Category: Current Issue

Posted on

my favorite punctuation mark

Years ago I was asked, “What’s your favorite punctuation mark?”  At the time, truth be told, I found it a fairly funny item to be asked.  I pondered for some time.  And some more.  Then we come to days like today where I realize the answer to that question is easy for me indeed.  It always has been…

 

Random questions… Why?  Because asking is always easier than answering…  and it still leads to growth…

 

Why is the Chinese government increasing their arrests of Christians involved in “house churches”?

 

Why does any church have to be underground?

 

Why (referencing our most recent blog, “The Holy and the Common”) is mocking Jesus Christ considered entertainment but mocking Muhammed prompts an apology by the American government?

 

Why do congressional men and women — who haven’t balanced a budget since the days of Bill Clinton — continue to be paid and employed?

 

Why does our government think massive deficit spending is an appropriate economic approach?

 

Why are we calling sequestration “cuts” when actually we’re cutting nothing?  Sequestration only means we don’t spend as much as previously planned.

 

What is Pres. Obama’s motive?  For a man who is unquestionably, highly intelligent, how can he continue to advocate spending and borrowing money at an unsustainable rate — overseeing a massive expansion of those dependent on government assistance, while focusing on tax increases that are not expected nor proven to make a significant difference — if any?

 

How do massive tax increases actually help the economy?

 

Does the audience realize that many of the Academy Award recipients are actually inebriated when engaged in their passionate, acceptance speech rants?

 

Does Hollywood really represent America well?

 

How come wine has calories?

 

Why are professional athletes paid more than teachers and preachers?

 

Why is the Pope resigning?

 

Is the winner of “American Idol” actually an American idol?

 

Are idols healthy and good?

 

Is the NFL America’s favorite sport?

 

Why are we so mad in March?

 

And…  and…

… what is the Intramuralist’s favorite punctuation mark?

 

It can only be the question mark… for nothing else has the distinct potential to prompt increased reflection, contemplation, and respectful — hopefully — conversation.

 

Respectfully… always…

AR

Posted on

the holy and the common

This idea of a new pope has really got me thinking…

 

Now while not a member of the Roman Catholic Church (even though some seem to think my membership would be fairly solid), the Intramuralist promotes great respect for all faiths. I appreciate Catholic tradition, and like-faith or not, there is zero doubt the pope has significant, global influence.  Hence, I will be watching which color of smoke blows over the Vatican as the next wise leader is selected.

 

Thinking about this process, my mind has focused on the role of a priest — not necessarily a Catholic priest — but a leader within the Christian faith.  What is a priest called to do?

 

Different denominations may assign different duties.  Varied religious rituals may be a part of the process.  Yet time and time again, as I study ancient historical documents, one role stands out that seems to stand for all time.  It is the responsibility of the priest to differentiate between the holy and the common.

 

The holy and the common…

The sacred and the secular…

 

As a culture, I don’t think we get that.

 

Friends, please take that as no judgment.  I include myself among the “we” who doesn’t get it.  We live in an age where all things go, where all is accepted, where tolerance trumps intolerance — well, except, arguably, if you’re tolerant of the reality that some things are actually holy.

 

Last weekend, “Saturday Night Live” ran a new skit, entitled “Djesus Uncrossed” — a sarcastic spin of the Oscar-nominated “Django Unchained.”  In the SNL skit, Jesus is resurrected, but — and that’s an incredibly huge “but” — instead of returning to save the souls of sinful men, Jesus Christ takes vengeance upon his one-time accusers.  The skit then features approximately 2 minutes of bloody gore, similar to “Django Unchained.”  In pops the narration:  “He’s risen from the dead … and he’s preaching anything but forgiveness.”

 

The public dialogue since has been fascinating…

 

There have been claims of outrageous blasphemy.

There have also been numerous retorts to “lighten up”…

 

Can’t a guy take a joke any more?

 

I wonder…

I wonder if the joke was on Muhammed, the historic leader of Islam, if that kind of joke would be asked to be tolerated? Can’t you take a joke any more? … especially in light of the fatal September Benghazi attacks, when the American government actually paid to put commercials on Pakistani TV, apologizing for any offense to Muslims for an unrelated, anti-Islamic 13 minute movie trailer by 1 American citizen…

 

I wonder if mocking Muslims would — could — be considered a joke…  I wonder if they would have been told to lighten up.

 

Great questions, friends.  Truthfully, I don’t know all the answers.  But what I do know is this…

2 things:

 

  1. The creators of NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” are not “priests.”

And (2) They have no idea of the difference between the holy and the common.

 

Respectfully… always…

AR

Posted on

fleeting beauty

Did you notice the reaction to Sunday night’s Grammy Awards?  (… no worries if not a music fan…)

 

“See Katy Perry’s 2013 Grammys Dress!”

“Kat Dennings Grammys 2013: Actress Stuns In Strapless Dress”

“Rihanna Flashes Toned Tummy For Grammys After-Party”

 

It doesn’t have to be from the Grammys (… still, no worries…).  From the Super Bowl, for example, much of the post-game reaction was in regard to Beyoncé’s halftime show and whether she was provocative or powerful….

 

“Beyoncé Is a Sex Kitten at the Superbowl”

“A Defiant Dance of Power, Not Sex”

“Beyoncé’s Sexy 2013 Super Bowl Outfit Slammed by PETA—Too Much Skin!”

 

Pick your event, awards night, athletic competition, etc.  We have this all too frequent tendency of focusing on the external…  on what we can see, the outward adornment, or appearance.  We make all sorts of judgments and distinctions based on the external appearance of man.  We like to say ‘we’re not a judgmental people,’ yet we draw countless conclusions based solely upon what we can see.

 

In fact, in a little less than 2 weeks, the Oscars will be upon us.  What’s the initial focus of the Academy Awards?  The beloved red carpet.  Outside Hollywood’s Dolby Theatre, for hours fans will flock to the edges in order to gain a glimpse of their favorite star.  And reporters and pundits and commentators and critics will copiously opine how the celebrities seem to be faring these days — all based on how they look.

 

I’ve frequently wrestled with this increased fascination.  What is it that attracts current culture so quickly to the external?  Why do we feel so emboldened to comment on others based solely on what we can see?

 

What causes us to judge — when it is a person’s inner disposition that makes them beautiful?

 

My sense is that as society has digressed, we’re torn with what’s inside.  We don’t always know how to deal with the individuality of a person’s character and heart, and so we accept it, as opposed to being willing to acknowledge certain aspects are unhealthy.

 

Too often, for example, we simply accept adultery.  Whether it be Julia Roberts, Jerry Seinfeld, or someone nearer and dearer to our hearts, we often ignore whatever lack of moral grounding internally existed that caused them to act upon their unhealthy impulses.  If we actually focused on what was inside the adulterer’s heart, it would be incredibly challenging to deal with respectfully.  We would have to admit that there exists right and wrong in this world, and that persons we appreciate had made a wrongful choice.

 

Friends, I am not advocating judgment.  In fact, my strong sense is we’ve done an incredible disservice to the younger generation when we define judgment as the acknowledgement of right or wrong.  In it’s most basic definition, judgment means feeling empowered to render the consequences for actions; it by no means equates to a lack of acknowledgement of wrongdoing.

 

Why then do we focus on the external?  Because it’s easier; it’s far easier than dealing respectfully with what’s inside the character of the person.

 

At the Grammys Sunday evening, singer Carrie Underwood won her 6th Grammy Award, this time for Best Country Solo Performance.  The Intramuralist has no relationship with Underwood, but those who know her well speak of a tender, beautiful heart.

 

Did you happen to see her dress?  It served as a fascinating, changing, light up, digital screen!  Supposedly (but not surprisingly) it stole the show.

 

Respectfully,

AR

Posted on

sweet grace

There’s that one moment in time…  that moment when circumstances are so intense, so blinding, that you can’t see anything else around you…  when the weight of the world is so heavy that you are forced to ask life’s deeper questions — bottom line Q’s — questions that get to the heart of every issue.

 

Some days I get so frustrated… at the…

 

… dysfunction, discord… the arrogance, lack of accountability… in our families, communities, Washington, and world… the total lack of respect for others… the hypocrisy… the judgment… so often justified in the name of passion, emotion, self-focus, or self-inflated-ness…

 

I get frustrated, too, as to how each of us falls prey…  how I fall prey… how I, too, can justify a foolish response or approach in the name of something lesser…

 

And then a moment arises that jolts us to the truth… where all else crumbles to the ground and our sense of self finally deflates, as we are forced to ask those deeper questions.

 

At midnight Wednesday night, the teenage daughter of dear friends kissed each of her family members ‘good night’ and told them how much she loved them.  She then left.  She has not been seen nor heard from since.

 

… every parent’s worst nightmare…

 

As of this posting, it has been over 70 hours of not knowing where this beautiful 16 year old is.  Pause for a moment…

 

Grace was not some troubled teen with obvious, flashing warning signs, where any of us would have previously contemplated the concept that “yeah, this is a behavior I would have expected from her.”  Not at all.  Grace is a beautiful, sensitive, sweet, faithful young lady.  This could be happening with any of our children.  With any of us.

 

So many (especially) teens get an irrational thought in their head that they then justify acting upon because of how they feel in the moment.  They have all these feelings inside that they don’t know what to do with… fear… anger… failure… They don’t know how to resolve all the emotion inside of them; they no longer want to feel that way.  They don’t know what to do.  And so they run.  They leave.  They are not running to something; they are running away.

 

How my friends now ache wanting to wrap their arms around their little girl, saying, “It’s ok.  We’re here for you.  We’ll walk through this together.  And there is absolutely nothing in this world that happens, that God isn’t big enough to handle.  There is nothing you have done or can do that will make God — or us —  love you any less.  He is real.  He is here.  And with his help, nothing is impossible.”  In other words, my friends know that circumstances are incapable of changing who God is and how he so desires to have a relationship with each of his children.

 

But instead, we choose to run.

 

We run from God.

 

Ok, ok, so our running may not appear as painstakingly obvious as beautiful Grace.  Adults are a little better (and definitely more intentional) at covering up and managing the impressions other people have of us.  We don’t necessarily leave our homes and abandon our families, but we do get caught up in foolish approaches and responses; then what happens?

 

We begin to justify the dysfunction, discord, arrogance, and lack of respect for others.  We justify them in the name of passion or emotion.  We inflate our sense of self, as our circumstances now blind the reality of God’s existence and who he really is and what he calls us to do.

 

Pray for Grace.  That she would come home.  Pray for the family.  That they would be blessed with an uncanny sense of peace and would continue to trust God…  that they would trust him regardless of circumstance.

 

That’s the message for us all.  Can we trust him?  Can we believe in him?  Can we recognize the reality of God’s existence?  Or will we allow heartbreaking circumstances — perhaps even a parent’s worst nightmare — to get in the way?

 

Respectfully… for you, sweet Grace…

AR

Posted on

hating politics

I hate politics.  Ok, so really… that’s kind of a lie.  Sorry, I attempt to be transparent.  I’m also very human.  While several of you consider yourselves among that camp (a camp that includes my very respected spouse), I do not hate politics.  If, however, there were ever days when the Intramuralist was most tempted, Monday and Tuesday were two.

 

From this semi-humble vantage point, politics is a tool that is best used as an ethical, responsible means to govern and assist people.  When I come to the proverbial breaking point where the thought of “hate” creeps into my head, it’s typically prompted by a distortion of that responsible means — typically, too, made manifest via the perception of either arrogance or self-servingness.  It’s a point where what’s best for the country seems secondary to some other motive — a motive which may or may not be able to be discerned with certainty.

 

Afford me first the grace to offer both caveat and confession…

All parties and all people are capable of arrogance.  All parties and people are capable of self-servingness.  I am equally capable.  Note:  neither Democrats nor Republicans are overwhelmingly noted for their outstanding ethics; neither is known to consistently put what’s best for the country first.

 

Hence, follow the sequence of events leading to Monday and Tuesday…

 

Both Pres. Bush and Pres. Obama promised to enact immigration reform.  Bush promised it within term 2; Obama promised it within year 1 of term 1.  Neither prioritized such as promised.  With arguably up to 12 million persons living in this country illegally — impacting our workplace, healthcare system, etc. — this is an issue that undoubtedly has bipartisan appeal (hence, the promises)… hence, also, why the Intramuralist believes this is not a partisan issue.

 

Consistent with that thinking, on Monday, a group of 8 leading senatorial voices (which included Dick Durbin, John McCain, Marco Rubio, and Chuck Schumer) excitedly and incredibly respectfully announced the bipartisan agreement they crafted in order to deal with this challenge well.  Look at the polls.  Citizens have no desire for “liberal rule,” “conservative rule,” or anyone’s dictatorship; they want — we want — effective, bipartisan agreement.  American citizens do not seem to believe that one party has the complete and always correct way.  Hence, Monday’s bipartisan agreement — where both Democrats and Republicans had to “give” on something and were still excited about it — seemed a potential, effective solution.

 

That solution may still exist.  It may not.

 

On Tuesday, the President decided it was necessary to announce his immigration proposal.  He flew to Las Vegas and back to D.C. solely to deliver this address (note:  such a trip costs taxpayers an estimated $1.6 million).  While commending the senators for their announced actions, Obama added that the Senate must move fast, saying, “If Congress is unable to move forward in a timely fashion, I will send up a bill based on my proposal and insist that they vote on it right away.”  The President’s proposal seemingly differs from the mixed group of senators in that it does not require border security prior to offering free legal status.

 

As a person who (does not) hate politics — and questions this of all parties — I question the motive of the President’s speech.  Was the proposed bipartisan solution not enough?  Was the senators’ joint excitement not ample to keep the momentum rolling toward achieving what’s best for our country?  Or does there exist some secondary motive — something that true, we cannot discern with certainty?

 

In the White House Press Secretary’s daily Monday briefing, Jay Carney added the following:  “I think it’s important before we let the moment pass to acknowledge that the progress we’re seeing embodied in the principles put forward by this bipartisan group is happening for a reason: I think it’s happening because consensus is developing in the country, a bipartisan consensus, and it’s happening because the President has demonstrated significant leadership on this issue.”  [emphasis mine]

 

“Because the President.”  President Bush?  President Obama?  My sense is that who is responsible pales in comparison to actual solution.

 

Wait.  Allow me one more significant tangent prior to this post’s end…

If you find yourself excessively irritated or joyfully ‘amen-ing’ at today’s dialogue, please be aware of the prodigious potential for naiveté on each of our parts.  Know that persons from both parties have secondary motives, and also know that no politician is exempt from hidden motive, regardless of how much of our admiration they tend to attract.

 

Ok, ok… enough…  I don’t really hate politics.  It’s just that sometimes both parties really tempt me.

 

Respectfully,

AR

Posted on

whoa whoa whoa feelings

Sunday morning the pastor took a quick poll in morning worship:  “How many of you had a leisurely, relaxing morning, and everything went smoothly on the way here?”

 

That was quickly followed by:  “How many of you have had a stressful morn so far?”

 

I swiftly raised my hand to the second of those 2 Q’s (… love the freedom and grace to be authentic on Sunday mornings…).  My morning stunk.  My youngest son had a major meltdown.

 

When I refer to a major meltdown, I mean major.  It was ugly and loud and nothing I’d want noticed when focused too much on Impression Management 101.  It didn’t make either my son nor me look good.  He was a mess.  So was I.

 

Not only was Josh a mess, but he was disobedient and disrespectful.  He was tired and cranky and such evolved into obstinacy and arrogance.  Like I said, it was ugly.

 

Every now and then, I find one of those rare moments of parenting when everything within me seems to converge, and I humbly realize this is a huge teaching moment.  My sense is that such probably occurs a whole lot more often than I realize; but far too frequently I am too impatient, too busy, or too self-focused to recognize the meaning of the moment.  I am too distracted by daily life to teach the lessons that will serve my kids for all their life.

 

Not last Sunday morning.

 

As my son’s temper turned to tears and his disrespect morphed not-so-calmly into regret, I simply sat beside him — silently but not ostensibly nor overtly compassionate.  Truth be told, my heart welled will enormous compassion — recognizing the potential teaching of the time.

 

Josh’s body, which previously shook in accordance with all tears, was calm now.  The tears, though, continued to quietly, abundantly flow.  After a few more pregnant pauses, Josh drudgingly but deliberately raised his eyes to meet mine.  “I’m sorry.”  The sincere admission prompted even more tears, but now he was listening.  Now he could hear me.  Now was the time my words were most important, carrying the most significant of weight.

 

“Josh, you have to choose to be obedient no matter how you feel.  You still have to choose what’s right.”

 

Therein lay my ‘a-ha’ for the week; my words to this precious, teachable young man were words so much of the rest of the world has so obviously, so quickly, and so seemingly, callously discounted.  We aren’t even always so young.  And certainly, we are not always nor even consistently teachable.  Of course, the Intramuralist often wonders as to why.  I suppose we’re too often too impatient, busy, or self-focused; we’re distracted by daily life.  Arguably instead, we are distracted by emotion.  Our emotion tends to trump what is right.

 

Instead of choosing what’s right no matter how we feel, my strong sense is that the rest of the watching world is more likely to actually change what they previously perceived as right.  Instead of consistently doing the right thing, we allow our emotions to justify what we once knew to be wrong; we allow our emotions to actually change what the right thing is…

 

“Because I feel this way, it must be right…”

 

Perhaps we’re too emboldened by our self-serving practice of Impression Management; perhaps we are so emboldened that we don’t actually articulate the practice aloud, although the bottom line point remains the same…

 

We aren’t always as teachable as my precious, young Joshua.

 

True, Josh has much to learn.  So do we.  Hopefully, none of us will continue to be so distracted.

 

Respectfully,

AR

Posted on

minority status

Let’s push the envelope a bit today, shall we?  In fact, it’s quite possible that today’s post may be our most controversial.  Maybe it will ruffle the most figurative feathers.  Please know that’s not my intent; ruffling feathers — regardless as to how figurative — but ruffling for the sole sake of ruffling seems a futile exercise indeed.  My goal has always been to wisely and correctly handle words of truth.

 

Yet in the seemingly continual, digressing state of society — where discouraging words are too often heard and far more than deer and antelope play — big is considered better; more is always best; and the majority is irrefutably wise.

 

The Intramuralist does not agree.  Big is not always better.  More is not always best.  And often it is the minority which offers the most prudent message.  Yes, the minority often possesses the greatest strength and keenest insight.  Granted (and such is said with an undeniable, sober sigh), the minority often face unfathomable, dire challenge; also true, no less, is that the existence of the challenge has the power and potential to strengthen the person and thus prompt that incredible insight.  In other words, the minority often possess the greatest blessing.  And yet, my ruffling sense is that the minority too often give that blessing away.

 

Reflect upon the minority for a moment…

 

A minority marked by race, religion, gender, or geographics…

A minority marked by ambition, achievement, or athletic competition…

A minority marked by perspective, potential, or political position…

A minority marked by intelligence, institution, or physical impairment…

A minority marked by skin color, school, or social standing…

 

Regardless of what distinguishes the group, the minority is the smaller number — by some part lesser than half the whole.

 

Regardless of being “lesser,” within that minority still, we find incredible insights, values, and places of personal and corporate growth…

 

Among them, perhaps?  … humility… perseverance and pride…  work ethic and wisdom… faith and self-awareness…  (… did I mention humility?)

 

The majority, however, is instead too often marked by an unattractive arrogance —  possessing no perceived desire nor even believed need to persevere.  Far too often the majority even replaces faith and self-awareness with an over emphasis on self.

 

So what happens when minorities grow?  … in number?  … in power?  … in significance?  What happens when their numbers evolve into that bigger half of the whole?

 

My prudent hope would be that we/they would remember where we came from… that if we were ever once in the minority we would not forget the values learned nor the blessing gained that evolve when meeting challenges wisely…

 

Too often, though, I think we fall prey to simply adapting and absorbing the unattractive traits observed in many of the majority…

 

Humility is zapped for arrogance…  Faith and self-awareness are replaced with that over importance of self.

 

Regardless of what marks one as a minority — by race, gender, or Senate standing — by not making the playoffs or by a lower GPA — regardless of what distinguishes us and places us within any lesser or bigger half of the whole — may we hold on to the humility that propelled us to persevere.  May we hold onto the blessing.

 

P.S.  Blessing is good.

 

Respectfully,

AR

Posted on

executive orders… round 2

In recent days, there has been much conversation about the appropriateness and legality of bypassing the legislative process via executive order.  The Intramuralist is certainly no expert, yet as Pres. Obama averred his presumed certain authority to exert specific decrees, my mind wandered (albeit fairly facetiously) as to what decrees I would declare, should I perceive such authority…

 

… I hereby declare that all young men under the age of 23 must pull up their pants, with underwear waistlines fully covered…

 

… I hereby declare that no texting, Facebook, Twitter, or alternative social media shall substitute for authentic dialogue…

 

… I hereby declare that Congress and the White House must work together and actually listen to one another…

 

… I hereby declare that Congress cannot simply, solely arrogantly obstruct the desires of the White House…

 

… I hereby declare that the White House cannot simply, solely arrogantly decide what is wisest and what is not…

 

… I hereby declare that Pres. Obama must discontinue use of the self-focused phrase “I won”…

 

… I hereby declare that the government can no longer spend more money than it takes in…

 

… I hereby declare that again…

 

… and again…

 

… I hereby declare that the Constitution must be adhered to…

 

… I hereby declare that term limits be imposed immediately…

 

… I hereby declare that radio stations must quit over-playing “Gangnam Style”…

 

… I hereby declare that “Keeping Up the Kardashians” is not reality…

 

… I hereby declare that most all reality shows are not reality…

 

… I hereby declare that we will no longer borrow money from China…

 

… I hereby declare that we will no longer borrow money from anyone…

 

… I hereby declare that we will not print money in order to make money, thus decreasing the American dollar in value…

 

… I hereby declare that no one is allowed to scare people via the inexact science of global warming or climate change…

 

… I hereby declare that no one is allowed to scare the elderly via inflammatory rhetoric so that they will be more prone to vote a certain way…

 

… I hereby declare that politicians will not and cannot lie… ever…

 

… I hereby declare that I will not and cannot lie… ever…

 

… I hereby declare that no politician will overlook what is good or right or true in order to advance their own political agenda…

 

… I hereby declare that no more executive “actions” or orders will be allowed.

 

By this I stand.

 

This is enough.

 

… albeit even facetiously…

 

Respectfully,

AR

Posted on

blessing in the bad

Every now and then, the Intramuralist semi-gracefully stumbles upon a truth which is so counter-cultural — an ideal or behavior that seemingly opposes all prudence.  In other words, there exist areas of wisdom that the world completely fails to comprehend…  where society thinks one way… often fairly adamantly… often obliviously… often, unfortunately, at its own peril.

 

Lately, the Intramuralist has been observing society’s reaction toward suffering.  Let’s face it; there’s been a lot of “bad stuff” happening…

 

… people out of work… government bickering… Sandy Hook… Hurricane Sandy…

… death… divorce… distance between friends…

… not enough money… not enough time… sickness…

… sick children… fighting… debt… more debt…

… friends losing houses… families losing jobs… neighbors not knowing how to put food on the table each night…

 

Trials and temptations, negative circumstances, scenarios which are simply incredibly difficult to endure.  There’s been a lot of “bad stuff.”

 

Most of us — maybe, possibly, most all of us — perceive the “bad stuff” as exactly that:   bad.  Hence, we work tirelessly to alleviate the “badness” — to eradicate any situation in which suffering exists.

 

There’s only one, glaring glitch embedded within that pursuit.  If we eradicate all the “bad,” my sense is that we miss the surprising, bountiful blessing within…

 

  • Blessed are those who are poor… who are thus more likely to realize their need for God — and not allow arrogance to get in the way…
  • Blessed are those who are grieving… who are thus more likely to seek out lasting comfort — and not fall prey to numbing themselves via merely temporary means…
  • Blessed are those who don’t succeed… who thus have opportunity to learn to genuinely celebrate the success of another…
  • Blessed are those whose best laid plans have completely fallen through… who are less likely to struggle with their need to dominate or control…
  • Blessed are those who must sacrifice… who are then more likely to comprehend what is valuable and what is not…
  • Blessed are those who cannot care for themselves… who are thus more likely to appreciate the authenticity of selfless service — and in turn encourage service in others…
  • Blessed are those who have tragically lost a loved one… who are far more likely to long for something more eternal than this planet…
  • Blessed are those whose children have disappointed them… who have intensified opportunity to recognize what’s most important to teach — and surrender that which is minimal…
  • Blessed are those who cry… for they have learned the beauty of empathy…
  • Blessed are those who have less… for they are less likely to take life for granted…

 

Friends, we work to eradicate negative circumstances.  And while I would wish such specific circumstances on no one, I am concerned at the bountiful blessings society seems to simply ignore — that it completely fails to comprehend.  It’s almost as if in our perceived pursuit of rights, fairness, and entitlement — each which possesses some value — we forget that there exists blessing in the “bad.”  Joy lies ahead even amidst the trial.  Hence, if we eradicate what is arduous, if we abolish the “bad” — no matter how adamantly — we may also eradicate the blessing…

 

… and the waning wisdom of society.

 

Respectfully,

AR

Posted on

executive orders

In the wake of emotion following the shock of Sandy Hook, this coming Tuesday, a Washington group led by VP Joe Biden plans to place on the desk of the President their recommendations regarding increased gun control and safety.  Foreshadowing their report, Biden publicly remarked that while multiple options remain, “The President is going to act.  There are executives orders — executive action that can be taken.”

 

U.S. presidents have been taking “executive action” for over 200 years.  While these orders are not legislation, they still are accompanied by full force of law.  The reality is there is no specific constitutional provision for the decrees, but there exists a vague granting of executive power in Article II.  The idea is that presidents issue executive orders in order to assist in operational management of federal agencies or to carry out what they perceive as their unequivocal, “constitutional responsibilities.”   That’s what the orders are supposed to do; however, through the years — as for some reason seems typical in contemporary culture — we have digressed…

 

Initially, executive orders were issued for such as the following:

 

  •   On December 25, 1868, Pres. Andrew Johnson pardoned “all and every person who directly or indirectly participated in the late insurrection or rebellion” related to the Civil War (the “Christmas Proclamation”).

 

  • In 1861, Pres. Abraham Lincoln used presidential directives to run the early months of the Civil War.  Within his first two months in office, Lincoln issued a proclamation activating troops to defeat the Southern rebellion; he also issued proclamations to procure warships and to expand the size of the military.

 

  •   After World War II began, Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the interment of Japanese-Americans — thinking they may be a threat — thereby impacting more than 120,000 Japanese-Americans, even though many were U.S. citizens.  Note:  it is widely believed that in FDR’s clear growth of government, expansion of the extent of executive orders was also his practice.

 

Via executive order, Teddy Roosevelt protected 130 million acres of land and created 5 national parks.  Pres. Ford pardoned Richard Nixon.  Executive orders have been arbitrarily and subjectively utilized, all via one man’s discretion… albeit one very powerful man.

 

Don’t let me also act as if all of the above was deemed categorically constitutional; much, in fact — even then — was controversial.  Conventional wisdom tells us that Lincoln’s actions were most likely unconstitutional, and the purported cruelty of Roosevelt’s executive orders has been debated for decades.

 

Still, as alluded to, through the years, executive orders have digressed; they have become seemingly more arbitrary and albeit, more political.  Such as…

 

  • In reaction to 9/11, Pres. George W. Bush created the Dept. of Homeland Security.

 

  • On March 16, 2012, Pres. Obama gave the White House absolute control over all the country’s natural resources in case of a natural disaster or during a time of war.

 

There is more.

 

Friends, herein lies the challenge…

 

If you are a supporter of Pres. Obama, the probability is that you wholeheartedly support his executive orders.  If you were a supporter of Pres. Bush 43, you most likely supported his decrees.  The challenge is that wisdom must be adhered to regardless of who is president.  For example, should any president decide he or she has the discernment skills to dictate the approach to the economy — meaning proceed via executive order — such would scare me.  For example, as much as I respect Pres. Obama, his economic background, in my opinion, is strikingly minimal.  Hence, should he enact any executive order affecting our economic future, the Intramuralist would question the inherent wisdom.

 

Gun control?  Gun control?  Did VP Biden misspeak once again?  Or is it totally ok to bypass Congress and simply dictate one’s opinion, assuming it is wisest and best?  Is it ok to bypass bipartisan debate?  Is it wise?  Or is it arrogant?

 

Great questions.  Guess we’ll see on Tuesday.

 

Respectfully,

AR