This morning I was thinking that in less than a week, my husband and I will be with his family in Europe. I have been packing and planning, knowing what our plans are while we are there. And I began thinking how priviledged and blessed I am to have the freedom to "be normal".
"Normal" means what any human needs for physical and emotional health. Our free society allows us to live without interference from government or fear of upheval in our life or plans. My husband and I can plan to go see his family and enjoy normal family connections.
Americans and others that have "freedom" so often take those freedoms for granted. Freedom is won by hard work and loyal commitment from those who serve in government, in the roles of government officials, or the military. I do not take their sacrifice/service for granted, as I often think about "freedom" and how valuable it is to be "normal".
So, this day, I am thankful for freedom.
Showing posts with label African Americans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label African Americans. Show all posts
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Saturday, April 4, 2009
It So Bugs Me....
Yesterday I was writing about justice and how justice is equality under law. Of course law is dependent on those who rule, but in the West we have a rational base for discerning what is "right", which our nation protects with our military.
Today while scanning over some of the blogs I usually read, I found one aguing against the Pentagon's spending in reference to how many 'nets" could be bought in Africa for 5 years! This statement alone angers me. While I wholeheartedly agree that government in gerneral overspends in their budget. We will disagree as to how that budget's money should be distributed!
The statement that the Pentagon was unworthy of existing because of the "poor" is just nonsense! This is the devaluation of sovereignty as a nation and a push toward a "peace" that will not happen in this world. So, though some may value their life's calling in serving the needs of the poor, that is not the only value that is of significance and value. I really cannot stand someone, especially someone with power, like the media, brainwashing the "brain dead" with "moral evaluations" that are one-sided opinions or convictions. It just enrages me.
The Pentagon is representative of protecting the values that we hold most dear. We must not devalue their service, nor the service of the military. We cannot maintain a nation, protecting our interests without a miliatary. We are fools if we think that those who devalue and hate our culture will "go away"!
So, ar those who need nets in Africa of value? Yes, but that has nothing to do with our nation's interest and we cannot be just a nation of "humanitarian aid"!
Today while scanning over some of the blogs I usually read, I found one aguing against the Pentagon's spending in reference to how many 'nets" could be bought in Africa for 5 years! This statement alone angers me. While I wholeheartedly agree that government in gerneral overspends in their budget. We will disagree as to how that budget's money should be distributed!
The statement that the Pentagon was unworthy of existing because of the "poor" is just nonsense! This is the devaluation of sovereignty as a nation and a push toward a "peace" that will not happen in this world. So, though some may value their life's calling in serving the needs of the poor, that is not the only value that is of significance and value. I really cannot stand someone, especially someone with power, like the media, brainwashing the "brain dead" with "moral evaluations" that are one-sided opinions or convictions. It just enrages me.
The Pentagon is representative of protecting the values that we hold most dear. We must not devalue their service, nor the service of the military. We cannot maintain a nation, protecting our interests without a miliatary. We are fools if we think that those who devalue and hate our culture will "go away"!
So, ar those who need nets in Africa of value? Yes, but that has nothing to do with our nation's interest and we cannot be just a nation of "humanitarian aid"!
Friday, November 28, 2008
The Law's Intent
Ken Schenck has been writing on Romans lately. His last entry was on a "theology of Romans". If theology is understood in leadership terms, how does "that" look, according to Romans?
The Jews were to represent God to other nations. They exemplified what God was like, which illustrated his character. At least, this is the bilblical understanding. The Jews understood the "law" as that which perfected man, because the "law" represented "God". But, along comes Paul, who, as a Jew persecuted Christians stoning them because they did not "do" the requirements of the "law" (according to his understanding). Christians were following in Christ's footsteps in meeting the needs of others, and theologizing about Christ. Even though Paul was a Jew and educated as a leader (Greek) under Gamiel, he did not "do the works of the "law"", according to Paul's own self-judgment.
There are two ideas that run together concerning the understanding of the Law. One is a personal dimension of grace and mercy to others, which was understood and exemplified by Christ in his earthly life. The other side of the 'law is justice" where all were equally 'sold under sin" as Paul would term it. What does this mean?
Life is understood by the Christian as sacred because it is a gift, so all men are equal under the 'law's protection of justice". Social justice is what the law demands and human rights are to be protected and sought by all religions. This is the ethical demension to the law, which is not about morality, as defined by a text, culture, or moral model, so much as it is about treating others with respect and dignity.
Morality is about specific human behavior. One can be moral, but ethically perverse. That is, one can meet the legal demensions of the law requirements, without really giving equality under and by the law. Many times taking advantage of another is done by those who know better about the law's "ins and outs". The law can give a check to our human nature, in helping us to understand and question ourselves and motivations and at the same time protect the rights of those who aren't 'in the know". Whenever there is a flagrant disregard of the law, because of arrogance, self-satisfaction, self-indulgence, or selfishness there is also a payment that must be made by someone.
Just today it was reported that a Wal-Mart employee was trampled to death because shoppers trampled him underfoot in the name of a bargain. People were seeking after their own interests at the expense of this Wal-Mart employee. Did they intend to trample him? I'm sure not . All they had in mind was their own agenda, to get that bargain before another got it. Paul would say that these shoppers who had the "law" in its allowing freedom to shop, were not "doing the law" because they were focused on something other than self reflective moderation of life. The Gentiles did not have the law, and yet were obeying its requirements. In an honor/shame culture, this would either humble or infuriate the Jewish believer by accentuating their heart.
I think Paul was using the legal language of the Jew, who boasted in its "civility" to cause a humbling attitude toward those who did not have that civilizing law. It does behoove the American to understand what this might mean to us as a culture of indulgence. I do not believe nor think that sacrifice is the "gospel", but I do think that a self-reflective look at what America is about is needed. We are a great nation. But, do we boast in our greatness, and disregard another? Is our attempt at diplomacy only in "word" and not in deed? In seeking freedom for individuals, which is the 'ideal" how much do we question our pursuit of "ends" that justify means that are only self-interested goals for advancement? We became great becasue we believed in a government for and by the people, with representatives that showed a concern for the common good.
Paul's Romans is a good dose of medicine for us all, but especially in light of America's goal-oriented, market-driven, money-making, business-protective environment.
The Jews were to represent God to other nations. They exemplified what God was like, which illustrated his character. At least, this is the bilblical understanding. The Jews understood the "law" as that which perfected man, because the "law" represented "God". But, along comes Paul, who, as a Jew persecuted Christians stoning them because they did not "do" the requirements of the "law" (according to his understanding). Christians were following in Christ's footsteps in meeting the needs of others, and theologizing about Christ. Even though Paul was a Jew and educated as a leader (Greek) under Gamiel, he did not "do the works of the "law"", according to Paul's own self-judgment.
There are two ideas that run together concerning the understanding of the Law. One is a personal dimension of grace and mercy to others, which was understood and exemplified by Christ in his earthly life. The other side of the 'law is justice" where all were equally 'sold under sin" as Paul would term it. What does this mean?
Life is understood by the Christian as sacred because it is a gift, so all men are equal under the 'law's protection of justice". Social justice is what the law demands and human rights are to be protected and sought by all religions. This is the ethical demension to the law, which is not about morality, as defined by a text, culture, or moral model, so much as it is about treating others with respect and dignity.
Morality is about specific human behavior. One can be moral, but ethically perverse. That is, one can meet the legal demensions of the law requirements, without really giving equality under and by the law. Many times taking advantage of another is done by those who know better about the law's "ins and outs". The law can give a check to our human nature, in helping us to understand and question ourselves and motivations and at the same time protect the rights of those who aren't 'in the know". Whenever there is a flagrant disregard of the law, because of arrogance, self-satisfaction, self-indulgence, or selfishness there is also a payment that must be made by someone.
Just today it was reported that a Wal-Mart employee was trampled to death because shoppers trampled him underfoot in the name of a bargain. People were seeking after their own interests at the expense of this Wal-Mart employee. Did they intend to trample him? I'm sure not . All they had in mind was their own agenda, to get that bargain before another got it. Paul would say that these shoppers who had the "law" in its allowing freedom to shop, were not "doing the law" because they were focused on something other than self reflective moderation of life. The Gentiles did not have the law, and yet were obeying its requirements. In an honor/shame culture, this would either humble or infuriate the Jewish believer by accentuating their heart.
I think Paul was using the legal language of the Jew, who boasted in its "civility" to cause a humbling attitude toward those who did not have that civilizing law. It does behoove the American to understand what this might mean to us as a culture of indulgence. I do not believe nor think that sacrifice is the "gospel", but I do think that a self-reflective look at what America is about is needed. We are a great nation. But, do we boast in our greatness, and disregard another? Is our attempt at diplomacy only in "word" and not in deed? In seeking freedom for individuals, which is the 'ideal" how much do we question our pursuit of "ends" that justify means that are only self-interested goals for advancement? We became great becasue we believed in a government for and by the people, with representatives that showed a concern for the common good.
Paul's Romans is a good dose of medicine for us all, but especially in light of America's goal-oriented, market-driven, money-making, business-protective environment.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
An Applause for America
John McCain lost last night and he, in characteristic fashion, graciously applauded Obama's presidency. In like matter, I would like to applaud our form of government and the ideals that our government represents.
Many across the world have watched to see if how America's ideals would play out in our presidental decision. The American ideal of equality has won the day with the election of the first African American. And I am proud that this ideal has won. It seemed to me that many African Americans were emotionally touched by this outcome. One does not have to question why this may be. Slavery is not representative of the American conviction of individual freedom or equality and choice. African Americans have lived with the stigma of slavery and discrimination, whether self-imposed or not, and it has affected their self-perception.
Now, the world knows that we mean business when it comes to our ideals of freedom and justice for all, at least within our own borders. Let's see how Obama and his cabinet envision these ideals on a global scale.
Many across the world have watched to see if how America's ideals would play out in our presidental decision. The American ideal of equality has won the day with the election of the first African American. And I am proud that this ideal has won. It seemed to me that many African Americans were emotionally touched by this outcome. One does not have to question why this may be. Slavery is not representative of the American conviction of individual freedom or equality and choice. African Americans have lived with the stigma of slavery and discrimination, whether self-imposed or not, and it has affected their self-perception.
Now, the world knows that we mean business when it comes to our ideals of freedom and justice for all, at least within our own borders. Let's see how Obama and his cabinet envision these ideals on a global scale.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
