Jesus Camp: Good for children or disturbing?

I am a part of a fraternity of sorts known as the “PK” or the preacher’s kid. For these reasons, my parents exposed us to Biblical teachings at a young age. I remember when I was growing up as a kid, one of the programs we had was vacation Bible school in the summers. It was a time when we were educated on fundamental Biblical principals in a relaxed setting with the information presented in a fun and exciting way. We would have lunch and it was also a time to connect with our friends at the church. We looked forward to it often times because it was not forced upon us. It would last for about a week and was typically half a day. Programs like that were good for children, whether their families were religious or not, because it reinforced character, integrity, and accountability for actions in life and the messages related to all people regardless of their religious affiliations.

Fast forward to 2006. There is a new “evangelical” Christian movement in America that, in some ways, seeks to “push” Christianity through television, film and politics. This would be fine if they were simply focusing on the teachings of Christianity, but the self proclaimed “evangelicals” take it a step further. They engage in right wing political endeavors under the name of Christianity. They use the name of Christianity as a tool instead of as a lifestyle. There is a new camp that is a result of this agenda. It is simply referred to as “Jesus Camp.” There is a new documentary on “Jesus Camp” coming out that shows first hand how this agenda is being either shared or forced upon children. I am curious to see what people from all walks of life feel about this camp program. Here is the trailer:

How does this trailer make you feel? I don’t hide the fact in any of my writing that I am a christian, however, I do not associate myself with the self proclaimed “evangelical” movement in America. I think that it is agenda based rhetoric instead of Biblical based teaching. If it were simply a camp for children about Jesus and Biblical teachings in America, I would support the program, but I feel that something else is driving this program. What do you think? The Republican party won the white house on the basis of “evangelical christian” voters in 2004. “Evangelicals” are taking on political issues from their pulpits, trying to sway the electoral process. They are also trying to push their political rhetoric on children. Once again, I feel that they are and continue to exploit the name of Christianity to push forth their political agendas. This film has caused a tremendous controversy because of this story featured on ABC news:

ABC news raises the question of whether or not this is indoctrination or christian education. Does this camp go over the top? Is it fair to put young impressionable children in this camp? Should the children be forced to pray at a cut out of President Bush? Is this a move to share Christianity, or is it something else? Although I feel that they tried to slant the story using a “secular liberal feminist” as a source, I believe that the general question is valid from ABC news. Is “Jesus Camp” simply a christian camp or a representation of the evangelical political agenda in America. I do not think that Becky Fisher has a tainted philosophy about children being passionate about Christianity, they should be. I am concerned with where she is trying to focus that passion. I do not believe that praying to a cut out of President Bush is warranted and her rhetoric can be dangerous. Her intent is good, but her means is where I have an issue with this camp. It is treated, in my opinion, more as a stamp for “war” and intolerance than as a banner of God’s true love. Here is an interview clip of Becky Fisher…watch the language she uses.

Is this message being portrayed right under the umbrella of Fisher’s rhetoric? I believe that Christians should stand firm on their beliefs, but I do not think that in pursuit of those beliefs Christianity should be used as a weapon instead of a message. What is the “evangelical” weapon form of Christianity? Two words…President Bush! We must separate the message of Christianity from the rhetoric of “evangelicals” or our true mission will be sacrificed.

 

 

Should Christians celebrate Halloween?

A couple of Sunday’s ago during the youth service at my church, an interesting discussion took place about Halloween. The discussion centered around what role, if any, Christians should have in the celebration. I am not going to give the answer the youth minister gave, because I want to see what other people think on the subject. Halloween has become, in America, one of the big four holidays next to Christmas, Thanksgiving, and Easter. It is commercially lucrative, educationally encouraged and socially accepted by many Americans, including individuals that identify themselves as Christian. Parents let kids go “trick or treating” and dress up as devils and witches…and any other character that the child chooses. Schools have costume days, employers have competitions centered around it and many churches do not preach against it. Should Christians celebrate Halloween? Is it just fun, or does it go against the fundamental teachings of Christianity?

To truly asses an answer, you must understand the origins of Halloween. I wanted to get information from a non-biased source, meaning that I did not want to use sources from those in favor of or against Halloween. For these reasons, I gathered my historical background information from History.com, the on-line extension of the History Channel. The holiday’s origin is routed in the Celtic festival of Samhain (pronounced sow-in). Samhain was celebrated in the Celtic areas now known as Ireland, the United Kingdom, and northern France. They celebrated their new year on November 1 and the day marked the end of summer and the harvest. They had a belief that the night before this new year, October 31, the boundaries between the world of the living and the dead was not existent. Samhain, or October 31, was basically considered a day when they believed that the ghosts of the dead returned to earth. The Celts felt the “otherworldly spirits” made it easier for the Celtic priests, or Druids to make predictions about the future.

To commemorate the event, the Druids built huge bonfires where people would gather to burn crops and animals as sacrifices to the Celtic pagan deities. During this celebration, they wore costumes which typically included animal heads and skins. In addition, they attempted to tell each other’s fortunes during this time. In the 800s, Christianity had spread to this territory. In efforts to change the Celtic holiday related to the dead with a church sanctioned event, according to some sources, it is believed that Pope Boniface IV designated November 1 as “All Saints’ Day.” It was designed to honor saints and martyrs. This celebration was also called All-hallows or All hallowmas (this word originated from Middle English Alholowmesse meaning All Saints’ Day). Samhain began to be known as “All Hallows Eve”, basically the night before All Saints’ Day. All-hallows Eve eventually morphed into Halloween.

Now with its origins routed in Pagan worship, occult rituals, sacrifices, and fortune telling; is Halloween simply a “fun” holiday or a representation of something bigger? An estimated 36.1 million 5 to 13 year-olds across the United States engage in “trick or treating.” This means that their parents are either allowing or condoning them participating in the holiday. Why is this important? According to the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, 76.5 million Americans identify themselves as Christians (approximately 52% protestant and 24.5% catholic). The majority of Americans identify themselves as Christian, yet a holiday routed in pagan tradition is widely celebrated in this country.

Proponents of Halloween say that it is “just fun for the children?” Opponents of the holiday say that it is routed in pagan traditions and children should not be identified with it. Should Christians celebrate Halloween? Should churches offer alternatives to Halloween if they do preach against celebrating it? Why aren’t more churches taking a position on Halloween? Personally, because of my Christian beliefs, I do not celebrate Halloween. I do however support programs that provide children with a positive alternative on that night so they do not feel “left out.” I also believe that adults have an ability to distinguish between events that support the tradition of Halloween and events that are simply trying to provide children with entertainment. I’ve gone to events on Halloween that I felt were good community festivals, such as the Khema Boardwalk’s “Boo on the boardwalk.”

Where is the balance for Christians? Many of the youth at our church felt that they should have a right to participate in Halloween festivities like all other youth. Although we were not allowed to celebrate Halloween as children in my family, it became a fun family night for us. My mother taught us from the beginning the origins of the holiday. As an alternative to celebrating Halloween, we made candy apples, popcorn balls, played games and enjoyed family time. Is it the responsibility of Christian families to offer an alternative if they are not going to let their children participate in the holiday? Are the youth at my church right as long as there is balance, or are they wrong because of the history of the holiday? Does a holiday routed in pagan worship, secular rituals, and ghosts and witches have a place in Christianity? Should Christians celebrate Halloween?

Like father, Unlike Son…Ford’s fight to stay in office

Harold Ford Jr., 36, is a Democrat and a member of the United States House of Representatives. He represents the 9th congressional district in the state of Tennessee, centered on Memphis. Ford received a B.A. degree in American history from the University of Pennsylvania in 1992, and he received his J.D. (law degree) from the University of Michigan Law School in 1996. When Harold Ford Sr. decided to retire from congress, Ford Jr. ran for his seat and won at the age of 26. He has been re-elected four times without serious Republican opposition, averaging 80% of the vote in the heavily black-majority 9th district. (the above background information was gathered from Wikipedia.com and Ford Jr’s congressional web site)

Harold Ford, Sr. held the office in the 9th congressional district from 1975-1996, so Ford Jr. winning the seat, although commendable, was not necessarily “an uphill battle.” His dad pretty much handed it to him and Ford has been given opportunities that others did not have access to because of his dad’s connections. His father’s reputation got him in office, but his competency as a congressman has kept him in office. Ford has made the bold decision to campaign for a Senate seat this year, challenging the Republican candidate, Bob Corker. This is the seat being vacated by retiring Majority Leader Bill Frist, a long time republican dominated seat. Although his father faced little opposition during his tenure in office, Ford Jr. is currently in the fight of his life to win the senate seat.

The Republican National Committee (RNC) has engaged in a series of personal attacks on Harold Ford, Jr in addition to the attacks that are coming from the local republican candidate, Bob Corker. The republicans are trying to raise concerns in the minds of voters over some of Ford’s family members questionable dealings and behaviors. His brother, Jake, admitted to having several arrests in his early teens and twenties included DUI, marijuana possession, assault on his father, and assault on a former girlfriend. Despite this history, Jake Ford,34, is running to replace his brother Harold in the house of representatives. Harold has not endorsed any candidate in the race to fill his old seat. The other issue that is being raised by the RNC is Ford Jr. allegedly is a “play boy” and has allegedly received funds from some individuals in the porn industry. Finally, the RNC, is for some reason trying to raise the issue that Ford allegedly dates outside of his race, specifically white women.

He is often accused of being a sleek “pretty boy” and the RNC and Corker are utilizing his image to try and attack him. Ford has consistently been viewed though as one of the most competent and capable Democratic representatives in the house. The election is very close, and in efforts to sway the race the RNC released this ad. Does this ad cross the line? Does it offend you?

Although Ford has been elected to office like his father, unlike his father he is facing much opposition in his fight. Republican candidate Bob Corker has maintained that he did not have any ties to this ad and it came from the RNC, but it is very suspect to think that a republican candidate would not have ties to the committee. Critics of the ad claim that it degrades black women as ignorant portraying them as voters that look for a candidate that “looks good.” Critics of the ad also say that the ad crosses the line with the use of a white woman as a satirical piece to criticize Ford’s tendency to date outside of his race. Does the ad cross the line? Is the ad racist or is it simply a part of politics? Should a candidate’s personal life have any thing to do with their political life? Who cares what race he dates, isn’t this 2006?

Ford Jr, clearly angered by the ad appeared at Bob Corker’s press conference to confront him. Although I try and just report the story, I have to admit I wanted to call Ford and give him a “high five” for having the guts to do this!

“Meet the Press” has offered to host a debate featuring the two candidates, but Ford is the only one that accepted the invitation so far. Ford also has not engaged in the personal attacks that are coming from Corker and the RNC. The RNC has pulled the ad due to the controversy, but the damage has already been done. It is interesting to release an ad that you know was over the line and then pull it so more people will go online to see why. It is political strategy. I believe they released the ad with the intent to pull it. Politicians perform focus groups to gauge responses to ads before they are released.

Ford Jr has a history of being a middle of the road democrat, which causes much concern for Corker. He has voted conservatively on some issues. Is it fair for the RNC to attack him personally? He was even considered as a good vice-presidential candidate, but he turned 35 after the required deadline in the last presidential election. This is a race to watch because it is a true gauge of the fight at hand to take majority control in Congress.

Shhh! I have a stock tip…

Forget buying stock in IBM, Xerox, Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo. Don’t put your money into real estate and property. Don’t invest in currency and foreign markets. There is a gold mine that is bound to make people rich! It is the best kept secret. What goes well with a Gucci bag? What is more fashionable than Stiletto Hills, more popular than Rolex watches and soon to rise quicker in the market place than “Pet Rocks,” “Cabbage Patch kids,” “Tickle me Elmo,” and IPODS? Call all your friends, get your store fronts ready and start making your connections and partnerships in Africa! Forget the “Dot-com” boom of the early 90s. Invest in African Babies. Nothing will compare to the marketability of African Babies in the new Millennium!

There is a new trend among the rich and famous. It does not involve purchasing the latest Bentley or the latest mixed breed puppy. More and more Hollywood socialites are adopting children from Africa. I just have one question though…Why are they choosing children from Africa? Adoption is honorable and commendable and many more people should look into adoption, but what about the American children that are overlooked? Why are African babies such a “hot” commodity? What makes “rescuing” a child from the clutches of a Third World country more appealing than saving a child from the streets and systems of America? What is the motivation?

In the United States of America, there are approximately half a million children in foster care. Nearly 41% of the children in foster care, are at least the age of 11 and older. 20,000 children in America “age out” of foster care, meaning they turn 18 years old in the system. Not only do they “age out” of foster care, but they have been in the child welfare system on average for 7 years with 3 to 4 placements by this time. In addition, 40,000 children who are eligible for adoption remain unadopted every year in this country. (The above statistics were gathered from the Research & Training Center on Family Support and Children’s Mental Health at Portland State University)

According to the most recent statistics from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (Adoption and Foster Care Reporting and Analysis System), over 500,000 children were in foster care in 2005. Of those children, approximately 60,000 were 1 year old or younger. 311,000 children entered the foster care system in 2005 and only 287,000 children exited the system. What do these statistics show? There is a tremendous need for adoptions of American children, and on average there are over 60,000 to choose from if you want to adopt a baby. Most of the sources I researched also stated that the average adoption costs between $2,500 and $30,000+ to complete.

So, why are celebrities adopting African babies? I am not denouncing the importance of adoption from all countries, however, I am curious about the motivation. Is there a sincere desire to adopt children from Africa, or does it give celebrities a “world stage” to appear less superficial than they are? Is it simply a trend? Who is going to look out for the millions of American children that “fall through the cracks?” Some people choose foreign adoptions because the cost is lower. This is not a problem for rich celebrities. Maybe they want a baby of a particular race? If this is the case, nearly 35% of children in the system are African American in the United States.

What is the motivation of celebrities? Why are they choosing to adopt children from Africa, despite the startling statistics in America? If this trend continues to take effect, I wonder how the thousands of multiracial, forgotten, deserving children in America are going to begin to feel…when they realize they are slowly becoming victims of trends and possibly celebrity vanity. What is the motivation? It is kinda like having concerts all over the world to raise awareness about poverty in Africa, when all the celebrities involved in the concert could ban together and purchase the continent. What is the motivation? Why are Africa babies being treated like the latest trend? You better hurry and purchase a tribe while supplies last!

Rush Limbaugh: Cast the first stone…

I remember when kids would play basketball at the local courts, someone would always bring their own ball. The kid with the ball thought they had special powers. They would try and bully the other children into picking them on their team, even if they stunk at the game of basketball. The kid with the ball was often very arrogant. They always forgot one important principle…just because you bring the ball to the court, does not mean you will win the game. The Republicans have the majority in Congress, they have the ball. Unfortunately though, just like the kid on the court, they feel like they deserve special entitlements even-though they are losing the game. Just like the kid with the ball, they throw tantrums and fits when they are losing. They are losing on public policy issues, they are losing in Iraq, they are losing on border control, and soon they will be losing elections.

One of the Republican responses to all of this losing is a loud mouth, eccentric talk show host named Rush Limbaugh. The whole time President Clinton was in the White House, Limbaugh complained about everything he did just for the sake of argument. Now that President Bush is in office, Limbaugh defends everything he does even if it is wrong, because he is more committed to the Republican Party than he is integrity. Both parties have turned up the heat in the upcoming elections because they know what is at stake, the control of congress. People, famous and wealthy, are all coming out to support their favorite candidates in hopes of swaying voters. Enter Michael J. Fox, an actor best known for his role in “Family Ties” and “Spin City.”

Fox appeared in an ad in support of stem cell research that encourages people to vote for the candidate that believes in it, Missouri Democratic Senate candidate Claire McCaskill. The ad has been playing during the World Series. Although Fox is a known conservative and Ronald Reagan is one of his heroes, due to his current bout with Parkinson’s Disease he is in favor of stem cell research even-though most conservatives are against it. Rush Limbaugh, on his nationally syndicated radio show that he has in spite of all of his drug abuse and legal troubles, criticized Fox for the commercial. If Limbaugh would have simply disagreed with his politics, it would not be an issue. Limbaugh, however, made implications that Fox exaggerated the effects of his disease for the commercial.

Limbaugh has clearly crossed the line. Here are some of his direct quotes from his radio show concerning the commercial:

“And it’s purely an act. This is the only time I have ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has.”

“This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn’t take his medication or he’s acting, one of the two.”

“Michael J. Fox is using his illness as a way to mislead voters into thinking that their vote for a single United States senator has a direct impact on stem cell research in Missouri. It doesn’t, and it won’t.”

“Michael J. Fox is allowing his illness to be exploited, and in the process is shilling for a Democrat.”

I believe that Mike Myers created a greedy, fat character in Limbaugh’s honor in Austin Powers! The ridiculous assumption that someone would fake or exaggerate an illness for political gain could only come from someone like Limbaugh. Michael J. Fox has a right to stand up for what he believes in and I commend him for putting his passions above partisanship. Limbaugh could actually learn a lot from Fox. It is a clear insult to Fox to suggest that he is over exaggerating his movements or purposely missed taking his medication for the purpose of this commercial.

Limbaugh obviously did take his pain killer of choice before he made this ignorant statement. Another ironic fact about Limbaugh’s statement is Fox’s medication causes the “exaggerated” movements that he experiences in the commercial according to media reports. Limbaugh is just an example of a kid with the ball throwing a tantrum because he is losing the game. The Republicans are fearful of what may happen in the upcoming elections and they are stooping to the lowest levels in response to that fear. Since when did bashing Americans with disabilities become a part of the conservative agenda? I thought they were too busy fighting against affirmative action, programs for the poor, immigration and social programs.

Limbaugh should remember an important Biblical principle…”He who is without sin, cast the first stone.” Limbaugh has problems with addictions and legal troubles, but the Democrats have never reached to the levels of character attacks that he engages in. It is funny that many Republicans from Foley to Limbaugh are quick to cast stones with all the cracks in their houses from all the stones that have been successfully thrown at them with reason!

“Blessed is the man who, having nothing to say, abstains from giving us worthy evidence of the fact.” -George Eliot

“Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.” -Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

“The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance — it is the illusion of knowledge.” -Daniel Boorstin

The Prenumptial Agreement: A statement of true love or an insult

I was watching a talk show today and a topic was raised that incited a huge debate. Passions were flaring up from all sides on the issue! Should you get a prenuptial agreement before you get married? For so many years, people have been under the mindset that a prenuptial agreement is just for the super rich, athletes, and actors. The overwhelming majority view point on prenuptial agreements is changing though. Why are more people leaning towards prenuptial agreements now before they get married? Chris Rock in one of his stand-up routines said that rich people don’t need prenuptial agreements because they can afford to give away half in the case of divorce, he said that “people need to get a prenuptial agreement when they make like $30,000 a year!” His assertion was someone taking half of $30,000 is a lot worse than someone taking half of a wealthy person’s money. Is he right?

Why is the issue of a prenuptial agreement such a “hot button” for many Americans? Let’s look at both sides of the issue. Over 53% of all marriages in America end in divorce according to recent statistics and 60% of second marriages end in divorce. 41% of spouses in marriages admit to physical or emotional infidelity in America. Only 31% of marriages last after an affair has been admitted or discovered. The average divorce proceeding takes a year to complete. The average estimated cost of a divorce proceeding is $15,000.00 in America according to some estimates and $27,000.00 according to others. Simply put, the statistics show that half of all marriages end in divorce and it costs a lot to end it!

What does a prenuptial agreement provide in cases of divorce? It reduces the costs and time involved in a typical divorce. A prenuptial agreement basically determines how assets and property will be separated. What is the benefit? Any kind of property, such as a home, automobile, stocks, checking accounts, business ownerships, and personal belongings can be included in the agreement. In addition, debts can also be categorized as separate property so that one spouse will not be liable for the debts of the other should the marriage dissolve. Although people perceive that prenuptial agreements are a divorce sentence, courts will not uphold the agreement if:

1. It is likely to promote divorce

2. Was written and signed with the intention of divorcing

3. One party was forced into signing it

4. The agreement was created unfairly

A prenuptial agreement also requires full disclosure of all assets and debts. What is the benefit? In this instance, both spouses will know ALL of the assets and debts of the person they are marrying, which is sometimes not the case in marriages with out them.

On the other side of the issue, 47% of marriages work out. The main argument of advocates against prenuptial agreements is they believe it denounces the permanence of marriage. Many people believe marriage is forever, hence, they do not need a prenuptial agreement. Most of the religious right and individuals in the conservative christian movement are against it because of the Biblical mandate, “What God has joined together, let no man put asunder.” Basically, they believe that it goes against the original intention of marriage. Many people also believe that it goes against “real love.” Idealistic individuals will tend to lean towards this logic and line of thinking. Why would someone in love suggest signing a contract to enter into marriage? Americans typically have a very idealistic view of love that often overshadows the reality that relationships can be fragile if both parties aren’t on the same page.

Is a prenuptial agreement a statement of true love or an insult? Most Americans lean towards it being an insult because only 5-10% of couples typically sign one. If someone is truly in love, why should they care about being blocked from your assets in the instance of a divorce? Can a prenuptial agreement expose false motivation? Does a prenuptial agreement set an expectation for divorce? Is a prenuptial agreement smart based on the statistics? If you went through a divorce, would it change your viewpoint on the subject? The irony in the arguments against prenuptial agreements is the belief that couples do not need a contract as the basis of their relationship. Although a marriage is ideally an expression of love, according to the law it is a legally binding contract that merges assets, property and debts. Is a prenuptial agreement a statement of love without motivation or an insult to “real love?”

 

Can you buy a vote? Only in America…

 

When I was younger, I had aspirations of running for public office. While in high school, my brother Ethan got us involved in some city campaigns and we learned alot working on the “front lines” of the electoral process. During this time, I also dabbled in high school politics as a class president and continued in college as a vice-president for diversity in the student government association my senior year. At the age of 24, I tried my hands at a city council seat in a suburb of Houston. During that election, I was exposed to the “dirty” side of politics on a whole new level. I learned something firsthand during that election that would change my perception and thought process forever. The person that really controls the office is not the politician, it is the person that is influencing them.

I lost the election because I was unwilling to form alliances and receive money from people that would later want something in return. They wanted to buy me, I mean groom me, for the next election and I refused. If they can buy you into office, they can control your tenure in office. This is the problem with the American electoral process. Politicians in their desperation to get elected form alliances that pollute the true democratic process. Politicians are bought into office and then bought to make decisions in office. Who gets hurt in the process? Democracy. The recent scandal with Jack Abromoff is going to become synonymous with this flaw in our “democratic” process. Is it really a democracy if the electoral process can be influenced financially by America’s wealthiest residents?

The electoral process has been compromised for years, but it is rarely exposed on the level that Abromoff provides. How did one man buy Washington? Abromoff is a part of the fraternity that really controls American politics, lobbyists. What does a lobbyist do? In a nutshell, they try and see how much money it takes to get a politician to vote in their favor. Where do they get their money? Their money comes from the cornerstone of the American economy, corporations. How do they hide the money? They funnel the money through organizations called political action committees (PACS) and campaign funds. This process makes the “bribe” less noticeable. Is it legal? Yes and no…it is legal if they cannot make the connection between the lobbyists, the PACS, and the politician. It is illegal if they can, ask Tom Delay, the former house majority leader. Where is Abromoff in the middle of all of this?

Abromoff is the center-point of a federal investigation that seeks to expose the corruption of the “democratic” process by way of lobbyists. An investigation that they only started when the media exposed the corruption, the Bush administration was connected to the corruption and the federal government was embarrassed by the corruption. Abramoff admits to bribing public officials, including the hiring of congressional staffers and conspiring with them to lobby their former employers which include members of Congress. This is in direct violation of a one-year federal ban on such lobbying. Abromoff’s money tree was the Indian gambling casino interests, but he “got over” on them too.

The plot thickens, in January of this year, Abramoff plead guilty to three felony counts, conspiracy, fraud, and tax evasion, involving charges stemming principally from his lobbying activities in Washington on behalf of Native American tribes. He also allegedly, along with his partner Michael Scanlon (a former Tom DeLay aide) conspired to bilk Indian casino gambling interests out of an estimated $85 million in fees. What does this mean? The lobbyist was trying to win on both ends, from the Casinos and in Washington. Why is this important? A lot of the “dirty money” in the middle is connected to many Washington politicians, including Delay who conveniently stepped down before everything “hit the fan.” This story is an ongoing one because politicians are falling like leaves in the fall in Washington because of their connections to Abromoff. The funny thing is, politicians will put aside partisanship for the real president of this country…money. Abromoff is connected to Republicans and Democrats alike. The charges keep coming, Abramoff lobbyists Neil Volz (Congressman Ney’s former chief of staff) and Tony Rudy (DeLay’s former aide) plead guilty to conspiracy charges recently.

Many of the connections to Congressmen and the White House are becoming obvious, such as the connections to DeLay. Other connections are slowly being exposed. How does one man buy Washington? It is actually pretty simple, they find the backing of a major corporation and utilize the “deep pockets” to influence the electoral process to congress and in congress. There are more disturbing connections to this blatant violation of the democratic process. Tom Delay and Jack Abromoff, believe it or not, are figure heads for the evangelical movement at the center of the Republican rhetoric that they are the political party for people of faith. This, of course, will require another blog entry to explain. What is the religious right doing in the center of a lobbying scandal? How are they all interconnected? Do we really live in a democracy if our politicians and votes can be bought? I personally think that it pollutes and threatens the very process our country is built upon. It changes a democracy into a store of corruption where lobbyists can choose which offices they want to purchase. Why can one man buy Congress?

Married to your business…

I was talking to an old musician one time and he was relaying stories to me about some great musicians he had an opportunity to play with in his lifetime. He was a good musician, but felt he had missed his full potential. He told me that as a piano player, if I wanted to be great in my craft, I had to make a choice. I looked at him and wondered, “What is he talking about?” For the next few minutes he explained his logic. You see, he was well on his way to a music career and then it happened…he met a woman and ended up getting married. I looked at him at this point in the story like,” What’s wrong with that?” He then went on to explain to me that his priorities had to change at this point away from his passion of music to his passion for his wife. He then told me a line that should be in movies that I never forgot, “No great musician has been able to have both, a wife and success in their craft…one will be sacrificed at times if you try and entertain both.” He went on to say,”If you want to be a great musician, leave them women alone because they do not like to compete with anything, not even your passions.”

I was 19 years old at the time and sitting there thinking, “Could he be right?” Is it impossible for someone to maintain a strong relationship and entertain building a strong career? Is there some validity to what he said? Now at 30, I see what the guy was telling me, but I am able to put it into perspective. As an entrepreneur, a large part of your life has to be devoted to building your business. It becomes a type of “marriage” of sorts. You have to be fully committed to it, you can’t spend too much time away from it, and you can’t “cheat” on it with other endeavors or the “relationship” will suffer. For your business, or any passion in life that you want to cultivate, to be successful you must place high priority on it. Entrepreneurs typically are lonely people in the beginning stages of their business because of the time commitment required.

While other people are going out, you are at home working. While other people are trying to build relationships with the opposite sex, you are trying to build partnerships with a competing business. While others are “enjoying” life, you are supposedly living a “boring” life devoted to a business. Can you entertain a relationship and a business, career, or passion at the same time? It depends on the persons involved. The only way it can be successful, in my opinion, is if your mate is just as devoted to supporting your passions as they are supporting you. What does this mean? They have to understand the time commitment involved, in the initial stages, with your business. They have to understand that you are laying a foundation for you future, so you can live in the house of success later. They have to understand you.

Can you entertain a wife/husband or relationship and your passion at the same time? It depends on the person. I do not criticise people that say they are “married to their career” and I do not criticise people that say you need “the support of a mate” to accomplish your goals in life. It is a matter of choice. Balance in your life is not based on what people think it should be, it is based on what you want it to be. If you are comfortable with what you focus your attentions on and you know the end results, press towards your goals. Entrepreneurs are often lonely people, even when they make the choice to bring a relationship into the equation though. Simply put, the guy was right in one respect, few people will understand and have an appreciation for your passion as you do! No one said being “married” to your business or passion is a bad thing, you will probably go from “poorer” to “richer” a lot faster than you would being married to the opposite sex! Haven’t you ever wondered why in a wedding ceremony they say for “richer” first and then hit you with the bombshell for “poorer” next, but yet put in “sickness” first and in “health” second.

“A man’s worth is no greater than the worth of his ambitions.” -Marcus Aurelius Antoninus

“The only place success comes before work is in the dictionary.” -Vidal Sassoon

 

No greater love…

“One word frees us of all the weight and pain of life: The word is love.” -Sophocles

“There is no greater love than this, that man lay down his life for his friend.” -A Biblical Proverb

The highest level of love is the ability to sacrifice one’s life for somebody else. There have been songs about it, poems about and sermons about it on Sunday mornings. Politicians have used the concept to mobilize the human spirit, civil rights leaders have used the concept to fight through adversity, and people often use the concept to expose false love and intentions in others. Love has an ability to break down barriers, open doors, and connect people. It has a way of healing the hurting and restoring the broken. Love is the center of every great accomplishment and change in life and love must begin within.

Over the course of this past year, I was pushed beyond what I imagined I could handle. My spirit was quenched, my hope was faint, and my faith was challenged. In the middle of my struggles, I even found myself isolated and alone. Only you can identify with your true inner pain and only you can take responsibility for your recovery. There were times where I was surrounded by people, yet alone for these reasons. If you have ever faced adversity in life, you understand this type of despair. My despair was routed in a divorce that I went through. Your despair may be based on the loss of a career, a ended relationship or it may be routed in depression. Whatever your despair is, it has to be addressed for you to move forward.

When you are at the edge and you feel that you just may fall off of it, you must grab onto your life line. When the people seem distant and the situation seems hopeless, when your life seems like an abyss of stress and tragedy. How do you recover? You have got to be your own best friend. You have to look within, evaluate your pain, process your past, and plan your recovery! You have to lay down your life for a friend…you. What am I saying? To move forward to recovery, it requires action. You must make the choice to lay down your life of despair and sacrifice your pain so you can entertain new life in happiness. When I used to hear about the parable of the “greatest love,” I only related it to outer encounters. The true essence of this level of love is derived from your ability to love yourself first though.

The extent to which you love yourself directly correlates to your ability to love someone else at the highest levels. When I made a decision to lay down my pain, my past, and my despair for myself, I was able to begin the process of moving forward. You have to give up the current life of despair, so you can experience new life. There is no greater love that a person can have, than a love that begins within and resounds outwardly to others. When you begin to love yourself again, you begin to open yourself to loving and being loved by others again. When you lay down your former life, joy awaits, peace is abundant, and a new birth of you occurs. Lay down your life “for a friend,”for yourself so you can see all that life has for you. God’s gift of love is placed within us to heal, given through us to help and showed to us to save. We have, by Divine design, a love within us to help us recover! No love is greater…

 

“Learning to love yourself is the greatest love of all.”
-Michael Masser and Linda Creed

Everybody needs Damascus…

In life there is a thin line between practical thinking and faith. Often times in the middle of the two, we find ourselves obligated to something that leads to nothing and ignoring the very thing that will open the window to everything. We find ourselves in the middle. The middle is the place where your job pays the bills, but you hate it. In the middle is where you are in a relationship with someone that is a good person, but you do not love them. In the middle is where you go to church, but don’t live a Christian lifestyle. In the middle is where everything you will to do, you don’t. It is a place of mediocrity, a place where others are bound to get hurt, and a place where your purpose is stagnant. How do you get out of the middle? You are living life, but missing its fullness in the middle.

There is a Biblical passage where Saul is traveling on the road to Damascus and encounters the Lord. He realizes all of his current work, even-though he is passionate about it, and his efforts are misguided. Was his passion wrong? His passion was a trait that he would need once he came out of the middle. His efforts were simply directed in the wrong place. He was literally knocked down so that he could see the error of his ways and be forced to make a decision. Why is this important? Sometimes when you are in the middle in life, you have to be knocked down through conflict by the Creator so that your efforts and passion are directed towards purpose. He has to get your attention! Just because you are doing your current work with passion, does not mean that it is where you are suppose to put your efforts.

Saul was in the middle. He was gifted and talented at his work, but working for the wrong things. You can be passionate about your career, but working for the wrong company. You can be passionate about being in a relationship, but you can be with the wrong person. Passion alone will not take you to purpose. It can be misguided. Everyone needs Damascus. Everyone needs an experience in their life where they realize what it is they are suppose to be doing and begin to redirect their passion towards that goal. Everything in your life is important to the journey. What you deposit in to your life will either create greatness or hinder purpose. Your career, your relationships, your spiritual development, your friends and your family must all be evaluated on this basis.

Who and what will continue on the journey with you after you leave Damascus? I view it as the place of enlightenment, and personal revelation that redirects your life towards the pathway you were designed for. There are four things to remember at this point in your life:

1. You have to make a decision to change the way you think

2. It often involves conflict

3. Sometimes it involves going against everything you were taught to believe

4. Your purpose is on the other side

Saul’s name was changed to Paul because, theologically speaking, he was converted to Christianity. The name change is even more significant though. When you begin to do the things you were designed for, you will become a different person. When you begin to surround yourself with people that are good for you, you will see more positivity in your life. When you understand that conflicts in your life are designed to awaken purpose, you will embrace them and look forward to what is on the other side of the road. Do not denounce the importance of the road, because the road, eventhough it involves conflict, leads to purpose. Everyone needs Damascus! It forces you to leave the middle and make a decision on which direction to move forward.