Diane Birch is the sister of a pretty good friend whom I met in South Africa while working with Youth for Christ.  She’s an artist of the highest caliber and someone I supported from the beginning, in that I helped her record a live piano demo.  It turned out ok, and now she’s on the road doing what she loves and getting paid for it.

Take the time to listen to her music as well as get to know her on her blog.

This morning I read an article which reflected an attitude becoming more prevalent in society.  The director Roman Polanski (see the Comcast article here) has finally been taken into custody for a crime he committed thirty years ago.  It seems  the Swiss have a new found sense of justice for they arrested him when he landed on their soil.

What dumbfounded and amazed me is that this man admitted to raping a 13 year old girl in court negotiations, yet somehow escaped justice.  The comments of the French minister and president especially dropped my jaw.  They think he’s paid enough for his crime and ought to be left alone.

Strange to say these same people wouldn’t be so lenient had it been their own daughter or themselves.  Polanski has lived in pretty good circumstances, releasing movies and receiving awards without being harassed too much.  Though he regrets his misconduct according to interviews, he doesn’t want to serve his time.

What is it that makes us think that some crimes are more negotiable than others.  Here’s a man who broke the trust of a kid, scarred her for life and messed up his own life, yet some in power want to excuse his crime and let him off the hook.  It doesn’t matter if he was a survivor of the holocaust, he committed a crime against a defenseless child and deserves punishment.  Just because he’s famous doesn’t give him special privileges or let him off the hook as far as justice is concerned.

Now before you think I’m being vengeful or recommending capital punishment, let me make clear that I don’t think he ought to serve out the rest of his life in prison, but the normal sentence for what he’s done.  Obviously he’s quite unwilling to do so and by his behavior has thumbed his nose at the US justice system by continuing to release his art and work in our country.

Let me put this in perspective for us a little better:  If a man was molested as a child by an aunt or uncle, we have sympathy for his troubled soul, scars and struggle to regain some balance in his life.  However, if this man does the same to several children when he grows to puberty and beyond, we have to cut off his access to the them and protect the helpless.  Just because he’s been hurt doesn’t give him license to hurt others with impunity.  In fact, it should make him hyper aware of the pain and scars he will cause them by his own actions.

It doesn’t matter in one sense that he’s been molested himself when he continues the behavior himself because it’s still a crime.  No one in their right mind would say it’s ok for me to steal another person’s guitar just because someone else stole mine, right?  How can we apply different rules to sexual crimes than we do to thieving?  Stealing someone’s innocence and sense of safety is a bigger crime than taking money in my estimation for you not only damage their ability to make a life but their very sense of self.

No, Mr. Polanski needs to take his consequences like everyone else and not be let off just because he’s famous.

There are several billion people on the earth and all living, breathing, breeding, eating and eliminating.  With all of this activity, you’d think that someone would stop and recognize the dire consequences of people breathing out once they breathe in…I mean come on, we’re talking about a carbon foot print pretty hefty here.  We need oxygen but breath out carbon, which means humans all other breathing creatures are contributing to the global warming crisis just by breathing in and out.

Next, most people on earth eat fairly spicy foods, which produce?  You guessed it, methane.  There are more cattle of course than humans on the earth producing several times the amount of methane as human beings, but we need to eat them, milk them and use their hides for shoes, rock n roll-show-your-stuff-pants and cool leather jackets.  Not to mention cheese products and whatnot.   And anyway they don’t reason very well so trying to persuade them to stop contributing to the earth overheating is like talking to a wall.  They either don’t care or are too engrossed in being part of the food chain to worry about other stuff.

So it’s up to us humans to solve the methane problem.  My suggestion is that we have one day world wide set aside to save the earth where no one farts, burps or has a bowel movement to prevent any methane from escaping at all.  I know many a lady would welcome a day her husband didn’t belch of fart in some form, and it’s all for a good cause, to save the planet.  But this would mean we’d all have to be pretty self-controlled about our bodily functions because the explosions at night would be hard to prevent, unless, of course, you know a healthy way to plug the offending outlet.

I declare the need of a day of fart fasting for every human being alive.

If you care, you won’t let ‘er rip.

And please stay away from fried foods, beans or other gaseous products which inspire such unseemly, thoughtless and utterly disgusting expressions.

Help humanity survive by holding it in, people.  You’ll be glad you did.

For one thing, you’d be able to keep the SUV, and the Lear jet and that gas stove…O, and those plastic bags.  Let’s may be even…

Politics is not a speciality of mine.  For the most part I have studiously ignored it, practically, for the following reasons:

1)  I bought into the communal living idea years ago so politics means less to one who thinks in collective democracy rather than a hierarchical.  I don’t relate to power mongers of any kind.  It’s hard for me to focus on them when I know they have other agendas than what they claim publically.

2)  I’m not given to listening to the issues much nor the pros and cons the two parties in the majority seem to be arguing.  I know it sounds like I bury my head in the sand about stuff, but it’s not exactly that really.  It’s more that I have so many other fish to fry.

3)  It’s only been recently that I had any real interest in listening to politicians.  I find they say whatever it takes to get elected and then play games with policy enough to stay in power and keep their universal health care all to themselves.

4)  I find it strange that the very government which should be working toward the equality of all people, simply cannot see that the more they give themselves raises, the less those of us in the working class actually have to spend on non-essentials which drive the markets.  It makes me laugh (not because it’s funny) that these people are willing to cut services to the disabled among us, special funding for emergency care for hospitals, which treat those with no money, and a whole series of what politicians call “infrastructure” yet they keep on raising their own salaries and tax breaks on everything from dining out to travel expenses.

This last one just turns me off to no end.

The first time I ever voted was the election after I got married in 2001.  My wife and mother-in-law were staunch republicans and so were most of my family.  I listened to the arguments about why I should vote and what the issues at hand were and decided to go for it.  My first time voting for anyone and I chose a guy who seemed to be on a quest outside of commonsense.  At first I thought Bush would actually keep a level head, then I realized that Cheney and Rumsfeld were pretty much in control.  After they got into the war with Iraq, I threw up my hands because though all the top generals counseled against it, no one had any exit strategy or thought what to do once Sadaam was caught or dead.  People who fail to plan always fail.

I don’t think Iraq is so much a failure as a waste of energy.  We could have concentrated on Afghanistan and been far more successful with the terrorists.  Our control of the country was pretty clear already and the government there was cooperative.  But I didn’t know any of that at the time so I did the best I could.  I saw the alternatives in the Democratic field and felt like we were being given two bad choices with no where to turn but down.  I stayed out of the last election because I have never been able to make heads or tails of the issues.  May be I’m just really dense, I don’t know, but I just didn’t see Obama as the answer any more than McCain.  I liked McCain’s record and policies better, but Obama had some pretty good ideas as well.  

We have this great privilege of voting our conscience and I dropped the ball.

Ignorance, however, doesn’t make for good voting strategies.  Still I see hope for America in some ways because Obama seems to be a reconciler, a peacemaker, if you will.  I don’t know what his agenda is and it really doesn’t matter in the long run whether I agree or not, what happens will happen.  What does matter in every way is who I become.

I could argue politics till I’m blue in the face and may be convince a few people I’m right but still be called a “fool” by the opposition, yet what would that accomplish?  The truth is what makes America great is the people who run it—you and me—our drive and commonsense keep the ball rolling.  I could object to the Socialist agenda we’re headed for because I don’t like the idea of anyone taking over 50% of my paycheck to do with as they please.  The larger the beauracy, the larger the payroll to keep it going.  Some call it a sacrifice for the betterment of mankind, I just wonder if we’re not buying into another system instead of taking personal responsibility for our neighbors.

Quite frankly, giving the government the power to run social welfare programs seems like an oxymoron to me.  No government in the history of the world has done a good job at it because they are run by people interested as much in their own bottom-line as anything else.  I’ve been sorta’ watching governments for the past few years and thinking back to my childhood and quite frankly things are not much better today than they were when I was a kid.  People still starve in America even with the social outreach we offer; there are still poor and the divide is growing bigger; life is still tough for some and not so hard for others.

Inequality will always be a problem where we have human nature.  You can’t put bad programming into those little computers we call “brains” and expect anything more than a hashed up result.  Until we change the nature of human kind where power over the helpless is not a common problem no matter what the social status, we are gonna’ see disparity.  Change the character and you change the outcome of the person’s life.

One of my older brothers was a cop for years.  His favorite saying was,  “An uneducated thief steals your tv, appliances and radios.  Give him an education and he’ll steal your house, your identity and make it look like it’s your fault.”  Mere education isn’t the answer, in my opinion, we need a change in the way we look at the world in general.  If all we’re out to do is “get ours,” then survival of the fittest rules the day.  I don’t mind giving 50% of my income if I know it will really benefit the programs.  To be blunt the Western world has the most educated populace in the history of the world.  Our 6th graders know more about science and technology than even their grandparents two generations ago.  If education’s the answer, somethings wrong with the method because I don’t see more peace in the world nor less poverty, dishonesty or murder.

On the other hand, most of us want to know we’re doing some good without having to get our hands dirty.  Letting the government handle our welfare is abdicating responsibility for our lives as well as those around us.  Instead of copping out to Big Brother we should take personal interest in the people and needs around us.  Instead giving a handout to those in need, we should give them help them finding a job.  Nothing builds self-respect like earning one’s own way.

There are always caveats to these plans because the best laid plans fail due to the characters involved.  A person who hates working will find ways to get out of it no matter what we offer them, so all our efforts will be useless unless we convince them to change their attitude.  Those who take drugs to excess will do so with or without education; narcissists will be who they are unless they are treated and conquer their nature.  Those in great pain due to past abuse or lifestyle will remain there unless we show them a better way—and even then there’s no guarantee they will choose something different.  Some want to numb others ride the roller coaster.  Whatever their aim, they drive themselves many times into the gutter.  Yet we cannot profile drug users or the poor anymore than we can races because those who want to get out will take a helping hand, go live better and not look back.  This is a truth of the nature of mankind and no amount of programs will change it.

I personally would rather be involved in selecting where my money goes so that I know I’m supporting a good cause.  Giving my money to the big goverment just so I don’t have to actually get involved in helping people personally is sick and wrong.  It’s also about as dumb as giving to the big church conglomerate we all hate so much.  The money usually lines the pockets of the leaders and toadies with barely a trickle reaching those who really need it.

It’s not the system that’s at fault here, but the people who run it and vote it in.  Blaming the “system” ultimately avoids the truth.  People design the systems that are in place and people will design the next one to take the current one’s place.  Escaping responsibility for their failure isn’t possible.  A system can only work as well as those who work with it.  As long as there are people willing to take advantage of others, as long as there are users in the world, as long as there are human beings trafficking in everything from drugs, contraband, black market goods and other people, we will have a failed system.  We don’t need a more conscientious police force we need people who refuse to do wrong to others.

Change the character, we change the outcome.

Of course, this is just my opinion.

The Whale…

If you read a recent front page story of the SF Chronicle, you would
have read about a female humpback whale who had become entangled in a
spider web of crab traps and lines. She was weighted down by hundreds
of pounds of traps that caused her to struggle to stay afloat. She
also had hundreds of yards of line rope wrapped around her body, her
tail, her torso, a line tugging in her mouth..
A fisherman spotted her just east of the Farallon Islands (outside the
Golden Gate ) and radioed an environmental group for help.
Within a few hours, the rescue team arrived and determined that she
was so bad off, the only way to save her was to dive in and untangle
her.
 

 They worked for hours with curved knives and eventually freed her.

When she was free, the divers say she swam in what seemed like joyous
circles.
She then came back to each and every diver, one at a time, and nudged
them, pushed them gently around ~she was thanking them. Some said it
was the most incredibly beautiful experience of their lives.

The guy who cut the rope out of her mouth said her eyes were
following him the whole time, and he will never be the same.

May you, and all those you love, be so blessed and fortunate to be 
surrounded by people who will help you get untangled from the things 
that are binding you.
 And , may you always know the joy of giving and receiving gratitude.

In a recent show on “World have Your Say” I heard a climate change prophet condemn the world at large for not doing more to prevent the problem.  It was an interesting show, since he also called the radio show host out on the carpet for inviting the opposing view into their midst.  He actually sounded offended she would even consider the opposing view or allow it to be heard on air.

Now while I don’t know the science as much as some or the truth about what causes this phenomenon, I do believe it’s pretty easy to figure out part of the problem is humans.  I mean go to Africa where the regulations on emissions are less stringent, then stand behind one of their buses.  One whiff of that fresh, heavy, black exhaust will cure anyone of thinking we aren’t at least partially to blame for changes in our atmosphere.

Yet what I found almost heartless is some of the people who wrote in seemed to ignore the greater problem the world has with getting along with each other.  It’s as if they think the answer to the world’s problems is curing climate change rather than giving everyone a sense commonality.  It’s really easy to focus on green issues when you don’t have a gun pointed at your head or someone else eager to lop it off.

Before the people in Darfur will be able to focus on the damage they’re doing to the environment, they will need to solve the problem of suviving with their heads connected to their shoulders.  Before anyone will care about the issue of trees being harvested at an alarming rate, their economic sustainability must be addressed.  No one will care about the environment when their children are freezing or unable to eat.

The luxury of being in a free society with wealth for even the poor (by the rest of the world’s standards the westernized nations’ poor are richer than most third world middle class) is that we can sit and chew the fat about less basic issues.  A person worried about their next meal is less likely to focus on any other agenda than getting their belly filled.

I’m not denying the need for cleaner energy because I’m actually an advocate.  The Judeo/Christian mandate in Genesis told us to take care of our planet and everything in it, so those with any other view or priority have fallen down on the job handed to them by the Creator.

I have no problem believing the science which calls for more responsible care for our world.  In fact I applaud it.  But what I find purely utilitarian and cold is the attitude of some who would ignore the basic human problem of war, war caused famines, political domination and lack of freedom.

In the 1980s we saw an intervention for Ethiopia in the form of a huge Rock concert.  We also saw the Etheopian government starve their people while the grain and other gifts for their country sat on the docks till they rotted or were eaten by rats.

How do we force people to be concerned with issues such as climate and polution when they can’t feed themselves or their desire for self-preservation has been squashed?

Here’s a saying from my childhood that deserves consideration:  “People don’t care how much you know till they know how much you care.”  And it rings true in even this situation.  Pushing clean energy on people who barely read or write is a crime.  Anyone who claims they know better than the uneducated should educate instead of mandate.  If we want the people of the world to grow concerned for their planet, we have to secure their livelihoods or they will care less about any future beyond their next meal.

So I advocate teaching people cosmopolitan thinking which hopefully will lead to understanding and acceptance of differences in beliefs, cultures and customs.  Only then will we find any kind of unity on the survival of our planet.

Vivitur parvo beme

Vivitur multo malum

Or…

One can live well with little

One can live poorly with much

Jerome (pastor of Grace Point Fellowship) said he couldn’t find who originally wrote this ancient proverb, but that St. Benedictine (I believe that’s who he said it was) was famous for quoting it.  I find the concept of being wealthy an elusive truth, for I noticed early on that many who held great amounts of land, possessed the ability and freedom to live or travel as they pleased, were not necessarily the happiest people nor the most content within themselves.  That said, I’ve met incredibly wealthy people who were poor as church mice as well as rolling in the doe.

My conclusion?

I don’t think what we own as far as toys and savings has anything to do with our happiness.  I will say, however, that being poor isn’t some saintly state of being either.  Much of history records the misery of the poor and weak, which is  one of the many reasons we hate poverty so much.  The truth of our world’s history comes down to this:  powerful men and women dominated and abused the powerless.  The results speak for themselves.

This last testament is one of the reasons I don’t buy whole heartedly into the Darwinian theory of survival of the fittest for our present day means of forming ethics.  It’s too utilitarian for me and speaks only to those with the power.  In other words, the power mongers  among us love the concept of themselves being the “fittest” to survive because it allows them to be ruthless, cutthroat and careless of the needs of others.  Notice I didn’t say the wealthy are this way, rather those who seek power for its own sake.

Yet, like the protagonist in “High Fidelity” (a John Cusak movie) I am not a class warrior.  I don’t begrudge people their money or possessions.  I do, on the other hand, believe that if they want to be happy, they must find a way to use their position, power and wealth to give others a leg up.

Not long ago, no more than 75 years ago, a popular theory viewed many who were poor and uneducated as less able to demonstrate intelligence or higher cultural attitudes and habits.  People from the African-American community who proved this theory wrong were considered aberrations to the norm rather than a sampling of their culture’s potential.  Now we think that attitude quite strange and wonder how anyone could hold such a view.  Yet these attitudes find themselves slipping into our collective consciousness through other segments of society.

I guess my point is that I don’t like judging a person by my standards as to their abilities for I don’t know their abilities until I take the time to learn about them.

How we live is not subject to our possessions or status.  Socrates was a slave yet highly intellectual and a great influence on future generations.  Our ability to be happy does not depend on these things but who we become internally.  We could look at the ancient proverb above and conclude that it speaks only to the actions of one’s life.  I think it points to the whole of the human psyche.  Not only how we live in the world but the attitude with which we live has the potential to be little or much.

The greatest wealth a person can find is contentment with themselves and the world around them.  Yet this contentment is not of the sort which is done with accomplishment or striving to move forward, rather it points to an attitude of being comfortable in our own skin while we grow.

I just finished mixing Too Wonderful and uploading it to MySpace.  The only thing left is to put live drums on it.  I sequenced the piano, drums and added background vocals.  It’s labeled Too Wonderful 2 so it contrasts from the original down lower on the playlist.

Tears for the Children is still in process because I have a vision for the BGVs (background vocals) which means I have to wait on other people’s schedules for the recording sessions.

So much of my life I have felt like a square peg trying to fit into a round hole.

That is until I was on stage and playing my heart out.  For the first time in my life I felt like I belonged somewhere, like the music fit me.  Oddly enough the first time I felt this way I was playing elevator music for sleepy Christian audiences.  I wasn’t all that enamored with the style of music, but the experience still resonated and filled me with contentment.

I have never needed to be the lead vocalist or even the lead guitarist, though I like doing both because there’s so much freedom, what fascinated me was the ability to inspire energy in the room for the audience and create sound.  This dawning realization led others to perceive me as something other than I am, of course, because being onstage allows one to let out their inner scream or whatever.

I never desired to be the leader of a band either.  When I led a band, I did under duress–or rather, I did it because no one else would do it without dictating to me and others what we could or couldn’t sing or write.  Since I wrote so many songs, I knew that I would be seen as vying for leadership, but nothing was further from my intent.  I don’t know how to explain it better than all I wanted was to hear the sound from the band that I heard in my head, create the mood of the song and bring the audience into it.

What usually happened was a confused power struggle I had no desire to be engaged in.  It’s like I attracted hornets or something because I would write these songs and find myself staring at the leader with wary eyes realizing they resented me or felt I was pushing myself forward too much.  Even in worship bands I had to be careful because so much of the time, the worship leader had a vision for the songs and invited me to be myself he/she didn’t really mean be myself, but a truncated version of me.

Very few just let me fly.

So I’ve begun striking out on my own.  If I can’t fit into their mold, then may be I wasn’t meant to.

The trouble is I don’t mind singing my heart out, improvising at the top of my lungs or playing until my fingers bleed, I just don’t feel comfortable as a worship leader.  I get butterflies in my stomach every time I get up there wondering what I’ll do wrong this time.  Sometimes I just feel out of place–like I’m faking it or something.  I love serving the church but I worry that it feels so out of place.

There’s a big difference between being a performance musician, hired gun and one who leads others to sing together.  I don’t feel good at the latter.  I don’t know why.  Some people tell me I’m good at it, but still the unease persists and I wonder whether I’m fooling myself as well as them continuing to attempt this unnatural marriage of performance and leadership.

Humility forces us to see ourselves for who we are.  Yet I wonder if this is humility or just a feeling of inadequacy brought on by a lifelong battle with self doubt.  My gut tells me it’s the latter.

Being a square peg, I know what it feels like to not fit anywhere.  I want to belong but those who have the gates to the community feel uncomfortable with me, or I with them.  So I drift.  May be someday I’ll find a home where square pegs are looked on with the same value as triangles or circles.  Until then, I won’t give up or stop growing.

There is an ancient Jewish law, written by Moses, that says, Do not plow with an ox and donkey yoked together.

Now I don’t know all the reasons this might be given as a rule, but I can guess.  It could be the height differences would chafe the animals; the gait of one would hinder the other causing problems with not only the plowing but the way the yoke sat on the shoulders.  I do know that Paul the apostle applied the concept to marriage between differing ideals.  Though his discussion previously had been about marriage, his instruction seemed to be more universal.  In other words, he intended it not to speak to just marriage between men and women but that which connected opposing ethics as well.

Whatever the reason, I mainly believe it was a living metaphor to establish certain social boundaries within the culture itself.  To create a national identity many times customs become the mark for that unique look or practice so that one nation is seen as different from another.  Also, the lesson Moses and the God of the Hebrews seemed to be doing their best to communicate throughout the entire five books of the law was that the Jews must be single-minded in their devotion their God.  I don’t believe this to be an accident of arbitrary requirements, though it might seem so.

First off, belief systems differ quite radically between nations–especially in ancient times.  Some practices remained the same, like sacrifices and offerings to the gods or God, but many times the emphasis would be completely different.  If you wanted your people to remain established as unique and self-contained, they must continue to practice those things which made them stand out among the nations around them.  Values also differ widely between people.

So how do we apply this kind of ethic to ours today?

If you as a businessman decide to make wafer chips for a certain type of product, getting in a partnership with clothing designer wouldn’t be the right move.  You would be “unequally yoked” together for both your goals.  We consider this simple logic within such a context, yet I think it is precisely the point Moses or God was trying to make here.  Say you know a dude that is great at being a salesman, but he’s shady in his tactics.  Do you combine your honest interests with him in order to get the sale, even though you abhor his methods and attitude?

To combine our lives with those who don’t respect our values, consider our goals or find common ground with our lifestyle sets us up for not only disappointment but friction and most likely failure.  How bad the latter problem gets depends on the people’s temperament, of course, but none the less it is something to consider.  Now does this principle exclude people from different fields joining forces for a common goal–e.g. a financial whiz teaming up with an inventor?

Actually, that sounds like a good call and great combination.  What one brings to the table the other balances or what one lacks the other may have in spades.  But they have one goal:  to stay in business and sell the product the inventor creates.  They bring differing abilities to the table, sure, but these compliment one another not fight each other.

Yet I don’t believe either reference above (Moses or Paul) were concerned about economic differences or social strata, rather they were speaking of either religious practices or lifestyles.

What do you really believe in?  If the one who is closest to you doesn’t share or at least admire your dedication, you’re screwed.  We can’t combine our lifestyle with those who dislike or disapprove of them because they will do their best to change us, or influence us away from them.  I think this is one of the main reasons I am so strong on establishing mores in a person’s personal beliefs.  I am a Christian so my system of belief is quite established as far as the instruction goes.  Yet there are many traditions and false boundaries within the religion of Christianity which have been human additions to a spiritual instruction.  I’m pretty sure most of these additions were just honest attempts to understand the rules and explain them, but what ended up happening was unnecessarily constricting, confining and probably quite hindering to the healthy operation of the human nature.

So your established beliefs must be held as sacrosanct and non-negotiable (unless you consider all such things as negotiable, then have at it).  In this context, however, other people’s established beliefs and practices must be held in the same light–unless they transgress societal safety.  Murderous practices are not included in this freedom nor is theft of another’s property or life.  I know those are extremes but respect for others is important so we need to draw the line in the sand where a person cannot cross for the sake of personal belief or practice of belief.  To sacrifice the innocent for the sake of my beliefs is not an option but a crime.  

This said, as long as a person is not transgressing another’s freedom to live out their beliefs and lifestyle, they are free to do so themselves.

I know that many feel boundaries are evil and limiting but I feel they give us our greatest freedom, for they allow us to see clearly what we believe to be true and operate within that sacred place.  Boundaries also require we recognize another’s beliefs and values so that we hold their right (in America at least) and freedom to live out their values as sacrosanct as well.

When I was a kid, there was a saying I will end with here:  My freedom ends, where another person’s nose begins.