First of all, I am not familiar with this person.  But what she has to say reveals something to be liked about her character.  In the liberal bastion of Hollywood, this kind of talk is likely to bring trouble.  For instance, what happened to Tom Sellick?  Unless she is drop-dead gorgeous and an established mega-star, she will lose money for daring to challenge the establishment.  Still she has opened her mouth and said something critical about our Rock Star President.  And, refreshing to me, she has dared to challenge the tiresome, intellectually weak, and patently unfair assumption of so many Obama-maniacs that criticism of him is automatically to be labeled as racism.  It’s a tried and true way to bully the thoughtful person who may happen to simply disagree. 

Here is my take on the political, social, and religious opinions of the Hollywood elite:  Just because you can perform before a camera does not mean you have especially perceptive insight in such matters.  What you think is really of no more value than the average person on the street.  Except, you have a platform that most do not have.  Therefore you have access to the attention of millions of people.  So you open your mouth and people listen.  What do Sean Penn or Julia Roberts really know about complicated issues of life faced by the everyday people of America?  Who cares about their solutions and their preferred candidates?  Apparently a lot of people want to listen to their pontificating on the issues of the day.  And I guess that is okay, in the same sense it is okay for the blowhard at the coffee shop or the Freshman from College to wax eloquently about their political persuasions.  Just take it for what it is- a good bit of passion, combined with a heavy dose of ignorance, and all of it should be open to inspection.

So, with the preceding disclaimer, I present some select quotes from Angie Harmon- who is not a racist:

“If I have anything to say against Obama it's not because I'm a racist, it's because I don't like what he's doing as President and anybody should be able to feel that way, but what I find now is that if you say anything against him you're called a racist.”

“I also think if W or John McCain or Reagan would have gone and done a talk show, the backlash would have been so huge and in his face, and 'What is our president doing? How unclassy!' But Obama does it and no one says anything,”

 

Bill has been a fat man for all the years I have known him, until recently.  He is a truck driver who works extremely hard.  And he eats hard.  I’ve accompanied him to social occasions and buffet restaurants and can personally attest to his massive eating capacity.  He’s also stated as fact that he drinks at least a gallon of whole milk daily.  Thus Bill ballooned to 260 pounds.  Several months ago he went on a diet.  I do not think he followed any particular program, but simply stopped some unhealthy eating habits.  He cut out all the milk, second helpings at the table, and desserts.  Now he has lost about 60 pounds.  He looks good.  But the problem is that he is prideful of his accomplishment.

About a month ago he said something to me about being overweight.  Since he said it with jovial laughing, I took it as friendly jesting, and countered with a similar smile that he should be the last person to give opinion about another person’s weight.  That’s when he told me he had lost over 40 pounds.  I congratulated him, and then spent the rest of the day wondering if everybody was thinking I was a fat tub of lard!  Then my wife told me that Bill was pointing toward a young man and commenting to others about how much weight he had gained.  I know him as a fine gentleman who is sensitive about the matter and know he would be hurt to hear such criticism.

To me, this illustrates the capacity of too many people to be far too slow to show mercy and quick to judge.  Bill is an extrovert, so he probably does not worry too much about what others think about him.  Many people, though, struggle with self-esteem and will hurt for days from the slightest criticism.  Folks like Bill may accurately judge such persons to be overly sensitive and tell them to get over it.  But why hurt another person when it can easily be avoided?  More importantly, Bill should not forget so quickly what it feels like to have a weight problem.  I have often said that it is absolutely unfair that some can eat with abandon and still have a svelte figure, while others seem to only think about a doughnut and gain a pound.  It is one of the great inequities of life!  Bill worked hard to lose the weight.  It involved a lot of self-discipline.  Likely he looks around and wonders why all these other people cannot show the same self-control?  So he opens his mouth, at least in slight contempt, and offers criticism. 

Meanwhile many hear his words with a wizened smile.  They know the real victory is not in losing the weight, but keeping it off.  They will quietly revisit the conversation, or at least his criticism, in six months.  Likely Bill will be back to 260 pounds- sad vindication. 

Pro 16:18 NASB
(18)  Pride goes before destruction, And a haughty spirit before stumbling.
Mat 5:7 NASB
(7)  Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.

The conversation around here has been about the need to "turn the other cheek", an admonition from Jesus found in Matthew 5:39.  It is not a casual statement.  Within context of the Sermon on the Mount, it is to be part of the lifestyle approach of those who would claim to be followers of Christ.  Now our debate is whether such would be good foreign policy for our nation?  And I want to reserve comment on that aspect for other places.  But I know it is an appropriate personal lifestyle.  And I also know that I am not very good at it.

My tendency is to rise to anger quickly when I feel I've been insulted or unfairly confronted, to quickly become combative.  Imagine that!  Words come out, actions taken, positions expressed, that can really complicate things down the line.  Such words are spoken under the adrenaline of the moment.  And you and I know what tends to happen when we disengage wisdom and "shoot from the lip".  Likely what is said is not very wise.  It is not well accepted, tends to exacerbate the situation, and often leads to perceptions and relationship complications that will be difficult to change.  Lots of times, when I go into attack mode, it is really a defense mechanism.  If I could be honest, likely the response would be: "I am hurt that you would have this opinion of me.  I am injured that you think so little of our relationship that you could say or do this thing without regard to how it would make me feel or how it would alter our relationship."  Instead, the effort it taken to strike a fatal blow.  After all, I've been caught off-guard.  I feel unprepared to do battle with logic, and am afraid you will win if I try.

In practical matters, how does one turn the other cheek?
*I need to be sufficiently assured of my own value as a person and general respect I've earned from others that I feel no need to go into full warfare mode because someone has confronted me or challenged something that I hold important and concerning which I have taken a public stance.
*When taken aback by the words or actions of another person, silence and inaction would be a good initial response.  It would give me time to think, and pray, and consider...
-Does this person have a valid point?
-Even if he is incorrect in many things, is there truth within what he is saying?
-Did this person truly say what I think I have heard?
-Was my injury his earnest intent?
-Will an aggressive response, at this moment, help the situation?
*Often the other person is angry, aggressive, and even insulting for reasons that have little to do with the immediate matter at hand.
*Perhaps I would behave similarly, or even more so, were I to have walked in his shoes?

This trying to follow Jesus is not easy!  It would be nice to just focus on the problems of others and offer smug solutions and retorts.  But, no!  He just keeps turning the mirror back onto myself!  I look at Jesus.... and look at myself....  Good grief, there is not a whole lot of resemblance. 

Thank God for grace.  Thank God for His persistent and sometimes not-so-gentle love.  God makes life to be a fascinating process.

Wake-up call for organized religion is another extraordinary piece by the gifted columnist, Leonard Pitts Jr.  I've linked to the article, and think you should invest five or ten minutes to read what this insightful man has to say.  I cannot label Pitts as a conservative or liberal.  He is that refreshingly rare independent journalist.  When I read one of his pieces I never agree with him entirely.  Most importantly, I come away with something that sticks.  I've been entertained but also disturbed.

Here is a rather lengthy quote, illustrating his ability to make me squirm, think, agree and disagree, think "Wow, I wish I could write like that!", and walk away with the matter on my mind.

"And people of faith should ask themselves: What is the cumulative effect upon outside observers of Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker living like lords on the largess of the poor, multiplied by Jimmy Swaggart's pornography addiction, plus Eric Rudolph bombing Olympians and gays in the name of God, plus Muslims hijacking airplanes in the name of God, multiplied by the church that kicked out some members because they voted Democrat, divided by people caterwauling on courthouse steps as a rock bearing the Ten Commandments was removed, multiplied by the square root of Catholic priests preying on little boys while the church looked on and did nothing, multiplied by Muslims rioting over cartoons, plus the ongoing demonization of gay men and lesbians, divided by all those ''traditional values'' coalitions and ''family values'' councils that try to bully public schools into becoming worship houses, with morning prayers and science lessons from the book of Genesis? Then subtract selflessness, service, sacrifice, holiness and hope

"Do the math, and I bet you'll draw the same conclusion the researchers did.

"Who can be surprised if the sheer absurdity, fundamentalist cruelty and ungodly hypocrisy that have characterized so much ''religion'' in the last 30 years have driven people away? If all I knew of God was what I had seen in the headlines, I would not be eager to make His acquaintance. I am thankful I know more."

I underline the next-to-last sentence.  In my opinion, journalists as a whole are unfair in their coverage and depiction of religion, especially Christianity.  And I could write at length as to why I believe this.  But, it seems to me, the personal statement of Christianity as a whole should be so loud and positively impacting that it would drown out the prejudiced naysayers.  And not because we conform to the world- which, after all, is what these journalists seem to want- but because we are the vehicle of God to transform the world.  Our weapon of transformation is not to be a sword, but the love of Christ.  Now I look at this litany of Christian transgressions scribbled by Mr. Pitts.  I am sure he could continue far past the end of the page.  I could.  And in all of this I see no love.  Therefore I do not see Christ.  Such is in my opinion the core reason why my Faith is indeed so unappealing in this day and time.  In our fear of the culture and resultant militance, we've forgotten to be like Christ.  And Christianity without Christ leaves us with so much of what we see in American religion, today.

So, what do you think? 

Krystal, my oldest daughter, and I went to see the King Tut exhibit at the Atlanta Civic Center.  For some time I have been promising her an outing, and while other matters seemed to constantly get in the way, she has been insistent that I keep the promise.  Saturday we spent the afternoon together.  We dined at a favorite sub shop, spent several hours at the exhibit, and topped it off with a waffle cone at Bruster’s.  It was a nice time together.  I’m pleased and rather proud that she still wants to spend time with her dad.

It was billed as TUTANKHAMUN AND THE GOLDEN AGE OF THE PHARAOHS.  There was quite a crowd, although we were allowed to spend as much time as we would like with viewing.  Casually we strolled through several rooms of ancient Egyptian artifacts.

My impression?  Wow, that stuff is old!

As we perused artifacts from the different Egyptian dynasties, I absorbed it more as a purveyor of trivia than a careful student of history.  Here are some impressions:

So many of the busts showed the elongated skulls, characteristic of the people of that time and place.  I do not know if such is an anthropological feature or perhaps a deformity manipulated by wrappings.  But it seems I recall the same skull features from NBA basketball games.

Hatshepsut was a female Pharaoh, who ruled for twenty years of prosperity and enlightenment.  Apparently she dressed and behaved as a man, a necessity.  k. d. lang would be proud.

When I finished strolling through the detailed exhibits, I noticed what seemed an odd omission.  King Tutankhamen was nowhere to be found.  Displayed were crusty old photos of the original excavation.  And, there hung a neat 3-D depiction of the X-Ray of his mummy, used in an effort to theorize as to why he died at age 19.  The X-Ray appears to reveal a major breakage of his knee, perhaps the result of a fall or an incident of war.  It is surmised he could have died from the resulting infection.

I’ve searched the internet and found him.  Well, at least his head. He is on display in a museum in Egypt, appropriate I think, except that I paid $30 per ticket for a King Tut exhibit in Atlanta that did not include him! 

The security guard walked over and forced my daughter to erase some pictures she had taken of the displays, explaining that photographs were forbidden, and if we were unhappy with the policy to take it up with management.   Why can’t you take pictures?  Does National Geographic have a copyright on ancient Egyptian artifacts?  It seems to me such images would belong to posterity, and not to some copyright lawyer.  So, I’ve gone online and found some images, likely taken with cell phones, and therefore illegal.  They are proudly displayed below.

Long live rebellion to silly rules

 

 

 

(My personal favorite)

03.16.09 (10:49 am)   [edit]

16 Comments

Cursing
Strictly defined, a curse is a formula of words intended to bring calamity or misfortune upon another.  Many have believed, throughout history, the ability to call down a curse upon others with an exacting string of words.  Such sounds quite primitive to me.  I've never even considered calling upon the forces of darkness to bring sickness or injury upon someone with whom I am offended.  When I was irritated at the elevator that suddenly would not function, certainly I was not wishing for it to implode or melt in fervent heat.  In the past, I've had persons use rather salty language in expressing dislike or disapproval toward me, but I am pretty sure they were not seeking a literal realization of their verbal barbs.  I have no intent to go to Hell, and no fear from the occasional contrary wishes of another.

Vulgarity
As I understand, it is the intentional use of words that lack good taste and propriety, and often refer to crude subjects like embarrassing bodily functions and excrement.  Think about red-neck humor, Larry The Cable Guy & company, ...surrogate.  Now I will be honest- I did not grow up having breakfast at Tiffany's, and so I can appreciate the humor within crudeness.  But I also know that in the context of most social settings and relationships in which I find myself, such is just not appropriate. 

Blasphemy
It is a contempt for God expressed in thought, word, or action.  Out of reverence for God, I steer clear of blasphemy.  I believe God loves me, and try to live and relate in a manner that expresses love in return.  As it would be injurious to hear the name of my wife or child used in contempt, even more so I am quite uncomfortable to hear a verbal insult of God.  Oh, I think God can handle such.  Likely there will be no bolt of lightning in store for the next person who shakes a fist at God.  And the vast majority of those who "use God's name in vain" are simply displaying ignorance or laziness of verbal skills, probably more in line with vulgarity than blasphemy.  But many are serious about God. And surely those who are thoughtful and decent will avoid the intentional use of such language.

Cussing
These are not words intended to belittle or demean, nor hate speech.  And I know the word "cuss" is simply a colloquialism likely to be avoided by one with good speech habits.  But it is an appropriate term for this inappropriate, but highly common, word usage.  To cuss, I think, is to choose to use crude and at least slightly offensive terminology in crafting a statement or response.  Sometimes we say "it slips out".  But let's be honest.  It was in there all along.  It came out most likely because, at the moment, we determined it was the best way to express what we were thinking.

Let me tell you a little bit about myself:
*I think I have at my disposal a fairly good vocabulary.  At my disposal, in any given situation, will be a variety of words from which I can choose to express myself.  I do not have to cuss because of a limited vocabulary.

*I understand the importance of social deportment.  I would not want a poor choice of words to reflect badly upon those connected with me.  For instance, I could not imagine using a cuss word in a sermon, or in any kind of connection with my church.  I would not talk in such way with my mom, or in meeting a new neighbor.  Respect for others and for those I represent precludes such language.

*When I hear cuss words used, most often I do not make a big deal of the matter.  I understand people develop speech habits for a variety of reasons.  While I avoid the use of such language, I try to be quick to offer grace in listening to others.  If the language becomes too crude, generally I will simply be quiet or walk away.  And most people are smart enough to appropriately adjust the choice of language.

*I know there is a class of person out there, most often religious and connected with my brand of the Christian faith, very quick to express offense and disapproval of the missteps of others.  This person finds a quiet glee in making note of the imperfections of others.  As they lower another, they feel raised to a higher notch.  So I try to be on zealous guard when around such persons.  I mind my p's and q's, and often find myself utilizing the "language of zion" for their appeasement.  I think I do such because I know such people are dangerous.  But the problems is there are just so many of them.  And they seem to show up, with lazar eyesight and highly sensitive ears, at my most vulnerable moments.  Which brings me to a final point...

*I am a sinner.  I may play many roles in life, but those who know me best will have to nod their heads in agreement, "That guy has his faults.".  I'll compare my speech habits with those of most.  And I wonder what the Pope says when he stubs his toe first thing in the morning?  One can express surprise, frustration, anger, exasperation in many ways.  I am of the opinion many of those expressions still can be technically defined as "cussing", even if they do not sound like the equivalent word for "a barrier constructed to contain the flow of water".

Final Thoughts
Sunday night we had our monthly Church Business Conference.  Our volunteer Youth Minister stood to give his report of the activities and plans of the ministry to teenagers.  I know him to be a good guy, with a genuine heart to love God and serve others.  He also gets nervous when in front of a crowd and thus tends to keep talking far beyond the point.  So he was rambling about various things with most of his audience tuning out, when I caught the end of run-on sentence.  "... like us Old Farts!"  In the company of prim and proper church folk, with a big cross casting its shadow upon the lectern, this guy deigned to say "fart" in the church.  We all definitely heard the word.  It was very much out of place.  There was nervous laughter.  And he knew he said the wrong thing immediately after the word came out.  But it was too late!  He rambled on through his report.  Then I stood to continue the meeting.  I looked back to see mostly a smiling group of people who thought it humorous that this guy had unintentionally said the wrong thing.  But there were also a couple of red-faced, disapproving persons.  First I said to our recording secretary, "How about let's be sure to strike that one sentence from our church minutes?"  Everyone laughed, and agreed.  And the meeting went on.

Grace.  Now, that's never a cuss word!

Oh, and watch your language, please.

Last night I watched Body Of Lies, a confusing film set in the Middle East, that tries hard to show an ugly and immoral battle against al-Quaida. I will not try nearly as hard to write a review since I was working on my daughter's income taxes at the same time. Even as I write, the parallel between the title of the film and the IRS is not lost.

This was my first trip to the video store in several months. We have Direct TV. Even though we have chosen not to opt for the additional movie channels, we can always find a film to watch. For instance, I've now watched Roadhouse 14 times. It is a horrible movie that I really enjoy, akin to a similar fascination with CSI Miami. Along the same lines I catch all the reruns of the Clint Eastwood Spaghetti Westerns, and it seems the extremely irritating Sigourney Weaver is always available, somewhere. With the abundance of movies available with simply a click of the remote, it would seem the video store industry would be struggling. While I was there on a Tuesday evening, only myself a two other customers were roaming the brightly lit aisles. Like me, they had before themselves an endless array of movies, and yet could not find anything suitable to watch. Usually I will roam the store for at least an hour before reluctantly making a selection. And this was how I ended up with Body Of Lies. I strongly considered Roadhouse- The Uncut Version.

The film stars Leonardo DiCaprio. He seems to have made a nice transition from heartthrob to serious actor. Russell Crowe portrays this weird stay-at-home dad who also manages the War on Terror by remote video feed, and as I come to dislike his greasy character I also realize how incredulous is the premise. The torture scenes are particularly riveting. Do we really, in the name of Democracy, break knees with sledge hammers and sever fingers? Leonardo had his fingers smashed with a hammer. It was all very realistic and gruesome. Strangely, it made me crave a soft chocolate mint, the kind you can squeeze to see white creamy filling come oozing out. That's strange, isn't it?

I watch movies for two reasons. Foremost is pure, shallow escapism. Entertainment. But I also realize that a good film can make an important statement, just like a good book. And I am fairly sure such was the intention of Body Of Lies. It did not have much of a chance with me, last night. It was wide-screen format, which means the display was even smaller than usual on my television. A movie can project a much better message when viewed from its intended format of a large screen. Also, I get the idea there has been a good bit of editing and redacting with this movie. It just seems to jump around too much.

Rent it at Blockbuster. My daughter's boyfriend works at the store on Pleasant Hill Road. They sure need the business.