 |
A Samsung 50-inch Plasma HDTV for $798, a Bissel Compact Upright Vacuum for $28, a Samsung 10.2 megapixel digital camera for $69 and DVDs such as "The Incredible Hulk" for $9. All this and more were reason enough for over 2,000 eager shoppers to line up outside Walmart for their 5 a.m. opening.
How eager? So eager that they trampled a man to death in their zeal to save money. I realize this is a tough economy for a lot of Americans. But its not like this was a run on bread or rice for kids waiting hungrily at home praying for a meal. 34-year-old Jdimytai Damour was trampled to death for bargains on a TV. A vacuum cleaner. A camera. He gave his life so shoppers could be sure to get their very own copy of "The Incredible Hulk" -- for $9. Such a deal.
Sadly, his tragic death wasn't the only casualty of yesterday's shopping frenzy. A 28-year-old woman, eight months pregnant, was among four other shoppers who were hospitalized after being knocked down in the stampede.
According to an AP report, Dozens of store employees trying to fight their way out to help Damour were also getting trampled by the crowd, Fleming said. Shoppers stepped over the man on the ground and streamed into the store. ...
Kimberly Cribbs, who witnessed the stampede, said shoppers were acting like "savages."
"When they were saying they had to leave, that an employee got killed, people were yelling 'I've been on line since yesterday morning,'" she said. "They kept shopping."
I didn't realize retailers have traditionally called the Friday after Thanksgiving "Black" because it's the day, fueled by Christmas shoppers eager for a bargain, when stores' balance sheets leave the red and cross over into profitability for the year.
This gives the title a whole new meaning. It was, indeed the ultimate in darkness for Mr. Damour.
I re-read a post I did before Thanksgiving 2006 and was surprised to see how relevant it still is (especially the part about having a new baby boy). So here it is again:
How do you go into the Thanksgiving holiday when you can't think of anything to feel thankful for? Although I'm thankful this year for a new baby boy and other blessings, there have been years when I could identify more challenges and setbacks than reasons for thanksgiving. How about you? What's this past year been like? Have you dealt with the death of someone you loved? Financial challenges? Relational disappointments? Or maybe even just the blandness of a life without much to be happy about?
I noticed a great quote by our Plugged In team yesterday by H.U. Westermayer. He said, "The Pilgrims made seven times more graves than huts. No Americans have been more impoverished than these who, nevertheless, set aside a day of thanksgiving." In the face of loss of life, severe hardships and a still unknown future, the Pilgrims found within their recent harvest a reason to trust God and to return thanks.
Their attitude reminds me of the song The Martins released in the late 90s called "Count Your Blessing." For people who can't count many blessings in their life, the Martins suggest finding at least one blessing to count. The song goes, "Count your blessing. You'll find one if you try. Count on the Lord and watch that blessing multiply." Even in the worst circumstances, they remind us that we can still give thanks for a risen Savior and a perfect God.
What one blessing can you count on?
Mumbai, India is the most recent victim of terrorist attacks. We don't yet know much, but some reports are that nearly 100 have been killed and perhaps 1,000 injured in a series of over a dozen coordinated attacks on hotels, a hospital, a train station, a gas station, a Jewish center, and other locations.
I'm watching a streaming news feed, and I gather that it's one of the most significant such attacks in recent memory.
Let's pray that the terrorists meet swift justice, and that the families of the murdered and injured find some comfort in the love of God and friends.
Today is the last day of my 16-day carb-free diet. Praise the Lord. I stayed strong and feel like I broke some sort of sugar addiction, which is good. I'm more alert and have increased energy. But if I see one more egg, almond, piece of turkey or beef jerky, I may descend into some Lord of the Flies craziness. I simply cannot eat steamed broccoli at breakfast ever again. I refuse to consider a piece of cheese "dessert." And while I will slowly add "good" carbs (lamest term ever) back into my diet, I now have to go into Thanksgiving and the rest of the holiday season with a more sensible attitude toward carbs in general. I don't really want a sensible attitude toward carbs. I didn't put it on my Christmas list. I haven't prayed for it. It's not my spiritual gift. But it's necessary.
So is giving thanks. Because while I'm at the end of my hard-core, spit-out-that-crouton diet experiment, it's really just the beginning. I can't hit midnight tonight and celebrate by downing a box of Ho Hos. I can't eat half the bowl of mashed potatoes tomorrow (accountability needed here -- help!). Likewise, Thanksgiving is merely the focal point of what should be a year of living in an attitude of thankfulness. Write a list of what you're thankful for this year, and share it with others. Do it. Why'd we stop doing stuff like this in grade school? If anything, as I get older and experience more of life's ups and downs, I realize how important it is to pause and thank God for everything in my life, and quite frankly, some things that aren't in my life. God is good. I'll say it again: God is good.
Finally, sometimes you have to get excited about the little things. My friend sent me a photo of her toddler sitting next to this year's frozen turkey. Both of them are exactly 21 pounds. That made me smile. My mom called to tell me to tune into the Thanksgiving special of "that guy who's dead but his people still dance around and sing on TV" (Lawrence Welk). Priceless. And to spread some random Thanksgiving cheer, I solicited on Facebook those who'd appreciate a special "hello" via this post. Here's to the following fans of the show:
Tina -- because it's time the Tinas of the world got recognized. And her bf supposedly looks like Joaquin Phoenix.
Rachel and Elizabeth -- hang in there with the grad work, smart girls. You can do it!
Beau -- I think he just wants to be in the spotlight, which is totally fine with me.
Kirsten -- she's from North Dakota. And her maiden name is Anderson. 'Nuff said.
Amie and Tammie -- because you're not ashamed to exploit our friendship for your own self-promotion. Love ya!
Give Thanks -- 00:00
The team's in the studio to talk about Thanksgiving and what it means to give thanks even when times are tough. Ted says it's really still all about the food for him, so we scowl at him and judge his spiritual maturity. We're just helpful like that.
Peace on Earth -- 14:24
Mark Hall from Casting Crowns is back to talk about their first Christmas album, Peace On Earth. With it, CC reignites Christmas carols and makes them about worship, not just tradition. This week's music is from the album. What's your favorite carol, by the way?
Lincoln's Proclamation -- 28:45
President Abraham Lincoln made a Thanksgiving proclamation in the middle of the American Civil War. It set the precedent for the Thanksgiving Day we celebrate now, and implored citizens of the United States to remember God's hand as the source of all blessing. Dave Salkeld reads the proclamation and allows us to relive a little bit of history.
Is It Too Soon? -- 33:46
How long should you date prior to marriage? Is there an "acceptable" timeline, and what are the benchmarks to look for as you head toward a lifelong commitment? The guys share their perspective for a listener who is sensing that "the talk" is coming.
Happy Thanksgiving, everyone! Here at The Boundless Show, we are thankful for you. Yes, we are.
As you may remember, one of my friends, Eli Bremer, is an Olympic pentathlete. He finished a disappointing 23rd in Beijing, but a happy 3rd at the World Cup Finals in Portugal.
Well, the sad news is that the sport has been experiencing some hard times, and some cuts have become necessary. Seems the financial markets aren't the only things contracting. Yup, the number of events that make up the sport has diminished from five to four. ESPN explains: Shooting and running will now be combined in a fourth and final discipline. The starting order of the final event is determined by the points accumulated after the first three, so the leading competitors get a head start. The overall winner is the first to cross the finish line.
Now, athletes should be able to ride horses, shoot and run at the same venue. The idea is to make the event easier for fans to follow.
I watched Eli compete when he was in China; the events were broadcast deep into the night and into the morning over the Internet. To be honest, if he weren't involved, this wouldn't be a sport I'd follow. It takes some endurance from those watching to hang in there for up to 12 hours while athletes move from venue to venue, with lengthy breaks between each. Though the change introduces some logistical challenges, I think it's a good one for spectator and participant alike.
I suppose they can continue calling this a "pentathlon," as there are still five disciplines represented in the four events. I'm going to propose, though, that -- out of solidarity with those struggling in this difficult financial downturn with its budget cuts and layoffs -- the sport be renamed "the modern quadathlon."
This morning I was pondering what I should write about Thanksgiving. Of course, I consider myself extremely blessed. Compared to most of the world, I am rich. Not only that, but I have a safe place to live and can travel freely. My family members are healthy and thriving. I recently retained my job while some friends lost theirs. I had a thought then: God's grace allowed me to remain employed. But then I had another thought: Who's to say it was not God's grace that my friends lost their jobs?
That sounds very callous. But we're quick to assign God's grace to the good things in life while blaming that other guy for the bad things. Do we really grasp the statement found in James 2:5? "Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him?"
Rich in faith. Is that not the greater blessing in God's economy?
Some of our fellow Christians have it really hard this Thanksgiving. Not just those suffering in a poor economy in our country, but those suffering for their faith in other countries. According to Worldmag.com, Iraqi Christians are being stalked: Thousands of Iraqi Christians have found threats like this under their front doors or stoops, in stairwells or shoved through their courtyard gates: "Be informed that we will cut your heads and leave your dead bodies with no organs and no heads in your stores and houses. We know your houses and we know your family. We will kill you one after the other. Depart the Muslim areas."
As a result many are fleeing into the neighboring countries of Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt. Often they have spent all they have to get out. And in these countries they cannot get jobs. The problem is most evident in Syria, where approximately 350,000 Iraqi Christians out of over 1.2 million total Iraqi refugees currently live. The Syrian border is only 80 miles from Mosul, Iraq's third-largest city with at one time a sizeable Christian population. Christians in recent decades made up about 4 percent of Iraq's general population, but according to church leaders in Syria they make up over 30 percent of its Iraqi refugee population.
This Thanksgiving, those Christians — and others around the world — are poor and not blessed by our flimsy standards. The things many American Christians will be thanking God for will never be realities for these refugees. And yet, I know they will be thanking God.
Last year, I saw a video about Iraqi believers receiving the Bible in their own language for the first time. One woman equated receiving the Bibles to an Iraqi saying that went something like this: "I thought that when I saw my beloved, I would experience the greatest happiness possible. But now that he is here with me, that happiness is exceeded."
It's a beautiful picture of the rich in faith. For they actually receive the greater blessing. Let's remember that this year. Let's be thankful for the things we have and the things we don't have. Perhaps in the latter God's grace abounds even more.
I haven't researched the subject, but I'll bet infidelity has been on the rise ever since women flooded the workforce in the 1970's. It's a perfect setting for forming intimate relationships. Where else can you spend such long hours together with members of the opposite sex?
And I'm not just referring to sexual infidelity. Emotional infidelity -- as well as other inappropriate attachments among singles -- can wreak havoc too. CareerBuilder.com calls them "work spouses," which are close platonic relationships with co-workers of opposite sex.
Here are some signs from CareerBuilder.com you should consider when examining your own behavior at work: 1. You depend on a particular co-worker for office supplies, snacks and aspirin.
2. There are inside jokes that you and a specific co-worker share.
3. You can be bluntly honest with this person about his or her appearance, hygiene or hair (and vice versa). You're comfortable enough to point out that the other's hair is sticking up -- or that someone's fly is down.
4. When something eventful happens at work, this co-worker is the first person you seek out for a de-briefing.
5. At breakfast, lunch and coffee breaks, your closest co-worker knows what to order for you and how you like your coffee (and vice versa).
6. You and your co-worker can finish each other's sentences.
7. Someone in your office knows almost as much about your personal life as your best friend or real-life spouse does.
If you're married, you should ensure you're not singling out a member of the opposite sex with these types of intimacy. And if you're single, you should be careful you're not singling out a member of the opposite sex with whom you have no intention of pursuing.
As we head into the Christmas season, businesses and charities alike are suffering from a struggling economy. We hear a lot about "belt tightening" these days. We've experienced it personally here at Focus. Giving is down. Way down. I don't consider myself a miser, but according to Culture 11, the facts aren't in my favor:
Strike 1: Churchgoers today give much less to the church than they did during the the Great Depression. In fact, fewer than 5 percent of churchgoers actually tithe 10 percent of their income; the average, according to numbers from Empty Tomb, a Christian research group that puts out annual reports on church giving, is now 3.4 percent, or 21 percent less than what dust-bowler counterparts gave during the worst of the Great Depression. Figures show that churchgoer contributions have been cascading downward since the 1960s. Religious conservatives do give more. Problem is, they only give nominally more and other groups give next to nothing.
Strike 2: Twenty- and thirty-somethings are the least likely to give. Taking a cross-section of church contributions nationwide right now, you’d see they nosedive as you move down the age spectrum. We can only hope that’ll change as today’s youth get older and wealthier, but it isn’t unreasonable to wonder about the cultural implications of sixty-year-olds who are 10 percent more likely to give to the church than are still not-so-youthful churchgoers in their forties and fifties, who, in turn, are 30 percent more likely to give than are those in their thirties, who are then 30 percent more likely to give than are twentysomethings, fewer than a third of whom give anything at all.
Strike 3: Evangelical churches tend to hoard funds. For every dollar evangelical churches now spend, they give about two cents to missions, an amazing statistic when you consider that funding missions was once paramount to evangelicals.
The conclusion: Americans and even the churchgoers among them grow ever less generous, spending their disposable income on goods that reflect a self-detached apathy toward the less fortunate. This shift will soon have real and immediate consequences—in fact, it has already.
The paradigm needs to be changed. I'm convicted by the personal charge: "spending their disposable income on goods that reflect a self-detached apathy toward the less fortunate." Ouch. There are certainly ways I, and I'm guessing all of us, could cut back to give more. Also, why not look into how your church is using its funds? Perhaps there are ways you can encourage your congregation to be more outward focused. Yes, we're in a difficult economy, but giving shouldn't be the first thing to go. Those fine men and women who continued to give during the Great Depression are a good example to us all.
HT: Justin Taylor
I'm told that, "whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God" (1 Cor. 10: 31). So, as a musician who listens to music, I find myself pondering how I might do so for "the glory of God."
I suppose I could keep from listening to music that tempts me to sin, either because of the lyrics or because of what the music brings to mind. I could be aware of how much time I listen to music, and whether doing so isolates me from friendships or keeps me from my obligations. And I should question when it might be best for me to seek energy and happiness from the very personal Author of music, God, rather than from mere impersonal tones.
Bob Kauflin, pastor and Director of Worship Development for Sovereign Grace Ministries, explored this in a recent post on his blog, Worship Matters.
The foundation for his thoughts on the matter are that sin exists: outside us, and within us. It's therefore helpful to be aware of how music might stir these sinful desires in harmful ways. Indeed, as he says, "Listening to music without discernment and godly intent reveals a heart willing to flirt with the world."
He goes on to list six things to be aware of when listening to music. Ones obvious to me include the lyrical content of a song, the amount of time we listen to music, and the emotions produced within us when we listen to a song. He also lists "submission," "associations," and "conversion."
Submission is always a tough one, though I do realize that just as I am in authority over others, I am under the authority of others. Even in the area of music, perhaps. Hm.
What do you think? Is it even possible to listen to music "for God's glory"? If so, what might that look like for you?
My coworker wants me to get a dog. Badly. She thinks having a dog will revolutionize my life for the better. I am not convinced of this, as my encounters with her dog have involved her cleaning up his poop, pinning him down to put in his ears oily drops that apparently "help with the nasty yeast infections he gets," dressing him in quirky T-shirts, and regaling me with stories of middle-of-the-night vomit attacks, things eaten that could not be digested, stinky breath and all other forms of dog-ness.
But I am relatively compliant , so I have gone with her during lunch hours to hold dogs in the nearby pet store, me huddled in a small play area wearing a suit and heels while a pet store worker places a wriggling puppy on my lap and apologizes for whatever ills it currently has. He or she generally also says something like, "We're still working on getting him potty trained, so watch out!" I smile somewhat fakely and pet the creature, trying to avoid the goop in its eyes or newspaper shreds stuck to its backside.
My coworker left a stuffed dog on my doorstep a couple of weeks ago. This I can handle. I've had a hectic few weeks, so for the first time in about 25 years, I am sleeping with a toy. Concerning, I know. But in a weird way, it has helped. More than that, though, my rough patch has shown me what helps even more -- the love and concern of good friends. Because even though I've spurned every one of her attempts at making me a dog owner, my coworker has stuck with me. She and others have been a real encouragement during all the times that matter. Maybe a dog is in my future. Maybe. Until then, I'm grateful for my friends.
T-Rex + Intentionality -- 00:00
Theodore Rex Watters joins us in the studio this week, but at five days old, doesn't contribute much. Bummer. I'm sure that had he not been sleeping, he would've had much to say about intentionality, today's focus in the continuation of our Guy's Guide to Marrying Well series. What does it look like for a guy to be intentional in dating? How can he convey his intentionality to women in a direct but non-creepy way? We break it down for the gents and let the ladies listen in.
One Moment In Time, Part 2 -- 22:03
Candice and Steve finish up their conversation with Gary Thomas, where they tackle the elusive "finding God's will" debate. How can we avoid dwelling on the "don'ts" and instead proactively serve out of love? How do we avoid both passivity and burnout? More great wisdom from a guy who's been there.
Finishing the Race -- 39:38
In this week's The Hungry Years, John Thomas introduces us to his wife's grandparents, Jake and Myrtle, his own "marriage and family heroes." Married more than 60 years, Jake and Myrtle are a couple who finished the race well despite great odds. They provided a blueprint that John and his wife look to even today as they navigate their own marriage journey.
Get Over Him! -- 45:04
It's been three years, and he's still not into her. Still. Yet they move in the same circles and she has to force herself not to email or talk to him in hopes of making the acquaintance something more. How will she survive? Suzanne and I have shed our own tears in this department, so we help Ms. Hangin' On get some perspective on the situation. And then some guy busts into the studio and leads us on a rabbit trail. But he knows people who know people, so we had to listen. :)
Have a fantastic week, everyone. When you get a minute, thank your friends for being who they are. And for being who they aren't. But thank them most for loving you, no strings attached.
As a former Lyme Disease sufferer, today's article "Waste My Lyme" caught my attention. In it, author Jen Marie talks about her struggle with the disease and some of the spiritual insights she has gained through it. She points out that God can use trials, such as a chronic, incurable, painful health condition, to capture our attention and deepen our faith and trust in Him. That is if we don't waste it.
The dramatic onset of my Lyme symptoms happened during the first week of my senior year of college. That entire semester was a dark blur as I struggled to adapt to my health limitations. In my Brio article, "Unwanted Detour," I describe how God used the disease to change my heart: One day I sat in my car at the end of a hectic afternoon, and tears began rolling down my face. I realized I couldn't drive back to my apartment because my hands and feet were too stiff.
I tracked down my brother, who was a sophomore living in the dorms, and tearfully asked him if he could drive me home. That night as I lay in bed feeling so helpless, I prayed. Before that, I'd been ignoring God because I believed He might ask me to do the unthinkable — drop out of school.
As my roommate lay sleeping across the room, I poured my heart out to God. I cried as I told Him that I'd drop out of college if He asked me to. This was my Isaac. I knew God wanted me to give Him my future, my hopes and my dreams.
I hadn't trusted Him with any of those things before. All through my high school and college years, I'd pressed ahead doing good things but failing to consult my heavenly Father about my plans.
As I gave my future to Him, a great peace settled over me. I knew that whether I stayed in school or moved home, He'd provide for me.
I look back on that season as both the hardest time in my life and the sweetest time with my Savior. I depended on Him, because I absolutely had to. And He offered me precious relief through the love of friends, unexpected provision and most of all His faithfulness.
During that time, Stacy S. Padrick's article "5 Myths About Suffering," was a profound comfort to me. In it, Padrick points out that suffering allows us to identify more deeply with Christ and can be used for God's glory when we willingly accept and surrender it to Him.
Jen Marie adds that our sufferings, when given to the Lord, actually provide a strong witness: There is nothing more confusing to a world that seeks wholeheartedly after comfort and health and possessions as the keys to happiness than a suffering, joyful Christian. God did not place me in this position without providing divine opportunities to display the light of the Gospel to that watching world.
I have several friends who struggle with chronic, painful conditions. And I know some of my Boundless friends do as well. Take heart today. You are not alone. God sees your pain and cherishes you in your physical weakness. He is "able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us" (Eph. 3:20). And because He is that kind of God, no suffering is a waste.
OK, so this is just cool. Like, give-you-goosebumps cool.
Christianity Today has posted an image of biblical cross references: When Christoph Römhild, a Lutheran pastor in Hamburg, Germany, sent Carnegie Mellon Ph.D. student Chris Harrison a list of 63,779 cross-references between the Bible's 1,189 chapters, the two became enthralled with elegantly showing the interconnected nature of Scripture. Each bar along the horizontal axis represents a chapter, with the length determined by the number of verses. (Books alternate in color between white and light gray.) Colors represent the distance between references.
I'm surprised by how the graphic affects me. Seeing a visual representation of a deep truth is beautiful on many levels. How can you look at that and maintain that the Bible is contradictory?
The graph won an honorable mention in the 2008 International Science and Engineering Visualization Challenge, which was sponsored by the National Science Foundation and Science journal.
I can't let Ted and Steve get away with going all mushy on us without contributing my own deeply insightful poetry. My initial foray into the category achieved limited renown, but I won't let that stop me. I do it for the art, despite the philistines who don't appreciate it. There once was a man from Toledo
Who loved to go swim in his Speedo
He thought he'd be cool
Diving in the kids' pool
Now his head is exceedingly bleedo.
There once was a man from Las Vegas
Who managed a chain of bodegas
He ran out of beef tacos
With fresh red tomakos
Now no money to give his employas.
There once was a man from Havana
Who detested the taste of banana
Show up with the fruit
And he'd give you the boot
Then crush you with falling piana.
There once was a concert pianist
Who was known to be somewhat dishonest
At Carnegie Hall
He spun tale quite tall
Of throwing a piano the farthest.
There once was an old scuba diver
Who fancied himself a MacGyver
He defused a big bomb
With a stick of lip balm
He's now the shipwreck's sole survivor
There was once a ski downhill racer
Who was also a bit of skirt-chaser
"Don't I know you somewhere?"
He asked with great flair
Her slap mark is still on his facer.
There once was a fast-food employee
Who worked despite his ennui.
"Want fries with that?"
He asked a young brat
"Have it your way," he said with lethargy.
There once was a poetry writer
Who considered himself so much brighter
Than the philistine boor
Whose background was poor
Too bad he wasn't a fighter.
Just as I suspected a year ago, eHarmony founder Neil Clark Warren, a confessing Christian, has agreed to facilitate relationships the Bible explicitly condemns. As part of a settlement in a discrimination case filed against eHarmony, the company will launch a new dating service for the gay community called Compatible Partners.
Here's the story: The settlement is the result of a complaint New Jersey resident Eric McKinley filed against the online matchmaker in 2005. McKinley, 46, said he was shocked when he tried to sign up for the dating site but couldn't get past the first screen because there was no option for men seeking men.
"It's very frustrating and it's very humiliating to think that other people can do it and I can't," he said. "And the only reason I can't is because I'm a gay man. That's very hurtful."
Neither the company nor its founder, Neil Clark Warren, acknowledged any liability. Under the settlement, eHarmony will pay New Jersey state division $50,000 to cover administrative costs and will pay McKinley $5,000.
McKinley called the settlement "fabulous" and said he was happy with the outcome. He's considering signing up for the new site once it launches.
Pasadena, Calif.-based eHarmony said it plans to launch its new service, called Compatible Partners, on March 31.
It's not like eHarmony lost the case. They settled. They simply rolled over with little more than a whimper. And I believe there are only two reasons for this: 1) The case provided cover for the company to launch a more hedonistic service for more riches or 2) They feared losing and were looking after the bottom line, wanting to protect the empire Warren has built on hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of disappointed romantic hopefuls.
Like the Boy Scouts of America, eHarmony should have been willing to shut the whole thing down instead of helping precipitate sinful sex between men and men and women and women.
Around the time Ted posted his blog featuring his poetry, I was cleaning out files in our home office and came across some stuff I wrote in college.
Here's one piece that may explain why people even bother writing poetry:
Poetry, they say, is for losers
Especially those who've lost out
Who go grabbing metaphors like lifeboats
When their ship is going down
Poetry, they say, is for sick people
Especially the terminally unwell
Who go stabbing their pens like needles
Into veins with things to tell.
Poetry, they say, is for loners
Especially because it's done alone
But still we write and read it
To know we're not alone
Not to belabor the point, but I must chime in on Heather's excellent post on Mr. Darcy. I, too, am a lover of P & P (only the BBC version will do). It began when my college English professor played a portion of the film in our lit class. A friend and I watch it yearly, just after Thanksgiving.
The truth is, this story evokes something in a woman's heart that is worth considering. One of my favorite passages from Blue Like Jazz by Donald Miller makes this point: Here's a tip I've never used: I understand you can learn a great deal about girldom by reading "Pride and Prejudice," and I own a copy, but I have never read it. I tried. It was given to me by a girl with a little note inside that read: "What is in this book is the heart of a woman." I am sure the heart of a woman is pure and lovely, but the first chapter of said heart is hopelessly boring. Nobody dies at all. I keep the book on my shelf because girls come into my room, sit on my couch, and eye the books on the adjacent shelf. "You have a copy of Pride and Prejudice," they exclaim in a gentle sigh and smile. "Yes," I say. "Yes, I do."
While I don't advocate men using Pride and Prejudice as a means to impress women (although I find this anecdote amusing), there is a nugget of truth in Miller's observation. What is it about the story that "is the heart of a woman"? Heather gave two examples: a woman's desire to bring out the best in a guy, and her attraction to a faithful, devoted, strong man.
I have another to add. Women swoon over Mr. Darcy because he is strongly and exclusively drawn to Elisabeth. He sees who she is — a reader, a walker, a devoted sister — and he cannot help but love her for the things that make her unique among women (despite the fact that she is not an ideal match for him socially). That is a woman's dream. To be seen, accepted and desired for who she is.
Additionally, as some commentors noted, both characters change. They bring out the best in one another — and challenge each other on their shortcomings — which is one of the primary functions of marriage: "As iron sharpens iron" (Prov. 27:17). Of course, this type of refinement can happen outside of a romantic context, but romance and marriage can be a special glue that allows such influence to "set."
In this sense, the dream of changing someone is not an unbiblical fantasy (although it is God who does the changing). If you open your heart to someone, both of you will change. That's not even a question. If the changes you desire to see are those that drive both of you closer to the Savior, then such a dream is not wrong.
My take on the whole P & P issue is to keep your dreams about love and marriage as long as they flow from the heart of God. Philippians 4:8 may be a good test: "Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable — if anything is excellent or praiseworthy — think about such things." Personally, I think Mr. Darcy's character fits the bill.
Boundless author Randy Thomas grew up pretty much without a father. He remembers a few things about his biological dad, like the time his father dropped by to get in an argument with his mother's boyfriend, or the time he was chewed out by his father for becoming a Christian and leaving the gay lifestyle.
Through the years, he ached for the youthful joy of being chased around the room by his daddy. That day never came, and won't, as Randy has completely lost contact with his dad.
Upon reflection, though, Randy sees that Someone has been chasing after him. Through the times in the playground and the times in the gay bars. And that Someone has caught Randy up in His fatherly embrace.
Randy's is a rough story. A narrative that reveals a God who loves through the difficult times, who reveals His grace at just the right times, who is there to catch us whether we're running or falling.
Times are tough. All the leading economic indicators tell the story: Job growth, manufacturing, retail sales, industrial production, and consumer confidence are all down with some at all time lows. And many say these conditions hit young adults the hardest.
The Clarion-Ledger reports, "This economy not only affects people entering the job market for the first time, right out of college," said Bill Brister, assistant professor of finance at Millsaps College in Jackson, "it also affects people who have been in the market a few years.
"Typically, when companies are trying to cut back, the last ones hired get cut first.
"So, opportunities for young people to build careers, to move to better jobs, are limited.
"This hits the 20-somethings hard, the early 30-somethings, too."
Though the economy may affect young adults in greater numbers, they're probably the most able to absorb the loss. I know it's little consolation but you'd be amazed at how little you can live on when you're single and responsible for no one but yourself.
I graduated college during a recession when careers were very hard to launch (particularly for English majors). But I found employment in a restaurant, rented a house with four of my buddies, and ate lots of bologna sandwiches until things turned around.
So buck-up you unemployed 20-something. Things will likely turn around for you too. In the meantime, be grateful for wherever you land ... even if it's mixing Kirschwasser Swiss Cheese in a fondue restaurant.
Several weeks ago, we had a very lively discussion emerge on Motte's Whom Not to Marry blog about 19th-century novelist Jane Austen, her books and, specifically, the hero of her novel Pride and Prejudice, Mr. Darcy.
Some gals praised what Mr. Darcy's character represented -- chivalry, integrity, morality and all things gentlemanly. Others begged to differ -- "pompous prat" was a personal favorite of mine.
A few men seemed a little frustrated with the general female fascination with Mr. Darcy. They pointed out how Jane Austen is no expert on marriage (having never been married herself). They also expressed the concern that Mr. Darcy is an idealized fictional character and, therefore, no realistic model of a flesh-and-blood husband.
So, it's been bouncing around in my head lately. Why Mr. Darcy?
I'm a Jane Austen fan myself. I love P&P. But why? Are Austen's works just like chocolate truffles for my brain? Are we females hardened little vixens intent on being the mistress of a castle? After more than a decade of real life Christian marriage, should I be warning my single friends to burn their Austen libraries for their own sakes? Run, girls, run?
I don't think so. But here's what I do think. While not an expert on marriage (Austen herself seems to concede this by ending all her books at the altar), Austen is very adept at capturing the desires of the female heart. No, men, it's not the money or the looks or the pompous-prat-ness. In fact, my hypothesis is that it isn't who Mr. Darcy is that captures our imaginations so much as what Austen writes Mr. Darcy to do. Two things he does, to be specific.
First, it's the steadfastness of the character's love. Above almost all, guys, we want husbands who will love us without wavering, who will never leave us. God has commanded us to respect our husbands and submit to you as the head of our homes. Truthfully, that can be scary. Peter encourages us not to give way to fear and, gals, we need to look to our Lord as our ultimate source of security. But, men, when you communicate not just your love, but your unwavering love to your wives, you do more to lift her up and solidify your marriage than you will ever know.
Now, Austen makes her poor heroes go through some serious fictional trials to test their steadfastness (Mr. Darcy has to wait awhile, Col. Brandon had to wait even longer and poor Captain Wentworth had to wait nearly a decade). We don't want to test you like that. But we do want to know that when life's trials come, you'll still be there.
Second, and this is a little bit harder to describe, is the inspiration of good. Mr. Darcy changes through the course of the novel, and attributes his improvement to the verbal tongue-lashing by Elizabeth, the heroine. First off, I do not recommend the tongue-lashing approach. But I think Austen has nailed one of the desires of a female heart--to inspire her man to be a better man.
Guys, we know we are not better than you. This is not a girl = angel / boy = demon-who-must-be-fixed situation. We are all sinners saved by the grace of God. But I do think that the Lord has given females a desire to bring good to the world that is unique and separate from the way a man desires to bring good. One of the ways I've experienced that desire is by contributing to an environment, a home, a relationship where my husband can flourish. I want to, as Proverbs 31 points out, "bring him good, not harm, all the days of [my] life."
Too often, this desire can go wrong. I've learned that I am not my husband's mother. Before giving in to the temptation to lecture him on his failings, I remember the descriptions of a nagging wife in Proverbs and it stops me cold. But I've discovered there are ways, following the Word, that have led not only to my husband's growth, but to mine as well.
So, guys, there's no need to take Darcy down. It's not necessarily him that we want. But do take the clue that we treasure a steadfast love and the willingness to mature. And, gals, remember. There's some good stuff in Darcy but, ultimately, he's on the page. Enjoy your book. But after you put it down, take a good look around. Mr. Biblically Right might be closer than you thought.
A few days ago Matt from DC suggested that "Someone should create a Boundless Commenters group on Facebook."
Hm. Now that's a great idea.
If you'd like to be part of our new Boundless Line Commenters Facebook group, we'd love to have you. And maybe do something about the sad fact that I'm the only one thus far to upload any photos.
Oh, the wonder that is the Internets. Trying to track down an old friend? Give Yahoo! People Search a try. Don't know the name of America's 14th president? Check Wikipedia. The name of your favorite artist's first hit? Just a Google search away.
And while we're at it, do you want someone to explain why your girlfriend won't sleep with you -- despite the evidence that you're "clicking, compatible, and all signs are pointing to the fact that yes, this girl is really into you"? You can find that answer online, too.
Thanks to eHarmony.
Apparently, there are five main reasons why she "has yet to give you the green light," ranging from she's still undecided how she feels about you to the likelihood that she's seeing other people. Sandwiched in between is the notion that she doesn't believe in sex before marriage, but since that reason doesn't show up until fourth on the list, it must not be too likely.
(While you're at it, you might want to browse eHarmony's thoughtful list of "Pickup Lines that Actually Work." And no, I'm not providing a link.)
We received the e-mail on Saturday. Her boyfriend was pushing her for more sexual intimacy, but she didn't feel quite right about giving in: My boyfriend and I have been dating for a year. We both are ready to marry each other. He hasn’t proposed yet, but I think it is coming soon. We have discussed the topic generally and want to be married next spring.
There is just one thing we don’t agree on. He thinks it is okay to pursue physical intimacy up to but not including intercourse prior to marriage. I, however, think that playing that close to the line is not safe nor biblical. He says it borders on legalism to be okay doing some things such as holding hands and kissing but hindering yourself from others. His interpretation of ‘do not arouse or awake love until it so desires’ strickly means intercourse.
We’ve had many discussions over this and though I know what I think and feel is true, I am struggling convincing him and struggling to find biblical text to back up my beliefs. Can you please help me or am I in the wrong? What are the boundaries when you are almost engaged? I do want to show physical affection but as soon as I do, this huge stream of gray lines pops up and where do you stop? He is willing to respect my beliefs but wants me to back up my thoughts. I then get tongue tied as I try to explain and end up feeling like maybe I am being legalistic if I can’t find the specific scriptures to prove why I think and feel how I do.
Providentially, perhaps, today's Q&A on Boundless Webzine addresses a very similar issue. Here's an excerpt from the Q part of the Q&A: I recently met a Christian guy at my church and we've been out many times. We seem to agree on many issues except the issue of sexual intimacy before marriage. I believe that God wants us to enjoy sex with the person we are married to; however, he believes that God created sex to be enjoyed as a part of the dating relationship because we have such a basic need for it.
I have this vision of predatory men wanting to use and discard naive women for their own selfish purposes. Men who call themselves Christians, but unChristianly twist Scripture to satisfy their desires for sexual intimacy. Sickening.
Well, it's a good thing John Thomas provided the response in today's Boundless Answers column. He's much more gracious than I would have been.
I know this is awfully late in blog time, but I finally had a minute to post an update about our new baby. On November 13 at 2:48 PM, we welcomed Theodore Rex Watters into the world. It was my easiest delivery yet even though he was the largest baby I've had (7 lbs 5 oz and 20 inches).
We got the name from a book about Theodore Roosevelt, one of our favorite presidents. We found affirmation for the name when we read that "Theodore" means "gift from God." We see him as an unexpected gift since this pregnancy occurred after three doctors told us we wouldn't be able to have any more children.
It was challenging to finish this pregnancy in the midst of a struggling economy and uncertain times, but in meeting this little guy, I'm reminded of the great hope that comes with new life. Like each of our children, we know he will stretch our horizons and force us to engage more meaningfully with our future. We also found that this pregnancy gave us fresh perspective and motivation for writing our book Start Your Family: Inspiration for Having Babies that Moody is releasing in January.
Thanks to all the Boundless readers and podcast listeners who prayed for us during this pregnancy. I'm not sure yet what my Boundless involvement will look like in the days ahead, but I look forward to staying plugged in where I can.
Okay, gotta run, my free minute is up.
So Suzanne just got back from North Carolina. Tom just traveled to Germany. And I just took my first trip to the Northeast United States -- specifically, the tiniest state and a commonwealth. Here are some random thoughts from this Southerner's first "on the ground" experience in New England.
The foliage really is incredible. I've seen the majesty of the Rockies, the power of a thunderstorm rolling across the Kansas plain and colors dancing across the ocean at sunset. But those of you in New England really do have a treasure each fall. Some New Englanders seemed skeptical when I told them where I lived. "You don't sound like you're from Oklahoma," was an oft-repeated refrain. I wanted to ask them what an Oklahoman sounded like. Perhaps like Laurie? But I realized that I expected them to have an accent too. Only the Boston ferry guy came close to what I expected to hear. Me: "How much for the ferry?" Him: "A dollah sehventy." Me: "Why I thank you kindly, sir." He gave me a great accent. I wanted to return the favor. While walking around Harvard University campus, I saw one of the Harvard gates that had an inscription that struck me. Isaiah 26:2: "Open ye the gates that the righteous nation which keepeth the truth may enter in." May we keep the truth. At the Old North Church, I was surprised at the lack of pews. Instead, there were private boxes, each with names inscribed on brass plaques.
Me to Church Tourist Info Lady: How did the church determine which person got which box?
Church Lady: It depended upon the rent a family could afford.
Me: Rent? They had to rent their seats?
Church Lady: Yes.
Me (pointing): How much would this box go for?
Church Lady: About the equivalent to today's $25,000 a year.
Me: Did the poorer people sit up in the balcony?
Church lady: Oh no, those seats just rented for less money.
Me: So where did the poor go to church?
Church lady: Not here.
I'm glad we don't rent pews anymore. But it convicted me. I wonder if the poor feel any more welcome at my church than they did at the Old North Church. It was amusing, if slightly anachronistic, to sit and admire the architecture of Faneuil Hall while a few feet away street dancers gave a show to the professionals inhaling their sandwiches. Do those of you who live in historic cities ever just stop in awe at what surrounds you? I toured a few Gilded Age mansions in Newport, RI. One cost over $10 million dollars to build at the turn of the 19th century. The family lived in it for three years until the couple divorced and it became what my tour guide quipped, "One expensive closet." It was exquisite, but it was hard not to think about moth and rust. When standing on one of those Vanderbilt mansion lawns, looking out across meticulously manicured lawns to a breathtaking view of the ocean, sometimes a girl just needs to do a cartwheel. - Good clam chowder! Man, oh, man.
Overall, great trip. And, as usually happens when I travel, I found myself with much more of an appreciation and much less of a characterization of the place and the people.
This has been a crazy week. On Saturday alone, I attended a wedding (not mine), a birthday party and a bridal shower (again, not mine). Tuesday I took a friend to get her wisdom tooth out and then monitored her all day as she made exceedingly positive comments about the effects of nitrous oxide. Wednesday night was my girls discipleship group. I meet weekly with four fantastic high schoolers who get me caught up in their drama and make me grateful that I'm now "a few" years out of high school. But drama aside, these are smart girls who love Jesus, and I am so impressed with their teachability, enthusiasm and willingness to delve into things that are real. I'm already seeing changes in their attitudes and actions, and they encourage and challenge me as well. One of them brought four non-Christian coworkers to a church event last night. I can't wait to hear how it went!
Tonight, however, marks the highlight of my week. I'll be attending the Gaither Homecoming here in Colorado Springs, and am bringing 14 friends with me. As you know by now, I am a Gaither super-fan. From the time I was five and sang "Jesus, I Heard You Had a Big House" in church, I've had a special connection with Bill Gaither. So with that, I look forward to a night of unlimited praise. I will bring my Gaither flashlight, which is the Christian equivalent of a lighter, and adds an extra blessing to any Homecoming event. I will sing, clap, stand up and shout, and maybe do a fist-pump or two at the appropriate time. Stay tuned for a complete roundup of my experience.
Men and Matrimony -- 0:00
We've processed with the ladies on marriage, and Candice even wrote a book to help them navigate the path to a good, godly match. But what about the guys? Men want to get married, too, and they plan to, but perhaps have received some lame advice over the years on how to get there. Enter The Guy's Guide to Marrying Well. Available as an e-book only at Boundless, this "git er done" manual is the focus of today's roundtable. We lay out four principles for a man's dating and marrying well, and prep for delving into them more fully in the coming weeks.
One Moment in Time -- 13:53
Speaking of marriage, you've all heard of Gary Thomas, marriage dude extraordinaire and author of Sacred Marriage, among other books. Gary Thomas is serious about marriage, and sits down with Steve and Candice to talk about what he considers the critical decade for men as they think about tying the knot. And no, the critical decade isn't the 80s. Shame on the 80s for giving us Spandau Ballet, by the way.
Cafeteria Lady -- 27:11
Eryn Carman is back this week with a scary flashback to a school cafeteria boy-encounter. A mix of obsession and intent, a reflection on Eryn's hopeful but disastrous exchange reminds her to keep her eyes and heart on what's important.
Pencil Me In -- 32:03
Singleness often is synonymous with transition. There's always the next job, relationship or ministry opportunity around the corner. So how do you deal with the commitments you already have, and should you get involved in stuff if you may be on to something new in less time than it takes for a catfight to erupt on "The View"? Steve and I chat about taking on commitments, and sticking with them.
So it's a marriage-heavy week, folks (or "mawage," according to The Princess Bride). Heads up to the haters: don't diss us, because Candice just had a baby, and doesn't want to hear the whining. Don't mess with a sleep-deprived new mother, especially when it's regarding her pet topic. Word to the wise.
I now officially have only hours until the Gaithers. I'll have trouble focusing this afternoon. I'm having trouble focusing now, quite frankly. [insert excited squeal here]
Pew Research just released a report on the overwhelming support Obama received from the 18-29 year-old demographic in last week's election. Not that it affected the outcome much, since they represented only 18% of the electorate (1% more than 2004). But still, it does tell us something about the current political landscape in America.
I think this portion of Pew's study pretty much sums it up. Young voters are more diverse racially and ethnically than older voters and more secular in their religious orientation. These characteristics, as well as the climate in which they have come of age politically, incline them not only toward Democratic Party affiliation but also toward greater support of activist government, greater opposition to the war in Iraq, less social conservatism, and a greater willingness to describe themselves as liberal politically.
The combination of "more secular" and "the climate in which they have come of age politically" tells us a great deal about the disparate support Obama received among the young voters. It's no coincidence that the last time there was a 2 to 1 margin favoring one candidate over another was during another tumultuous time in our nation's history, the end of the Vietnam War in 1972.
But as I noted in another post-election blog, it's not enough to just be the right candidate during difficult times. You have to go after voters in the right way, with the right message. And Obama did just that with Gen Y by leveraging new media technologies such as YouTube and campaigning on a theme of moving past red state, blue state divisions.
Young people like the idea of a post-partisan nation. Never mind that Obama was voted the most liberal member in the United States Senate.
There's a lot in the Pew report to worry political conservatives, particularly with how young people are willing to identify themselves as liberals and want an activist government. But if there's one thing I'm sure of, it's that four to eight years of liberal policies and more government will just as surely change the political landscape as war fatigue and a bad economy.
We received the following e-mail from a man who had downloaded and read through our free Guy's Guide to Marrying Well: So according to this "guide" which quotes Mark 10 verses 11-12 anyone who has been divorced is not an "eligible" person to marry? What planet do you idiots live on? I have to marry someone who has never been married? Are you kidding me? I'm 43. I don't have "never been married" as a choice. Thanks for the worthless advice.
The Mark 10:11-12 reference is found on p. 51 of the guide, where we provide some guidelines for eligible spouses, among them this: "Is the person a believer who fears God (Proverbs 31:30) and who is biblically eligible for marriage (Mark 10:11-12)?"
My reply to this man, which draws from the Focus on the Family article "Should I Get a Divorce?": Is your concern with Jesus' words, or with our referencing Jesus' words? Or perhaps you're assuming an interpretation that we're not giving?
FWIW, we believe that Scripture allows for divorce in three instances:
1) When one's mate is guilty of sexual immorality and is unwilling to repent and live faithfully with the marriage partner.
2) When one spouse is not a Christian, and that spouse willfully and permanently deserts the Christian spouse.
3) When an individual's divorce occurred prior to salvation.
These, we believe, are biblically permissible reasons for divorce. If someone has been divorced for one of these reasons, then, we believe they are not sinning by marrying another person.
I pray you find this clarification helpful, and that you find a wonderful woman with whom to share your life.
God hates divorce. It tears people up, and misrepresents the relationship it reflects, that of Christ and His Church. But it is permissible (though not required) in certain instances.
If you're considering divorce, let me urge you to talk with your pastor or a Christian counselor whom you respect. Many who are biblically permitted to divorce, but who don't, end up with rich and satisfying and grace-filled marriages. If you're considering marrying someone who's been divorced, let me urge you to wrestle with that person's submission to the biblical principles identified above.
I appreciate the potential of poetry. I appreciate how the genre can distill feelings and thoughts into but a few words. As Paul Engle observed, "Poetry is boned with ideas, nerved and blooded with emotions, all held together by the delicate, tough skin of words."
Unsettling, these bones and nerves and blood and skin.
During my introspective college years, I scribbled down a few poems. Here's one of them.
* * *
reaching the white gardens
i stretch my legs over the sallow roadside bank
it's not so frigid and bleak today as it has been
the sky's not the gray and oppressive one of recent days
nor is it quite as dismal
now
here in the cemetery
kicking through drifts, my feet wet to the socks
i pass by iced tombstones and snow-crusted memorials
i'm not really looking for anything
but a feeling
here an oversnowed footbridge
here a burial mound hiding autumn's pine cones
here arthritic glass knuckles
cling from the crunchy skin of a leafless clicking lightning tree
rigid and chilly they grasp
lightly popping against each other
a clear drop hangs jiggling
and falls
tick
pocking the snow's surface
or sneaking down a worm tunnel it's made
before heading back, i haunch down in the snow
at the grave of someone's friend
and listen
to the ticking
 As Candice was preparing to release her Get Married book, I started talking to her publisher about the possibility of writing a similar book for men. We spent a lot of time debating the need and potential market for such a book. I remain convinced that the great majority of guys hope to marry well some day but often lack a good game plan to do so. Too many have missed out on the modeling and good advice they once would have gotten from dads, coaches, pastors, mentors and others.
My hope was to fill that gap with solid Biblical advice and I thought a book might be a good delivery system. The more I thought and prayed about it, the more I sensed that the best thing to do was skip writing a book and just give the message away.
I believe that A Guy's Guide to Marrying Well -- the digital booklet we ended with instead -- is a better product and will reach more people than the book I had in mind.
I have great respect for all the writers whose wisdom appears in this guide -- Dr. Al Mohler, Josh Harris, Scott Croft, Michael Lawrence, Gary Thomas, Dr. Scott Stanley and more -- and I wish this kind of resource had been available for someone to pass along to me back when I was stumbling along my path to marriage. Check it out at www.boundless.org/guys/ and let us know what you think.
A judge in England fears that young people will make bad jurors because of how they consume information saying, "They consult and refer to [the Internet]. They are not listening." He wonders if they'll become accustom to processing information in bits, unable "to endure hours and days of sitting [and] listening." He went on:
Our system of jury trials depends on 12 good men and women and true coming to court and listening to the case. Orality is the crucial ingredient of the adversarial system.
Witnesses speak and answer questions. Counsel speak and address the jury. Judges speak and give directions....
What process aimed at finding the truth between them, and enabling a jury to decide where the truth lies, will be in place in 25 years time? What will happen to our oral tradition? Should it, will it, be forced to change?
I've noticed this breakdown in communication in my own relationships. I've begun to skim conversations like I skim information on the Internet, not really listening as I should. It seems I'm hearing more and more people (my wife) ask, "Are you listening to me?"
If you're hearing that too, you might want to power down and engage in the real world a little more. The future of our judicial system just may depend on it.
During my recent travels in Germany I had the opportunity to spend a day at the Nazi concentration camp at Dachau. It's situated in a leafy suburb of Munich, today a bustling neighborhood of houses and shopping centers, with even a McDonald's and a Burger King near the entrance to the memorial site.
 But 75 years ago it opened as the first concentration camp in a Nazi regime barely three months old. (Hitler came to power in January 1933, and Dachau opened in March 1933.) It became the model for every other camp in a chain of hundreds that would stretch from Germany to Russia, with infamous names such as Buchenwald, Treblinka and Auschwitz as well as Dachau being seared into the world’s conscience.
It was initially described as a work camp, and the words on its entrance gate, Arbeit Macht Frei (Work Makes You Free), contribute to that lie. But Heinrich Himmler, perhaps in a moment of unguarded candor, described the camp as "the first concentration camp for political prisoners." Its first occupants were political enemies of the Nazi regime as well as social "undesirables" (including Gypsies and homosexuals) and common criminals. It soon became the main camp for Christian dissenters, and an entire barracks was used to house Roman Catholic priests and Protestant preachers.
 Its population soon swelled to include Jews and prisoners of war. By the time of its liberation by American troops in April 1945, a camp originally designed to hold 6,000 had swelled to hundreds of thousands of prisoners, not to mention the tens of thousands who had died of exhaustion, starvation or execution during the 12 years it was in operation. They lived in inhuman conditions, crammed like livestock into buildings designed to hold a small fraction of that number. (Actually, livestock probably had it better on the average German farm at the time.) So bad were the conditions, a typhus epidemic swept through the camp in the weeks before liberation, killing thousands.
Walking the grounds of the memorial site today, you can't stop asking yourself, How? Why? An entire nation apparently went mad. That, or they were indifferent to the evil happening next door. After the war many Germans said they had no idea what was happening, but a bit of popular doggerel at the time says otherwise: Lieber Herr Gott, mach mich stumm
Das ich nicht nach Dachau komm
(Dear God, make me dumb
That I may not to Dachau come.)
We also just marked the 70th anniversary of Kristallnacht, Night of the Broken Glass, the first overt persecution of the Jews in Germany and annexed Austria. In a ceremony earlier this week, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said: "Indifference is the first step towards endangering essential values. ... There was no storm of protest against the Nazi, but silence, shrugged shoulders and people looking away—from individual citizens to large parts of the church. ... It is a mistake to think it doesn't affect you when your neighbors are affected. This mistake just leads us further and further into evil."
Indeed, the opposite of love is not hate; it is indifference. The hater at least believes something, and perhaps he can be reasoned with. The indifferent merely shrugs his shoulders and says, "Whatever."
 My purpose here is not to accuse anyone of being a Nazi. Far from it. But I want to sound a warning of what can happen when ordinary men become indifferent to evil. There was one hopeful sign the day I was at Dachau. A group of young men and women in German military uniforms were touring the memorial site that day. I'd love to know what was going through their heads as they read the exhibits and listened to the videos. Was it mandatory that they be there, or were they there of their own free will? Either way, I think that's a good sign. And the mere fact of the memorial, its reverent upkeep and the fact that it charges no admission is also a good sign.
 By now you might be wondering about the title of this post. In idiomatic German it means Do Something.
Think about it.
 I had an interesting day flying back from Charlotte on Monday. All-said, my airport/flying time equaled 17 hours. I submit to you a schedule of my day:
11:30 a.m. (EST)—Arrive Charlotte Airport after having breakfast with my cousin. My flight won't leave until 3:30 p.m., so I rock in famous Charlotte rocking chairs.
3:30 p.m.—Take off for Dallas/Fort Worth. Have interesting conversation with Douglas from Seattle about Mars Hill Church.
5:30 p.m. (CST)—Arrive Dallas/Fort Worth. Since I have 3 hours and 15 minutes until my flight to Colorado Springs leaves, I decide to eat at Chili's.
5:50 p.m.—Chili's host seats some guy uncomfortably close to my table. Suitcase falls on uncomfortably-close guy, and I strike up a conversation. I discover guy is a 20-year-old professional slalom and long board skateboarder from Switzerland. Enjoy nice dinner conversation with now-not-so-uncomfortably-close guy.
6:30 p.m.—Say so long to new Swiss friend and head to my gate.
7:30 p.m.—Decide maybe I should check on new friend. Discover his flight to Denver is canceled. He's in line trying to rebook his flight.
8:00 p.m.—Swiss friend finds me and asks if he can fly to Colorado Springs since all flights to Denver are canceled. He asks if I know of a place he can stay.
8:05 p.m.—I call a guy from my improv troupe who is delighted to host International house guest.
8:30 p.m.—Swiss skateboarder introduces himself as Ramón and books flight to Colorado Springs—receiving a "priority access" boarding pass. We learn that all the runways have been shut down due to lightning storm.
8:40 p.m.—We are sent from gate C31 to gate C37.
8:45 p.m.—We are sent from gate C37 to gate C31 and learn our flight will now depart at 10:40. Our plane, which was coming from Phoenix, has to land and refuel in Lubbock.
8:50 p.m.—We find a kiosk with free Internet and begin to blog about our adventures. Ramón shows me amazing videos of him skateboarding in cities all over the world.
9:05 p.m.—Police officer wearing a helmet zooms (I use the term loosely) by on his Segway Personal Transporter (Ramón has to tell me what it is; it looks like an old-school lawnmower to me). Officer zooms back and forth through terminal repeatedly. Until we decide we want a picture—then we never see him again.
9:45 p.m.—Airport personnel begin distributing cots. We learn our flight will now depart at 11:10.
10:25 p.m.—Our flight will now depart at 11:25. Six guys wearing hard hats and reflective vests inform us that they have to disassemble the kiosk and move it 6 inches to the right (fire hazard). Ramón laughs and takes a video for his Swiss friends of our silly American ways.
11 p.m.—We learn our flight has arrived.
11:35 p.m.—We are hungry. I run to TGI Fridays and buy a sandwich and waters. When I return the flight is boarding. Because of his "priority access" ticket, Ramón gets on the plane a step ahead of me (I am not kidding about this).
12:15 a.m.—Our plane is sixth in line for take-off. I inhale my sandwich and take a little snooze.
12:30 a.m.—Take-off! Ramón shows me pictures on his iPhone of skateboarding, European cities and skateboarding in European cities.
1:30 a.m. (MST)—We touch down in Colorado Springs.
2 a.m.—I drive Ramón to my friend's house. Ramón offers me a Swiss chocolate bar as a gift for my help.
2:30 a.m.—I arrive home with fun memories of a long day, a better understanding of a fascinating sport and pictures of Europe dancing in my head. Not to mention Swiss chocolate and a new friend.
Any interesting travel stories out there?
In September, Donald Miller made a stop in Colorado Springs in support of Barack Obama's campaign for President. According to a Time magazine article last week, Miller's support for Obama may have contributed to moving enough Evangelicals his way to swing Colorado and other key battleground states. Some of Miller's message in Colorado Springs was transcribed on the Burnside Writer's Blog. One of his primary challenges was to win over Evangelicals who were skeptical about Obama's abortion policies. Here's a portion of his comments on that topic: Senator Obama is going to move us past the impasse in our cultural war, something I think of as a cultural Vietnam. On the issue of abortion, he is the only candidate who has a plan to reduce the number of abortions. John McCain's only plan is the same old trick: say that you are pro life and offer no plan at all other than to criminalize abortion. I simply think that plan hasn't worked, and we have to face that fact and look for other ways to make progress.
I realize this is controversial, that there are many who would rather vote for a pro-life candidate and keep the abortion rate the same, on principle. And like them I believe in the sanctity of life, I simply think we need to begin making progress, and Barack is offering progress. He is also standing up to his own party on the issue and moving the party forward to elevate the issue of the sanctity of life within the Democratic Party. I also see this as progress. I do wish we could end abortion completely, but the Republicans have not spelled out a realistic plan to do so, and until they do, I won't vote for a candidate who simply throws us a pro-life line and no plan. It seems insincere.
But let me add this: I do wish Obama were pro-life. His plan to reduce the rate of abortion is a great step for the party, but I also wish he would defend the unborn to a greater degree.
However, at this point, in this election, with these two candidates, I think progress will be made with Barack. Not enough progress, but some progress, especially within the Democratic party, who may soften their stand on the sanctity of life.
Now, consider the news today about immediate decisions Obama's team is considering: Among Bush administration actions likely to be quickly rescinded:
- The prohibition on federal funding for international family-planning agencies that provide abortions -- or counseling and information about abortion -- even in countries where the procedure is legal. This policy, known as the Mexico City initiative, was initially put in place by Ronald Reagan and reaffirmed by the current president's father. Bill Clinton removed it in 1993; President Bush restored it two days after taking office in 2001. ...
- The ban on federal funding for research on new lines of embryonic stem cells. In August 2001, Bush limited government funding to the embryonic stem cell lines then in existence and prohibited any funding for development of new embryonic stem cell lines. Proponents of such research -- including many Democrats and moderate Republicans -- have pointed to the potential for cures for such devastating illnesses as Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease, but many social and religious conservatives liken the use of such stem cells to abortion because it requires the destruction of an embryo.
I'm curious if Donald Miller categorizes this news as "some progress" or if he was truly disappointed to hear this.
I can't let a November 10 go by without a shout-out to my fellow Marines. Today is the 233rd birthday of the U.S. Marine Corps, which was founded this day in 1775 in Tun Tavern in Philadelphia. 
On that day they began recruiting for two battalions of Marines who would fight primarily from the mast tops of the ships, sniping into the decks of enemy ships that had pulled alongside for a broadside. But the Marines were also prepared to fight ashore, and their first battle on foreign soil was in Derna, Tripoli, where in 1805 a contingent of Marines marched 600 miles overland to free American sailors from the U.S.S. Philadelphia who were being held captive by Barbary Pirates. (That's the "Shores of Tripoli ..." line in The Marines' Hymn.) In 1847, during the Mexican-American War, they stormed Chapultepec Castle in Mexico City, taking heavy casualties in the process. (That's where the "Halls of Montezuma ..." line comes from.)
The Marine Corps has had a long and distinguished history since. In World War I the Germans referred to Marines as teufelhunden (devil dogs) because of the tenacity of their fighting. In World War II, they more than earned their reputation. The Japanese commander of Tarawa, a heavily fortified speck of coral and sand in the middle of the Pacific, boasted that it would take a million men a thousand years to take the island. The 2nd Marine Division (approximately 35,000 men) took the island in three days. And Admiral Chester A. Nimitz, watching the tough fighting on Iwo Jima, said admiringly of the Marines, "Uncommon valor was a common virtue." I highly recommend you read Flags of Our Fathers and With the Old Breed to get a feel for the type of war the Marines had to fight in the Pacific. (And don't bother with the movie version of the former, which doesn't begin to capture the true story and invents some incidents out of whole cloth.)
Marines are different, both in their training and in their outlook on life. Robert Kaplan captured that well in an article in The Atlantic Monthly about five days he spent with the 1st Battalion, 5th Marines in Fallujah, Iraq: The idea that Marines are trained to break down doors, to seize beachheads and other territory, was an abstraction until I was there to experience it. Running into fire rather than seeking cover from it goes counter to every human survival instinct—trust me. ... As the weeks had rolled on, and I had gotten to know the 1/5 Marines as the individuals they were, I had started deluding myself that they weren't much different from me. They had soft spots, they got sick, they complained. But in one flash, as we charged across [a road under heavy fire] amid whistling incoming shots, I realized that they were not like me; they were Marines. ...
What the Marines really had going for them was their warrior spirit and a matter-of-fact willingness to die, if circumstances demanded. It was never spoken of; it was simply there. Concomitantly, they had stores of compassion. The two occasions when I had seen the Marines of 1/5 most depressed in Fallujah were when the civilian was accidentally shot in the firefight next to the mosque, and when a six-year-old girl was killed by a mortar that missed the FOB [forward operating base] and hit a nearby house.
I joined the Marines fresh out of high school, a long-haired surfer dude not really sure what he wanted to do in life so long as it was gnarly. When I stepped off the bus at Parris Island, I quickly discovered that I hadn't the slightest idea of what gnarly truly meant. Indeed, there's no faster cure for long-haired surfer-dudeness than Marine boot camp. There was a still a war on, but I wasn't afraid of that. I even volunteered for the infantry. I wanted to be part of something larger than myself and engage in an honorable cause big enough to believe in. I’m a better person for those seven years I served, and it's hard to imagine what turns my life would have taken had I not. (I do know my hearing would probably be a lot better, though.)
A lot of Marines have gotten off the bus since that day long ago. There has always been some grumbling that new Marines don't have it as tough as we old Marines, but I'll quote Chesty Puller on this one: "New breed, old breed, it don't make a bit of difference so long as it's the Marine breed."
Happy Birthday to all Marines, young and old, and especially to those serving in a combat zone in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm proud to have worn the uniform alongside you and generations of Marines past and to come.
Semper Fi!
We've covered this before on Boundless. But for those of you who've been in a spider hole the last few years, here's Mark Driscoll's answer to the age-old question "How far is too far?" Which is akin to asking, "How much guilt-free, unmarried sex can I enjoy as long as it's not intercourse?" The repeated refrain of the Song of Songs is to not awaken love before its time. Therefore, the issue is not where is the line, but when is the time. The Bible knows nothing of sexual contact of any sort or kind before marriage, as sexual pleasure is reserved for the right person, at the right time, in the right way-which is all in the context of heterosexual covenantal marriage. The NIV translation of Ephesians 5:3 says, But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people.
In 1 Corinthians 7:1 Paul tells single men that they should not touch any woman in any sexual manner. Also, in 1 Timothy 5:1-2, men are encouraged to treat young women as sisters. Thus, since brothers and sisters can and do talk, serve together, enjoy one another’s company, etc., there are acceptable non-sexual ways for single Christians to build their relationship in pursuit of marriage. Lastly, in asking how far one can go, there is sin in the heart because the motive is to get as close to sin as possible rather than getting as close to Jesus as possible. The issue is not where is the line, but rather where is your heart and when is the time. That time is marriage.
Like I said, we've covered this before. But it's always good to put this issue in front of our dating or primed-for-dating readers, right?
It's fun to be passionate about stuff. I'm passionate about many things, including guacamole, the Gaithers, combating relationship lameness, loving and respecting the elderly, and seeing people live out a vibrant, saving relationship with Jesus.
I'm also jazzed about Focus' upcoming event called Wait No More. Scheduled for November 22 here in Colorado Springs, this event will do something unprecedented -- it will challenge the over 3,000 churches in Colorado to adopt the 700 waiting kids in Colorado, and then provide the opportunities to start the application process right on site at the event. That, my friends, is a call to action. That is getting down to "bitnit." That is recognizing a problem, and admitting that the Church has the resources, the opportunity, the heart, and most of all, the God -- to address it. I was in a meeting this morning for Wait No More, and walked away proud to be part of an organization that sees this need, and is not afraid to call believers out on it. And to top it off, we're partnering with the State of Colorado to get it done. Amen!
The Morning After -- 0:00
Another thing that inspires passion is our political process. We have heard your voices on the blog, and I personally have enjoyed following the discussion. This week, the Boundless team sat down the morning after the U.S. election and shared our thoughts, emotions, reflections and predictions on everything from amendments to Obama to our role in the political process, even if it involves a questionable run-in with touch-screen technology.
Back to the Future -- 16:51
Now that the election is behind us, Dr. Chris Leland, worldview expert and director of College Student Ministries at Focus, joins Steve Watters for a look forward. Was this election an obituary for conservatives, or is there a future for pro-family issues and legislation? How can young Christians be part of important change, and how can we all work with (or despite) the successes and failures of government to make our mark on this generation and beyond?
Home Fires and Apron Strings -- 34:46
We all hope for a good relationship with our parents, so how do we preserve that if a job, marriage or other life event is moving us away from them? Candice and I talk about the challenges of leaving home in this week's Inbox. Sometimes moving away isn't the best thing, but when it is, there really are ways to maintain (or repair and build) closeness and contact with our immediate family.
So speak up. Politics, justice, beauty, family...what are you passionate about?
So a couple of nights ago I found myself having eaten a, um, "few" handfuls of salted pistachios over the course of an hour's TV watching.
Going to bed, I noticed that my tongue felt burned. If you've sipped your hot chocolate or coffee too fast you know what I mean.
Now, a couple of days later, my tongue is still distractingly raw. My leftover microwaved spaghetti lunch wasn't as tasty as it would have been had I more unscorched taste buds.
Strange how something as innocuous as salt could cause such uncomfortable burns.
And then I thought about saline abortions. Man, that must hurt.
I've been thinking a lot about reflections recently. The way marriage reflects Christ's relationship with the church. The way families reflect the trinity. The way the Body of Christ reflects the unity of God.
In the fourth part of his series on race relations, Thabiti Anyabwile argues that racial reconciliation in the church reflects the "one new man" in Ephesians 2. In fact, the church is a primary place where racial unity can, and should, take place: The local church penultimately displays the unity and solidarity we have in Christ, the "race"-abolishing oneness we share with Him and with each other.
The local church is not a perfect display. Some people fear that talk of ethnic unity in the church borrows too much from the perfection that lies ahead in heaven.
It seems to me that our problem leans in the other direction. We need to live more fully in the already. We live beneath our inheritance in Christ. If Esau sold his inheritance for a bowl of porridge, we've sold an even greater inheritance for his leftovers. If the prodigal squandered his inheritance, we're the older brother refusing to rejoice and receive our once-dead sibling.
This message comes at a great time. With the election to office of the first African-American president, we're all wondering if race relations will get better or worse. As Christians, our responsibility, regardless of the social climate, is to make them better by receiving the inheritance of oneness Christ offers us. Unfortunately, embracing this inheritance doesn't come easily. Our love seeks the limits of convenience and familiarity, to be bounded by the ease that "race" offers, when Christ calls us to a largeness and breadth of love that is like His own, that assembles and gathers and loves and gives to every nation, tribe and language. And that's to be displayed in our churches.
Is there any biblical justification for the socially and ethnically stratified existence of the American church? Even if the fulfillment awaits the final things, shouldn't we incline ourselves to living and experiencing more and more of that reality while we wait?
Think of what a testimony the church would be if it embraced the future reality of all men and women being united under Christ. And, I suppose, that's precisely why it's so difficult. That is the kind of imagery Satan tries to erase in this world. The church should be leading the way in race relations. After all, we have the power of the Holy Spirit to help us succeed. For a primer on how to lead, read Anyabwile's series:
I agree with Jim Wallis, founder of Sojourners, that President Elect Barack Obama must be held accountable for his commitment to reduce the number of abortions performed in this country.
In an interview with Christianity Today, Wallis, who is an Obama supporter, said, Barack Obama will be held accountable on a serious commitment to abortion reduction. He called for that, his campaign platform said that, and he should be held accountable to that. He needs prayer and accountability, support and pushing, both at the same time.
In his interview with Cameron Strang of Relevant Magazine, Obama clearly stated his mildly pro-life convictions: I have repeatedly said that I think it's entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don’t think that "mental distress" qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.
Obama went on to express his support of abstinence education and adoption: I think we know that abortions rise when unwanted pregnancies rise. So, if we are continuing what has been a promising trend in the reduction of teen pregnancies, through education and abstinence education giving good information to teenagers. That is important -- emphasizing the sacredness of sexual behavior to our children. I think that's something that we can encourage. I think encouraging adoptions in a significant way. I think the proper role of government. So there are ways that we can make a difference, and those are going to be things I focus on when I am president.
I take some comfort in the President Elect's opposition to abortion and support of abstinence education and adoption. I join Jim Wallis and others in the great hope that Obama will follow through with his promises, and I will join Jim Wallis and others in holding him accountable should he break his promises to us pro-life Christians.
So how did President Elect Barack Hussein Obama win with a larger share of the popular vote than any other Democrat since Lyndon Johnson in 1964? There are many reasons really but several stand out to me.
First, Obama was the kind of candidate political parties dream of. He's intelligent, articulate, charismatic, and people identify with him. And if I'm honest, the fact that he's bi-racial only added to his appeal. These characteristics go a long way in a presidential election. But they're still not enough to win, even in a war fatigued nation in economic turmoil.
No, to win, your campaign needs to be better than the other guy's campaign. And this year, it wasn't even close.
Obama's campaign was brilliant in all facets, but particularly in messaging, marketing, and ground game. He ran just right of center on tax cuts, limited health care reform, killing Bin Laden and a tough stance on Pakistan. He even talked about reducing abortions despite his atrocious voting record on life issues.
And he was able to communicate these themes effectively by spending more money on advertising than any other presidential candidate in American history because he raised more money than any other president in American history.
And it wasn't just the frequency of his ads, the content and production quality were really good! Heck, there were a couple of times when I was almost tempted to believe him.
Then there's Senator McCain.
McCain wasn't simply the wrong candidate (and he was), he ran one of the worst presidential campaigns in the modern era. It was over the moment he suspended it (and the presidential debate) to return to Washington during the credit crisis. He said he was concerned about the lack of a "consensus" for the Administration's plan; he said we were "running out of time."
Right or wrong, this decision made him look anxious, not presidential. And the lasting impression by the public was that McCain ran for the cover of "consensus" because he couldn't come up with an alternative plan for an unpopular bailout.
I knew something of this type of erratic behavior when I worked in the U.S. Senate. McCain had the reputation of a maverick alright. But not in the way that's endearing, as someone who'll stand up to one's own party out of principle. No, he was more a maverick in the mold of someone who wants to stick it to his party out of anger and spite.
Many pundits believe this election marks the beginning of a new liberal era for our country. It's a belief that Christians appear to have bought into judging from their countenance. But I think it's as simple as this: Obama was a very good candidate who ran a very good campaign against a bad candidate who ran very poor campaign in a climate where the word "change" meant a lot.
Time will tell. Time will surely tell.
Finding a job can be nerve-racking. You prepare your resume, dress professionally and prep yourself to say all the right things. But something unconscious might be affecting your job interview more than you think: body language.
According to an article on MSN: Recent studies have shown that employers will form an opinion of you within the first 10 minutes of the interview.
But here's the kicker: It's not always based on what you actually say, but on something we term "body language." For instance, 85 percent of what you communicate is not with words. It's through the tone of your voice, the way you sit and a wealth of other messages that your body involuntarily sends. This is according to Greg Hartley, a body language expert who earned his chops with 20 years as an interrogator in the Army.
The article offers six tips, including "be real from the start," "mind your hands and arms," and "sit up straight." Consider these body language gems: Steepling your fingers makes you appear arrogant, crossing your ankles says you'd rather be somewhere else and touching your ears or nose makes it seem like you're holding something back.
In social settings, I have to fight crossing my arms. I've heard this makes a person seem closed-off or defensive. In my case, I have very long arms and I sometimes don't know what to do with them. What are your body language foibles?
My iPod has been on the fritz. Before my evening run, I sync the latest Boundless Show, strap on my armband and head out the door. But before I reach the sidewalk my iPod is frozen. Supposedly there's a way to unlock the iPod, but I've never been able to do it. Must be magic or witchcraft.
When a new Apple store opened in my neighborhood, it was just the motivation I needed to take my iPod in to the Genius Bar and have it checked out.
I made the mistake of dropping by on opening day. The end of the line was halfway across the shopping mall. Everyone in line looked very trendy and happy, but I was not fooled. There is nothing fun about standing in line for three hours to get a free T-shirt. I do not stand outside movie theaters for Harry Potter tickets nor will I stand outside Apple to have my iPod fixed.
When I went back the next week, there was no line. I walked into the store and felt a little out of sorts. It wasn't like the Apple store in my old neighborhood. The retail space was long and rectangular like a shotgun house, the walls were silver instead of white and the floor was metallic like the walls rather than warm hardwood. Now, I know I can't compare my old Apple store to the new one, but it felt cold and a little sterile. I bought a pair of headphones since I was already there, but I didn't bother to check out the Genius bar.
I haven't been back since, and if you asked me why I'd have to tell you it was the feng shui.
The United States has elected a new President -- Barack Obama. As a non-profit organization, we haven't been able to talk about candidates in this race ... until now. I'll be the first on this blog to say I'm disappointed and concerned about the days ahead. I realize from blog comments we've had over the past year, however, that some of you are probably excited about this result. Regardless of what you're feeling now -- discouragement or elation -- those of us who are followers of Christ, are called to live by 1 Timothy 2:1-4: 1 I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. (NIV).
Whether we voted for them or not, we are to pray for our leaders. Some of you may worry as I do that President-elect Obama is going to move forward on his promise to sign a bill that would roll back all the restrictions that have been placed on abortion over the past thirty years. You may also worry that Joe Biden's prediction of Obama's leadership being tested in the first six months will come true and might even result in the loss of innocent lives.
In the face of these and other reasonable concerns, we have to remember that God has demonstrated that He can guide the direction of any leader. Regardless of what Obama has said or done up until now, we can still pray that God will direct his steps in such a way that we will be able to "live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness."
We don't know what kind of presidency Obama will end up having, but we do know that God is sovereign and is still above all powers and authorities and His "dominion endures through all generations" (Psalm 145:13).
Updated: For a more eloquent call to prayer, read Dr. Al Mohler's commentary on the election.
I'm with Motte. I'm tremendously glad that I have the privilege to vote. Just today I was thinking of when I was a kid and Dad would come home from work. He and mom would drive up to the local school and vote together. There was always excitement in my home, knowing that Mom and Dad had voted. They had played a part in the decision that was unfolding.
Perhaps that is the reason I couldn't bring myself to use a mail-in ballot or do early voting (although kudos to those of you who did!). There's something wonderful, I think, about going to your neighborhood polling spot and seeing your neighbors — I saw my church's worship pastor and wife. My polling place is a little Bible church, manned primarily by seniors who also provide coffee and baked goods.
And so this afternoon, I entered my precinct with warm, patriotic feelings. I filled out my ballot, placed it in its protective sleeve and proceeded to the vote machine. That's when it happened. My ballot went in, but the screen informed: "ballot not read." Evidently, this was the first such error of the day. So I stood there awkwardly, the line growing behind me, while one of the election officials called four different numbers. In the background, I would hear him say, "Yes, we have a situation here." I smiled nervously at the growing number of "neighbors."
Fifteen minutes later the issue was resolved. My vote would, in fact, be counted. The crowd practically cheered.
While I cherish my privilege to vote, I also know that God holds authority over rulers. He raises them up and when necessary takes them down (Rom. 13:1, Is. 40:23). David Barshinger, in his article "God and the Election," makes this very point: God is the one "who executes justice for the oppressed, who gives food to the hungry" (Ps 146:7). Politicians can at best only partially deliver justice. Christians look to one who can deliver, and as the body of Christ, they participate in God's visible and invisible work to promote his justice and relief. And that's why the psalmist says, "Blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the LORD his God" (Ps 146:5).
God is on the throne. And our trust is in Him. There is no "situation" in which He is not an ever-present help.
So vote if you haven't. Then trust God and pray for your leaders and authorities. Anytime — under any leader — our nations need prayer.
I will be so glad when today is over. I am absolutely sick of politics this year. Instead of watching endless election blather this evening, I plan to pop Iron Man into the DVD player and tune out the world. (Hey, superheroes don't debate; they do!)
It's not that I'm an apathetic, cynical slug. In fact, I'm a political junkie and consider myself a very well-informed voter. And that's precisely why I'm so turned off right now. Politics has always been a rough-and-tumble game; there's never been a golden age of selfless, altruistic give-and-take in the halls of power. But I believe our politics has become increasingly meaner, stupider and ignorant in the past 30 years.
For the past two months my answering machine has been overflowing with robocalls, not just from politicians, but from this interest group or that. It's not unusual for me to have to delete 15 to 20 messages after work each day, and I can't help but wonder what important call I might have missed while a stupid computer tied up my machine with a message I have no intention of listening to. Entire forests have been laid waste to produce the campaign literature that has clogged my mailbox since summer—all of it going into the trash unread. The reason the messages go unlistened-to and the literature unread is that I’m tired of having my intelligence insulted by the inane scare messages and outright lies.
And only in the last 16 years have we been introduced to the idea of a "spin doctor," a political operative whose job is to twirl the truth to fit into his candidate's or cause's narrative. Forget truth; spin is all.
But what distresses me most is the growing ignorance of the American voter. High schools have not taught civics classes as required courses for more than 30 years. Many (most?) voting-age Americans have little idea of the way our government is supposed to work, as set out in the Constitution. Historical ignorance is at least as bad, with even college graduates unable to place within 50 years when the Civil War was fought or how we got to our present point in history. If you don't know where you've been, you have no idea where you’re going.
Into this historical and civics vacuum demagogues move. Just listen to some of the promises made by politicians today. Not only are many of them unconstitutional, but most are also impossible to keep. But beyond that, it's the premise behind the situation that's seriously off. A key example: Ponytail Guy.
In one of the 1992 presidential "debates" with George H. W. Bush, Ross Perot and Bill Clinton, Ponytail Guy got up and asked probably the most idiotic question in the history of politics: The focus of my work as a domestic mediator is meeting the needs of the children that I work with, by way of their parents, and not the wants of their parents. And I ask the three of you, how can we, as symbolically the children of the future president, expect the two of you, the three of you to meet our needs, the needs in housing and in crime and you name it.
Could we cross our hearts—it sounds silly here—but could we make a commitment? You know, we're not under oath at this point, but could you make a commitment to the citizens of the United States to meet our needs, and we have many, and not yours. Again, I have to repeat that, it's a real need, I think, that we all have.
After a sharp intake of breath at the ... well, breathtaking ignorance of the question, I shouted at the TV. "No, we are not the children of the president, symbolic or otherwise! The president is not my daddy! It's not his responsibility to take care of my 'needs'! You're an adult! Grow up and take care of your own needs ... and do something about that hair!"
How, in a constitutional republic where the government has specific, limited, delineated powers have we come to the point where someone could ask that question and not be laughed out of the room? More distressing, the candidates actually answered the question, incoherent though it was. (Their "answers" were either equally incoherent or doubly self-serving.) Such thinking is reflected in a video currently making the rounds on the Internet where a besotted young woman, after hearing her preferred candidate speak, said that if he won she would no longer have to worry about paying her gas or mortgage bills. Only the increasingly infantile nature of our politics and culture could account for such thinking. Only a people who have no idea on how our government is supposed to work could think such things.
But then there's the problem: our government no longer works how it's supposed to. In the 50 states today voters will determine several dozen additional measures to change the law or amend the state's constitution. In Massachusetts, for example, voters will decide whether to abolish the state income tax. Here in Colorado, we get to decide, among other things, whether being forced to join a union should be a condition for work and whether a human embryo counts as a "person."
Whatever happened to the role of the legislature? What of our Founding Fathers' vision of a representative republic where issues were carefully weighed and debated and then voted on by a legislature of educated and qualified leaders? Well, the people, with good cause, no longer trust their legislatures to do the right thing. Instead of a democratic republic, we're increasingly devolving into a direct democracy, with all the demagoguery and appeals to mob instincts that come with it—as well as the annoying robocalls and insulting campaign commercials and literature. The Founders rightly feared such a system, yet that is increasingly what we're becoming.
I voted last week, and I will continue to vote, since it's my duty as a Christian and a citizen. But I'm becoming less hopeful for our nation. But, like Motte, I also know that God is sovereign and that His will will be done regardless.
It's His mercy, however, that I think we're going to need more than ever.
Now that it's almost over, the thing that's surprised me the most about this election season is the lack of independent thinking displayed by many voters, in particular those who claim to subscribe to a Judeo-Christian worldview. Time and again I've been struck by believers who simply regurgitate some perceived need for "hope" and "change," yet aren't able to articulate any specifics with regard to these lofty sounding ideals.
I hadn't realized just how pervasive this kind of thinking was until last week, when I showed up at a friend's house for a night of chili and video-game bowling. As the election was just a few days away, the evening's conversation eventually turned to politics.
My first instinct was to avoid any discussion of the candidates, as I didn't want to turn a night intended for harmless fun into a charged debate. But when one of the guys, a seasoned Christian who works for a local nonprofit ministry, started explaining the reasoning behind his voting philosophy, I found it hard to remain silent.
The discussion shifted to the value of human life and the role that politicians play in either protecting it or devaluing its importance. I brought up the importance of a president's philosophy on judicial nominations and looming legislation like the Freedom of Choice Act.
And that's when it happened.
"Come on," he said. "You can't legislate morality."
I could hardly believe what I was hearing. Now, I don't know who first coined the phrase, or how long ago, but I do know that it has managed to live on ever since. I probably heard it for the first time nearly 20 years ago, and for a moment or two, it seemed to make sense. But the more I thought about it, I realized that if you can't legislate morality, then we might as well throw out many of the most important rules in human history.
Laws forbidding murder, rape and theft are all based in morality -- in particular the Ten Commandments. Lying (to a jury, for instance) and cheating (say, on your taxes) are also matters of biblical morality. Sure, we have plenty of laws that have little to do with Judeo-Christian values, but those are the issues that tell us where we can park our cars downtown during business hours or how public funds are divided between maintaining playgrounds and upgrading roads. The most vital issues pertaining to matters of personal property and public safety are inherently moral and always have been.
Now, there will always be those who say the phrase isn't meant to be taken literally, that the true meaning is more esoteric. "You can't legislate morality," they argue, "because laws won't change people's hearts."
So what then? Do we abandon laws based in morality when they're no longer popular? Do we legalize drugs, prostitution, sex with children, euthanasia? You might say that such things could never happen, but we all know better. They've happened before, and they're happening now. If not in America, such laws are already in place in other parts of the world. Where does it end?
History tells us that we've been here before. Just read the Book of Judges, which describes a time when Israel departed from the standards of conduct found in the law. The result? "Everyone did what was right in his own eyes."
You can't legislate morality, you say? Not only can we, but we must.
I love voting. I love casting my ballot for the candidates I believe have the best experience and vision to lead this country, both locally and nationally. And I actually enjoyed taking my time, reading the ballot initiatives here in Colorado on a variety of issues ranging from taxes to human life.
I feel great not because I think my candidates will win. Polls aren't oracles. But because I appreciate the gift God has given all Americans to participate in our representative government (mostly) without fear of intimidation.
And most of all, I'm joyful because I find rest in the sovereignty and goodness of our great God.
You see, this battle is almost over. And my conscience is clear that I have exercised my rights in this great city of man responsibly. I have studied the issues and carefully weighed the candidates. I've prayed for them and for the citizens of this country. I've put forth arguments in this forum on the issues for which I believe government is responsible, "to restrain evil, uphold righteousness, and provide for civil order."
The rest, I will leave to God, by the power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. And by his power, I will not make an idol of politics by responding with anger or anxiety. Because my hope is that whomever is president over the next four years, I will be joyfully dissatisfied in this life, longing for the next.
The only question yet to be answered at this moment is the level of dissatisfaction. ;-)
Robert George has a column Monday on National Review Online that links to undisputed evidence that life begins at conception. No longer is it defensible for politicians to say that determining when life begins is merely a matter of private belief -- as if it's an unknowable secret.
George asks, Is it actually the case that no one can tell you with any degree of authority when the life of a human being actually begins?
No, it is not.
Your life began, as did the life of every other human being, when the fusion of egg and sperm produced a new, complete, living organism — an embryonic human being. You were never an ovum or a sperm cell, those were both functionally and genetically parts of other human beings — your parents. But you were once an embryo, just as you were once an adolescent, a child, an infant, and a fetus. By an internally directed process, you developed from the embryonic stage into and through the fetal, infant, child, and adolescent stages of development and ultimately into adulthood with your determinateness, unity, and identity fully intact. You are the same being — the same human being — who once was an embryo.
Why does this matter? Because it removes the best excuse people have had for blurring the facts in order to advance a political agenda that says some people deserve to live. And others don't. George continues, Perhaps because the debate over when human life begins has never been about the biological facts. It has been about the value we ascribe to human beings at the dawn of their lives. ... The scientific evidence is simply too overwhelming for there to be any real debate on this point. What is at issue in these debates is the question of whether we ought to respect and defend human beings in the earliest stages of their lives. In other words, the question is not about scientific facts; it is about the nature of human dignity and the equality of human beings.
Tomorrow, when you go into the voting booth and are poised to fill in the blanks or pull the lever, remember that the most important issue -- who gets to live -- is at stake in new and dramatic ways. Only this time, it's not true that we can't know when life begins. No longer is it accurate to say "this is a matter of personal belief." It's now scientifically established and verifiable. As George concludes his article, In view of the established facts of human embryogenesis and early intrauterine development, the real question is not whether human beings in the embryonic and fetal stages are human beings. Plainly they are. The question is whether we will honor or abandon our civilizational and national commitment to the equal worth and dignity of all human beings — even the smallest, youngest, weakest, and most vulnerable.
As history reveals, a society that today says some people aren't worthy of life, may very well one day say no one is.
Copyright 2009 Focus on the Family. All rights reserved. International copyright secured. The Line and Boundless Line are trademarks of Focus on the Family.
|
Recent Comments