omission

photo-1431576901776-e539bd916ba2Except for all those with their laptops, TV’s, and portable electronic devices turned off last week, we were well aware of Pope Francis interacting with leaders and little ones, for the first time on American soil. From DC to NYC to his departure this night from Philadelphia, the Pope has called the people to something. That’s what’s fascinating — how we summarize that “something.”

People pounce on what they want to. They summarize the Pope’s message — characterizing and crafting the Pope’s exhortation in unique, albeit limited ways. Note the specific characterizations and summaries in recent days…

The editorial board of the NY Times laid out what they called, the Pope’s “challenge to America” — saying American leaders “must never forget the nation’s own roots of tolerance and equal justice.” They said Pope Francis called for “rational and just treatment of refugees here and abroad” in a veiled “rebuke” to some of the “ugly diatribes” amid the current presidential campaign.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said the Pope is “urging us to make the changes we need to protect our earth, and to treat all people with compassion and dignity,” entitling his CNN editorial “the moral call for equality.”

Reuters led a report with Pope Francis’ call for “world leaders to do more to combat climate change.”

Laurie Goodstein, also of the NY Times, said, “Francis on Friday called on the hundreds of leaders from the world’s religions who surrounded him to be a ‘force for reconciliation.’ ”

And still more from the articulate Times headlined their summary of the Pope’s message as a call “for peace and environmental justice.”

Not to be out articulated by the more issue-oriented angles, the Intramuralist also read the following politicized headlines:

  • “The Pope’s Progressive Call to Action”
  • “Pope Francis’ Speech Is a Win for Progressives”
  • “Pope Francis Calls Out the ‘Industry of Death’ ”
  • “The Patron Saint of the Left”
  • (And, perhaps shocking to some) “Top Signs Pope Francis is an Honest Conservative”

What I observe is a desire to politicize the Pope’s message. Granted, Pope Francis has invited much of the deliberation, as he has publicly articulated various political positions. But let’s acknowledge what’s missing from each of the above characterizations.

..

Pope Francis serves as the 266th and current Pope of the Catholic Church. The worldwide Catholic Church teaches that it was founded by Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the foundation of what the Roman Catholic Church believes.

What’s missing in each of the above editorials?

Any mention of Jesus.

While there’s much to like and discuss in the editorialized calls for justice, compassion, dignity, reconciliation, and peace, if Jesus is omitted from the conversation, then my sense is that we are not summarizing the Pope’s message accurately; we are crafting characterizations based more on our desired perspective than on the Pope’s actual words. We are politicizing something that should not be politicized.

Note that in New York, the Pope called on people to spread the Word of God; he urged listeners to be faithful, holding onto the hope God provides. He also, when first arriving, encouraged clergy to walk humbly with their God — all messages consistent with scripture.

Pope Francis believes that the kingdom he serves is not “of this world.” He believes in Jesus, and his belief propels his perspective. Sometimes we forget that. We conveniently omit it, too.

Respectfully…
AR

ask the pope

Canonization_2014-_The_Canonization_of_Saint_John_XXIII_and_Saint_John_Paul_II_(14036966125)
For the first time, Pope Francis, the leader of the Catholic Church, is walking on American soil. And so I asked you, if you could ask him a single question — concisely and respectfully — with great wit always welcome — what would your question be? Here are your top 50…

  1. What is love?
  2. How can I pray for you?
  3. Do you pray for world peace?
  4. Can you explain free will?
  5. Which came first — the chicken or the egg?
  6. What’s your most embarrassing moment?
  7. Who do you think will be the religious leader in the end times?
  8. Do you ever get depressed or feel overwhelmed by the sadness and violence in the world?
  9. Who’s your favorite NFL team? Do you ever pay attention?
  10. What makes you so forward thinking and accepting?
  11. How do you feel when the Ten Commandments or a Nativity scene is ordered to be removed?
  12. When the Bible speaks of “the great prostitute,” to whom do you think it is referring?
  13. What is the ideal role between church and state?
  14. If you could be a rockstar, who would you be and why?
  15. What’s more important to you personally: the Bible or tradition?
  16. How would you diffuse the racial tensions in this country?
  17. Do you know how to use an iPhone?
  18. What are the absolutes in life?
  19. How have the political left and right marginalized God’s Word?
  20. Why does the Catholic Church believe that Mary was immaculately conceived when there is no supporting Biblical passage?
  21. What do you do when it all gets too much?
  22. How do you respond to the person who says “I was born this way”?
  23. “Tastes great” or “less filling”?
  24. Do you believe Islam is a peaceful religion?
  25. What are you doing here?
  26. What’s your favorite book in the Bible?
  27. What do you really think of Pres. Obama?
  28. Do you believe Christianity is “under attack”?
  29. Is world peace possible this side of heaven?
  30. Is it ok not to be Catholic?
  31. What would you say those at a #BlackLivesMatter protest?
  32. Do you think our police have a problem — or some have a problem with police?
  33. Why are you talking about climate change instead of The Gospel?
  34. Do you enjoy wearing what looks like a dress all the time?
  35. What’s the biggest problem in the American church today?
  36. Can you explain why so many use religion as a justification for war, violence, judgment, and other forms of hatred throughout the world?
  37. Coke or Pepsi?
  38. What do we not realize about abortion?
  39. Have you considered changing tradition to allow priests to marry?
  40. Why does the Catholic Church prohibit women from the priesthood? …do you see this ever changing?
  41. How serious do you believe the threats to religious liberty are in this country?
  42. Which candidate for President do you like best?
  43. What do you think about Donald Trump?
  44. If you had a tattoo, where would it be, what would it say, and why?
  45. Do you believe our country is spiraling morally out of control?
  46. Do you wear pants?
  47. What do you struggle with?
  48. What do you want your legacy to be? …what do you believe God wants your legacy to be?
  49. What is the number one thing we can do to honor God?

And… last but not least…

50. Do you think Pope jokes are funny??

Respectfully…
AR

biased?

photo-1420177743490-15ee9ba8c78fWe are a contentious people. We disagree. We argue. Sometimes we fight… a lot. Why? Because we know we’re right. 🙂

I get it. There have been times in my own household — I’m sorry to admit — when it’s seemed a major, humongous decision between which one is best — because there’s only one right answer: sausage or pepperoni? (My poor veggie choice rarely garners another vote.) The reality is, friends, we think there’s only one answer too many times… and we make way too many mountains out of molehills.

Part of the reason we get so stuck, I think — and then miss out on the beauty of turning disagreement into dialogue — is because we’re unwilling to unravel our deeply embedded bias. We each have bias within us, and that bias skews our objectivity… whether we know it or not… acknowledge it or not… no matter the issue.

“Bias” is defined as “prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair.”

For example, one may believe Tom Brady’s explanation of why he destroyed his cell phone when under investigation by the NFL was completely logical, plausible, and full of good intentions. Others immediately pounced upon the need for stern prosecution.

Politically, some watched the Republican debates, and instantaneously concluded that each of the candidates is an honest, upstanding, completely transparent man or woman. Others claimed the debates were pathetic — and nothing of merit was articulated by any or all.

Think, too, of our immediate reactions — openly hostile or sweetly tender — directed at Hillary, Bernie, or Trump… at Christians, Congress, Planned Parenthood, you-name-it.

I submit that in each of the above, bias has typically skewed the perspective… whether we know it or not. Hence, allow me one more, brief example (I will try to be sensitive)…

America’s favorite sport by far is the National Football League. When the playoffs begin, so do the parties — with even the non-sports fan often tuning in. Last January, there was one game that grabbed my attention most (remember: this is about bias — not sports). The Dallas Cowboys and Green Bay Packers played a great game on a cold day up in Wisconsin. Dallas led most of the game but never by more than 8 points.

With 9 minutes left, the Packers finally took the lead. Dallas would challenge once more. Back and forth after an intense drive, it appeared that the Cowboys’ Dez Bryant made a miraculous, fourth down catch and scored the potentially winning touchdown!

But then… as written by a Sports Illustrated reporter:

“On fourth down with 4:42 remaining, Bryant leapt to catch a pass from Tony Romo. On the way down, as he moved toward the end zone, the ball hit the ground. After review, the referees called it an incomplete pass. 
NFL rules state the ground can cause an incomplete pass. It was ruled Bryant did not stretch out enough toward the endzone, therefore did not commit a ‘football act,’ and didn’t have control going to the ground.”

The referees reversed their initial call. The home crowd went crazy. The Packers took over on offense and went on to win the game.

From my very comfortable, couch-quarterback position, I adamantly disagreed with the call — and I soon found myself also in disagreement with multiple members of my family. They thought they were right! I thought I was right! But guess what? They are Packers’ fans.

There was… uh… one more thing…

Every football season I play a few, minimally-involved fantasy games. One requires a $10 entry fee, where each week you pick a single football team to win their game, and you can’t pick the same team twice. When your selection loses, you’re out. Over 200 people play. At the time of that playoff game, I was still alive. Had the Cowboys won, I was close to winning the $2000 prize.


Was I biased? You bet.
Did it skew my perspective of what may or may not be true? Of course.
And could I admit it at the time?

No way.

Bias obstructs truth. It impedes our dialogue, too.

Respectfully…
AR

amazing

IMG_5032When my youngest son was born, we were greeted by all the plethora of standard congratulatory salutations. But there’s something when a child is born with a disability that threatens to damper what should be none other than a celebration… “Yes, I’m humbled and thrilled at the birth of my child and God’s incredible creation — but I have to change my expectations. This isn’t the life I had planned… not for him… not for me.” I didn’t say that. But I thought it… often.

And no doubt due to the totally penetrating grace of God — even when I am clueless — I quickly realized that the blessing of Josh was no less than any other. He was amazing — just the way he was… just the way he is.

While I got there emotionally — with my dear family and friends who “came along” — it was soon apparent that not everyone else in contemporary culture gets that. There was the geneticist who referred to the day of Josh’s birth as “the saddest day of your whole life.” There was the one resident, callously mumbling after a broken finger that it “wasn’t like he’s ever going to play in the orchestra or anything.” And there were the many who made well-intentioned stabs at encouragement by saying Josh could grow up and “get a great job” bagging at the local grocery store.

I chose not to focus on those who weren’t where I was. I knew God was calling me to a wiser perspective… that it was not up to me to decide what my kids could and could not do. It was not up to me to dictate. It was not up to me to focus only on the perceived end results. It was, however, up to me to celebrate who my son was, how God uniquely wired him, and to encourage him to grow.

Josh is in 8th grade now. (Careful — he thinks being the oldest grade in school is akin to something close to “king.”) But as one who has watched his older brothers thrive in one of Ohio’s premiere show choir organizations, Josh decided last week to try out at the junior high level.

Truthfully, I was a bit skeptical at first. The bar is high, and it should be for such a talented organization. But if I was completely transparent, I would also acknowledge that I was weary of the time commitment required on my part — early a.m. practices, multiple week night practices, and all the supervision necessary, so as not to add more to the director’s already, admirably full plate.

 And so we spent Monday – Friday last week at show choir tryouts… up at 5:40 a.m., getting Josh ready, grabbing breakfast, downing the protein, and out the door by 6:30 in order to arrive at least 15 minutes early. We also practiced each night at home, worked on his dance moves, his vocals — with Dad and big brother joining along.

Let me add that initially, Josh didn’t comprehend the idea of a “try out.” He assumed everyone made it. I was worried about that lack of realization — that is, until Thursday, when on our way, he prayed, “And God, I know you have my back, whether I make it or not.” 

 I loved that.

So each morning the 80 some adolescents worked on the newly taught choreography. They danced as a group before the director and judges. I was there in case Josh needed anything. His teacher also graciously volunteered to come in early multiple days, helping with any supervision. (She is excellent — love our community!!) Then on Friday, it was Josh’s turn to actually sing before the judges — only 10-20 seconds. All students sit still while only one sings.

From this semi-humble parent’s vantage point, Josh’s singing was excellent. His enunciation was a little off — maybe his tone a bit, too — but nothing took away from the beauty of his words. As for his dancing ability, he was a half second or two behind on several of the synchronized moves; sometimes, too, he turned in the wrong direction, but he got it. That boy can dance!

Let me briefly share that Josh didn’t make it. I have great respect for the director, so please, no sighs; we had a great week! Let me also share, though, what I learned…

I was first reminded of that perspective I believe God desires us to have — to celebrate who each of our kids are, how God uniquely wires them, and to encourage them to grow.
Second, I learned that we often put too much emphasis on the end results; the process — and the growth in that process — is without a doubt, beautiful.

And lastly, I was struck most by Josh’s own words — words that are true. Loudly and proudly, with all others sitting and listening, my sweet son, Josh, sang the chorus from “Just the Way You Are” by Bruno Mars…

“When I see your face
There’s not a thing that I would change
Because you’re amazing
Just the way you are.”

Amazing. Smiling. Just the way he is. Again, it is he who teaches me.

With great joy…
AR

wanted: better leaders

photo-1422565167033-dec8fad92abaThree were land surveyors.
Six were one time farmers.
Many more served honorably in our country’s military.

Yet somewhere over the course of our nation’s history, we have come to value — and perhaps “trump” (bwa ha ha) — the resume of a career politician. I’m wondering if that’s wise. I don’t think I’m alone.

With the 21 persons currently running for the 2016 Presidency of the United States of America (both major parties combined), I am especially struck by a unique three: Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, and Donald Trump. Please don’t mistake my fascination for advocacy. But even before last night’s second active, insightful debate, I have been struck by the fact that none of the three boast a resume touting political experience — and each has a formidable following in these continued early polls. Trump and Fiorina have successful business track records. Carson is a respected neurosurgeon. The fact that many are increasingly attracted to these three candidates in particular tells us that there exists something within a growing set of voters that wants something other than a career politician in the White House.

Note…

Warren Harding ran a newspaper.
Herbert Hoover was an engineer.
Truman spent years as a men’s clothing retailer.

Lyndon Johnson was a teacher.
So were Chester Arthur and James Garfield; Garfield doubled as a minister.
And Ronald Reagan — revered by many on both sides of the proverbial partisan aisle — and before serving as California’s governor — was best known previously as an actor and President of the Screen Actors Guild.

We have long been attracted to persons of diverse, varied, life experience.

But somewhere along the line, we began valuing not only career politicians, but also, attorneys. 24 — yes, 24 — current or former U.S. Presidents are or were lawyers at one time. No doubt the ability to navigate through lawsuits and a fluency in legalese are helpful skills to bring to the Oval Office, but what have we sacrificed by valuing these skills so highly? Are we missing something? Are we trumping the wrong things within leadership?

I’m thinking we need something more…

… more than the ability to splice and couch words and navigate through legalese…

And … far more than someone who simply uses one election to propel them to the next…

Where is, my friends, is the servant leader?

A servant leader is a person who always enriches the lives of other people. “I/me/my/myself” are not routine nor frequent words in their vocabulary. It’s not about them gaining more influence or power. It’s not about them doing all the directing. It’s not about them proclaiming how wonderful or altruistic they are. It’s not about them and all they alone have to give. It’s not about them and how brilliant and omniscient they are. It’s not about their programs, their policies, or their self-proclaimed political giftedness. In other words, it’s not — and never — about them. A servant leader knows that. A servant leader never confuses serving the people with the propelling of self.

My sense — and I could be wrong — is that the career politician has trouble recognizing that it’s not (and never has been) about them. Maybe that’s harsh; that’s not my intent. But it’s almost as if the career politician feels they have to serve; they must do this  —  as if we can’t survive without them. I would add that after years of obvious, ongoing futility and ineffective government — a problem caused and contributed to by both parties — the public is tired; we are looking for something more.

We want authenticity. I think we want servanthood, too.

Can that be found in a businessman/woman or neurosurgeon? Who knows. Some of the more loquacious candidates (or at least one in particular 🙂 ) still seem way too comfortable with those “I/me/my/myself” pronouns.

But the rise of the non-politician — and the non-attorney — tells me many are searching for something better and more… and more effective.

Respectfully…
AR

more law?

photo-1435459025078-9857f8933bc9In our last post we referenced society’s selective adherence to the laws of the land — and our inconsistencies in advocating the adhering or breaking of law, pending what law we’re actually talking about. Truthfully, I think we’re collectively pretty bad at that (… shhh… no speeding conversations, please).

That then reminded me of the below; we shared something similar several years ago, but it felt time to revisit —  as best as I can discern, the following are still the law of their so-called lands…

In North Carolina, bingo games are not allowed to last over 5 hours unless held at a fair.

Embracing the sacred riddle, in Quitman, Georgia, chickens are not allowed to cross the road (… no matter why).

Be careful in the Lone Star State. In Texas it’s illegal to sell your eyeballs.

On Sundays, no less, in the state of Rhode Island, you may not sell toothpaste and a toothbrush to the same customer.

Gainesville, Georgia does not allow for the eating of fried chicken with anything other than your hands.

In Utah’s defense of marriage, there are to be no marital unions between cousins — except, that is, if a Utahn is 65 or older.

Carrizozo, New Mexico requires all women to be shaven if appearing in public.

Eureka, Nevada has a similar challenge with hair; If you have a mustache, it’s illegal to kiss a woman.

Alabama prohibits all wrestling between bears (…shew).

Alaska prohibits viewing moose from an airplane.

Wyoming protects the sensitivity of its rabbits; no picture taking is allowed from January to April — without a permit, that is.

In the state of my birth (gotta’ love those Hoosiers), should you desire to utilize public transportation, you must be sure to wait 4 hours after eating an onion or garlic.

In another favorite state of mine, for the record, it’s illegal to get a fish drunk in the great state of Ohio.

Also for the record, flirting is against the law in San Antonio (oops).

Idaho trumps health over chivalry; an Idahoan man is not allowed to give his fiancé a box of candy that weighs more than 50 lbs.

Idaho’s neighboring state of Washington is so honorable; a motorist with criminal intentions must stop at the city limits and telephone the chief of police as he is entering the town.

Also in Washington, you can be arrested or fined for harassing the legend of Bigfoot.

In Arizona, if you are found stealing soap, you must wash yourself until the bar of soap has been completely used up.

And in Hawaii, it’s illegal to put a coin in your ear.

Hmmmm… Maybe it’s no wonder we’re so selective.

Respectfully…
AR

[Note: special thanks to JustSomething.com and DumbLaws.com. Who knew?]

law of the land

photo-1431352905070-2ec849b49349Sometimes I’m quiet. Sometimes being quiet is good. Sometimes sitting back, taking time to reflect upon more angles of an issue instead of instantaneously reacting is a wise and wonderful thing. As mentioned multiple times, there is no issue the Intramuralist is unwilling to discuss. Sometimes, however, we will wait for the right time. Let’s discuss Kim Davis.

Actually, no. Let’s not discuss Kim Davis — the county clerk from Kentucky who refused to issue same-sex marriage licenses and instead went to jail. Let’s not make it about the person — the individual who had her so-called 15 minutes of fame; let’s focus on the issue. Way too many people made it about the individual… and truthfully, that bothered me a bit…

I was bothered by those who made Davis into some sort of profound heroine… “Finally, a person who’s had enough and not going to take it anymore!”… a person who’s finally standing up to an over-reaching government. I wasn’t too keen on those who seemed to utilize standing with her as a personal, political opportunity…

I was also bothered by those who portrayed Davis as some sort of ignorant imbecile… those who justified the mocking and vilification — mocking her hair, her past, her physical appearance. I was bothered by the many who mocked her who often preach compassion and tolerance — but then, justified totally no compassion directed toward Davis… no tolerance either…

Same-sex marriages are the current law of this land; it is the law in Kentucky. We can like it, love it, or want no more of it. We can also change it, if desired. We can enthusiastically agree with the summer Supreme Court decision — or we can vehemently disagree with the court’s opinion that the Constitution provides any right to marry. We can be emphatically joyous that five black-robed justices decided the law of the land; we can also be disturbed that a mere five justices determined that law. We can be either. Good people are either. It is still the law of the land.

As a human resource professional, I have long hired persons to do their job. If they don’t do their job — or can’t do their job — then the reality is that the person should have another job; they can resign, be let go, or serve in another capacity. That is not heartless nor cruel nor lacking any compassion. I simply believe that it is the employer who decides what the job is — not the employee. Public or private, profit or non-profit, too many believe they can be the deciders of what they will and will not do. They ignore aspects of the job for which they were hired, elected, or assigned.

That said, 

I deeply admire persons whose faith affects their entire being — whose behavior is so obviously prompted by their authentic belief in the one, true, amazing, almighty God. There is just something within that depth of faith that is admirable, contagious, and good.

I also believe it’s true that religious freedom is a serious issue in this country. I think we need to find a way to address it absent of cruelty and hypocrisy. Let’s face it: this is tough for us; it’s tough for our entire country. We tend to support or oppose religious freedom depending on how it fits the angle and issue we’re coming from at that time…

Can we force the baker to bake? … the photographer to take? … how about the florist? Have you heard, too, about the current case before the court in which our federal government is actually suing an Illinois trucking company that requires Islamic truck drivers to deliver alcohol? The feds are fighting for their religious freedom. Why is freedom allowed one place but chastised elsewhere? Why are we not consistent?

Friends, this is messy. Religious freedom is messy. This can also be understandably, highly-emotionally charged. But we have to figure it out — and not just support or oppose it when it fits with the issues about which we are individually most passionate.

In my semi-humble opinion, the issue that arose in that Kentucky county last week was not about religious freedom. It was also not about Kim Davis; she was just the easiest target to attack. The issue that arose was the selective adherence to the law of the land.
 Is it ok to be selectively adherent?

… what about persons who justify breaking other laws? … what about those who broke Prop 8 when it was law in California? … what about those who continue to support illegal rioting and destruction?

In other words, do we get to decide what laws to adhere to?

Are we thus ever inconsistent or (God-forbid) hypocritical in our adherence?

Like I said, this is not about Kim Davis. It’s about following the law of the land… which each of us is sometimes good at… and sometimes not.

Respectfully…
AR

immigration aspects & angles

xWcqazwvSXadCA7dZLiQ_Ship_mastSome propose a wall. Others say no wall is necessary.

Some propose amnesty. Others say amnesty isn’t appropriate.

Some believe no immigrants should ever be let in. Others believe all should be welcomed any place, any time… the more, the merrier…

Your tired, your poor… those huddled masses yearning to be free… oh, what to do…

Here. There. In the U.S. and Europe… oh yes, what to do.

When we attempt to decipher the different aspects and angles, I think the challenge comes in that we each trump one aspect of the argument (fun to use that word there, by the way); one angle means more to us than another.

As referenced in Tuesday’s post, for example, it’s very difficult to see the limp, lifeless body of 3 year old migrant, Aylan Kurdi, and not want to turn around and scream, “Let ‘em in! Let them all in!” I admire the compassion of those who immediately wish to aid and abet all yearning, huddled masses. The empathy… the compassion… the desire to help the seemingly least of these in securing a solid, stable life is a beautiful thing.

Also embedded within the masses, no less, are those who desire to destroy us. Make no mistake about it: there are many people on this planet intent on strategically sneaking into our country for the sole purpose of destruction. As the 14th anniversary approaches Friday of arguably, the most contemporary “date which will live in infamy,” many persons want to make certain terrorism never again happens on American soil. I admire the resolve of those who work tirelessly in those efforts. To protect… to defend… the desire to limit terrorism is an honorable thing.

Still more within the masses are persons who wish to make a better life for others. Years ago, when living in Southeast Florida, I had much contact with legal and illegal aliens. Perhaps it was Pepe who touched me most. Pepe was here in this country legally, working two totally non-glamourous jobs, 80 hours per week, paying taxes, and sending more than half his check to his family in another country. He never complained. He was a law-abiding citizen of one country — and a law-abiding resident of the other. I admire the kindness of those who generously pave the way for people like Pepe. The generosity… the humility… the genuine helping of a brother or sister in need is a wonderful thing.

Others included within the migrants are persons who have no intention of ever contributing positively to the totality of society. They don’t pay taxes; they don’t give back. They’re not terrorists, but they do intend to take advantage of the welfare assistance and social services our government abundantly provides. I admire the persons who are thus concerned about the strain on a system that doesn’t support itself fiscally. Life isn’t free; someone has to pay for it. The fiscal-responsibility… the proven business practice… the logic of ensuring a process or program is financially solvent is a prudent thing.

So we have the following:

  1. Compassion & empathy
  2. Protection & defense
  3. Kindness & generosity
  4. Fiscal-responsibility & prudence

Each of those motivating aspects is valid. The challenge and dissension arise when we trump (there’s that word again) one aspect over another.

 I get it. One aspect often means more to us. Sometimes we can only see a single side.

That one aspect, however, does not allow us to negate the validity of another angle or opinion. It also does not allow us to omit the legitimacy that lies within other angles.

Compassion, protection, kindness, and fiscal-responsibility are each valid, pursued priorities.

 While no doubt it’s harder, if we are committed to coming up with a wise, comprehensive way to address all immigration issues, we must consider each of the above.

And… dare I say… let go of the trump…

Respectfully…
AR

him…

Boat_People_at_Sicily_in_the_Mediterranean_Sea
Have you seen it?
Have you seen it?
I ask twice because if you’ve seen it — if you’ve seen him — you would not forget.

No, I do not believe we can forget…

Last week 3 year old Aylan Kurdi and his family attempted to flee from Syria to Europe. The fighting is so bad between the Islamic State terrorists and Syrian-Kurdish forces that his family was desperate to get out of Syria. Of his mother, father, and 5 year old brother, only Aylan’s father survived the treacherous trek across the great Mediterranean Sea.

These are desperate people — caught up in a major migrant crisis, as Europe attempts to discern how to respond.

This crisis existed long before last week. But what happened Wednesday? Aylan’s picture surfaced… this precious, innocent boy, a dark-haired toddler, wearing a t-shirt and shorts, was found lifeless, laying face down in the shallow, Turkish shore.

Sometimes we don’t care about something until we see it. Sometimes we don’t think too much until we experience it for ourselves; there’s a little bit of outta-sight/outta-mind mentality that permeates each of our thinking.

After seeing Aylan — and then later, a second image of a sober-faced policeman, who gently cradled Aylan’s limp body and carried him away — I care. I can’t get that picture out of my mind.

Not only is this a tough story to write about, but it’s a tough story to even follow — lots of angles, lots of motives, lots of countries, and all sorts of varied responses. Hence, what are the basics about the migrants’ massive flight?

  • The majority of immigrants are coming from Afghanistan and Syria; they are fleeing war, torture, and persecution.
  • Migrants are also fleeing from Africa, with the majority coming from Eritrea, Nigeria, and Libya; they are fleeing due to poverty and abuse.
  • While the European migrant or “refugee” crisis has been going on for some time, increased Islamic militant violence has also increased the urgency for many to move now.
  • Germany and Austria have said that they will welcome the migrants; in fact, in the most recent development, the German Vice Chancellor said his country would accept 500,000 annually for the next several years.
  • Many other European countries will not allow the migration — as they already face significant economic challenges of their own. Hungary, for instance, has called for Germany to end its perceived “open door” policy.
  • Funding is an issue  — how to pay and care for the migrants; tensions and disagreement seem rising within the various governments within the European Union.
  • Simultaneously, the migration is becoming seemingly riskier; there have been multiple reports of dangerously, over-packed boats — also, of boats sinking.

Desperate people dying.

So what should we do?

Great question… hard question… and the answer is probably not some nice, easy, simple answer. If it was easy, it would already be fixed.
Still, it is something we must address — even if outta-sight/outta-mind… even if on the other side of the world…

Have you seen the picture of Aylan?

Respectfully…
AR

learning from more than the likeminded

photo-1429051883746-afd9d56fbdafPrevious to these past 10 days and the excellent ensuing, daily dialogue, we heard the respectfully-articulated insights and perspectives from persons other than me in our annual summer Guest Writers Series. (P.S. I thought it was great!) Thank you, friends, for writing and listening. I have learned from you!

I believe that we grow when we are willing to listen and dialogue regarding diverse perspective. Far too many are only able to converse with the likeminded. Hence, we end up with a lot of really smart people — who are still very blind. They never allow their mind to be altered from where it is right now. They still may be smart, but their pursuit of wisdom is sadly, severely hampered.

 In the weeks I was away, I pondered the thoughts of our guest writers… Like you, I listened and learned. Like you, I often read certain portions of posts twice. Like you, I didn’t necessarily agree with every opinion embedded, but also like you, I desire to be stretched and challenged. Agreement and consensus are secondary to active listening.

Here were some of the articulations that struck me most from our summer series:

“If you don’t like the law, elect different representatives, and they can pass new laws. That’s democracy.”

“Think again about who you would want to speak at your funeral. What do you want them to say?”

“During those formative years when we were transitioning from girlhood to womanhood, our society and media wasn’t telling us that our physically displays of affection with our peers had sexual connotations. We were free to hug, touch, and run arm and arm. We were free to accept each other no matter how we were made. We learned how to be good friends, strong and reliable, and that love had very little to do with sex, but with our willingness to be there for one another.”

“What is best in a society: personal freedom to choose no matter the consequences or personal freedom to choose with possible financial penalty if you choose the socially-selfish option? Perhaps a mix of the two is best.”

“I will give examples of ‘dignity squashers’ first — then move on to the ‘dignity encouragers.’ Let me give the exact definition of dignity so we’re on the same page. Dignity is pride in oneself, self-respect, self-worth. By not teaching our children life skills that evoke dignity, we as parents are setting them up to fail.”

“What we should do instead is develop a ‘live and let live’ legal framework.”

“Ironically, it is often the overlooked seeds who soar after high school. They have already played in a tough game environment and are well equipped to take on a new road to the big dance. They don’t have to rely on their past bracket to define them. It’s a clean slate and they chart their X’s and O’s.”

“A favorite tactic in today’s debates over anything controversial is to question your right to hold a belief, or to label your opinion itself as ‘bigoted’.”

“How many of us will let our passion trump our reason? How many of us will lose friendships over words we type on our keyboards? Think about that before you hit post. Maybe you think it doesn’t matter, that if someone disagrees with your opinion you are better off without their friendship. But what about their respect? When did we become a country where people either agree with you or they are wrong?”

“Do you want to be right or do you want to be righteous? Do we always have to be right? … or will we allow for our character to be carved and to grow?”

[And quite possibly, my personal favorite…]

“I listen to the music now… with tears, for she taught me so much more than I ever taught her.”

There is so much we can learn when we shelve our deeply entrenched stances — and actually listen to other people, too.

So thankful to be back… cheers, too, to each of our guest writers…

Respectfully…
AR