Dazed and Confused

Have you ever woke up in the morning, looked around at the world, and found yourself being very disoriented?

This could describe a Sunday morning after a long night at the bars or it could be a description of how I really feel this morning.

And it's hard to put into words. But if I were to find just one word, it would be disbelief.

I find it hard to believe that I went to dinner with my wife last night and our babysitter was my "niece" who was only born a year or two ago, but has somehow managed to become a beautiful, responsible teenager. And today, the oldest child that she cared for as we dined last evening, was just dropped off at the kindergarten, where his scholastic career officially begins today. And how they can accept "babies" at school theses days? My little boy cannot be a little man already. he certainly is mature enough, but chronologically I can't believe that it is time for him to move into the world and begin to make his mark already.

And to make matters worse, my little girl was dropped off at daycare today. She can't be old enough already, can't be ready for daycare yet. Shes still daddy's baby girl. I have no fear of her being well taken care of, but she just can't be ready for this step. In two years and a couple months, we have not spent but maybe, and I mean maybe, three pieces of a day away from daddy. How did the time get here so quickly? I wasn't ready for this; I haven't prepared...

So in my attempt to cope with the new found absence of my children and this suddenly quiet house, I get on the Internet to see what is going on in the rest of the world. I try to escape my temporary sorrow until I better adjust, and I need a distraction. And nothing fits that bill as the Internet does.

But I find that my "escape" has turned out to have the quality of the tilt-a-whirl at the carnival; further causing vertigo and inducing nausea. Instead of helping me to find a barometer to measure reality or a compass on which to right my spinning head, I find myself even more confused and now wondering which direction is up and if my left hand is still on the left side of my body. Is up really up and is red still red? As I read the headlines and grow more confused, I look around to see if I am alone; for at this point I fully expect Rod Serling to walk into the room, smoking a cigarette, and describe my setting and how I have now entered the realm of the Twilight Zone.

The headlines and stories in the news destroy my concept of logic. Just as my children and their sudden arrival to their current stage in life has destroyed my concept of time and all things chronological.

My head reels as I read of someone killing someone because they oppose of their victim's killing of someone else. The logic seems to escape me. And lost in the story is that murder is only murder in certain cases, and those cases depend on legislation instead of morality. Otherwise murder is a choice if found within the confines of the law; so murder may or may not be a depraved moral or ethic.

Then I read that the citizens tax dollars are being further used to "bail out" a struggling auto maker, bringing the total to $50 billion in aid; and that the company that received the aid has now filed bankruptcy. From what I remember and understand, receiving money helps fight bankruptcy, not hurry along the process. I thought that lack of funds caused bankruptcy, not an increase. And I read now that a "private" company will now have the U.S. as 60% owner, Canada as 12% owner, a union health trust(whatever that is) will be 17.5% owner, and the bond holders will own 10%. I'm not told who owns the remaining.5% but I assume that is what is left of the "private" sector.

But is it the "private" sector? I thought that I spoke and read English, and that we haven't converted to Spanish or Chinese, yet; but for some reason I find myself not understanding the terms. Now my sense of communication is distorted. Private sector? Private? Sector? And if government interferes with one or two companies, or five or six banks, is it still private? Or is only part of the private sector personally owned or do we need to redefine the temrms? But any redefinition of terms implies political implications and leads to bias for or against an official entity that is supposedly impartial and judicially sound. But that cannot be certain if there is partial interferefcne to a sector that is privately owned; even if the private owners are the public government. So what is private? And I need to know; I just sent a kid to kindergarten telling him that a certain area on his body is referred to as "privates" because we keep the area and all language dealing with said area, to ourselves. It's not a bad area, just an personal area. Should we call that region of our anatomy our "mixed sector" now? According to cable t.v. it isn't very private anymore anyway.

So now being thoroughly confused, I decide to finish my blog and go to the gym. Maybe a good workout will take my mind of of all that troubles me and help me to clear my head. I only hope that when I do my bench press exercise that it will work out my arms and chest and not my legs; for at least that is how the language and application of force once worked on the human body.

But I am pretty dizzy still yet, and a little too nauseous to walk. Maybe this man standing in the corner of my room, in the dark suit and the uni brow, will be kind enough to drop me off at the YMCA when he steps out to get a fresh pack of smokes. If not, I may just call for the men in the white suits to come and give me a lift.

Sotomayor Vs. The People

As the politics of the new Supreme Court Judge, Sonia Sotomayor, are beginning to warm up, I find myself just as disillusioned and possibly more jaded than I was a week ago. And there are a handful of reasons:

For starters, I don't really know much about Sonia Sotomayor, and I think that most people who claim that they do have a lot of knowledge about her either have entirely too much time on their hands or they Googled her name like most of us pseudo-political, semi-knowledgeable, and opined bloggers and news media personnel have done. And though I admit that I don't know much about Sotomayor, I find some of her statements to be troublesome. I find it worrisome that we are concerned with her background and how that will make her a better judge. I find it ethically wrong to say that she can make better judgements because of her textured and cultural life as a Hispanic woman, when bias and background should not figure into any equation or jurisprudence from the bench. But so much is askew in all branches of our government, and our character as a nation is so diluted and taken for granted, that I must admit that I am not very surprised; more jaded, but not amazed.

I do think it is wrong to favor Sotomayor or oppose her based on the political party of the one appointing the new supreme Court Judge. If it is crucial that any one branch stay nonpartisan, it would have to be the judicial branch. Not that any branches should be partisan or tainted, but it would be nice if the parties would call a truce on our judges and leave the courts as a neutral site in the war of political parties. I guess it is too much to ask that we try to maintain purity or integrity in at least one area; and I infer that there is no honor among the thieves...

I am growing tired of hearing how the nomination of Sotomayor helps solidify the base of Hispanic voters as well as shores up a small percentage of the disenfranchised women voters. I am already sick of the reports saying that to question Sotomayor on many specifics will alienate several demographically challenged voters and their paolitical party of interest, so this must be handled with kid gloves. Kid gloves? We should not be passionate or appear to zealous when deciding on one of the handful of people that can shape and change our government; and our lives, whether we want the change or not?!!? We should tread lightly so we don't upset an election that will take place in three and a half years? Is this what the nomination of a Supreme Court Judge boils down to? I suggest that someone go to Gettysburg, Arlington National Cemetery, or even the National Cemetery in Bloomfield, Missouri and look at the graves of our soldiers and decide if they died for a demographic. Or ask a widow of a soldier in Iraq on the importance of what party wins the next election. Look into the eyes of a fallen soldier's child and tell her that she lost her daddy so that a certain party can maintain power in Washington...

I will digress on the party system for now; as I wish that the politicians would digress likewise. If only the people of America could see one act of decency; an act that shows the people that someone, anyone, cares. But I am afraid that in the case of Sotomayor versus The People, that we will see the bombastic and oppressive get the oil that the squeaky wheel always desires as cowards and the apathetic sit quietly by and hope the maelstrom passes them so that they can maintain a peaceful reelection.

I Remember

This is the blog I would have written on Monday, but I felt it wouldn't be right to rant on a day that others were sincerely honoring. But here it is a couple days later:


As I watched WW2 movies on Memorial Day, I thought about how the great men in our military have really fought to defend our freedom. For over 200 years, men and women have fought, sacrificed, and endured hardships so that the rest of us could enjoy our freedoms.

But our freedom has turned into "rights" through the process of selfishness, empathy, and politics. Those rights, in turn, have become entitlements; of which I will spare the rant, but would like everyone to think hard on the terminology used here.

This lead me to think of the hardships and sacrifices of our military people; and soon I became saddened by the thoughts of the abuse of our freedoms. I feel sad thinking about what we call freedom now; and how it seems unfair that we asked so many to sacrifice so much over the centuries. Those who fought for freedom must hurt when they see the ingratitude and the apathy so many carry around in our suitcases and briefcases.

Did we ask men to fight and sacrifice and endure so that egotistical congressmen can make ridiculous laws and regulations? Did our soldiers die so that we can concern ourselves with demographics in our political parties, while neglecting our core values and beliefs? Did our parents and grandparents die and suffer so that our government can grow so large that it redistributes our freedoms from those who believe to those who could really care less? A crooked sheriff's department in Jones County Mississippi not only infringes upon individual rights, but destroys the constitution with malice and ego. How easily do we surrender our freedom by turning the other cheek? The ACLU desires to destroy any tradition and most values that many Americans hold dear, in the name of progressive concerns and intellectual advancement; and we are so afraid of their terminology or fear having our own intellect questioned, that we stand pat as they assault real liberty. Freedom is taken out of our hands by the growth of government, but we allow it as long as the check clears the bank. Just show me the money and you can do whatever you like; regardless of the liberty and freedom destroyed. A governor in Illinois sells a seat in congress to the highest bidder, and punishment is delayed by "justice" and diluted by process; while many assume that is just how business is done, so why worry ourselves with the dirty details.

I could go on and on, but you get the picture I am trying to paint. And I am not suggesting that we all rise up in arms and start a revolution; although anyone interested in such should feel free to contact me. What I am suggesting is to think of the sacrifices and hardships of war and of our soldiers; men and women who fought for our future and for our freedom. And as we remember and think of these hardships that have been endured, we should act accordilgly and vote accordingly. We should be angered at the disrespect we show our should be heroes when we see real freedom compromised, and even more so maddened when we see the apathetic reactions to such situations. Many great men deserve better. And many great men in our future will deserve a cause bigger than themselves to defend. If we are to suffer and endure, let it be over our principles and our love of real freedom, not the self-centered and selfishness of rights and entitlements.

Taking A Week Off

There will be no blogs this week. I am taking a break; not that this is overly taxing by any means, but I need a break from blogging as I focus on a few other issues that deserve more of my energies and attentions.

Thanks for your support and feel free to read some of the archived blogs.

Have a great week!

TGIF

TGIF!

The Sun is shining and I have a travelling jones, so there will not be much in the way of a blog today. The kids and I are gonna get out and about, and to be honest it has a been a tough enough week for most everyone; and a rant on taxes or social issues is too heavy for the day, or at least the moment.

So if you are in the mood for something heavier, read some of the archived blogs. If you are like me and want to keep it light, put on some Sister Hazel tunes and get out in the susnshine before the thunderstorms hit!

I hope everyone has a great weekend! May God Bless all of us and Thank Him for Grace!

Cheeseburger In Paradise

As my wife so elegantly put on her Facebook status today, she married a genius. I have been bellyaching about taxes for quite some time and began to lament on the junk-food tax way back when they began taxing cigarettes heavily. Actually, I'm not as much of a genius as I just like to create things to gripe about, thus my "prediction" of the junk-food tax; but don't tell my wife, I would like to remain a genius for a few minutes longer.

But being more serious now, Do you remember when the cigarette taxes began to rise? And remember how that tax was going to help take the burden off of the health care system? And remember the promises that health care would remain affordable due to these taxes?

Have these promises came to any kind of fruition? And how about the health care costs? The taxes went up on cigarettes and the tobacco industry. The price of cigarettes went up to offset the cost, negatively affecting the consumer. And little, if any, of the tax money went to offset health care cost. Mark my words, the junk-food tax will follow the same model. As will the class action suits that are supposed to help those harmed by cigarettes, not just some greasy, slick lawyers. And those who eat junk-food will have to be sequestered like the smokers are now. They will be viewed as the scourge of society. There will be signs by the doors of the hospitals warning anyone eating a candy bar, that they will have to remain twenty yards away from any entrance or exit to the buildings.

Restaurants will have "junk-food free" signs posted on their walls and offer some lousy food and pseudo-dessert "to accommodate the consumer", not to make any money. Because our current government views wealth as being unpatriotic as well as a sin... People at church will talk behind the backs of those who eat at dairy Queen: "I saw sister Betty and brother Tom walking into the ice cream joint after prayer meeting this morning. I guess they didn't hear the pastors wonderful sermon on the excess of sugar and Jesus...Me? Oh I only eat a little sugar, and it's for my blood condition...of course not, I wouldn't go into one of THOSE places. I have a nephew who is a little shifty, as well as non-denominational, who buys mine for me...I'm no sinner..."

Of course this will be the case until they begin to tax fatty foods. Then the entire south will shut down. The IRS will raid our homes looking for Crisco or an old FRY-Daddy. We will have to buy french fries and fried chicken in "speak easies". We will have to know the secret knock or the password, "Love that Chicken from Popeye's" just to get into any place serving good old comfort food.

But they will of course raise the taxes on alcohol so high by then that if you add in the tax on sugar, Bananas Foster will be a super secret dessert priced at $2500 a serving. Only the wealthy will be able to eat this delicacy. If there will be anyone left with more than a few bucks in their pocket. And this will be only if the bananas are grown in Mexico, our forced trade partner. Otherwise, even the wealthy wouldn't risk the punishment or pay the extra tax.

Of course I am being a little facetious and sarcastic; but I am not certain as to what extent. If I am the Nostradamus of all things taxed, who knows how much of these fictional scenarios could come true. And if I am correct in my prognostications, it is not due to my being an economist. It is due to my perception that the government, as well as many people, have the wrong idea about government.

And that view is that our government is a business. Nothing could be farther from the truth. We did not become independent of England so we could become incorporated; We became independent because we had a hope and a desire to become something bigger than ourselves. Our forefathers had a vision of what this land could be and a vision of what freedom really was; what it looked like and felt like. But now we are heading towards a bondage worse than that of England's yoke 200 years ago. We are taxed by an oppressive government who does not represent us or our philosophies; and our oppressors were created by our greed, apathy, and corruption. We have built ourselves a gilded cage made of tax percentages, deficits, and broken promises. We have voted in the scoundrels and supported wrongdoing while we point the finger of blame at an opposite party or philosophy.

And it didn't get this way over night. Our government didn't begin at such a monstrous size as it is now, nor did it have the power it does now. And the people in office then did not want it any other way. The power ahould be in the hands of the people, not the ability of the government to provide over-priced and ineffective care as a drunken nanny may give her children on a Saturday night. We believed in the power of ourselves and the ability of the individual to became whatever they wanted and worked to become, not to live off of handouts, litigations, or government subsidies.

But our freedoms were surrendered a little at a time. When a crisis develops and we would rather someone else, or the government, fix things, we surrendered a little freedom. And each crisis that occurred and we looked beyond ourselves to solve such crisis, more freedom was devoured by whomever we surrendered it to. The more comfortable and apathetic we became, the more freedom we allowed to slip from our hands. We vote on issues and legislation without understanding the jargon; we lose freedom. We cast a ballot not knowing about the person, but realizing their party; more freedom wasted and lost. We drink the Kool-Aid and walk around with our heads in the sand, pretending that the problems are someone Else's; freedom surrendered.

All too often we forget history or trust blindly so that we don't have to involve ourselves. We have little concern for the future of our children or our great nation...

And I realize that I have gone into a full blown rant. I get so worked up, I forget what I began writing about. I never learned the brevity is the soul of wit thing...but I do know that I started out bragging on my prediction and gloating at the fact that my wife finds me brilliant today; and I desire to get back to that point, as she may come to her senses at any minute.

But I do ask that you consider ALL things as we move forward, at least chronologically forward; the rest remains unseen. I hope something in my rant causes us to think about things that can affect us and to reevaluate our priorities.

And in the meantime, go have a smoke, a beer, and a Snickers while you can still afford them; Cheeseburger in Paradise may not just be a song, but an anthem to the mega-wealthy, in our nations future.

One Reader Writes

A few days ago,a reader posted a comment asking for a discussion on interracial dating/marriage, should you discuss birth control with teens, and teens in regard to starting dating. The comment was that these topics came up in some conversations and are topics of interest to some of the readers of this blog. I sincerely want to write about things that cause us to think, and have expressed my desire for this blog to have a sense of purpose. I also want to do my best to answer questions and discuss topics that are not only relevant, but topics that are of interest to the readers. With all of that being said, I will do my best to give my two cents on these topics. Feel free to add any comments or start any discussion, whether you agree with my views or not. Leave comments here or at The Readers of The Self-Inflicted Blog, on Facebook. It is an open group that anyone may join:

I will begin with the third topic first: "Teens in regards to starting to date." I don't feel that there is a set age for a teenager to begin dating. I think the age depends on the maturity of the teens involved, as well as the character of the teens involved. Teens wish to be treated as individuals and hate to be lumped together as a group, and just called teens. Maybe not in matters that generalize a demographic, but in matters that would generalize individuality. My kids are two years old and five years old, and already hate to be lumped together as "you kids"; but prefer to be addressed as individuals. So acknowledge the teens individuality and consider dating based on their individual maturity and their personal character. When we give the kids a magic age of sixteen or eighteen, they can feel like it's just another rule. Encourage kids to make well thought out decisions and to look at all of the causes and effects of their decisions; based upon their ability and maturity. This will better develop character.

On a side note, be aware of what your kids watch on television. Many of the "kids programs" and Disney stuff can cause some kids to grow up too fast; or at least pretend to grow up too fast. My five year old is very susceptible to shows like iCarly, where preteens and teens talk entirely too much about dating and breaking up and throw words like boyfriend and girlfriend around way too much for my taste. Ive seen some of the Hannah Montana junk and it's dangerous to some kids as well. They place kids in positions of career, responsibility, and relationships without ever teaching them anything of value. Many of the shows have kids and adults living vicariously through the other; never focusing on the reality of relationships or dynamics of reality. These shows can be counterproductive, depending on what and how you teach your children...and that's just the condensed version of my views in this matter.

The next topic of " Should you discuss birth control with teens?": I believe the answer is yes; especially if the teen asks about the issue first. My wife and I believe that if a child is old enough or inquisitive enough to ask a question, then they deserve an answer. We try to raise our kids with this philosophy. Now the depth of the answer depends on the maturity of the child, obviously. There is no need to confuse or muddy the waters, nor is there any reason to cause any child, or person, to feel dumbed down by any answer that they may receive.

I have done youth ministry for over ten years and I feel that there are no taboo topics to discuss with teens, especially if they are doing the asking. I believe that you must use discretion as to when and how to introduce some topics, all things have a time and place, but I feel that there should be no topic that cannot be discussed.

A topic like birth control is no different. I do feel that it is a topic that can be discussed in general with teens, but when it involves specifics or more personal talk, they are best advised to take this up with their parents; and I would advise the teens to do such. But all kids do not have the luxury of caring or understanding parents, and I would treat each case personally and individually.

As to my opinion of birth control for teens, I always teach from an abstinence point of view. I realize that that may not be very pragmatical, but I believe it is Biblical, and the Bible and God is where I get my wisdom and guidance. But to just tell a kid that they should not take birth control and that they should just practice abstinence is not enough. These are personal, serious issues that cannot be looked at or taught as just another rule to follow with no real reason for the "why" to follow. You have to focus on the relationships. You have to teach about love. Without the relationship with God and without love, all of our acts are reduced to merely acts that are performed in order to satisfy a dynamic of our psyche. I realize that I sound "old-fashioned" and maybe close-minded to some, but I have found these things to be true in my life as well as in the life of others. And it really isn't a matter of narrow-mindedness in my opinion, it's what is best for the kids.

Teen pregnancy is a big problem. And the ages of pregnant moms get younger and younger. I have witnessed c-sections on eleven year old girls; on more than one occasion. An eleven year old's body cannot handle birth control; at least not healthily. Kids have to be taught about relationships, and no more important relationship than the one with a loving God. We are advised and commanded to wait until marriage for reasons that God reveals and teaches, not just because someone said so; and abstinence should be taught from that perspective.

I have also told pregnant teens that being pregnant and having a child is no sin; so enjoy and love the child. The premarital sex is the sin that was committed; regardless of the pregnancy. Don't let a social stigma burden you. We all sin, some sins have more serious repercussions, but we all have sin. Take it to God, focus on your relationship with Him, and allow Grace to work in your life. Nothing is worse than treating an unwed mother like they are a scourge on society; and little more is hypocritical.

As for the question of interracial dating/marriage, I cannot find it anywhere in the Bible or in my quiet time with God, as to where interracial marriage is wrong or a sin. I have actually had a preacher tell me that he believed it was a sin and gave a couple of verses; but it was easy to see that he was trying to rationalize his own sin and prejudice. God warned the Jews not to marry outside of Jews at "that" time because He knew that marrying pagans would lead to practices that would dilute their worship and affect their relationships with God. And I guess that the preacher ignored the entire book,"The Song of Solomon"; a romance/love story between a Jewish king and a Shulamite servant; who was black. But prejudice is ignorance and if you practice it, it clouds your view of the truth.

On the modern interracial relationship; the view I take depends on the maturity and character of the individuals involved. I realize that it is beginning to sound like a cop-out, but I am sincere in my approach to serious issues. It would be more difficult to encourage interracial dating to someone who is not mature enough to handle the extra dynamics that are involved in an interracial relationship; but by no means can I teach or advise that it is wrong. But because something is permissible doesnt make it beneficial, to simplify some words from Paul. But it is also difficult to tame the heart in matters such as these. There is fine line sometimes, as there are in any issue.

Interracial relationships are not for everyone, but for many it is not an issue that causes problems. Geography, culture, community, and the like, are more highlighted sometimes, but minimal in other situations. But never is interracial relationships to be considered sinful or not acceptable. We should teach and advise against prejudice, and true love has no hint of bias; in our relationship with God as well as others. God can certainly have the mate He chooses for you to be of a different skin color. And we are certainly capable of loving someone for who they are, not loving basd on a skin tone.

I realize that these are general answers/opinions to some hot topics; but time and space won't allow for much more depth. but notice that all of these things, as well as all things in our lives, involve relationships; both with God and with others. Don't ignore or forget the lesson that Jesus tried to teach those He encountered, over and over.

Maybe this will get the ball rolling and open up some discussions. I hope I was clear and concise. If not, feel free to ask questions; and feel free to leave any comments you wish!