CLICK HERE FOR BLOGGER TEMPLATES AND MYSPACE LAYOUTS »

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Not Helpful

Ok, starting to become very unhelpful: people who like to predict the end of the world. A few weeks ago at the Unitarian Universalist church in Prescott, the topic of interest was the situation in Columbia with the civil war and human rights violations. The story that was told by a man who travels to Columbia often to protest the human rights violations was very troubling and sickening. What's worse is that the United States hosts "schools" used to train military activists responsible for these human rights violations. But that's a topic for another discussion. At the end of this man's speech at the church, a question and answer session ensued. The first comment was by a seemingly frustrated woman in the front row: "this just proves what we have known all along. Our country is not a democracy anymore; whatever the people have to say doesn't make a bit of difference. I believe and have always believed, along with my friends, that the world is going to end on... [insert your favorite predictive date here] and there's just nothing we can do anymore. There's just nothing we can do."

Second instance: during the previews for "Quantum of Solace," the new James Bond movie, audiences were shown an image of a Tibetan monk in the Himalayas frantically sounding a huge gong as a massive tidal wave swept over the Himalayas. The ad line goes something like: "what will the governments of our world do when the end comes? [Pause] Nothing." Which is followed up by the date of the movie release and encouragement to google "end of the world [insert favorite date here]."

First off, an ocean over the Himalayas? Really? We are talking about the highest point on Earth. Global warming will indeed increase the levels of our oceans, catastrophically reducing inhabitable land along our nations' coastlines. This type of logic, plus the womans' from the UU church are based on fear, catastrophizing and unsupported attitudes of helplessness. And what is the use of this type of thinking? That we shouldn't mobilize our humanitarian aid power to protect the people in Columbia because there's no use? That we shouldn't do everything in our power to protect the Earth and the delicate atmosphere because a huge tidal wave is going to sweep over on us and destroy everything anyway? What is the use of such fatalistic thinking besides a morbid interest in an unpredictable future? Such thinking only promotes helpless attitudes that what we say and do has no effect on the behavior of others or our environment.

Wednesday, November 05, 2008

Like Christmas, But Not Quite

This morning as I woke, I had the distinct sensation of impending joyfulness, like the day was full of promise of great things to come, like Christmas morning as a kid. Then it dawned on me: "Barack Obama has been elected our next president!" It was and is indeed Christmas. Obama represents a new chance and a new hope for our nation, an unblemished fresh start. I remember now last night when the news was announced: I had been watching the results for so long at that time that I was barely focused on the television anymore. My mind was numb with the pundits' guesses as to outcomes for this battleground state and that controversial county and this prediction made in such and such month, and so on and so on.... and then... beneath the captions, I read "Obama elected president!" I sat with my mouth agape; my mom walking in the house at that moment didn't believe it was real. She cried. We hugged. We called relatives. We listened to one of the most real and convincing and heartfelt speeches I feel that I will ever hear a politician make.

On the other hand, this morning I read in the Prescott Courier that the "same sex" marriage proposition passed in Arizona. PASSED? A proposition amending our constitution to define marriage as only an institution between a man and a woman!? I couldn't think of a better example of NOT separating church and state. If this definition of marriage is not fully and 100 percent supported by secular organizations, then by reasonable argument, it is being pushed as an agenda of faith organizations! Then how, HOW can it be written in our Arizona constitution that we ALL must follow the mandate of a faith that is not neccessarily ours? This is NOT separation of church and state. This is lobbying by religious organizations that controls the lives of citizens that such organizations can't control any other way (not by scare tactics, or door to door evangelizing). This proposition is unconstitutional and un-American. Isn't it ironic that the faith-based organizations that pushed this amendment through are the same ones that are against what they call "government-controlled health-care?" Why is it ok for faith-based organizations to control our right to marry whom we want, but it isn't ok for the government to create a socially responsible universal health care system?