Current Event – Page 75 – intramuralist ™

07/09/201607/09/2016

man, not god

As I watch the events of recent days unfold — and even more so, watch people respond to recent events, sometimes wisely, sometimes not — my thoughts are a bit in overdrive… “How do we solve this? How do we fix the problems? And what exactly is/are the problems?” … And every now and then a person avers with all certainty exactly what we are to do to fix the problem. They typically blame a singular people group. I contend that rarely, is a single people group to blame.

I haven’t yet organized my thoughts surrounding the events in Dallas and Minneapolis to a place where I can articulate them concisely and well (… I have noticed that others have also not, even though some have still qualified as social media rants). However, prior to these incidents, I was thinking of how often we think we’ve got it all figured out… “All we have to do is _____!” (… exclamation points always included…) And then we act as if we are so wise… we know so much. And I am reminded of the following wisdom…

“But you are a man and not a god…
though you think you are wise as a god.”

My sense is such words were not casually written, and yet, so much of me is quick to dismiss. I think…

Of course, I don’t think I’m wise as a god. What would ever give off that impression?

And yet again…

Sometimes I think I’m so right, there’s no way I could be wrong.

Sometimes I fully declare “this is the right thing to do” — and then entertain no serious consideration of varied opinion.

Sometimes I look down on other people… (… granted, sometimes I’m really good at hiding it… sometimes not…).

Sometimes I creatively chastise other people — maybe I’m clever about it — maybe not. And if not verbally, I may allow the disrespectful thoughts to flow fluidly through my brain. I often fail to take such thoughts captive.

Sometimes I announce my opinion in such a way that it makes others around me feel as something lesser… less valued, less respected, less smart.

Sometimes I don’t care that others feel lesser.

Sometimes I say I love and accept all people — only to love and accept only those who most often agree with me.

Sometimes I refuse to submit to anyone other than myself.

Sometimes, even, I think that “submission” is a bad word.

Sometimes I act as if unity isn’t important.

Sometimes still, I don’t give a crud who is hurt by my expressions… (…”If it’s my conviction, then I’m going to state it for all the world to hear, daggone-it…”).

Sometimes I just love to hear myself speak.

Sometimes I act as if I care about the entire world, when my articulations allude to caring most about me.

Sometimes “I/me/my/myself” are my most frequent prepositions.

Sometimes I fail to love others well.

Sometimes I don’t care that I don’t empathize with those I don’t love well.

…

Yes, sometimes I think I’m wise as a god. But I am not.

It’s important that we remember that now.

Respectfully…
AR

07/07/201607/07/2016

email analogy

(Dare we wade into much rhetorically wrangled waters, allow me to humbly attempt to address the following…)

On Tuesday FBI Director James Comey announced that they would not be recommending criminal charges against presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. According to Comey — who is widely respected on all sides of the political aisle — Clinton’s activities were not criminal; they were, however, “extremely careless.”

The reason, no less, for my trepidatious step into this topic is because Hillary Clinton is one of those “hear-and-proclaim-what-you-want” kind of topics… For those who think she is as awful and evil as a radical Islamic terrorist, they will proclaim the vicious villain again escaped just consequence… For those who think she is as wonderful and selfless as Mother Theresa, they will proclaim the suffering public servant never meant any wrong.

Recognizing that compromise is not always wisest nor accurate — knowing, for example, that you can’t split a baby in half — allow me five takeaways…

#1 — Too much money was spent on this investigation. (Sadly, too much money is spent all the time in Washington.)

#2 — This was political. On all sides. For those who both fiercely support or oppose Clinton, politics is in play. I don’t, though, believe we can ascertain that statement about Dir. Comey. That cannot be known for certain from each of our limited vantage points.

#3 — Hillary Clinton is not guilty, but she is also not innocent. Comey contradicted her repeated claims that none of the emails were classified at the time she saw them. Clinton did not always tell the truth.

#4 — Intent is always difficult to measure; it’s so subjective, and none of us are in the head of another. Hence, an accurate assessment of Clinton’s utmost intent most likely parallels where she falls on one’s individually assessed, “vicious villain to suffering servant” spectrum.

I realize the above are challenging, given the volatility and lack of objectivity on this lightning-rod-like topic. Let me add, though, #5, my final, albeit still many-won’t-like-it analogy. Follow, my analogy from “March Madness”…

In March of each year, even the non-fanatical fan hangs out in front of their big screen TV to watch one of the year’s purest sporting events. We fill out our brackets, choose our upsets, and soon wad up the remnants as one by one, our selections succumb to the conference powerhouses and surprisingly mighty underdogs. It’s college basketball’s year end tournament: the annual national championship. Everyone’s watching and paying attention!

Near the end of many of these key games, there seems a desire to let the game play itself out. While a game might be closely refereed throughout most of the contest, as a tight game ekes into it’s closing seconds — with the game and fame totally on the line — the refs have a tendency to let the players play. They want this game to be won or lost based on actual play — not on some controversial, perceived to be major or minor development — even though the development is real.

The main player drives hard down the lane, attempting to score, and there’s clearly, distinct physical contact — it’s a foul. But what do the refs do? Do they call the foul? Do they blow the whistle on something that everyone knows is not right, but they know will totally disrupt the flow of the game?

The refs often… let it go. The assessment of how bad the foul actually is then depends on who each fan was rooting for…

Half cry out, “Are you blind?? That’s egregious! That’s a foul!!”

The other half confidently adds, “It wasn’t that bad. Everybody does it.”

In other words, the “no call” ensures the end result is not significantly influenced by the referee.

(Note: they do call it “madness” for a reason.)

Respectfully…
AR

07/03/201607/03/2016

in search of genius

As often noted, every now and then I run across an editorial that strikes me as profoundly insightful, uniquely creative, or just a better way to say what I’m thinking. Perhaps each of these is true in the recent words of author Peggy Noonan.

Let me first say, as that semi-humble current events observer, I have the utmost respect for Noonan. She is an American author who has written several books on politics, religion, and culture. She has served previously as both a commentary writer for Dan Rather at CBS News and a speech writer for Ronald Reagan in the White House. Her words, in fact, after the space shuttle Challenger’s explosion — drawing upon the poet John Magee’s famous words about aviators who “slipped the surly bonds of earth… and touched the face of God” — is considered one of the best American political speeches of the 20th century. Noonan excels at articulating the heart of the matter.

Last week in her weekly column for the Wall Street Journal, Noonan reflected on the lack of strong leadership in the world today. She called it a “world in crisis” with “no genius in sight.”

Isn’t that part of the challenge these days? We crave authentic, wise, shepherding leadership; and yet it’s rare. Strong personalities, extensive resumes, and extraordinary talent are not enough; we crave something better and more.

For Noonan, this observation was most recently spurred on by what happened in Great Britain and the European Union — with Britain exiting the EU. She writes:

“The leaders of the world aren’t a very impressive group right now. There’s a sense with some of them of playing out a historical or cultural string, that they’re placeholders in some way. Many are young, yet so much around them feels tired.

Which has me thinking, again, of the concept of the genius cluster. They happen in history and no one knows why. It was a genius cluster that invented America. Somehow Franklin, Jefferson, Washington, Adams, Madison, Hamilton, Jay and Monroe came together in the same place at the same time and invented something new in the history of man. I asked a great historian about it once. How did that happen? He’d thought about it too. ‘Providence,’ he guessed.

There was a small genius cluster in World War II — FDR, Churchill, de Gaulle. I should note I’m speaking of different kinds of political genius. There was a genius cluster in the 1980s — John Paul II, Reagan, Thatcher, Vaclav Havel, Lech Walesa, Lee Kuan Yew in his last decade of leadership in Singapore.

The military genius cluster of World War II — Marshall, Eisenhower, Bradley, Montgomery, Patton, MacArthur, Nimitz, Bull Halsey, Stilwell — almost rivaled that of the Civil War — Grant, Lee, Stonewall, Sherman, Sheridan, Longstreet.

Obviously genius clusters require deep crises, otherwise their gifts are not revealed. Historic figures need historic circumstances. Also members of genius clusters tend to pursue shared goals.

We have those conditions now — the crises, and what should be shared goals.

Everything feels upended, the old order that has governed things for 70 years since World War II being swept away. Borders have disappeared before our eyes. Terrorism, waves of immigration transforming whole nations, Islam at war with itself and parts of it at war with the world. In the West, the epochal end of public faith in institutions, and a dreadful new tension between the leaders and the led. In both background and foreground is a technological revolution that has actually changed how people experience life.

It is a world crying out for bigness, wisdom, steady hands and steady eyes.
We could use a genius cluster.

I’m not quite seeing its members coming, are you? Maybe they’re off somewhere gaining strength. But the point we’re in feels more like what a Hollywood director said was the central tension at the heart of all great westerns: ‘the villain has arrived while the hero is evolving.’

Let’s hope some evolve soon.”

Yes, let’s hope.

Respectfully… and a Happy 4th…
AR

06/30/201606/30/2016

self-selecting the truth

As one who believes in promoting good and extinguishing evil, I find myself again pondering how to articulate our wrestling after another terrorist attack… I hate evil. I know I’m not alone in that. As articulated frequently here, there aren’t a lot of things I hate — and remember, I try to only hate what I perceive God hating (which, by the way, does not include any people or people group) — but… I do hate what motivates a person to intentionally take the life of the innocent.

This is not about anything else. It’s not about gun control, foreign policy, or any kind of phobia. It’s not about statistics, economics, or any long term research study.

This is about an organized group of people within one religion, who have embraced the command included in their holy book to kill the person who does not believe what they do, arguably believing that their call to combat is against those fighting against the established Muslim state.

This perceived call to combat is not a new idea; it’s not something that instantly arose when Pres. Bush grabbed that blow horn amid the rubble and boldly announced that “the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon.” In fact, in his October 2001 video, terrorist Osama bin Ladin mentioned the “humiliation and disgrace” tormenting Islam for “more than 80 years.” He was referring to an 1918 Islamic defeat of the once mighty Ottoman Empire.

My intent is not to dive into all aspects of Islam or all that drives some in their hatred of the Western world. My perspective is no doubt limited at best, as I’d pose, most of ours is. My point, no less, is to acknowledge our struggle in solving this problem and extinguishing the evil. On one hand, some pronounce the need to go after the terrorists in their terrorist-hosting countries and blow the crap out of them; on the other hand, some boast that Islam is an entirely peaceful religion and we just need to love them better.

Yikes. I unfortunately see two groups of people telling us what we most want to hear instead of really wrestle with the truth. They then lure the rest of us into adopting their manipulated perspective instead of carefully examining all the ins, outs, and relevant aspects of this problem — even though solution only comes via correctly handling the truth. Yes, most Muslims are peaceful. But also yes, many Muslims are bent on killing us. Both are true.

This manipulative attempt seems in constant motion. Look, for example, at how the concluding report on what happened in Benghazi was handled this week, saturated by media attempts to lure us to a skewed side. I borrow from Issie Lapowsky, an articulate staff writer for WIRED.com:

“If you were to read the way the left wing and right wing media were covering the newly released report on the attacks in Benghazi today, you could be forgiven for thinking they were referring to two entirely different documents…

If you’re an American voter, trying to decide whether or not [Hillary] Clinton was responsible for the deaths of four Americans in Libya in 2012 — which was, after all, one of the chief missions of the House Select Committee on Benghazi — which story do you believe? The answer: Whichever one you want.

It is the beauty and the tragedy of the Internet age. As it becomes easier for anyone to build their own audience, it becomes harder for those audience members to separate fact from fiction from the gray area in between. As media consumers, we now have the freedom to self-select the truth that most closely resembles our existing beliefs, which makes our media habits fairly good indicators of our political beliefs.”

Look at what’s happening; whether we wrestle with Benghazi or the terror that happened Tuesday in Istanbul or this morning in Afghanistan, the media fuels our increasing inability to separate fact from fiction. They — and thus we — are skewing objectivity.

Skewed objectivity is not objectivity. Self-selected truth is not truth. We thus have to find a more authentic, effective way to deal with evil.

Respectfully…
AR

06/26/2016

brexit

Some say this was far more significant than any development with the Donald or the Hillary. On Thursday evening, most citizens of Great Britain went to sleep seemingly believing they were still part of the European Union (EU) — a politico-economic structure to which they had belonged since 1973. On Friday, they awoke to a voting result stipulating the opposite. The people voted. With record turnout, 52% chose to exit the EU. “Brexit,” it’s been called. But what does it mean?

We’ve been told it means a lot of things…

British Prime Minister David Cameron long articulated that “Britain is stronger, safer and better” as part of the EU. He resigned after the vote.
Pres. Obama — saying now he will “respect their decision” — previously said Britain would “find themselves in the back of the queue” in regard to trade deals, if they exited.
Donald Trump said it’s “a great thing.”
United Kingdom Independence Party leader Nigel Farage said, “We’ve got our country back.”
German’s Angela Merkel expressed “deep regret.”
English singer and songwriter Ellie Goulding said, “I truly believe this is one of the most devastating things to happen during my lifetime.”
English actress and model Elizabeth Hurley thought it was excellent, saying, “And suddenly the birds are singing.”
And comedian Ricky Gervais tweeted, “Terrible day for Britain. Great day for Twitter though.”

The reactions have been nothing less than mixed.

Regardless of advocacy or opposition, part of me wonders if the people knew exactly what they were voting for. I sometimes think we listen more to the media, pundits, and politicians than actually exercise individual discernment. As my older, wise bro pointed out, in fact, in the wake of this significant vote, Google Trends listed the top searches in the UK about the EU as follows:

What does it mean to leave the EU?
What is the EU?
Which countries are in the EU?
What will happen now we’ve left the EU?
How many countries are in the EU?

Did the citizens know what they were voting for? Or were they influenced more by the media and rhetoric as opposed to actually weighing the issues and discerning the outcome (… sigh… bet we never do that here…).

There will be an economic impact — although the specifics remain uncertain. At one point on Friday, the British currency hit a 30 year low. Note, too, that 3% of American earnings come from England; hence, America will also be affected. But as all good economists know, economic impact is assessed over time — not in any instant.

So at this point, as an obvious outsider, allow me to make a few observations, absent the media, rhetoric, or any strong opinion on this issue…

First, it will take many months and even years to fully comprehend the consequences of this referendum — positive or negative. No one has ever left the EU before.

Second, immigration seemed to be a significant driver of this vote; people have wrestled with the wisest way to handle open immigration — especially with the ongoing refugee crisis in Europe. How does each country find a balance in welcoming the huddled masses yearning to be free, but not allow the influx to alter the values and freedom that prompted their initial attractiveness to the country?

Next — and perhaps this is a little ambiguous — but I’m a little uncomfortable by all those — especially from so far away — who seem to maintain an “I-know-what’s-best-for-you” attitude. This is Great Britain’s vote. I figure they know better than me.

And lastly, as written in a succeeding LA Times editorial: “It does mean that politicians — and not just those on the banks of the Thames in Westminster — need to wake up. On both sides of the Atlantic, governments and politics are not working.”

Respectfully…
AR

06/21/201606/21/2016

editing aspects of truth

Still wrestling with Orlando… why? Because it was awful.

Why else? Because it continues to be challenging the way many respond… again, this past weekend.

Borrowing from one of the Intramuralist’s fave sites, RealClearPolitics.com…

The Washington Post reported last week that the gunman made multiple phone calls while holding hostages: “The gunman who opened fire inside a nightclub here said he carried out the attack because he wanted ‘Americans to stop bombing his country,’ according to a witness who survived the rampage.”

Salon reported that: “Everybody who was in the bathroom who survived could hear him talking to 911, saying the reason why he’s doing this is because he wanted America to stop bombing his country.”

The Washington Post also noted that during his 911 call from the club, the gunman referenced the Boston Marathon bombers and claimed “that he carried out the shooting to prevent bombings, [echoing] a message the younger Boston attacker had scrawled in a note before he was taken into custody by police.”

In other words, the murderer clearly claimed his allegiance to radical Islamic terrorism.

On Sunday, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced that the Justice Dept. would be intentionally editing the 911 transcripts from that fateful evening — removing those Islamic pledges of allegiance. They then released the redacted transcript — no audio — later on Monday morning.

Her motive?

“The reason why we’re going to limit these transcripts is to avoid revictimizing those who went through this horror,” said Lynch.

Interesting…

If such is the full, sole motive, then I am assuming this precedent will be set for other horrific, violent acts…

… if someone attempts to blow up an abortion clinic… if someone is viciously raped… if someone targets black people… Jewish people… police officers…

So “revictimizing” is a justified reason to omit details?

As simply a semi-humble current events observer (and as always, the emphasis is on the “semi”), I question whether it’s rational, logical, and wise that the full and only motive is as the Attorney General states. With all due respect, I am not suggesting lies or deceit; I do not claim to know. I am merely saying that in our ongoing desire to wrestle with all aspects of the truth — hard as that may be some days — this just doesn’t make sense to me. The fact that the Orlando murderer was motivated by his violent interpretation of Islam is relevant to this crime. It is one aspect of the truth.

Let me also not assert that I know the entire motive for scrubbing the 911 transcripts; there is much I don’t understand… I don’t understand, for example, the purging of references regarding radical Islamic terrorism in government agent training manuals in recent years. My thought is that it would be wisest to include all aspects as a part of those trained to recognize potential problems.

So I wonder… Can we not deal with all aspects of the truth?

And if we decide it’s best to omit specific aspects, will we be consistent in the way we wrestle with others who commit such awful crimes? Will re-victimization be an acceptable reason for withholding details then? … for the non radical Islamic terrorist?

As usual, my wondering sometimes gets the best of me…

[Added update: after strong negative reaction to the Justice Dept.’s arbitrary decision to redact all references to Islam in the murderer’s 911 calls — from far more than the Intramuralist — the Justice Dept. reversed their Sunday declaration, releasing an uncensored transcript later on Monday. As for this observer, I continue to wonder…]

Respectfully…
AR

06/19/201606/19/2016

redirecting anger

The examples are seemingly endless. First is Col. Lawrence Wilkerson (Ret.): “If anybody is directly responsible for Orlando, it’s the Republican Party for stymieing all manner of gun control.”

Next is Sen. John McCain: “Barack Obama is directly responsible for it because when he pulled everybody out of Iraq, Al-Qaeda went to Syria, became ISIS, and ISIS is what it is today thanks to Barack Obama’s failures, utter failures, by pulling everybody out of Iraq.”

And let’s not omit ACLU attorney Chase Strangio, suggesting Christians are to blame: “You know what is gross — your [Christian] thoughts and prayers and Islamophobia after you created this anti-queer climate.”

I get it. We’re mad. We’re mad that someone could annihilate the innocent. It makes no sense. To all of us.

While conversations regarding gun control, Obama’s military strategy, and the truths in Christianity can and should be respectfully had, each of the above arguments directs the anger more at something other than the source. As stated in a recent post, we don’t know all the details yet in regard to what happened at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando. What we do know is that a Muslim man who claimed loyalty to ISIS, an Islamic terrorist organization that routinely executes homosexuals, took it upon himself to brutally murder 49 more.

My sense is our most intense anger should be directed at him.

It concerns me, nonetheless, when we redirect our anger. It’s as if when someone does not match the intensity of our passion, we assume they should be looped into the opposition. It’s as if we’ve changed the idea of “if you’re not for us, you’re against us” to “if you’re not as loud and angry as we are, you are just as bad as them.”

We seem to keep feeding the growing divide… the divide that too many of the politically expedient immediately succumb to. I was saddened, I will say, that in the immediate aftermath of the atrocity in Orlando, some of the most prominent politicians attacked their partisan opposition more than focusing on the victims. When we pounce on politics first, we have fed the division more than wrestled with the truth.

What happened in Orlando was awful. As said here previously, I believe it was the clear manifestation of evil. So regardless of whether you’re a Republican or Democrat (or like the many more seemingly gathering somewhere in the middle), whether you’re a card-carrying member of the NRA or desire to abolish the 2nd Amendment, or even if you’re a supporter or not of gay marriage as the law of this land, it doesn’t change the fact that what happened in Orlando was horrendous. And we can each see that regardless of partisan stance.

Now is not the time to chastise those who don’t share our intensity. Now is not the time to demand that everyone “agree with me” because only “I” know what is right. Now is also, no less, not the time to feed any division.

What if we could pause long enough to see what we have in common?

Republicans and Democrats…
Gay and straight…
NRA members and non-members…
Trans-bathroom supporters and non-supporters…

What if we realized that regardless of where each of the above stand on the issues with which they most identify, their hearts still hurt for what happened to those 49 innocent men and women in Orlando?

What would happen if we took the time to take a deep breath and realize that?

Maybe, just maybe, we then could wrestle with the truth. Maybe, too, we could heal.

Respectfully…
AR

06/14/201606/14/2016

this side of heaven

Every time we witness such a horrific event, we struggle with how to react. We are mad, sad, outraged, and more. The existence of evil on Earth is profoundly disturbing, and I pray we are never numb to it.

And so we cry out… we rant and rave… scream “how dare they.” Many of us will even change our Facebook profiles. This just hurts too much.

I am actually, soberly thankful that we are not numb. A society that is numb and fully fails to recognize evil is a society that I’m afraid will soon cease to exist. A society unwilling to acknowledge evil — therefore discarding any semblance of a moral compass — would seem to have lost any blessing or coverage from an omniscient, almighty God.

Let’s be clear: any time mass murder is targeted against a specific people group, it is evil; it is the clear absence of God.

And so I wrestle… how should we react?

I wish I could say that there was only one right answer with a singular fix, a sole perfect way to respond, and each of us simply needs to support and follow suit. But there is not. I think God gets the ranting and the raving… I think he also gets the crying out… I think he weeps.

Some of us then insist that we do whatever it takes to ensure this horror never happens again, no one is ever hurt, nor must we ever feel as awful as we do today. I admire that motive and emotion. I admire the desire to extinguish the evil.

Others still, call for peace, love, and the playground mantra of “can’t we all just get along.” This, too, is admirable.

The wrestling is whether our reactions are effective in the fight against evil.

The man responsible for the Orlando shooting early Sunday morning killed at least 49 people seemingly solely because they were part of the LGBT community. For my dear friends also a part of that community, I can’t imagine how that must feel. I know if I shared the same specificity for which the people group was targeted, my heart would hurt even more.

It’s true that we don’t know all the details of what happened; we may never know. Just like in Boston, San Bernardino, Ft. Hood, etc., it takes multiple days for details to be divulged. What we do know, however, is that the man was a Muslim, claimed allegiance to Islamic State, and ISIS claimed responsibility for the attack. While it’s illogical to judge all or most Muslims as terrorists, it is also illogical to ignore that many Muslims abhor various threads of current American culture — including homosexuality. Homosexual behavior is subject to severe legal punishment in many Muslim countries. ISIS routinely executes homosexuals, and on Sunday, the radical Islamic terrorist group called for more shootings in gay nightclubs across the globe.

That makes my heart again hurt more.

I wish there was a more effective way to wrestle with this evil rather than solely calling for greater gun control or invoking playground mantras. While each is a valid angle and worthy of discussion, neither will stop the man motivated by terror — the man bent on destroying another simply because of what the other believes. We must do more than that.

I also wish that it didn’t take a breaking news report about a shooting massacre to bind us together, in the recognition of the preciousness of life — and even more so, recognizing the preciousness of lives that are different than our own.

And so I find myself still wrestling, wondering how best to respond.

I will pray for peace for the families of the victims. I will pray that we each learn a little more what love really is — and learn to love those who are different than we.

And then — just as I believe the God of the universe often does — I will weep this side of heaven.

Respectfully…
AR

06/12/2016

how many days left?

One of my fave songs from last season’s phenomenal show choir season went as follows:

“Before last night, I was down on my luck
There was nothing going my way
Before last night, wasn’t feeling the love
No reason for a smile on my face
But I was always told, ‘You could turn it around,
Do it for the light of day
So get yourself together, head out on the town
The music gets you feelin’ okay’

Now I’m on a roll, and I’m losing control cause
I got that sunshine, it’s like the world is mine
I can’t deny I’m feelin’ good
Can’t stop from smiling, I’m bottled lightning
Oh, deep inside, I’m feelin’ good
All my heartbreak, my long and rainy days
Are gone, and now I can’t complain
Everything’s all right, I’m feelin’ so alive
I can’t deny I’m feelin’ good…

I got that sunshine, the world is mine
I’m feelin’ good
I feel it deep inside, I can’t deny
I’m feelin’ good
Everything’s all right, I’m so alive
I’m feelin’ good, I’m feelin’ good…”

The above song was from the talented Christina Grimmie, an American singer who found success via NBC’s “The Voice” in 2014.

On Friday night, after a concert, for currently unknown reasons, a 27 year old man intentionally shot and killed Christina, as she signed autographs at a merchandise table. Grimmie was only 22.

I’m reminded of our post only ten days ago, quoting the poignantly piercing words of Sheryl Sandberg, the Chief Operating Officer of Facebook. Sandberg delivered an unusual, albeit beautiful commencement address, where she recalled the unexpected, tragic loss of her young husband. Cutting through any comfort or coziness of the crowd, she asked the graduates:

“… Can you ask yourselves to live as if you had eleven days left?”

Realisticly, I don’t know that I can do that. And yet, none of us know the hour or the day. Christina Grimmie had no idea Friday would be mark the expiration of her days.

And so the question before us is not how long we live but whether we live our lives well… Do we live them for a greater purpose? Are we intentional? Do we do what we’re called to do? Do we encourage another? Do we come to grips with who God is and what he asks of his people?

What have we valued that matters so little?

What molehills have we made into mountains?

And what have we missed that means so much?

Where are we blind?

Sorry… my deep thoughts are plenty this day. It’s just that murder disturbs me. While the Intramuralist will always advocate for mercy, grace, and forgiveness in incredibly generous portions, I also believe that murder is a most arrogant act.

May God be with the family of Christina Grimmie. She only lived a short time, but “I can’t deny” she made her mark on me. I will forever both smile and shed tears at her song.

Respectfully…
AR

06/09/2016

raped

Perhaps by now you’ve read the story of the unconscious young woman who was raped by the college freshman. If you have not yet heard of it, let me start by saying it was awful. Awful… heartbreaking… heinous… disgusting. Pick whatever disturbing word you wish. It’s that bad.

20 year old Brock Turner went to Stanford on a swimming scholarship. Unrelated to this story, Turner was a three time All-American in high school. In January of 2015, he sexually assaulted an unconscious 23 year old. They were at a fraternity party. She was out of college and had a boyfriend, who was not in attendance; she had no intention of engaging physically with any other. Turner drank a lot; the young woman drank a lot — more liquor than her out-of-college body now tolerated, she stated. She did call her boyfriend during the evening, leaving an incomprehensible, slurred message. What ensued later that evening she does not remember in any capacity. It was relayed by a pair of graduate students who walked by, witnessed, and (thank God) stopped the horrific incident.

The woman was unconscious. She was totally out of it. She had been dragged behind a dumpster adjacent to the frat house, half of her clothes ripped off, with pine needles, etc. in multiple areas on and in her body. The witnesses shockingly saw Turner sexually violating a completely immobile, unresponsive, and clearly non-consenting woman.

12 jurors found Turner guilty on three felony counts, which are as follows (again, this is awful): (1) assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated or unconscious person, (2) sexual penetration of an intoxicated person, and (3) sexual penetration of an unconscious person. Note that “sexual penetration” is distinct from “rape,” as it involves any object or body part other than a sexual organ. Note, also, that Turner made no apology nor offered any admission of wrongdoing.

At sentencing last week, Turner faced 14 years in prison. Prosecutors had asked for 6. Guilty of three violent felonies, astonishingly, the judge gave him 6 months… (You read that correctly…) 6 months.

Please don’t mistake this as any race/privilege issue; no evidence suggests such. Allow me to instead return to the reference earlier identified as “unrelated” to this story. Truthfully, a more accurate phrasing is “should be unrelated”…

Brock Turner was a varsity swimmer — a reported Olympic hopeful. After Turner left the university and lost his scholarship, his father, Dan, who pleaded for leniency, responded: “His [Brock’s] life will never be the one that he dreamed about and worked so hard to achieve. That is a steep price to pay for 20 minutes of action out of his 20 plus years of life.”

“20 minutes of action”… “a steep price to pay.” I agree… but a steep price to pay does not mean the wrong price to pay. There are serious consequences for serious sins.

The judge actually said a harsher sentence would “have a severe impact on him”… Him.

Let’s be clear: there was only one victim in this instance, and it was not Brock Turner. Yes, I believe in forgiveness. Yes, I believe in mercy and grace. I also believe in justice. This sentence does not in any way appear just. This shockingly light sentence, in fact — which only paves the perception that losing his scholarship and Olympic dream was somehow enough — indicates that the judge valued the impact of the rapist’s consequences more than the impact of the violation of the victim. It furthers the fictional, societal notion held by far too many that rape isn’t as violent or criminal as we think. These kind of judgments — sentencing profound minimums, forgiving an offense because it’s one’s first, and reducing rape to the absurd description of any “minutes of action” — disturbingly fuel the normalization of rape — again, in too many people’s minds. That’s awful.

Let me sensitively add that I am also hesitant to join some of the succeeding public protests demanding re-sentencing. I have no desire for the loudness of the people to dictate appropriate consequence (see Salem, 1878). I do, however, believe in justice, restitution, repentance, and forgiveness. I just don’t believe we’ve witnessed any of it here.

What we have witnessed, no less, is an amazingly articulate victim, who read her poignant, 12 page account in court and shared it publicly. She is both bold and sincere — and honest about her own strengths, weaknesses, fears and failures. As one empathetic friend said, “Her words speak powerfully of the brutality of rape, the imperfection of our justice system, and the strength of the human soul.”

Indeed they do… all in the face of something awful and unjust.

Respectfully…
AR