principles to anything, separation of church and state you know. We just can't allow this prosperity to continue. This growth in jobs. The people must reman dependent upon the government. Socialism is the answer, we must establish a socialist state. We'll start by teaching our children we have a democracy. At all costs we must hide the truth. A Republic? A government of the people? No, no, we must have a government that the people depend upon. Dependence not independence is the key. 

what I'm talking about

 Once again I find myself shaking my head and wondering. How can others read something and totally misconstrue what was written? I had posted a blog concerning Nationalism. A hot topic at the moment and a tool being employed by the left leaning folks these days. Anyway, a friend reposted that blog and comments followed. I am always pleased when others comment on what I have written, yes it gives me a certain sense of satisfaction. Yes, I like it better when others agree with my opinions. It was on this thread that I read opposition to my opinion. I became confused as to why? You see this person started complaining about Nazi's, the mistreatment of the Jews and people of color.
 I was confused because my blog, my opinion, was about Nationalism. I had even included the definition of what that is. Simply stated, it means taking care of your own Nation first and foremost. It is that idea I was defending. Last I knew our nation contained all of the aforementioned groups. They are all a part of our National identity and culture. All those groups should be Nationalists as well! But this one individual seemed to have a totally different view, almost as though she lived in a different nation altogether. That is where I became confused. You see, I know this person, if only by family name recognition and reputation, and she is just as American as I am. Or so I believed anyway. Had she not read the opening lines, the ones where I explained what Nationalism is, and what I felt about that definition? Must have been because she said nothing about that, just went on about racism and how peoples treat others badly. They do that in every nation and always have. Most likely they always will but let's not get off track here.
 I'm not writing this to disparage this individual in any way. She is certainly entitled to her own opinion. I'm writing because her opinion wasn't about Nationalism, the topic of my blog. Why had she chosen to post her opinion there? It is my feeling it is simply because she is listening to the rhetoric of the left.
 The National Socialist German Workers party, what we know today as Nazi's were nationalists. That's true, they were also Socialists, but that doesn't seem to be a concern from these folks. Some candidates from the left identify themselves as socialists and enjoy much support. Personally I find that a bit puzzling. So, being a Nationalist is a very bad thing, the supporting of your Nations interests and welfare before solving the rest of the worlds' problems, but being a socialist, creating a strong central government that redistributes your money as it sees fit is a fine idea. But don't take my word for it, here is what Merriam -Webster says; " Socialism definition: is- any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods." It enjoys wide popularity mostly due to a fellow named Karl Marx. He was a German gentleman born to Jewish parents. Karl Marx did advocate for communism which is the state following socialism.
 So what is the point here? The point is a simple one, Nationalism is not a political system. Nationalism is supporting your Nation above all others. Nationalism has nothing to do with Nazi's, Jews, Blacks, Muslims, or anything else. Nationalism has to do with a NATION. It is the nation I was talking about. Yes, bad things happen in our nation, very bad things, and that is why you should support her. " Stand beside her and Guide her through the night with a light from above." The discussion of what that light may be is another topic altogether. We should stand beside each other, as a Nation, as a National Family, and take care of our family first. That is what Nationalism is all about. And to quote Lee Greenwood, " I'd gladly stand up and defend her still today. " That's what I'm talking about.   

a red flag

 It was quietly passed without much attention from the main stream media; until now. Now that it is law in Maryland, the media is touting its' great stride. It is called the " red flag " law. What is it? If a family member, roommate, relative, or health care professional reports you to the police they can confiscate your legally owned firearms. The report? It only needs to be a statement from you that the person feels threatened or uneasy about you owning a gun. It is then up to you prove you should get your guns back. That's correct, you are guilty as charged until you prove otherwise. I suspect that will come at an considerable expense and take some time.
 I understand the intent. Remove the gun from the hands of a dangerous or threatening individual. Sounds simple enough doesn't it? The problem is this, now anytime someone has a problem with you they can have your guns confiscated. Have a disagreement with your sibling? That sibling can just call the law and they can come take all your guns. They don't have to prove that you did or said anything, just state they feel threatened or that you may be a threat to others. That's it. As far as a health professional goes are you going to tell that professional you even own a gun knowing they can have it confiscated? I may be nuts, but I'm not crazy.
 This law can not be challenged until it is abused in some fashion. I believe that won't take very long. I can see this law being used as a tool to confiscate legal weapons. If I'm a vindictive husband or wife and my spouse owns or collects guns guess what, I feel threatened! Take those guns away from him or her! My reason, we are getting divorced and he or she is angry. Well that's grounds enough with the " red flag " law. The police can now break down your door and take your guns. You have to prove that you are not angry or a danger. What evidence do I present to prove that? Do I need clearance from a mental health professional? I need to prove my sanity? Or do I need to prove my non-intent to shoot someone?
 I guess I wasn't paying attention. The first I heard of this piece of legislation was after it was passed. Strange that the main stream media wasn't broadcasting all the details on this. You would almost think there was some inherent bias in that. Well I'll be watching and listening. I really don't think it will be long before this law faces a challenge. Its one of those things that sounds good on the surface  but is full of pitfalls. If I can say I'm afraid of you and have your legally owned firearms confiscated by the government what's next? I'm afraid of you and have you placed in a mental health institution for evaluation? You know that's not a far fetched idea, that actually took place quite often in the not too distant past right here in America. Read about it, State run hospitals for the mentally ill. Yes, the state, the government, could and did place you in a mental ward without any hearing beforehand. They just went on someone's say so. It was for the safety of others. That was the official line on it.
 I'm not saying this " red flag " law is the beginning of government confiscation of firearms. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I do see this law as dangerous to our freedom granted by the second amendment. It is an infringement of my right to keep and bear arms when those arms are taken prior to any investigation. I should be given the opportunity to defend my position beforehand. Just because you are angry with me, for whatever reason, is no reason to deny my constitutional rights. The intent of the law is a good one but in practice flawed deeply. I'll be watching and a repeal of this law will be forthcoming I'm certain of that. A " red flag " law, appropriately named I'd say, it has certainly raised a red flag with me! 

Because we're Christians

   Once again I found myself defending and defining the separation of church and state. It appears that many believe the first amendment prohibits religion from even being mentioned. That simply is not the truth. Even the Supreme court, having heard many cases about this, has been ambiguous in their interpretation. I believe it is just the context of time that has gotten so many confused. Why did so many seek to come to this new land? It was religious persecution, at least that was a big portion of it. So it is easy to understand why you would establish a government that would not allow that persecution. It's a no-brainer. Was the intent to prevent religious practices? No, the opposite of that was the intent. The first amendment to the constitution guarantees your right to practice your religion the way you see fit. That is the separation! The government can not endorse, support, enable or otherwise approve or condone any religious practice. That doesn't mean the " government " doesn't believe in a higher power in deriving its' just powers. It means the " government " can't tell you what that higher power is or says as a matter of law. Morality is derived from a higher power, some call that conscience.
 In the Declaration of Independence you will find the reason for the creation of our government, to form " the separate and equal station to which the laws of Nature and of Natures God entitle them." In the next paragraph we find this words, " endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights " It goes on to explain," governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. " Notice how , the creator, Natures' God plays a prominent role in all of that. In fact it plainly states the power to create that government comes from God. Separate? Only in that no one ideology, as to the epistemic value of any singular religious practice, will be considered the law of the land. Remember that had taken place in merry old England and other nations precipitating the exodos of what we call Pilgrims.
 Who is the government? The people. Approximately 73% of the population identify themselves as Christian. Therefore if one were to look at that without bias, we are a nation ruled by Christians. Much is said about our nation being a Democracy, but in fact it is a Republic. But let's go with the Democracy thinking. In a simple Democracy the majority rules, 51 being greater than the 49 and that is all that is required. By that measure we certainly would be considered Christian. The truth is that was prevented by the first amendment to the constitution. Our representatives can not impose their religious beliefs in the creation of law. In other words, they can't pass a law simply because that is what the King James Bible says, or because that is what the Torah says is law. That is the separation they are talking about. The power to enact laws comes from the people, hence we have a Republic. That power doesn't come from God although it is clear that the founding fathers believed in a higher power than man, and it was that power alone that allowed men to create governments. To be more succinct, God, that higher power, whatever you conceive him or her to be, can revoke that at any time. And that is why we pray. The founding fathers did not intend government ( people ) to be atheists! That wasn't what they were saying at all. There intent was quite the opposite. They were well aware that it was divine providence, belief, that drives mankind forward. They were also well aware that some will pervert that belief to further their own cause, not the cause of mankind in general. That's why they didn't just say the United States is a Christian nation. They did say we as a nation of the people, by the people, and for the people, are a religious and moral people. We separated ethics from religious practices, not religion from government. If that were the case all our representatives would have to be atheists.
 There is one thing I don't understand. Why are so many offended by what they claim not to believe in? If you do not believe in a higher power, if you believe there is no higher authority than man, why does it bother you when others pray to that power? It doesn't exist right? Therefore that power can not intervene. You know it is interesting to note that Christians have held the majority in government since that founding of our government. Yet, not once has it been proposed that we repeal the first amendment. Clearly that would be advantageous to us Christians wouldn't it? You know why we don't? Because we're Christians. 

Nationalism

  Nationalism definition is - loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially : a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups.  That is what Merriam -Webster has to say.

 Nationalism is now under assault by the left. Nationalism is a bad thing. You know why? Nationalism is taking care of your own first and foremost. Rational people understand you can't support an open border policy and Nationalism! It really is as simple as that. And for that reason we must change the rationale. Nationalism must be related to Nazi's. Well, because the Nazi party did call themselves Nationalists, therefore all Nationalists are Nazi's. That's how it works. That is not stereotyping or prejudicial thinking, that's rational. Yeah, that's rational alright. In this case though, who are the Nationalists? Anyone that feels America's interests should be protected first. Notice how Merriam-Webster says a Nationalist places emphasis on promotion of its' culture and interests as opposed to others. A Nationalist wants to preserve America, the others want to destroy it! And what confuses me is how so many can fail to see that. It is that blindness that created the Nazi's in the first place. When you ingrain loyalty to " government " that is what you will inevitably wind up with. That's why children were turning their own parents in to the government of Germany, it wasn't Nationalism, it was blind obedience. The Nazi propaganda did its' job and led the sheep to slaughter! The liberal agenda will do the same thing to America, if we allow that to happen. 
 Funny how we don't hear much about that caravan anymore. An occasional mention here and there. Now the big story is what? Nationalism as a bad thing. You are a bad person if you love and support your country. Oh, you can be Patriotic, as long as you preface that patriotism with a handout. Thank you for your service, now allow the illegals into the country and pay for them too. Funny how those in that caravan are waving flags of their nations and no one is calling them nationalists. No, they are waving their flags in support of our country! Yeah, that makes sense. They are proud of their heritage and culture, we should fully support that! Don't support America's though, that's being a nationalist. Strange how many in that caravan carry signs disparaging our President, calling him names, advocation for his removal and those on the left are supporting that. To support your own President would just be Nationalist wouldn't it? Well, the President is a Nationalist, he has to go. I understand the disappointment, just when you thought a continuation of eight years of destroying America was eminent. It was all rigged up, in the bag. What happened? And now we have a nationalist President! Imagine that. A President that believes the interest of his country should come first. Outrageous isn't it? 
 Well label me a Nationalist. I fully support the interests of the United States of America to the exclusion of all other nations. I pledge allegiance to her flag. I will watch out for the interests of legal United States Citizens. If you are not in my country legally, you are here illegally. Illegals will be removed. There is no reward for breaking our laws, none. You are welcome to apply for a visa, a green card or whatever document is necessary to gain entry. You may submit your request and wait in line like everyone else. When you agree to become a citizen of the United States of America you must pledge allegiance to the same. 
 Allow me to explain my nationalism is the simplest way I know. I will care for my children before I will care for yours. I will care for my neighborhood before I care for yours. I will support my Country before I will help you support yours. I will extend charity to the best of my ability and to the extent of my limitations. As far as the office of President I will respect that office regardless of who is occupying the seat. The job of President is to protect the interests of the United States of America above all else. He is the Commander in Chief and holds that title for a reason. He commands the forces the guard the nations freedom! Yes, yes, there are checks and balances, the President can't declare war and all of that, I am well aware of the legalities. The President can, for a period of ninety days order military action to defend the interests of the nation. Hence he is the Commander in Chief. A Nationalist?  I certainly hope so. I don't anyone willing to surrender. 

In the attempt

 I placed flags on the graves of three veterans that I know in the Greensboro cemetery. I'm aware of many more that lie there but selected three in particular. The first one is my daughter in laws father, Tom Albino. I knew Tom in his later years and he was a fine gentleman and a patriot. Another gentlemen I knew quite well was Robert Taylor, LtCmdr USN retired. Mr. Taylor served in WW2 in the Pacific and saw action there. The final selection was Lt Col Comegy. He is a veteran of the civil war. He passed in 1897, one hundred and twenty one years ago. Apparently no family still lives in the area and so I ensure he is recognized. No, I didn't know him. I do know that he died of a massive heart attack following a hair cut. A newspaper clipping describes that incident. " The Colonel left the barber shop on main street and was walking in the direction of his home when he was stricken. He collapsed in the street, and passed on the spot."
 The historical society places the flags on the graves. I didn't hear from them this year and so I am uncertain if that got accomplished this time. I will make a point of visiting the cemetery today. I feel an obligation to stop by and render a hand salute to those that lie there. It is the least I can do. I realize that today is about all veterans, not just those that died in defense of our country but the dead deserve their due as well. Today we commemorate the end of the war to end all wars. That's what the press was saying then. What a hopeful world it was then, and thankfully we remain so. " Hope springs eternal in the human breast, Man never is, but always to be blest. The soul, uneasy, and confined from home, rests and expatiates in a life to come. "  ( Alexander Pope )
 Much has been written about serving and the sacrifices made. The sentiments are warranted. I retired in 1993. That was twenty five years ago and it seems like a lifetime ago. I first wore the uniform in 1971 and that surely was a lifetime ago. I was just a kid then, although it didn't feel that way. It was a different time and a different world. There were no safe spaces, no restrictions on speech and the expression used. What would be called hazing today was an everyday occurrence. It was expected and the norm. Was it right? Ah, how can you judge what took place in 1971 with what takes place in 2018? The context of time changes everything. My time has come and gone and I'm thankful there are young men, and ladies ( kids really ) to carry the tradition of service forward. I do not concern myself so much with the motivation to do so, as give credit for the doing. That's the reason I say, Thank You for your service. One hundred years has passed since the official end of WW1. Yes, that took place 11-11-1918. How many lifetimes is that? In the context of time it is innumerable.
  Let us remember those lives today. The ones that lived, the ones that died, and the ones with us still. All made their contributions. Are all equal? I believe that those that serve with honor did make an equal contribution. It is as General Patton stated, the purpose is not to give your life for your country, the purpose is to make the enemy give their life for theirs. That is paraphrased from his actual words but the sentiment is the same. What he didn't say was you must be willing to risk your life in defense of your nation. Being willing and offering are different entities. For that reason I say the only sacrifice I offered was my time and my willingness to defend my nation. Dying for my country wasn't part of my thinking. I had no intention of sacrificing myself. It is estimated that between 1775 and 1991 forty one million, eight hundred ninety two, one hundred and twenty eight American patriots served in our wars. It is my thinking that not a single one of them thought of giving their life for their country. Their thought was defending that nation! Of course, they were willing to die in the attempt. And it is that we should commemorate and remember.
   

the easy way

We have had another tragic shooting. The question is being asked again, why. What can we do to stop this? Gun control? Is that the answer? No, I don't believe disarming the innocent will prevent the guilty from committing these acts. Guns have been available since the country was formed and as we are all well aware protected by the second amendment. Guns aren't the problem, people are the problem. The question is how did this come about, why this increase in horrific assaults on fellow citizens? I have my own theory about that. I believe at least a portion of that mentality comes from being taught that someone else is always responsible for what happens to you. I think that is easy enough to see. Just turn on the television and listen to some ads. There are teams of lawyers promising you the " compensation " you deserve, promising you justice! You have been wronged in life and someone else has to pay! Isn't that the message?
 That message is being sent to our children everyday in many different forms. Hate speech, prejudice, religious persecution, race, physical appearance, and what you " feel " are all part of this mentality of victimization. If something isn't going the way you had hoped, someone is to blame other than yourself. Now you have a regular smorgasbord of wrongs to choose from to justify your victimization. The bottom line is, it's not your fault. Even when you act contrary to accepted social norms and behaviors it is society that should change, not you. That is the message being taught in the name of liberalism. Just do your thing without consequence or accountability. If someone questions you about that, strike back! That's what we have lawyers for, that's why we have defense leagues! You have the absolute right to be happy and if you are not someone must pay for that. Not you though, it's not your fault.
 So now we have created this atmosphere where someone else is always responsible for your happiness. When something isn't right, strike out and demand justice. Hey, you deserve justice don't you? Of course you do! If I can't sue you or an entity in a court of law what is my other option? I strike out in a physical way. After all, I deserve justice. And it is this perverted sense of justice that precipitate these acts of violence. I'm no doctor but it is mental illness. What is causing this illness? I say a lack of accountability, responsibilty and the dissolution of a moral compass is the cause. The emphasis has shifted from punishment to reward. We deserve the reward, but never the punishment is the current thinking. That's the thinking behind what I call a more permissive faith. Forgiveness is automatic, the reward always forthcoming just for the asking. I should never be denied. That should be true in my professional, social and religious life. Any denial of that is a wrong against me. It's not my fault, I asked, you didn't listen. I will get your attention.
 If I get addicted to drugs, not my fault. If I become an alcoholic, not my fault. Nothing that happens to me is my fault. Things happen to me because of others hate, racism, prejudice, some phobia, or the color of my skin, the religion I profess or because I'm poor, I'm rich, I'm middle classed. I deserve justice! And someone has to pay even if it is total strangers. And that is why I am justified in grabbing a gun and killing as many people as possible. Well, that's my thinking as to why we are seeing this increase. It's a part of it anyway. I offer no solution as I don't think it can be " turned around " very quickly or easily. Just confiscating all the guns, an impossibility in the first place, will not solve the problem those folks have. We need to change the social conscience of the country entirely, and I harbor grave doubts about that being accomplished. Why? Because it is so much easier to just blame someone else than take personal responsibilty.      

does it matter

 Are we obligated to make a change? That's a question I find myself asking this morning. What I mean is, can we just go along minding our own business, unconcerned with the world around us? It seems to me that quite a number of folks do just that. Is that alright? I feel like I am obligated to do something, be a contributing member of society, or something like that. Where does that obligation come from? That's what I am questioning. That the obligation exists, if only to myself, is not in question, but what is the nature of that obligation?
 At the root of it would be self interest. That's a sobering thought but I believe a valid one. The only things I try to change are those things that run contrary to my own self interest. That interest isn't necessarily property, money or social position, although they are certainly factors to be considered, but my personal moral and ethical values. What makes me feel comfortable to put it succinctly. I could retreat into my own world, just ignore, block out, or condemn others but find that an impossibility for me. In that I see a contrast. I was never a leader, that's not my personality. The alpha male, no, not me. I've always had to rely more on guile and wit than brawn. Yet I have never been content with just being a follower.
 Does this obligation exist solely because that is what I was told? Aren't we all told that? We should make a difference! Each of us should excel, stand out, and contribute. Have I taken this too seriously? But then isn't that also what we are told? Believe in yourself, no matter what others say, believe in yourself. The problem with that philosophy is, not believing in others. So, if I just keep believing in myself what's the point? Is the object to impose my beliefs and thinking upon others? Is it to get others to adopt my ideas. Is that the same thing? I think maybe it has to do with the offering of a gift. We want people to accept our gift. I can't think of a scenario where I would purchase a gift for someone with the thought they wouldn't like it. Isn't that the same thing as offering our opinion, viewpoint or perspective? We expect others to accept it. The frustration, and sometimes anger, stems from lack of that acceptance. Without that acceptance, nothing has been changed.
 One should offer a gift freely and unencumbered with any expectation of return. That is the true nature of a gift. The reality is the majority of us do expect something in return. It may be as simple as a pleasant thank you and a smile. The majority of us do expect an acknowledgement of that gift, and not in a negative way. Are we obligated to change anything? No, but we are obligated to try. Now I need to learn to not expect results, that's the hard part. That's the believing in yourself part. Because it really shouldn't matter; right? 

everybody does it

 I read a small article that pointed out that the candidate named Beto, who I'm not really familiar with, dropped the " F " bomb on live television. As I understand it he was saying how " f-ing " proud he was of his supporters. I left my comment on social media, as I am prone to do, saying I felt this was just another display of a lack of civility. Not surprisingly I was attacked for that opinion. The big defense for him doing so was, you guessed it, President Trump. Well because Trump says bad words too. I don't disagree that Trump does indeed use crass and vulgar language, I disagree with that as an excuse for anyone else to do it. Isn't that what you said as a child? Everyone one else was doing it!
  I went on to explain that if we are to create a civil atmosphere we really should foster civil discussion. I believe that starts with keeping a civil tongue in your head! I know, I know, many say it is no big deal, he was just thanking his supporters. For me however I expect my candidates to at least display a modicum of respect for others. Using that word demonstrates a lack of respect. We are talking about a public forum here. It is a situation I have frequently written about, the concept of polite company. You should temper your speech in polite company. Something that used to be taught but apparently isn't being stressed anymore. Now apparently using such language is supposed to emphasize how passionately you feel about a subject. If that is the only way you can express that I feel sorry for you. By doing so you appear unintelligent and unprofessional. The acceptance of it, in general conversation as a matter of public discourse, I find troubling. There is a time and place for everything.
 Now I understand he isn't the first to say that. I understand that it is used all the time and on television when it slips by the censors. I understand that many people think, it's no big deal. It is that complacency that I find troubling. It is a sign of moral decay. Why use this words? It is because of the shock value? I'd say that is a part of it. It is aggressive speech, no doubt about that. Is that another reason for using it? Yes, it is an attempt to bully the listener. I'm swearing, therefore I'm committed to this action! It isn't right but I do get being angry or upset and those words coming out. But in this case, this Beto candidate used that word as an adjective to describe how thankful he was for the support he received. That tells me he is very comfortable with using such language, in everyday conversations, with anyone, in any situation. It is that acceptance that I find troubling. To use a more modern term, where is the filter? All this talk about " hate speech " and " racial slurs " and how terrible all that is. We even have laws governing that. But this language is perfectly fine? This language is acceptable? Am I alone in seeing the hypocrisy in that?
 Well that's my little rant this morning. I'm just old fashioned I guess. I find that language unsuitable in a public setting, I find that language unattractive and off-putting when coming from a lady. ( Beto is a guy )  Guess that is the sexist in me, but it's the way I feel about it. I do believe if you want a kinder, gentler society you do have to act in that fashion. Slinging expletives and vulgarities around isn't doing that. The atmosphere being created is one of aggression. No wonder so many people are aggressive these days. Act like a barbarian and expect to be treated like one. 

I'll be watching

 The election didn't go the way I had hoped. Well, it happens and I will move on with what we have. It will not do any good to cry about it and throw a fit. Ah it's a bitter pill to swallow. Scary to think that Nancy Pelosi will now be third in line to the Presidency. Let that sink in. It's a shame but things will be clogged up for the next two years with the squabbling between the Senate and the House. Politics as usual.
 Congratulations to the winners on both sides of the aisle. It is my firm hope that you serve for what you ran for, to the benefit of the people that elected you. Remember the oath of office and the trust placed in you by your fellow Americans. You do owe America your allegiance! If you are unwilling to promote America's interest first, you really have no right to the office to which you have been elected. The people put you in office, the people can also take you out!
 In listening to the news reporters touting the winners one thing did stick out. Many of these reporters kept listing the winners as, the first openly gay this, or the first Native American that, and the first Muslim. That's all well and good but the impression I was getting was that they won because of that distinction instead of winning on their merits as a candidate. The idea is that those things should not matter. Isn't that the agenda? In an ideal world none of that would matter at all. For that reason I wonder why those very things are being pointed out as the most important, historic, milestones! Shouldn't those things be a footnote to history? Maybe it's just me, but what I hear is they won in spite of these " handicaps. " It isn't important if they are actually qualified for the position, their platform isn't important, what is important is they are the first. I question if these folks what to be viewed as equals to everyone else, why do they advertise their differences? Look I'm not saying they should be disqualified, I'm not saying they are not equals in every way, I am asking why they promote their differences as an disadvantage? Why are their victories being broadcast as, " in spite of?" Well, because in todays' world it's an advantage to be the victim.
 Now I'll be watching what happens with this so called caravan. I won't be surprised if it never reaches our boarder. That distraction is no longer necessary. I'll be very interested to see how the house deals with that should it continue. No doubt it'll be a mess for quite a while.     

right to vote

 I read a news report where some states are considering lowering the voting age to 16. Setting aside all discussion of whether that is a good idea or not, I remarked that the 26th Amendment to the constitution sets that age. I was amazed by the number of people claiming otherwise. I even posted the 26th Amendment in case those folks didn't have a copy. Sadly you can't really expect others to look it up. The entire document, with footnotes and scholarly commentary is available with just a few keystrokes yet the effort is apparently too great. Still, I heard from many claiming the contrary, that the individual states or DC could indeed change that age. The primary argument? The amendment doesn't say they can't. I wonder where these folks went to school.
 Section 2 of the 26th Amendment states, " The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. " Just where in that statement does it say the states or DC have the power to make changes? It seems perfectly clear to me, The Congress shall have the power.
First I heard of sanctuary cities. That's still a concept I fail to understand. Federal law takes precedence over State or local law and ordinances. Then I keep hearing how certain states have " legalized " marijuana. That simply isn't true. Those states have decided not to enforce the federal statue, that much is true, but they haven't legalized marijuana. Failure to prosecute a crime is not legalization of that crime! And now I hear this silly notion that the voting age could be lowered by the states or DC. Hey people, this isn't a feudal society where individual states get to make their own laws contrary to the federal law. This is a constitutional republic where the law is established by a Congress of the people, that law being the supreme law of the land. It is the very reason we have the SUPREME court. The supreme court issues opinions on the constitutionality of law. It is the job of Congress to approve, disapprove or amend the law, you know, by amendments to that constitution.
  State legislators do not have the power to modify the constitution! I really believed all of that was common knowledge but apparently there are a number of ignorant people out there. Guess they never watched School House Rock, I'm just a bill. Scary that many of these ignorant people appear to have higher education and degrees but can't pass a reading comprehension exam." The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. " What does that mean? It means Congress has the power. Can't be much clearer than that. It goes on to say, enforce this article by legislation. That means law. That law must be constitutional law, not state law. Again pretty clear to me and I'm no lawyer.
 I even heard one person arguing that it doesn't say if you are under 18 you can't vote. Section One : The right of the citizens, who are 18years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age. I wonder what part of " who are 18 years of age or older " this person fails to understand. His argument centered on the phrase " on account of age. " What age is that? 18 or older! Duh, I really get annoyed by that nonsense.
 As to Felons keeping, losing temporarily, or having their voting rights restored that is up to the states. Why is that? Because it is not addressed in the Constitution of the United States directly. That power is reserved to the state. Some states may revoke your voting privilege. There has been a trend lately to restore that right. The reasons for doing so are strictly political in my opinion. It is all a part of a liberal agenda. What the states can't do is change the age requirement. That is set by Congress. Felons do not lose their citizenship and that is the argument for restoring their voting privileges. The 26th amendment does say voting is the right of a citizen. I think you can forfeit those rights if you commit a serious crime, you know, like a felony. But, that's just my thinking.
 Well if you are over 18 and haven't committed any felonies, get out there and vote.

a decision to be made

 Tomorrow we vote. I can't help but wonder if the caravan of migrants will continue towards our border or disperse throughout central America. I do think that will hinge upon who wins and loses. If the Republicans maintain control of the house, the caravan continues forward. If the Democrats win the caravan magically disperses. At least that is my estimation of what to expect. This caravan wasn't formed by accident, by word of mouth alone. No, this caravan took some logistical support. The who is the big question, the why is obvious. The globalists see the United States as the final frontier. If the United States can be overrun and borders breached that would spell the beginning of the end. The end of Freedom as Americans have enjoyed it for 242 years. Aristotle wrote: " Republics decline into Democracies and Democracies into Despotism. " How many times do you hear the politicians and others talk about our Democracy? That idea has been promoted for a long time now hasn't it? Did they teach you in school that our government was a Democracy? Yes, they did. Oh, we recited "and to the Republic for which it stands" without anyone explaining exactly what a Republic was. Does it make a difference? Yes, it certainly does. In the minds of many the Republic no longer exists, we have a democracy. A Democracy is nothing more than MOB rule, where the 51 defeat the 49. And so the Republic has declined into a Democracy, at least in the minds of the governed, can despotism be far behind? If a Nation has open borders how can control be maintained? When there is no lock on the door can you expect to remain in business?
 Tomorrow we vote in the mid-term elections. The mid-terms are extremely important because we are choosing our representatives. You hear a lot about voting to defeat Trump. This election is not about Trump, don't be distracted. This election is about who you want to represent your interests. Who you elect today will most likely never vote on what is important today. The business of government is a slow, churning process that takes many years. You have to think far ahead and not be caught up in the politics of today. Every election cycle is important. My suggestion is to vote for a Republic and dismiss this idea of Democracy. What's the difference you say? Simply put the difference lies in the law. In a Republic the people place limits on Government. In this way the people protect their rights, as in the right to bear arms! In a Democracy the mob gets to make the law. The distinction can be difficult to understand but is worth studying. Before you vote tomorrow I suggest you read up on it just a bit. Your vote is vital to the future of our country.
 An interesting bit of history is that the Democratic party was the party of the working man. That was their platform. They were Federalists. Federalists could better be described as Nationalists! That's right, Nationalists. Isn't that the very thing the Democrats are decrying today? Aren't the Democrats proclaiming Nationalism as a bad thing? So, the question is, just what do the Democrats support then? A strong central government with absolute power? A government controlled by whom? Not by the people, by the mob. Yeah that's all good, until the mob shows up at your door, and it will sooner or later. It's heading for the border as I write this opinion.     

a more permissive faith

 It is a frequent topic of mine because it is frequently on my mind. This morning I find myself thinking about it once again. The topic? God, the practice of religion and the whole philosophy behind it. The existence of God, or a superior power if you are more comfortable with that terminology, is something I wholeheartedly believe. There is order in the universe and that didn't happen by accident. Stands to reason it took intelligence to accomplish the task. And since man can't even figure out the basic building block, energy, it sure wasn't us. I have written about that many times. Man can not create or destroy energy, the only thing we understand about that process is changing that energy from one form to another. But that is about the nature of God.
 The practice of religion is another aspect of that and one I often wonder about. I don't think there is a right way or a wrong way to practice faith. The practice of religion depends a great deal on tradition. What were you taught? It is the practice of religion that causes the majority of the friction, not the belief. Recently I hear the argument that if you don't allow others to do whatever they wish, with your full endorsement, you are not being a Christian. The argument being that God commands us to love thy neighbor as thyself. I agree with that. I should love my neighbor as myself and that includes being aware of any shortcomings I may have and taking action to correct them. When we do harm to ourselves are we loving ourselves? If we see our neighbors doing harm to themselves aren't we obligated to help? Does that only apply to the physical? That would seem to be the thinking in some cases. I believe God is concerned with eternity, not today. And that is where the philosophy of religion enters the equation.
 The part that bothers me is when others call it hate. Their reasoning is, if I don't allow you to do whatever you wish, I hate you. Now that is a general statement and doesn't apply to every situation. I am talking about the teachings in the Bible. I agree that it can be interpreted in many ways. You can just take the literal or read into each word and phrase. It is my belief that you can't be taught what that book says, you have to learn it. That's where the confusion often comes in. If you only believe the words as they were written, you are believing what another man wrote down as his belief. If you only take the words to mean whatever meaning you assign the result will be similar. You are only believing what one man thinks. The answer has to lie somewhere in between all of that, the answer lies in learning, not being taught. I have found the answer is often in the simplest statements.
 The most common argument I hear is that God or Jesus forgives us of our sins. For that reason we shouldn't judge anyone else. God is the judge. Yes, I believe that also. The thing is, pointing out that another is breaking what you perceive to be God's law, is not judging. Disagreeing with others choices, is not hate. In truth, that is loving your neighbor as yourself. To me it was summed up nicely when Jesus said, Go and sin no more. He was saying I forgive you. He also said, don't do that again. The actual verse is John: 8:11 " No one sir," she said. " Then neither do I condemn you ," Jesus declared. " Go now and leave your life of sin. " He was giving her a choice. He didn't condemn her on the spot, rather pointed out that she was sinning and shouldn't continue to do so. That's the lesson I learned from all of that. He didn't say, I forgive you keep doing what you want! I also believe that only the guilty, feel guilt. If you feel guilty when someone points something out, then you already knew it is wrong. " This feeling of guilt is your conscience calling your attention to the higher road, and your heart wishing you had taken it. " ( Richelle Goodrich )
 The practice of religion is the practice of discipline. What is discipline? Teaching people to follow the rules, to put it simply. Discipline typically involves using punishment, or the withholding of it, as the motivation to learn, or at a minimum, obey. A disciple is one who learns. Interesting how the two words are related to each other. We think of a disciple as a follower of Christ. Our punishment for failing to obey? Well, it's pretty severe I'd say. But, as we all know forgiveness for our shortcomings will be granted if we are sincere in our efforts to obey. And I believe that God knows our hearts, we can not deceive him. That is the judgement of God, the truth, and he knows it.
 Now all this new age thinking about allowing others to do whatever they want without even mentioning their wrongdoing is just a continuation. Since the very beginning, when Adam and Eve were in the garden, man has sought more leeway. In the beginning God commanded " thou shalt not eat of the fruit of the tree in the center of the garden, you must not touch it, or you will die." Now you can take that for whatever you want, Adam and Eve didn't die in the sense that their life ended, but something else died. I'll leave that to the theologians to discuss. The point being they didn't obey the law. Yes Eve was tempted, as we all are, but that isn't an excuse. I'm sure she tried to use it as one though. Adam and Eve then felt guilt, that guilt taking the form of shame.
 I could go on and on about all of that. But I didn't set out to write a missive on the practice of religion. I am trying to explain what I think. Now I'm not very good at that but that doesn't stop me from trying. What I am trying to say is I believe what these folks are trying to achieve is a more permissive faith. By using the verses in the Bible that say Love thy neighbor as thyself, and others, they are attempting to justify themselves. In this way they can proclaim how Christian they are, while not actually practicing Christianity. Dare I propose that some " churches " are doing the same thing in order to keep " business. "
 I don't believe any of that will work however. I do believe that God knows our hearts. I do believe we will die if we eat of that fruit. Simply making our faith more " permissive " will not gain what we seek. It may indeed make life here on this earth easier. But we must remember that the practice of religion is the practice of discipline. Self discipline is what is required, always was, always will be.      

The seasons

 I haven't heard any talk of Indian summer this year, or is it now Native American Summer? I certainly wouldn't want to offend anyone. Whatever you call it I think it may have arrived here in Greensboro. I also believe it is supposed to leave today. I did enjoy temperatures in the 70's for the last two days. The fall foliage has begun to change although a bit dull this year. The weatherman on television explained it was because of excessive amounts of rain. Apparently rain washes the colors out, well, who knew? Halloween night was quite pleasant for the trick or treaters and that's always a good thing. I even slept with the window open last night, won't be many more like that. There are 48 days before winter arrives.
 It won't be long before the leaves will blanket the ground for the coming winter. It's God way of keeping the earth warm. For that reason I don't think we should be raking all those leaves up, they are put there for a reason. I see the trees against the skyline and can't help but think of them as the skeletons of summer. They will stand, stark against the horizon until spring arrives again. Whereas I feel the leaves serve a purpose on the ground, burning leaves are a pleasant memory. I hear now inhaling that smoke is a carcinogen. I'm not surprised, I think inhaling anything other than fresh air isn't a good thing. And cancer, cancer is a multitude of illnesses that we don't have another name for. But then again it is not important what you call it, the important thing is to find a cure for it. I do enjoy that smell though, I don't understand why Yankee candle hasn't made one like that yet. I heard they made a bacon one. No thanks, I would rather smell the leaves. I would expect it is a universal smell, one that everyone would recognize.
 Yes, it the beginning of the holiday season. We do like to be entertained; don't we? Thanksgiving became official in 1863. Thank Abraham Lincoln for that. Abraham declared a day of " Thanksgiving " right in the middle of the civil war to boost moral and improve spirits.Thanks and praise was to be given to a benevolent God. That was part of his proclamation. That part of the holiday seems to have been forgotten, for the most part. The story of the Pilgrims and their Thanksgiving was being told and had already been, shall we say creatively, rewritten. Today we see Thanksgiving as a day to eat to excess and the gateway to Christmas. And Christmas, Christmas is a day for excess as well. It's all about the gifts. Amazing how we have changed the intent of the holidays entirely. The holidays were intended to be days of Praise and Thanksgiving but have morphed into a gluttony of consumerism! The Praise and Thanksgiving being the excuse for it all. Nothing new about it, it has really always been so. Our prosperity enabling our more pagan traditions. We pray for success and when we get it, forget where it came from. Human nature I suppose.
 The " celebrating " begins earlier every year. By celebrating I mean the commercial portion of that celebration. This year I hear " experts" saying that's a good thing, that it is comforting to people. One claim being it evokes childhood memories of Christmas's past. Yes, going to the mall and charging gifts you can't really afford, is a regular Norman Rockwell experience. Well, that's what the retailers would have us believe anyway. Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy the holidays. I only question how the holidays wound up being an entire season! When I was a kid it seemed like each holiday was a, well, holiday in and of itself, a unique celebration of an event. Maybe that has something to do with being a kid and the perception of time. The time between Thanksgiving and Christmas was a lot longer when I was twelve. Back then, Santa Claus did show up for the leftovers of Thanksgiving dinner, right at the end of the parade. After his Christmas eve run you won't see or hear about him till the next year. Tis the season. That phrase comes from the song, Deck the Halls and had nothing to do with Thanksgiving. So, I'm wondering, how come Christmas is a season? It is though, ask anyone. There is Spring, Summer, Fall, the Christmas season, and winter. Indian summer is optional.    

as the tower crumbles

 There was an old saying I often heard growing up, if the shoe fits, wear it. That came to mind the other day as I read a post. This person was complaining about other people posting stuff they felt aimed at them, although their name wasn't mentioned. It isn't the first time I have read such statements and my usual response is, only the guilty feel guilt! The rest of us may become indignant or annoyed, but don't feel guilt. It has been my experience in life that when others point out your shortcomings or misconceptions, you do feel guilt. Yes I have tried to blame others or rewrite the script but the truth remained, I was guilty. I hate it when that happens. Learning about ourselves can be shocking and painful at times. I expect it would be even more so had you previously enjoyed a higher station in life. When your ivory tower isn't as tall as it used to be, it must be a shock.
 When you start seeing posts that you believe are aimed at you, it could be you're just looking in the mirror. Call it karma, call it fate, call it whatever you like, but things do come back to bite you. When you act in less than a genuine fashion that is what happens. Those that make public displays of their charity are quite prone to that happening. You know the type, the volunteers that volunteer for the " prestige " of the position. They are the ones always complaining about volunteering, making sure you view them as a martyr. That's because the role of Martyr is important to them. Far more important than any inconvenience it may cause, they are the ones proclaiming a sacrifice. They live for the awards and accolades. When those are no longer forthcoming however, they feel slighted. In the end, they will feel guilt. Public image is everything to these folks.
 The thing is one has to find the shoe that bests fits them. Some of us wear boots and others sandals. Are we concerned with fit or fashion? That is the real deciding factor isn't it? It should be, in my opinion. Nothing as good as good as a pair of comfortable shoes. Try wearing ones that are not for any length of time, who'll soon feel the difference. Your countenance will betray you. It is best to where the comfortable shoes. When your happiness depends upon the perception others have of you, that causes issues. When you expend more energy attempting to create an illusion, reality grows dim. Ah, but eventually that illusion begins to fade, the truth is revealed. You begin to believe others see the truth and your only recourse is denial. Bitter replaces the sweet and the cycle is completed. We got those new shoes only to discover they didn't fit! Disappointment. We were fashionable for a while. And now we find that fashion doesn't fit us at all. Haute, haughty and just plain  proud · vain · arrogant · conceited · snobbish · stuck-up · pompous · self-important · superior · egotistical · supercilious · condescending · lofty · patronizing · smug · scornful · contemptuous · disdainful · overweening · overbearing · imperious · lordly · cavalier · high-handed · full of oneself · above oneself · snooty · sniffy · hoity-toity · uppity · uppish · cocky · bigheaded · swollen-headed · puffed up · high and mighty · la-di-da · fancy-pants · on one's high horse · too big for one's boots · toffee-nosed · chesty · too big for one's breeches · vainglorious
Well, I guess that sums it up. Fit or fashion? Popular or practical? Fact or fantasy? The mirror never lies, it just reflects what is shown. We do get closer to the truth, more grounded, as the tower crumbles.