Friday, June 18, 2021
Great Day of Jubilee
Sometimes I'm all alone but Jubilee
Sometimes I'm all alone but Jubilee
Sometimes I'm all alone, my heart done turned to stone
But a great great day of Jubilee
There's a great great Day of Jubilee
A great great Day of Jubilee
A great great Day hard times they can not stay
A great great Day of Jubilee
The time is nigh at hand for Jubilee
The time is nigh at hand for Jubilee
The time is nigh at hand, Good News across the land
A great great Day of Jubilee
Wednesday, June 16, 2021
Live With It
If I were an oak leaf
which, once, sat atop a tower unbending
and I found myself resting
on a soft bed of moss
in a darkening forest...
I could live with that
Wednesday, May 12, 2021
In Praise of Honest and Decent Conservatives
Even though I disagree with Liz Cheney on most policy opinions, she is right on here. Speak that Truth to Power, Representative Cheney!
"Today we face a threat America has never seen before. A former
president, who provoked a violent attack on this capital in an effort to
steal the election, has resumed his aggressive effort to convince
Americans that the election was stolen from him.
He risks inciting
further violence.
Millions of Americans have been misled by the former
president, they have heard only his words, but not the truth. As he
continues to undermine our democratic process, sowing seeds of doubt
about whether democracy really works at all...
"I am a conservative Republican, and the most conservative of conservative principles is reverence for the rule of law.
"The
Electoral College has voted.
More than 60 state and federal courts,
including multiple judges the former president appointed,
have rejected
his claims.
The Trump Department of Justice investigated
the former
president's claims of widespread fraud and
found no evidence to support
them.
The election is over.
That is the rule of law. That is our
constitutional process.
Those who refuse to accept the rulings of our
courts are at war with the Constitution.
Our duty is clear. Every one of
us who has sworn the oath must act to prevent the unraveling of our
democracy.
"This is not about policy. This is
not about partisanship. This is about our duty as Americans.
Remaining
silent and ignoring the lie emboldens the liar.
I will not participate
in that. I will not sit back and watch in silence, while others lead our
party down a path that abandons the rule of law and joins the former
president's crusade to undermine our democracy."
~Liz Cheney, in a speech on May 11 that helps mark the downfall of the modern GOP and much of modern conservatism and modern white conservative evangelicalism.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/05/11/liz-cheney-house-floor-slams-trump-calls-him-threat-america/5047782001/
I'm glad that Cheney, W Bush, Romney and other responsible and decent conservatives have been speaking out or have started speaking out. I would hope that they could also recognize the part that they played in leading the US to this crisis time where a pervert conman could overtake the GOP that they helped shape... and maybe they do. But stepping up to clearly denounce a great existential threat to a free Republic is a starting point.
Oh, what has become of modern conservatism... Where facts, truth, decency, honesty, integrity used to matter? I truly believe that to be true, because I was raised amongst conservatives who held to those ideals.
And while I recognize that there are sort of three camps of conservatives -
those who've sold their souls to Trump-style corruption and dishonesty,
those who recognize Trump as a deviant but remain silent to appease their fellow conservatives and
those few who have publicly spoken up to denounce this for the deviant and dangerous corruption it is -
the latter seem to be a pretty small group and the Silent group is enabling the Deviant groups to maintain power.
Maybe, when people like Cheney and George W Bush speak out, the silent ones will find their spines and sense of decency and join those who are breaking away from the deviants. Time will tell and history will judge.
Sunday, May 9, 2021
Solutions to Problems that Don't Exist...
The experts are agreed: There is no data that shows we have a widespread voter fraud problem in our nation. That is, there is no evidence that bad actors are cheating the system in one way or another to change election outcomes via election fraud.
Conservative experts agree (here, from the Hoover Institute)...
https://www.hoover.org/research/no-evidence-voter-fraud-guide-statistical-claims-about-2020-election
The ultra-conservative Heritage Foundation notes... "The Heritage Foundation’s database includes 1,296 “proven instances of voter fraud” out of the hundreds of millions of votes cast going back to 1992. Of those cases identified, 1,120 resulted in criminal convictions."
[In fact, 1200 cases of fraud out of hundreds of millions of votes is an INFINITESIMAL amount of voter fraud. And, to be clear, HF described this, rather breathlessly as "Database SWELLS to 1,285 cases of Voter Fraud!!!" (emphases mine)... as if ~1300 cases out of millions is evidence of a problem, instead of evidence of NO significant problem. ~DT]
https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud
GOP voting experts agreed that there was no significant voter fraud happening leading up to the 2020 election...
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/republican-experts-are-in-agreement-the-2020-election-is-not-rigged-212332034.html
Experts agree...
"Despite this dramatic increase in mail voting over time, fraud rates remain infinitesimally small."
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/false-narrative-vote-mail-fraud
US Election officials agree...
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-54926084
Over and over and over again, from GOP to Democrat, from election watchers to election experts... the people who know and who are responsible for free elections all agree that we have NO SIGNIFICANT ELECTION FRAUD happening in this nation.
Experts agree!
"That shouldn’t be a surprise. One exhaustive study of 12 years of elections in five states found only 500 cases of alleged voter fraud.
In 2016, North Carolina’s Board of Elections found that 4,769,640 votes were cast in November and that one would probably have been avoided with a voter ID law."
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/editorials/article247291039.html
Trump's OWN LAWYERS didn't try to make that case in this last election, because they knew it was a stupidly false claim to make and they can get in trouble for that sort of foolishness.
"Trump Cries Voter Fraud. In Court, His Lawyers Don’t."
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-cries-election-fraud-in-court-his-lawyers-dont-11605271267
The facts are not in debate by rational people who know what they're speaking about. We don't have election fraud problems of any significance in our nation. It happens, the experts are not saying that it doesn't happen. We know it happens because pretty regularly, Republicans get caught doing it.
"North Carolina Republican operative charged in election fraud scheme"
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-north-carolina/north-carolina-republican-operative-charged-in-election-fraud-scheme-idUSKCN1QG2FS
The experts are just noting that it's not a significant problem at all and doesn't impact elections.
Over and over again, I can cite the experts from across the political spectrum saying that there is no problem. Handfuls of voter fraud in hundreds of thousands of votes. Or 500 cases of voter fraud in millions of votes across many years.
Those are the facts, Trump and his useful idiots be damned.
So, after this last election, instead of agreeing with reality, some large number of GOP voters (70%!!) are denying reality and GOP politicians - many of them - are creating laws to restrict voting. IN SPITE of the reality that we have no serious election fraud problems. When they do this immediately following a loss due to high minority and young folk turn-out, people take note. We can SEE it's not because we have an election security problem. We can SEE that they're clearly doing this to try to maintain power in a nation where they are a decided minority and their candidates just can't win if they have a large population of brown/black/gay/young citizens to convince.
But what about the case for increasing election security, even though there is no significant election fraud?
First off, we have to admit that we're trying to find a solution for a problem that practically doesn't exist. But what IF we could more effectively prevent those handful of Republicans from cheating, by using Voter ID laws, for instance?
The problem in implementing "solutions" for non-existent problems is the consequences. If I were more naive, I might call them unintended consequences, but when the experts note that the restrictions put in place will tend (possibly) to damper more Democrat voters rather than Republican voters... at a time when the GOP voting base is dwindling... well, I'm not naive.
We could, for instance, be even more secure in our election process by demanding that each voter have an ID - better yet, three IDs! - and bring their parents along to confirm they are who they are? AND their pastor or rabbi or imam!? After all, having a photo ID AND parental confirmation AND religious leader confirmation would certainly dry up almost ALL cases of voter fraud of that sort.
But - and there's the vital part - it would certainly decrease the voter turnout and just wouldn't be necessary, given that this is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist!
That is, creating rules and restrictions that serve to decrease voter turn-out (especially of one party's voters... especially making it more difficult for the poor and marginalized) when there's not a problem that needs to be fixed, it's just wrong. It's creating more problems than the one they are trying to fix.
If the GOP wants to increase their chances of winning elections, let them do it by renouncing racist, misogynist, anti-LGBTQ, anti-environmental policies and win over their citizens by creating policies that more people will support... Or making a better case (if they can) for the policies they do support. In other words, let them do it by being candidates that appeal to more people.
But you don't do it by "fixing" problems that don't exist and especially not by lying and saying that there IS a significant voter fraud problem to (try to) scare people into supporting these unnecessary policies.
Wednesday, April 28, 2021
Morality and Harm
Stan (at his "Winging It" blog), recently took it upon himself to speak for me, telling me what I believe and identifying some area of agreement between us. The conservatives that I've interacted have historically proven incredibly inept at stating MY positions. Stan did better than many have done, but still missed the important distinctions of what I believe.
Stan said, among other things...
There is something that he and I agree on. Seriously. Dan argues that morality is based on harm. Without quite agreeing with that, I believe that harm is a principle that is involved with morality. Unfortunately, at that single point of agreement ... we diverge. Dan believes, next, that we can reliably figure out what "harm" is so we can reliably determine what should or should not be moral. I don't...
Dan and I both believe that morality and harm are interlinked.
The difference is that Dan is absolutely certain that he has the ability and wisdom and far-reaching understanding to determine what constitutes harm, and I'm just not that good. So I tend to rely on the Manufacturer, the Maker of humans. If He says, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? ..." (1 Cor 6:9-10) (for instance), I'm not going to castigate Him for saying so. I'm going to warn those I love. "Watch out! This will hurt you!"
His post is called "The Harm Principle," if anyone wants to read it in full.
Some clarifications/corrections...
1. Dan doesn't argue that morality is "based on harm."
2. Dan argues that IF we're causing harm to an innocent person, then we're almost certainly wrong to do so. That is, it's morally bad to harm another baselessly. It's wrong to kill someone. It's wrong to abuse, rape, burn to death, torture, blow up, steal from, assault another human being. That may be similar to "morality is based on harm," but I just wanted to clarify because it's not the same, to me.
The way I would put it might be something more like...
Morality can probably be best understood as supporting that which strengthens, encourages and helps, and immorality can probably be best understood as that which causes harm, oppression, a devaluation of human rights.
3. Where Stan suggests that I'm doing something amazing ("Dan believes we can reliably figure out what harm is...") I disagree. Where Stan says he's not reliably able to figure out what harm is ("I don't..." and "I'm just not that good..."), he is of course, mistaken. OF COURSE he can recognize that killing his neighbor is wrong. That abusing his child is wrong. That catching a person's house on fire is wrong.
That is, generally speaking, we all universally understand the reasonable and moral nature of Do No Harm to Others and the corresponding, Be Helpful, Be Kind, Be a Good Neighbor. In broad strokes, we tend to understand that, regardless of culture, religion, beliefs or politics.
4. Stan's "solution," on the other hand, "Use the Owners Manual," has its own set of problems.
4a. Not everyone agrees that the Bible is the owners manual, or even a good source for morality.
4b. Even amongst those who value the Bible's moral teachings, there is not universal agreement on what is and isn't moral.
4c. Referring to the "owners manual," then, to understand what is and isn't moral STILL involves our human reasoning and our human reasoning is imperfect.
Thus, the advantages of using Harm as a gauge of morality is that it's practical, it's understandable, it's understandable pretty universally, it's not dependent upon belief in a certain segment of sects within a given religion and its sacred text. It's a more universal way of understanding right and wrong.
And if, as Stan seems to acknowledge, that God wants the good for us and doesn't want bad, then we could also reason that IF we find a moral ruling that causes harm ("Polluting is okay, as long as it's only in rural water streams where not as many people live," for instance), then we can be pretty sure that it's violating "the owners manual..."
Put yet another way: IF an inability to understand morality 100% perfectly is a problem with using Harm as a guide, it's every bit as true that understanding morality based upon reading the Bible will also not result in 100% understanding.
Stan would not take the time to correct or address his misrepresentations and lack of understanding of my views on his blog, but I would ask him, Where am I mistaken?
Reading the Bible will not result in 100% perfect understanding of morality. Correct?
Using harm as a guide will not result in 100% perfect understanding of morality. Correct?
There is no data to suggest that using the Bible as a guide is ANY more effective at understanding morality than using harm as a guide. Indeed, given that some significant portion of the world does not take the Bible as a moral guide AND that even with those who do value the Bible, there is disagreement on moral questions, then one could argue that it's a less effective way to understand morality.
Is that not reasonable? Practical?
Tuesday, April 20, 2021
We Shall Overcome... Someday?
"You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?"
You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed,
this is the very purpose of direct action.
Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension."
I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth.
Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.
The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation
so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation.
I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue...
We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation.
For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied...”
Let us consider a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is difference made legal.
By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal.
Let me give another explanation.
A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting or devising the law. Who can say that the legislature of Alabama [Georgia, Dan] which set up that state's segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout Alabama [Georgia, Dan] all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some counties in which, even though Negroes constitute a majority of the population, not a single Negro is registered. Can any law enacted under such circumstances be considered democratically structured?"
Read King's Letter from a Birmingham Jail...
https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html
Friday, April 16, 2021
Into the Swamp
Hiding in the hills, and
taking to the trees
Wayward wandering ones
led by the noon day sun
Into the swamp we waded
and tromped
baptized our bleeding
scars
we flew from the noise to
the peaceful fields
and there we gathered
stars
Friday, April 9, 2021
That's "Good News..." How?
I'm still reading/listening to white conservative evangelicals talk about the Gospel, the literal Good News and trying to make sense of what they're saying. Rarely to never do I get answers, so just posting an attempt again at understanding.
So (I'm asking)... the GOOD news is that
1. your god is an impatient, irrational and unjust tyrant (Not that they're saying that, but if he were a king who acted this way, he'd be considered an impatient and unjust and irrational tyrant, as we'll see),
2. who created an imperfect humanity,
3. KNOWING that we were imperfect
4. and who then demands perfection to be in his company, to enter heaven
5. and when we are not perfect (ie, how your god created us, in your theory), that god thinks we deserve an eternity of torture and is willing to send us there
6. UNLESS we repent (and do it in just the right way, not being mistaken on how to do it, even though we're imperfect and prone to being mistaken - see point 2)
7. and THIS god (who would not be called loving or perfect if he were a human parent or ruler) has provided ONE possible bit of good news - that there MUST be a blood sacrifice to "pay" for our sin-debt... this god of yours is wholly impotent and incapable of forgiving sin outside of this perfect blood sacrifice and a repentance done in roughly just the right way
8. and thus, the "good news" is that IF you accept this blood sacrifice offered in our place (by this god's own son, no less!), you can be saved!
9. AND YET, if you are sincerely mistaken in your views about homosexuality or the penal substitutionary atonement or the inerrancy of the Bible and some other undesignated list of rules/tenets you must understand roughly correctly... all of that MIGHT be a sign that your "repentance" didn't quite "take" right or that you were never saved in the first place? That you repented wrongly?
Is that a fair rendering of what you're calling good news?
If so, do you realize that this version of "good news" goes entirely* un-preached by Jesus during his years on earth in any of the sermons he preached? That seems odd, doesn't it?
[*certainly not directly]
Also, there will be some VAST majority who will not understand this good news - or maybe never hear it! - or who will get the details wrong in a sufficient manner that any repentance they do (in good faith), won't be sufficient to save them, nor will your god's "grace," which is less grace and more of a cosmic blood payment business deal, is that right?
And that for that VAST majority of humanity, this god of yours will let them suffer unimaginably an eternity for some temporal "sins" or "crimes" they committed - most of those sins almost certainly of the relatively minor sort that wouldn't even merit a prison sentence with human justice. Certainly not a life imprisonment penalty, never mind an eternity of torture.
Do you understand how that doesn't seem to be good news at all, to many?
Saturday, April 3, 2021
An Easter Plot
[DAN:
Jesus begins his ministry by saying...]
“The
Spirit of the Lord is on me, because God has anointed me
to
proclaim good news to the poor.
God has sent me to proclaim
freedom for the prisoners and
recovery of sight for the blind,
to
set the oppressed free,
to proclaim the year
of the Lord’s favor.”
[DAN:
Some have noted that “the year of the Lord's favor” is a
reference to the Jewish tradition of Jubilee and the Sabbath laws...
rules designed to return land to the poor and to ensure that the poor
and marginalized had real options to recover.
Soon after
Jesus begins his ministry, the Pharisees and the teachers of the law
begin responding to Jesus' ministry...]
The
Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to
their sect complained to his disciples,
“Why do you eat and drink with tax
collectors and sinners?”
Jesus answered them,
“It is not the healthy who need a
doctor, but the sick.
I have not come to call the righteous, but
sinners to repentance.”
Jesus and disciples were
“harvesting” wheat from farmers' fields on the Sabbath...
The
Pharisees asked,
“Why are you doing what is
unlawful on the Sabbath?”
Jesus answered them,
“Have you never read what David did
when he and his companions were hungry? He entered the house of God,
and taking the consecrated bread, he ate what is lawful only for
priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.
The
Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.”
On another
Sabbath he went into the synagogue and was teaching, and a man was
there whose right hand was shriveled. The Pharisees and the
teachers of the law were looking for a reason to accuse Jesus,
so they watched him closely to see if he would heal on the Sabbath.
But Jesus knew what they were thinking and said to the man with the
shriveled hand...
“Get up and
stand in front of everyone.”
So he got up and
stood there.
Then Jesus said to them,
“I
ask you, which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to
save life or to destroy it?”
He looked around at
them all, and then said to the man,
“Stretch
out your hand.”
He did so, and his hand was
completely restored.
But the Pharisees went out and
plotted how they might kill Jesus.
Looking at his
disciples, he said:
“Blessed
are you who are poor, for yours
is the kingdom of God.
Blessed
are you who hunger now, for you
will be satisfied.
Blessed are you who weep now, for you will
laugh.
Blessed are you when people hate you, when they exclude you
and insult you
and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of
Man.
“Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is
your reward in heaven. For that is how their ancestors treated the
prophets.
“But woe to you
who are rich, for you have
already received your comfort.
Woe
to you who are well fed now, for
you will go hungry.
Woe to you who laugh now, for you will mourn
and weep.
Woe to you when everyone speaks well of you,
for that
is how their ancestors treated the false prophets.”
“But
to you who are listening I say:
Love your enemies, do good to
those who hate you,
bless those who curse you, pray for those who
mistreat you.
If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the
other also.
If someone takes your coat, do not withhold your
shirt from them.
Give to everyone who asks you, and
if anyone
takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.
Do to others as
you would have them do to you.”
[DAN: John
the Baptist was curious if Jesus was “the One...”]
At
that very time Jesus cured many who had diseases, sicknesses and evil
spirits, and gave sight to many who were blind. So he replied to
John's messengers,
“Go
back and report to John what you have seen and heard:
The blind
receive sight,
the lame walk,
those who have leprosy are
cleansed,
the deaf hear,
the dead are raised,
and
the good news is proclaimed to the poor.
Blessed
is anyone who does not stumble on account of me.”
[DAN:
Jesus is speaking about the “proof” of his ministry and he talks
about some miraculous events... but his BIG wrap up is, “the good
news is proclaimed to the poor!”
Jesus, speaking of
the Pharisees...]
“To
what, then, can I compare the people of this generation? What are
they like? They are like children sitting in the marketplace and
calling out to each other:
“‘We played the pipe for you,
and you did not dance; we sang a dirge, and you did not cry.’
“For
John the Baptist came neither eating bread nor drinking wine, and you
say, ‘He has a demon.’ The Son of Man came eating and drinking,
and you say, ‘Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax
collectors and sinners.’ But wisdom is proved right by all her
children.”
“Whoever wants to
be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and
follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but
whoever loses their life for me will save it. What good is it for
someone to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit their very
self?”
“Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son
of Man has no place to lay his head.”
[DAN: Jesus,
speaking of the Pharisees...]
“And
you experts in the law, woe to you,
because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and
you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them.
“Woe
to you, because you build tombs for
the prophets, and it was your ancestors who killed them. So you
testify that you approve of what your ancestors did; they killed the
prophets, and you build their tombs. Because of this, God in his
wisdom said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom
they will kill and others they will persecute.’
Therefore
this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the
prophets that has been shed since
the beginning of the world, from the blood of Abel to the blood of
Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I
tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all.
“Woe
to you experts in the law, because
you have taken away the key to knowledge. You yourselves have not
entered, and you have hindered those who were entering.”
When
Jesus went outside,
the Pharisees and the teachers of
the law began to oppose him fiercely
and to besiege
him with questions, waiting to catch him in something he might say.
[DAN:
A rich man is planning on what to do with his great wealth...]
“Then
he said, ‘This is what I’ll do. I will tear down my barns and
build bigger ones, and there I will store my surplus grain. And I’ll
say to myself, “You have plenty of grain laid up for many years.
Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry.”’
“But God said
to him,
‘You fool! This very night your life will be demanded
from you.
Then who will get what you have prepared for
yourself?’
“This is
how it will be with whoever stores up things for themselves but is
not rich toward God.”
Then
Jesus said to his disciples:
“Therefore
I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat; or about
your body, what you will wear. For life is more than food, and the
body more than clothes. Consider the ravens: They do not sow or reap,
they have no storeroom or barn; yet God feeds them. And how much more
valuable you are than birds! Who of you by worrying can add a single
hour to your life? Since you cannot do this very little thing, why do
you worry about the rest?
“Consider how the wild flowers
grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you, not even Solomon in
all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God
clothes the grass of the field, which is here today, and tomorrow is
thrown into the fire, how much more will he clothe you—you of
little faith! And do not set your heart on what you will eat or
drink; do not worry about it. For the pagan world runs after all such
things, and your Father knows that you need them. But seek his
kingdom, and these things will be given to you as well.
“Do
not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give
you the kingdom. Sell
your possessions and give to the poor.
Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in
heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth
destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be
also.”
“When
you give a luncheon or dinner, do
not invite your friends, your brothers or sisters, your relatives, or
your rich neighbors;
if you do, they may invite you back and so you will be repaid. But
when you give a banquet, invite
the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind,
and you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be
repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.”
“No
one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the
other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other.
You
cannot serve both God and money.”
A
certain ruler asked Jesus,
“Good teacher, what must I do to
inherit eternal life?”
“Why
do you call me good? No one is good—except God alone. You know the
commandments: ‘You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder,
you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your
father and mother.’”
“All
these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said.
When
Jesus heard this, he said to him,
“You
still lack one thing.
Sell
everything you have and give to the poor,
and
you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
When
he heard this, he became very sad, because he was very wealthy. Jesus
looked at him and said,
“How
hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!
Indeed, it
is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than
for
someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
Again
his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to
them,
“I
have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do
you stone me?”
“We are not stoning you for
any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a
mere man, claim to be God.”
Jesus answered them,
“Is
it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’?
If
he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and
Scripture cannot be set aside -
what about the one whom the
Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do
you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?
Do not believe me unless I
do the works of my Father.
[DAN
speaking: What WERE the works that Jesus was citing?
Preaching
the good news of the realm of God specifically to the poor and
marginalized...
and calling out the oppression of the rich and
powerful and the religious rulers]
But
if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works,
that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in
the Father.”
[DAN:
The parable of the sheep and the goats...]
“When
the Holy One comes in glory, and all the angels with him, they will
sit on their glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before
them, and they will separate the people one from another as a
shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. They will put the sheep
on the right and the goats on the left.
“Then
the Ruler will say to those on the right, ‘Come, you who are
blessed by God; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you
since the creation of the world.
For I was hungry and you gave me
something to eat,
I was thirsty and you gave me something to
drink,
I was a stranger and you invited me in,
I needed
clothes and you clothed me,
I was sick and you looked after me,
I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
“Then the
righteous will answer, ‘Holy One, when did we see you hungry and
feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see
you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you?
When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
“The
Ruler will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of
the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for
me.’
“Then the Ruler will say to those on the left,
‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared
for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me
nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was
a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did
not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after
me.’
“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you
hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in
prison, and did not help you?’
“The Ruler will reply,
‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of
these, you did not do for me.’
“Then they will go away to
eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
[DAN
speaking: Nearing the end, now...
In the context of ALL that
/\ consistent teaching,
the warnings against wealth and power,
the
teachings to align with the poor, marginalized and “least of
these,”
the constant
harsh rebukes and mocking of the religious leaders, the rich and
powerful...
in THAT context and immediately after this parable
about the sheep and the goats...
The Pharisees met...]
When
Jesus had finished saying all these things, he said to his
disciples,
“As
you know, the Passover is two days away –
and the Son of Man
will be handed over to be crucified.”
Then
the chief priests and the elders of the people
assembled in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas,
and
they schemed to arrest Jesus secretly and kill him.
“But not during the festival,” they said, “or
there may be a riot among the people.”
Wednesday, March 31, 2021
You Can Be Sure...
Stan, at the Winging It blog, offered some thoughts on the problem with humans having a "deceitful heart." This line of thinking often posted at blogs like Stan's always raises questions for me. Questions that I've never had well-answered (and mostly have been ignored.)
Usually, these commentaries are of the sort that say (this is my summation, to be clear, not a direct quote from anyone...)
Even if someone SAYS they're saved, they can be mistaken, for Scripture says that some will be surprised in the "final days" to learn that they're not saved. Yes, the human heart is deceitful above all things!
Which always raises the question, for me, well, how do you know you're not the one who is deceived and deceitful, confused and mistaken?
In a (very) slight attempt to deal with the problem, Stan said...
"While admitting up front that God's word is truth (and when they do not, you can immediately dismiss them, having only their own deceitful hearts as their standard), we are still left to our own wits, so to speak, to interpret God's word."
Stan then asks, are we considering the text and the context of the text? The language and culture and the writing style (and Stan cites "historical, doctrinal, hyperbole, poetry, etc..." Noting that he doesn't offer mythic or epic as potential writing styles...), etc. All of which are fine, as far as they go.
But what of two groups of people reading the same collection of texts in good faith efforts to understand and yet who come to disagreement on interpretation and understanding?
Stan deals with this towards the end by saying...
"...how does your understanding of the text, the context, and the Scriptures line up with the history of Christendom?
Is your understanding novel?
Does it contradict all prior understanding?
Have you come up with a new and creative way to understand God's Word?
Then you can be pretty sure your deceitful heart is doing its devilish work."
So, this is a LOVELY rationale for sticking to human religious traditions. But, some questions arise...
1. It's not strictly biblical, you know that, right? Appealing to human traditions as a test has mixed responses in the Bible's pages. Some places, it affirms human traditions, others, it decries them.
2. Indeed, Jesus disrupted a HUGE number of human religious teachings and understandings, traditions that the religious fathers had handed down for thousands of years that Jesus up-ended.
3. It STILL has the problem of relying upon human teachings, which teachings and interpretations being HUMAN in nature, are fallible.
4. It has the problem of needing to affirm things like slavery and forced marriages (because God in the Bible appears to condone such things) and the problem of condemning loving marriage relationships between gay and lesbian folks. For instance.
5. So, to address Stan's last line:
Does your human understanding of your human traditions have you affirming slavery and forced marriages (ie, rape) in some circumstances and yet denying committed loving marriage options to gay and lesbian folk, you can be sure your deceitful heart is doing its devilish work.
Wednesday, March 17, 2021
Stop the Hate
Attacks on Asian Americans is and has been on the rise...
https://www.npr.org/2021/03/17/978055571/anti-asian-attacks-rise-during-pandemic-read-nprs-stories-on-the-surge-in-violen
Killer targets Asian Americans (Asian, Asian-looking...) in attacks in Atlanta. Eight dead...
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/atlanta-area-shootings-03-17-21/index.html
Spit on, yelled at, attacked... Asian Americans are not feeling safe...
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/us/chinese-coronavirus-racist-attacks.html
Trump and his supporters and other racists used and continue to use stereotypical hate language to inflate hatred towards Asians and Asian Americans. Words matter. It's NOT being PC to say that Trump should stop with the hate language. Just as we could predict violence over the election due to his stirring up distrust with his idiot words, so too, we could predict violence towards Asian-appearing people directly from the words he and his supporters use.
Stop it.
Asian Americans are not the enemy. Asian people are not the enemy. BLM is not the enemy. Antifa is not the enemy. Liberals, the media, LGBTQ folk, Democrats... hell, even Republicans are not the enemy.
The enemy are those who embrace hateful language and deploy dangerous attacks to demonize groups of people - especially historically oppressed groups of people. We MUST unite against such hate language and denounce it when it happens. We MUST not give a pass to such demonizations and hate.
Tuesday, March 2, 2021
Executive Orders, Clarification
Craig recently complained about Obama's Executive Orders, saying something on his blog that other conservatives have said in variety of ways, some not as gracious as Craig's (which is not saying a lot)...
I’m certainly not singling out Biden, I don’t remember this sort of rule by EO being a big issue before P-BO, and Trump was certainly guilty of it as well. This notion that “the other guys did it”, just doesn’t seem presidential or healthy.
1. "Trump was guilty of it as well..."
This is the sort of downplaying/attack that we see from the conservatives who want to pretend they don't support Trump, while downplaying his flaws and treating him as just another less than perfect politician.
The reality is that, for those who view EOs as "bad," Trump was much worse than Obama was. IF you want to say that Obama's average of 35 EOs a year are an abuse of executive power, THEN you HAVE to say that Trump was nearly twice (35/55ths) as bad with his 55 EOs a year.
*More on Trump's EOs later...
2. The reality is that, since 1900 (and before, at a lower rate), EOs have been regularly used.
McKinley averaged 40/year (more than Obama)
Teddy Roosevelt: 145/year
Taft: 181/year
Wilson: 225/year
....
Franklin Roosevelt: 307 (the peak)
...
Kennedy: 75
...
Nixon: 62
Ford: 69
Carter: 80
Reagan: 48 (more than Obama)
Bush I: 42 (more than Obama)
Clinton: 46
Bush II: 36 (more than Obama)
Obama: 35
Trump: 55 (more than Obama)
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/executive-orders
I point this out because, in their defense of Trump's abuse/misuse of EOs, I've seen many conservatives suggesting that Obama began the "abuse" of EOs. The reality is that he's on the average end of EOs.
* More on Obama's EOs later...
3. EOs have been used for a variety of reasons over the years. Mostly with less flashy/departmental clarification sorts of orders. In theory, they were often used to answer questions and make the workflow easier.
4. Perhaps the most famous EO was Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation (!)
* More on Lincoln's EO...
5. I am generally opposed to using EOs as a way of governing and working around Congress. If a policy needs to be implemented, then Congress should implement it. Generally.
But, as we can see from Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, EOs have sometimes been used to create policy that is absolutely required by reason and morality and justice. There's no telling how long enslaved people would have had to wait for freedom if they were waiting for Congress.
And so, while Congress SHOULD act in a just and reasonable manner and tackle vital issues promptly - and that IS the preferred route for policy - the reality is that sometimes Congress is "broke." They are not acting as they should, not taking action on policies as they should. Slavery is an obvious case that proves the point.
In cases when Congress is negligent, I support the president using EOs.
6. I am absolutely not an expert on Obama's (or Trump's) EOs.
However, we know that McConnell and the GOP Congress promised to be an obstructionist Congress. They deliberately tried to block Obama policies that he was promoting. They said out loud that this was their intent. In that context, Obama issued 35 EOs a year. Some were sort of typical, administrative style EOs and some were ways to work around a Congress that wouldn't take action on an urgent need.
In this link, we see that Obama used EOs (again, at a typical/average rate) at times to create policies to help oppressed/marginalized/at risk groups. He used EOs to help immigrants, to fight climate change, to raise minimum wage for federal gov't employees, to help LGBTQ people...
Obama "abused" (so say conservatives) the EO to help oppressed groups.
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/211303-obamas-key-executive-actions
7. Trump, on the other hand, used EOs to have a way of saying, "Look! I did something! I've done so much! More than any others! I accomplished things that no one else could!" Because he could not get anything of much significance accomplished in a Congress controlled by his own party (hell, he couldn't even get infrastructure policies passed!). Just watching Trump with his EOs and you could see it was a power trip for him (this is an opinion based on observation, not a provable fact, but it's a reasonable opinion). Trump LIKED the power of EOs.
But looking at his EOs, a lot of them were relatively meaningless. Minor policy adaptations with no significant impact. And a lot of them were to fan the flames of his supporters ardor for him (signing protections for federal monuments and establishing the anti-history, rightwing propaganda "1776 Commission," for instance... or his attack on diversity training or... well, he did this a lot.)
https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-executive-orders-ineffective-20190327-story.html
And, in contrast to Obama's EOs, Trump used EOs to cause harm to or limit liberty of immigrants, LGBTQ folk, etc... and to help industries and corporations. To "build the wall" or increase detention of immigrants, for instance.
https://cmsny.org/trumps-executive-orders-immigration-refugees/
Or to limit regulations to benefit businesses and polluters at the cost of the poor and the environment.
https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/votervital/what-is-the-trump-administrations-track-record-on-the-environment/
To promote fossil fuels and remove protections for the environment and human health.
https://eelp.law.harvard.edu/executive-orders-in-depth/
Just a short overview and not exhaustive. I see some of Trump's EOs that may been actually helpful, at least at a small scale, but more often than not, they seem to be used for tossing red meat to his ultra-right wing fan base, to give benefits to corporations, to cause harm to immigrants, LGBTQ folk and other marginalized, historically oppressed groups.
And he used them a lot, by comparison to all other recent presidents.
And no, Obama did not bring in a new era of using EOs at a rate wildly higher than ever.












