Carl's Random Thoughts On All Things

A Few Thoughts on Dawkins's The God Delusion

2012-01-26T15:05:00.000-08:00

Recently I read Richard Dawkins’s book The God Delusion and I’d like to share a few thoughts about it. At the outset, Dawkins lays down a couple goals for the book, one of which is that any people of faith who read it, convert to atheism, in my case, this will not be achieved, in fact, I felt sort of let down by the thing. Saying that isn’t really all that fair as I don’t think I set realistic expectations for the work and to be truly honest, I didn’t finish it. I guess I expected more from Dawkins. I don’t know what exactly but maybe something that I would consider a real challenge to my faith, that didn’t happen. It turned out to be a collection of arguments I’ve heard a thousand times before or at least had considered on my own. For that reason I became quite bored with it. I skimmed the remaining chapters to see if there would be any difference there and when I reasoned that there would not, the book went back to the library (there were other folks who had it on request). The long and short of it is that I expected something original from the man who may be the world’s foremost advocate of atheism, and I didn’t find it.

All that said, I didn’t disagree with Dawkins on all that much, mainly just the conclusions he draws. His indictment of religion is more or less correct. Religions suck. Jesus said repeatedly that he was not there to save a privileged few, but everyone, Jew, gentile, Yankee and Red Sox fans, even the French. Then, a bunch of people in robes show up and say “Nope, you gotta be one of us to be saved and in order to be one of us, you gotta do this and if you don’t, off to hell with you.” This is completely in defiance of Jesus’ words and screwed up the whole thing. The result is that people turned their backs on God. To quote Rob Bell: “A lot of people confuse religion with God and walk away from them both.”

Dawkins also goes to great length to prove evolution to which I say, “Well done.” For me, God and evolution can coexist quite nicely. I have no problem here. Yay evolution.

So let’s get to it. Here’s where I have a problem with Dawkins. First, he likes a small God. Also towards the beginning of the book, he says something like, and I’m paraphrasing because the book is back at the library, “some people believe in a God that no matter what science proves, it’s all still God.” How shocking. Duh.

One of Dawkins’s main arguments is a little bit schoolyard for me. There is a line of thought in creationism regarding a “Prime Mover.” Essentially you can regress everything so far back, but at some point there has to an initial cause that had no cause itself. Big Bang kind of stuff. This Prime Mover is labeled “God.” Dawkins’s answer is of course, “Well then, who created God?” I think he actually includes the phrase “Neener Nee Nee” (really he does). Which brings me to this, this book is a great deal of Dawkins masturbating in an intellectual sense. Much of the tone of the book is “If you weren’t so stupid, you’d agree with all of us smart people and be an atheist.” If fact, he sees his role in all of this as that of a consciousness raiser. Again, at least for me, there was nothing new in this book.

Dawkins lays out a good case of why one should not believe. His arguments are extremely rational as one would expect from a renowned scientist and certainly a brilliant man. To be honest, I’d love to have lunch with the guy as he truly seems to be an incredibly interesting being. The problem with rational arguments is that they don’t hit the spot on people where faith lives. Dawkins actually uses this quote from the bible and it occurred to me several times while reading the book “A fool hath said in his heart, there is no God” (Ps. 14:1). Notice how the brain is not mentioned? That’s not an accident. Brains are inconsistent. They’re designed to doubt, consider and reconsider, turn things over and over again. They also send you into a room to get something and then forget why. They lose your car keys and make you do thing that result in embarrassing facepalm moments. Your heart is something else entirely. (Before anyone points it out, I know it’s not actually your heart, it’s more a difference between the purely rational, and the aspect of the self that is not purely rational.) Hearts can be a bit wild sometimes, but when they are touched by the truth, they can move a man to tears. No simple, rational fact ever did that. An honest faith, will cross both planes, the brain and the heart. It has to. Of course, that means that the believer will be subject to doubt, but that’s okay. Doubt can have the effect of strengthening faith. My point in all of this is that I think there is a level of knowing something that goes beyond the rational. For example, I know how to play the guitar. I know the notes on the fretboard, the correct way to play them, and I can read music, but I don’t know how to play. I may know a lot of what a virtuoso knows, but I can’t do what he can do. His knowledge of the guitar exists on a different level from my own. I’ve stated this all quite poorly, but give it some thought.

One last point, and this is a bit of the small God thing, but Christianity is not stagnant. Christian thought and philosophy is constantly evolving as new people make new arguments. Within the last couple years, a young pastor in Michigan named Rob Bell sent shock waves though the Christian community with a book called Love Wins that challenged the commonly held notion of heaven and hell. The argument still rages over this. People of faith are not fools, we are not slaves to dogma, and you had better believe that we can damn well think for ourselves. One book by an atheist isn’t going to change that anymore than one theologian will convert all of the atheists. No matter how brilliant either thinks himself to be.

Ultimately, I’d suggest reading Dawkins, or at least making an effort to do so, whether a person is a person of faith or not. Challenges to faith are a good thing. It keeps one from becoming complacent. If your faith is really shaken, maybe it or aspects of it should be reevaluated. This is not bad. Think of it like going to the gym. You may even end up an atheist for a bit, but your heart may call you back after a while, in which case your faith will be tested and proven. We challenge our bodies to keep them healthy, we challenge our intellects to keep them vibrant, why should faith be left out of the mix?

One last thing. Dawkins states that an atheist can be a moral, compassionate, contented, and good person. I agree completely. Some of my favorite people are atheists. They are also some of the people who are doing some of the hardest work on behalf of people who need the most help in the world. In many cases, they’ve outdone us Christians to our shame and their credit. I’d rather stand with a good atheist than a bad Christian any day of the week, twice on Sunday.

I’d love to hear what any of you have to say. Also I apologize if this is scattered and not especially coherent, but my work schedule doesn’t allow for a lot of time on this right now. Besides, I don’t want to write a book to comment on one, nor do I want to summarize the whole of Dawkins’s work.

Y’all know I love ya.

© Carl Mealie, 2012

A Grandpa Memory

2012-01-08T12:44:00.000-08:00

On Christmas Day, at about 4am EST, my grandfather died. He was 96 and lived to see his children’s children’s children. He died without pain and was coherent almost to the end. Knowing that we’re all going to die, it’s not a bad way to go. In fact, his death mirrored his life in that he had always been a man who faced everything, at least those things that I saw him endure, with a quiet dignity and grace. Never once did I hear him complain about anything, not ever once.

He spoke very little. Certainly he had beliefs and opinions and would share them if asked. Once –about six years ago—I heard him launch into a tirade, a very short one, against George W. Bush and the Iraq war. My grandfather, like many of his generation, was a lifelong Democrat and had once been invited to the Democratic National Convention. His life had truly been one of service. He was in the Army just after WWII, spent almost thirty years in the fire service, was a member of community housing boards, and was always engaged in something at the church whether it was selling cards at bingo or taking a fire-watch shift at 2am when the church was threatened with arson. Not to mention the service inherent in raising a family and being a husband. By all accounts from everyone who knew him, he was always there when he was needed.

A remarkable life really. When people were speaking about him and things he had done in his lifetime, I could almost feel myself shrinking in my seat. Where would we be as a country if my generation was as engaged in the community the way my grandfather was? But that’s not this blog. If there was anything I could say that from my perspective I wish he’d been different about, I would wish he spoke more. All in all, I feel like I hardly knew him.

I have some general memories. My grandfather, with very little help, built the house that he and my grandmother (she died nine years ago) retired in. He worked on it six days a week, eight hours a day, through at least most of the year if not all of it for several years. In all the nails that go into a house, I’d guess he drove 80% of them if not more. He would spend time with us, not talking so much as just going for walks or ice cream, high school football games, stuff like that. When I saw him with my kids I could see him just delight in their presence and I think that comes across in the pictures.

I want to share one memory. It stands out as one instance where he completely broke his composure and showed a humorous side that I didn’t see often and it’s the enduring memory that I have of him. When I think of him, I think of this, even though it was a bit out of character. In sharing this, I have no intent of imparting any kind of greater message or lesson or any of that, it’s just a happy memory I want to share.

When I was a kid, my grandparents lived on Millionaire’s Row in Williamsport, PA. In the late 1800’s Williamsport had more millionaires per capita than any place else mostly due to the lumber industry. My grandparents we’re not millionaires. By the time they bought the house, the houses of Millionaire’s Row had been divided into apartments and the neighborhood seemed to be lower middle class. Anyway, their sea-foam green house (that's it right there though it was sold a few years ago and has been furhter divided) had rather large living room and during this particular instance, my grandfather was in his chair, reclined as far back as possible and soundly asleep. My brother and I were sitting in chairs that were perpendicular to his and faced each other. My mother and grandmother were on the two couches.

Any of you who have had the unfortunate experience of sleeping in the same area where I’m sleeping, will know that I snore, and snore egregiously. I get this trait from my grandfather and he is in rare form at the moment, so much so that the newspaper has been removed from the room to keep from being inhaled by him. Mom is doing a crossword puzzle (She is freakishly good at them and has since moved onto the more diabolical fill-it-in.) and I think my grandmother was sewing. There is also a Kerry Blue Terrier named Petunia (we called her Toonie) napping beside my grandfather’s chair. Other than the snoring, there’s not a sound in the house with the TV off. My brother and I are sitting in our chairs laughing each time my grandfather snores. Looking at the pictures, you might conclude that my grandfather was a man of slight build, and you would be wrong. He spent all that time in the fire service and after that was in construction and other labor intensive functions and he was really quite buff at the time and physically as capable as a man much younger. Within the last five years, he thinned out a lot but even still climbed on top of his roof to repair it while in his 90s. That starts to come across in this picture.
Anyway, he snores, we laugh. He snores, we laugh. He snores louder; we laugh harder and start rating the snores.

Snore.

That was about average.

Snore.

That was a good one.

Snore.

Oh. Wait, wait, maybe next one.

Snore.

Wow!
And on and on it went.

At some point, my grandfather woke up. I don’t know when, and more to the point, I don’t know how it was that he didn’t let on that he was awake. He kept making snoring sounds of varying intensity and we kept chuckling, hopelessly duped by the old man. Until…

He snored something like this:

SNORE!

At the same time he slammed the foot rest back into place and unreclined his chair even hopping to his feet.

Petunia, the dog, bolted from the room nearly peeing herself as she ran.

My brother and I both screeched like small girls until we realized what had happened and then laughed ourselves silly as did our grandfather who kept saying “Fooled you that time, didn’t I? I got you good.”

This story, like most, is diminished in the telling but I hope you get the picture all the same. Like I said, when I think of him, I remember this moment.

Farewell, Pop-Pop.

Y’all know I love ya.

Carl

©2011

Keeping Christ in Christmas

2011-11-30T11:20:00.000-08:00

The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel—which means God with us. Isaiah 7:14 and Matthew 1:23

So, I’ve been seeing a lot of, and I see it every year at this time, signs, stickers, Facebook posts, or whatever else that say something to the effect of “Keep Christ in Christmas.” This is usually has a tone that borders on hostile rather than being a simple reminder against overconsumerism (is that a word?) and the pitfalls that can accompany the holiday.

To some extent, the exasperation in the statement is warranted. Wish the wrong person a “Merry Christmas” and it will be explained to you, in no uncertain terms and at an inflated decibel level, that such a wish is not only unwelcome but terribly offensive. It shouldn’t be. Whether you are a Christian or not, somebody taking a moment to wish you a merry anything should be welcome. There’s enough ill will out there that I’ll take all the “merry” and “happy” thoughts I can get. No reason to be offended at all.

But…

The only people who care about keeping Christ in Christmas are obviously Christians and as such, are the only ones posting this message. So I guess my answer to them, and I’m Christian as well so no exemption here, is what are you doing to keep Christ in Christmas? If one is to demand the sentiment be left in tact, then this is a fair question. After all, who else’s responsibility would it be to do so? People of a different faith don’t care and atheists have no stake in the matter either way. Though it should be mentioned that atheists and non-Christians can embrace the spirit of christmas, small “c” as opposed to Christmas, as well as anyone.

Rather than scolding people for their political correctness, maybe we should do more to infuse this Holiday with Christ in more than just name.

The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel—God with us.

That is the reason Christians observe this holiday. I know, I know, Saturnalia and all that and that Jesus was likely born in July. But this is the day that Christians observe the birth of Christ and rather than get wrapped up in all of that, just think about it for a moment, God with us, not in heaven or some other place that a GPS can’t find, but here, with us, down the street, at the coffee shop, on your couch, here with us, and as one of us. That should have some significance I would think.

What does that mean for God to be “with us?”

God is love, y’all.

Simple. That’s one of the most direct messages in the bible.

Deuteronomy 4:37 “Because he loved your forefathers…he brought you out of Egypt with his Presence and great strength.”

Psalm 44:3 “It was not by the sword that they won the land…it was your right hand, your arm, and the light of your face, for you loved them.”

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world…”

Jesus’ commands:

Matthew 5:44 “…I tell you: Love your enemies…” and verse 9:19 “…love your neighbor as yourself…”

John 15:12 “My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you.”

And I could list examples like these for pages and pages. In a concordance (a book that catalogs the usages of any given word in the bible) the word “lord” has roughly four pages of entries (in my bible), the word love, just as many. That doesn’t take into account actions and where love is implied. For example, just before Jesus ascends, he says in Matthew 28:20: “And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” There’s a lot of love in that statement and it’s one of my personal favorites. Not to mention dying in the one of the most humiliating, and painful ways ever devised by humankind, or coming to earth at all from wherever Jesus came from, which brings us back to Christmas.

‘Kay so, if you want to keep Christ in Christmas, share a little love.

Does that mean give away a bunch of money? Not necessarily, unless you want to and have the means to do so.

Does that mean spending my time working in a soup kitchen? Sounds like a great idea, if you have the time.

What if you don’t have money or time? Welcome to the so-called 99%. But how about this: When the woman in a minivan who looks like she just went through pepper grinder cuts you off when she whips out of the Target parking lot and then looks at you with complete exhaustion on her face and mouths the word “sorry,” maybe you can smile and wave rather than flip her off, even though you might have spent the day in the salt mine yourself.

Maybe that homeless guy you see every day can stay under the cover of the strip mall and out of the rain for a little longer.

Maybe you can say “Thank you and Merry Christmas” to the checker at Wal-Mart who has a line at her register that stretches to Terre-Haute and looks like she hates her job more than anything else.

Maybe you can let the guy with the screaming baby go ahead of you in the grocery store without judging him about why the baby is screaming in the first place.

Lots of little things we can do to keep Christ in Christmas that don’t cost nothing or take much time. Most are a lot better than signs, stickers or Facebook messages.

Y’all know I love ya, and Merry Christmas.

© Carl Mealie, 2011

A Few Bits

2011-10-25T09:48:00.000-07:00

A few things I want to touch on in this one. There’s a lot of interesting stuff going on right now so blogging sooner rather than later. When I started this blog, I thought it would just be a neat thing to do, and it is, but sometimes I write a blog, read it, and think “That’s just stupid,” and junk the whole thing; that may even happen to this one. In this way, writing helps me make sense of stuff sometimes; that may happen here as well.

So first thing, and this happened recently and other similar actions are taking place following it, is the prisoner exchange between the Israelis and the Palestinians where Israel swapped around a thousand prisoners for one guy. Palestinians claimed victory and most folks think these 1000 exchangees are just going to be coming back at Israel as enemies. Terrorism experts are saying that the Israelis have only emboldened the terrorists. Well, maybe so, but that doesn’t mean it was a bad decision. I like that one of the most besieged nations in history can value the life of one man over the potential harm that valuation could cause. Certainly as we look at this with worldly eyes, it’s ridiculous but as a Christian, I am trying to see this through that lens (not that non-Christians could not reach the same conclusion) and as such, the view the world would take is often wrong. The world says kill them before they kill you, the ends justify the means, what’s mine is mine, and justice equals vengeance and then some. This is wrong, toxic, and self perpetuating. Jesus stands in counter to that as do all the great, inspirational leaders regardless of faith and time. Winston Churchill is an impressive historic figure. His strength and steadfastness were examples to a nation and stand as such for everyone throughout history. When I hear his speeches, I’m in awe of him. When I hear Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s speeches, it affects me on a deeper level and can move me to tears if it catches me right. King’s fight may still be ongoing, but he occupies (in my opinion, obviously) no lesser place in history than Churchill. There’s something about humanity in its purest form that we find moving and can touch our hearts so that we know that it’s right and true. Back to the prisoner exchange. Will this work against Israel? I think so. So what then? Do it again. Why? It’s the right thing to do. The war will continue anyway. Injecting as much humanity into it as possible is the only way to possibly and finally, end it. One must hope that when all is said and done, compassion can melt even the most stone-like heart otherwise, everything is a battle of attrition.

Second, Gaddafi (choose your own spelling) is dead. There are always bad guys. They change, but bad guys are always present. Gaddafi was the second bad guy I remember in my life; the Ayatollah Khomeini was the first. I remember the Reagan airstrikes against Libya in the 80s and all that. With him as a childhood bad guy, I found his capture and death interesting so I watched the footage of that event shot with a cellular phone by one of the rebels. In it, Gaddafi is found in a drainage pipe and is shot in the head though the wound is not immediately fatal. Before he dies, his is pulled to his feet, subjected to several humiliations, thrown on the hood of a vehicle like a dead deer, and driven around a bit. Apparently after a bit of this, he was put in an ambulance to be taken to a hospital but died in transit. That’s the story as I saw and understand it, knowing that this may be iffy. The whole time Gaddafi is repeating “Haram Aleiko” which translates as “This is a sin for you” but is used as a statement of vulnerability and a plea for mercy. He was shown none, and quite frankly, deserved none. The guy was a horrible dictator and he died as he lived. All the same, I found it unpleasant to watch a 69 year old man plead for his life while being brutalized. I’m not saying he deserved better, but the human in me would rather he just have been shot dead on the spot. Again, he got what he had coming, in a worldly sense.

Third, President Obama announced a complete troop withdraw from Iraq before 2012. Critics say that the whole thing is politically motivated. I’m sure it is, but it’s still the right thing to do. That he chose to do it at in a definite political climate and time is a sin for him.

Finally, Occupy Wall Street, I haven’t seen you in the news the last couple days. You need to politicize and politicize now, and stop talking to that idiot from the Weather Underground. Soon you’ll be nothing but an SNL parody and your high ideals will have counted for nothing.

In summation, HUMANITY & COMPASSION. Please?

(I know this is a little scattered and fragmented, sorry, hence is my noggin.)

Y’all know I love ya.

© Carl Mealie, 2011

You've Occupied a Park, Now What?

2011-10-19T17:50:00.000-07:00

I just wanted to touch on this Occupy Wall Street movement for a moment. First of all, well done!! It has been far too long since Americans protested in earnest. These things are truly the foundation of a democracy and when every other avenue fails, allow the people to have a voice that cannot be ignored.

That said, I philosophically disagree with the movement’s platform and whole-heartedly feel their way of carrying out the protest in its disregard for legality was wrong.
Wealth redistribution is a foolish aim and an unnecessary, even immoral one. There are people who have earned what they have. Others may have what they do through inheritance, in which case someone earned it and was able to support their own future generations with it, other may have been blessed or extremely lucky (depending on your theology), and certainly some may have gained through illegal means. Obviously in the last case, these people should be punished, but in the others, nope. Don’t vilify these people, learn from them, be happy for them, not jealous. They’ve been fortunate in one way, financially, but we all have our crosses to bear and there are worse things than being poor.

That said, if you’ve got a lot, maybe you can share a little. If I may quote the great Lemony Snicket*: “…99 percent of people want a roof over their heads, food on their tables, and the occasional slice of cake for dessert.” This of course simply means that people want to live their lives without being in a state of need and even enjoy it once in a while. Not so unreasonable, really. Another quote, this one from Dostoevsky’s The Idiot “Compassion was the chief and perhaps only law of all human existence” (Part 2, II Chapter 5)” I understand why the protesters chose Wall St. as opposed to D.C., Wall St. shows no compassion. Politicians at least can fake it. Closing plants here and opening them overseas-not compassionate. Cutting jobs that could stay-not compassionate. Defrauding people of their life savings-not compassionate. Giving people loans they could never repay and then foreclosing on their homes-not compassionate. Telling these same people that if they don’t pay the mortgage you will call the authorities and attempt to have their children taken away-not compassionate (and believe it or not, it’s said more than you might think). Sometimes people make mistakes. That doesn’t mean they should be homeless or should not be extended some compassion. It’s tough right now. People who can, should do more, not horde what they have. That’s the way I see it, anyhow.

So, the Occupy folks may have some valid points, so did the Tea Party. But, the Tea Party has progressed, if OWS does not take a page from the TP playbook, they will not. Specifically, the Tea Party morphed into a political entity. Now their platform is being discussed on the national stage and parts of it may become law.

If OWS does not follow this path, here’s what I think will happen: The holidays will approach and people's focus will turn to that. There will not be money for donations to noble causes so no more yummy food and material for signs. It’s also going to get cold. Some of the protesters will get sick and leave or be taken to the emergency room for care. Also, the media will find other things of interest. People chanting in a park are only fun for so long. They’ll leave and people will forget about the movement and its noble aims and soon the protesters will be like that guy at Pan Am in the ‘70s. (Okay so, when I was a kid my dad worked at TWA in LA. Across from the hanger entrance for TWA, was the gate for Pan Am. A bunch of people at Pan Am went on strike and picketed outside this gate. At first, the news paid attention and there were many picketers. But the picketers only picketed and people moved on. Years later, I would still see one guy out there holding a sign. Nobody cared.) Don’t be that guy.

Also, be careful what is said on your behalf. A woman saying that this is the fault of “Zionist jews” who should be “run out of the country” does not help your cause, though she has addressed the crowd in NYC. Along with that, be careful about who your friends are. The American nazi and communist parties are not good endorsements. Guilt by association is reasonable. If either of those groups had endorsed the Tea Party we’d still be hearing about it.

Once again, demonstrations are great, the allow people to vent, give them a voice, and raise awareness. All this only matter if there is a viable follow up. A man tells people every day that he is hungry. People hear him and give him food. This goes on for some time and people now just walk by him. One guy turns and says, “Okay, then do something about it!”

A few last words. Violence will hurt your cause. The moment your group employs it, they will dehumanize themselves. The police will clear the park with great injury to you and they will be on the side of justice. Violence never begets anything but violence. Frustration is understood, but it must remain peaceful.

Don’t put too much stock in that study on your website. If a church polled its choir, I’m sure they’d find a diverse group of individuals that agree with the pastor and that are active in the church. But this wouldn’t apply to the rest of the world. Your poll was much the same.

* The Lemony Snicket bit can be found here:

http://occupywriters.com/by-lemony-snicket

Y’all know I love ya.

© Carl Mealie, 2011

A Little on Exodus

2011-09-05T09:46:00.000-07:00

I’m just going to be honest here and own that the early chapters of Exodus (the later ones may as well but in this reading I’m to chapter 10) pose a couple problems for me in that I don’t understand why God is doing what God is doing. Fortunately for me, it seems a lot of biblical scholars, both Christian and Jew, seem to struggle with the same passages. So here’s what happens:
• The Hebrews, the descendants of Joseph who saved Egypt from famine and were welcomed by Pharaoh, have prospered.
• Many generations later, a Pharaoh who did not know Joseph, has perceived the Hebrews as a threat and as such, has enslaved them, a condition that persists for 400 years or so.
• Moses, who is a Hebrew, is raised in the house of Pharaoh, but after killing an Egyptian slave driver, flees to Midian where he becomes a shepherd, gets married, and has a kid or two before,
• he finds a bush that is burning but not being consumed. God speaks to him and tells Moses to return to Egypt where through him, Israel will be restored.

(Sidenote: Moses was happy where he was. Wife, kids, career, he was most likely a content man, and he doesn’t necessarily go along with God’s plan willingly. God seems to frequently pull people out of comfortable situations to serve divine purpose. Moses, Noah, Job, David, the Blues Brothers, Jonah, and the list goes on. Why is that? Maybe those who need help cannot always help themselves. I don’t have the answer this, really.)

Anyway, here’s where things get interesting to me. On the way back to Egypt, Moses and family and camped for the night and Moses is asleep along with the kid(s) but Zipporah, like most moms, is sleeping lightly. God shows up with the intention of killing either Moses, or the child (language nuance allow either interpretation). Strange, no? Moses is on a mission from God, a big one too, but it seems he failed to circumcise his son. Zipporah quickly pulls a blade and does the deed before touch the foreskin to Moses’ foot thus absolving him and saving the day, but still strange, innit?

Let’s move on. There are a number of passages about Pharaoh’s heart and the hardening thereof. Sometimes Pharaoh hardens his heart, sometimes God hardens it. But every time his heart is hardened bad things happen. Scholars point out that Pharaoh hardens his own heart after the early plagues and God only does so in the later plagues but why would God do so at all? At worst, God seem to be compelling a man to sin and then punishing him for it and not only him, but an entire nation, nasty, brutal punishments at that. At best, God is negating Pharaoh’s free will. Maybe the plague of boils would have been enough.

Reading what the “experts” say isn’t overly helpful. In short, their explanation is: God is sovereign and gives mercy where God chooses and was doing this so that God’s glory and authority would be clear. Translation: They don’t know why any more than I do.

This is ponderous. This text has been around thousands of years. By the time Julius Caesar was born, it was like, 2000 years old. Yet the above is the best answer I can find and one, by the way, that has stood for thousands of years. Maybe that’s all there is to it but it seems a little soft, maybe that’s just me.

I believe the intent of God, is to reconcile all of creation, as such, every human can have a part and be an instrument in that plan. So it’s hard for me to see God saying, “Hey, let’s go kick around some Egyptians. Anybody up for a plague or two? I’m thinking locusts but I’m open to suggestions.”

Ponderous.

All in all though, the bible should be ponderous. It should leave us with furrowed brow wondering “Really?” or even “WT…” This is God after all and it’s not reasonable to think we can understand everything. You get what you get.

So I don’t get these parts in Exodus. I’d love to hear any brilliant thought from anyone who reads this, but spare me the “glory and authority” bit.

BTW, not knowing doesn’t shake my faith. What I know, I know in spades. That’s not to say I’m not occasionally plagued by doubt. Every Christian I’ve ever talked to has been at some point in time, most are at various times. It’s okay, doubt is part of the game. But not understanding the bible here and there isn’t going to destroy anything for me.

Y’all know I love ya.

© Carl Mealie, 2011

Life of the Leg Puller

2011-08-19T08:33:00.000-07:00

One of the criticisms I have heard about the bible and one I once thought, is that the people in it are too perfect to be real. It’s easy to see how this could be the case given the way Sunday school stories are presented. Look at how Rachael and Leah are presented in art at the painting above, and these two sisters had so real competition going. In reality, these folks are heavily flawed. Just as an example, here’s a chronicle of Jacob’s life. I don’t want to add any commentary but keep in mind that Jacob is later renamed Israel by God and the names of his sons are the names of the 12 tribes of Israel.

Jacob is the son of Isaac and the Grandson of Abraham.

He is the second born twin. His brother is Esau and Jacob is born grasping Esau’s heel.

Jacob means “Grasps the Heel,” or “Heel Puller,” or even “Leg Puller.” Then as now, the phrase was a euphemism for deception.

Esau, as the oldest, will inherit everything, his birthright, as strict primogeniture was observed. However, when Esau returns home one afternoon completely famished and asks for a bit of stew that Jacob has cooked, Jacob gives it to him, in exchange for Esau’s birthright. As Isaac was a wealthy man, this may be the most expensive bowl of lentil stew ever.

When Isaac is old and for the most part blind, he orders Esau to kill and prepare some wild game for him to eat after which he will bestow his blessing upon Esau, and he can only give one blessing. Jacob colludes with his mother to deceive Isaac and therefore steal Esau’s blessing.

Esau is understandably angry, so Jacob flees to his uncle Laban where he meets Rachael, who he thinks is pretty hot.

He strikes a deal with Laban. He will work for seven years for free, in exchange for Rachael.

After seven years, Laban holds a big feast, lots of wine at feasts, after which Jacob lies with Rachael. Or at least he would have had Laban not subbed in his not-so-hot older daughter, Leah. Jacob must have pretty hammered as he doesn’t even notice that the girl he’s worked seven years for isn’t the one in the bed with him.

The next day, Jacob is a tad irked and protests to Laban. Laban says for Jacob to wait out the seven day honeymoon and then Jacob can have Rachael as well in exchange for another seven years labor. Jacob agrees.

Leah, the sister with “dull eyes,” gives birth to Reuben, then Simeon, then Levi, then Judah. Each time she thinks that the child will help her curry Jacob’s favor. (At least 4 kids, she had to be getting some favor.)

Rachael is annoyed by her sister’s fertility and has her maid, Bilhah, lay with Jacob. She then has two sons, Dan and Naphtali.
Leah thinks that two can play at that game and has her maid, Zilpah, lay with Jacob and she has two more sons, Gad and Asher.

Leah then becomes fertile yet again and has Issachar, Zebulun, and a daughter, Dinah.

Finally, Rachael has two sons, Joseph and Benjamin.

Jacob then wishes to separate from Laban and makes a deal. Essentially Jacob will keep the animals of the flock that are spotted (less desirable) and Laban will keep the others. So Jacob intentionally breeds stonger spotted animals and weaker solid ones. The he bails with all the good animals and his favorite wife, Rachael, steals her father’s household gods.

He then reunites with his brother Esau in a tearful scene and agrees to return to Esau’s land but then deceives his brother and goes the other way.

After this, Jacob returns to Bethel, has a wrestling match with God and is renamed Israel. Then the narrative largely switches to his favorite son, the first through Rachael, Joseph, the guy with the amazing technicolor dream coat, who after a great many trials, saves his family and as such, the Hebrew race.

Jacob’s story is really pretty interesting and that’s just the narrative. Can you imagine what it must have been like to live that out on a day-by-day? In the middle of those two sisters, Oy-vey.

© Carl Mealie, 2011

Cain and Abel and a Big Flood

2011-08-08T06:08:00.000-07:00

So Adam and Eve are out of Eden and they have a couple kids, Cain and Abel. I suspect they’ve had several more as well. The Bible doesn’t always follow a strict linear timeline and aside from that, one must do something to get into the Bible. Adam and Eve have a son that dutifully tills the field, marries an eventual sister or niece, and they live a reasonable, good, otherwise quiet life, and they get numbered in the “other sons and daughters” portion of a verse. There’s no shame in that, none at all. The great bulk of people throughout history, some even great, are simply other sons and daughters.

So Cain kills Abel out of jealousy because God had shown Abel favor because it seems that Abel had been more open with his sacrifices than Cain. Anyway, Abel is dead and Cain killed him. God, asks Cain where his brother is and Cain responds with one of the most famous lines in history (Gen 4:9) “I don’t know. Am I my brother’s keeper?” Really a bit of smart ass that one. I mean, he’s talking to God here, not some cop or even a parent. Again, God is not amused and says “What have you done? Listen!” “Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground.” Now God, remember They (God) didn’t curse Adam and Eve for disobedience, but God curses Cain, saying “Now you are under a curse and driven from the ground…” Strange, no? Offend God and you have to leave Eden; kill your brother and you are cursed to the land of Nod which basically makes him a wandering vagrant for the rest of his life. Bit of a difference between Adam and Cain, aside from the nature of their offense. God asks Adam what he’s done and Adam wilts saying “She made me do it” while Cain gives a rather proud, shoulder shrug of a response roughly akin to “How am I supposed to know.” God marks Cain so that no other person would take action against him in vengeance for Abel. What did that look like? Some guy is walking along and sees Cain and thinks “That’s Cain. Dude killed my uncle Abel. He’s going down.” The he gets a look at this mark on Cain and changes his mind. “That dude is so jacked up, I don’t even want to kill him.” This must have been some mark.

So fast forward to Noah. Big boat, a lot of rain, a whole lot of animals, and a long, stinky Mediterranean cruise with generally bad weather. Just over a year after drop number one falls, Noah and company get off the boat. God make a deal with Noah and uses a rainbow as a sign of this covenant and promises never to destroy all life on earth again. Also, you can eat any of these animals and anything that grows so long as it doesn’t have its “lifeblood still in it.” Then God says this (v5-7):

And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each human being, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of another human being.
6 “Whoever sheds human blood,
by humans shall their blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made mankind.
7 As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it.”
In other words, as I read it, “I understand that there was a misunderstanding in the past, but let’s be clear now, You are your brother’s keeper and if you spill another’s blood, you’ll answer to me for it. But have a great life and lots of kids. By the way, isn’t the rainbow cool?”

This makes me think and causes me to ask a lot of questions that I don’t necessarily want answered. As you read it, it should do the same so I don’t have to list the questions it poses to me.

You are your fellow human’s keeper.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t know that I’m prepared to answer to God on that one yet.

And now for something completely different. I don’t always understand the Bible. The Tower of Babel story doesn’t resonate with me. I don’t get it. There are a few other things I don’t get as well. If I ask about the Babel story, and I’ve looked on line a little, the answer I get is that “Well, man was prideful in building the tower and so…” Yes, I’m sure that’s an aspect of it, but I feel like I’m missing something. Genesis leaves out a lot. Like dinosaurs, who was Cain married to, and a couple other things. Cain’s wife is easy enough and I touched on that earlier, Dinosaurs are something that get’s thrown at Christians by nonChristians who are being smart asses. My answer to the dinosaur question is “who cares?” But other people feel compelled to answer this and come up with rather bad hypotheses. There’s a line later in the Bible that goes something like, “Be prepared to justify your faith.” Hence the bad hypotheses and Christians that look like inarticulate fools. I don’t think you have to understand everything. It’s okay not to know or not to get every detail. You get what you get. As far as justifying your faith goes, (1 Peter 3:15):

But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,

hardly means be able to explain everything. Simply explain what gives you hope. “You know what, I don’t know anything about dinosaurs, I don’t know who Cain was married to and I don’t get the Tower of Babel. But when Jesus said “I am with you always, to the very end of the age,” it spoke to my heart and gave me hope. That’s all I can really say.”

If that isn’t good enough, then even if you could explain dinosaurs, it wouldn’t matter.

Y’all know I love ya.

© Carl Mealie, 2011

A Thought on the Adam and Eve Story

2011-08-03T07:36:00.000-07:00

So, a little while back, I realized that it had been some time since I had read the Bible front to back. At the time, I wasn't in a position to start as we were just about to pull up stakes in California and head east. In the course of the trip, I think I might have donated my Bible to one of the various hotel rooms we stayed in. That's right, just call me Gideon. Anyway, I have replaced my lost Bible and I have the time to do this so I figured why not yet again inflict my opinions on my friends.

I'm not following any specific reading plan, I have no chapter goals, no "Bible within a year" plan or anything like that. Basically I have my morning coffee and read the Bible until I feel like stopping, usually 1-3 chapters. Beyond that I find that I get less out of it. The Bible I'm reading is the New International Version (NIV) Archaeological Study Bible. It's still a little heavy on opinion within the study notes but it does have some interesting cultural, historical, and archaeological notes that I find interesting. Any Bible quotes may be considered NIV unless otherwise stated. Finally, I'm just some guy. I've never been to seminary, I'm not a renowed theologian, or a pastor, or anything of the such; I'm just a guy sitting at his kitchen table. Also I know others might have already said the things I'll say, or really even better that what I'll say, these are just my thoughts as I read.

So starting in Genesis, there's the creation narrative and this has been exhaustively discussed. I have no desire to rehash any of that. It was really something in the Adam and Eve story that caught my eye. Adam and Eve live in Eden. In the middle of the garden God placed the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Adam and Eve can eat from any tree in the garden except the latter. On what was likely an otherwise perfect day, the serpent approaches Eve and convinces her to eat fruit from the tree of knowledge. You can't blame her here. It was likely the first lie she, or anyone else, had ever heard. Anyhow, she eats and convinces Adam to eat. Then bad things happen. First they experience shame and attempt to cover their nakedness with fig leaves. (Do you think Eve asked Adam if her leaf made her butt look big?)
Then God comes to the garden "in the cool of the day" and asks "Where are you?" Adam tells God that they're hiding. God then asks, in so many words, "Have you two been naughty?" Adam then throws Eve under the bus with a "She made me do it." I'm sure Eve replied with the first ever "Oh, so this all my fault." God is less than entertained by their banter. First he curses the serpent who slithers away. Then God tells the woman that childbearing will now be accompanied by crushing pain, and then turns to Adam and says:

“Because you listened to your wife and ate fruit from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat from it,’

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
(18) It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
(19) By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

Notice that God never curses Adam and Eve, but in this moment, the time it took to take a bite of fruit, all that God had done in the seven distinct periods of creation and in the creation of mankind, was shattered. I don't know about you, but I'm frustrated if my kids mess up my weekend plans. "Cursed is the ground because of you." That's some heavy stuff there. And this is God's curse, not like my curse that doesn't mean anything, this is God's curse, the Alpha and the Omega. Also, Adam and Eve can not be allowed to eat from the tree of life so they are banished from Eden where a cherubim and flaming sword prevent their return.

So Adam and Eve have disobeyed God and ruined everything forever. God was so angry that he has cursed the very ground, God's own creation, and had thrown his first children out of paradise, guarding it with an angel and a flaming implement of death. God then returns to his throne and calls them both idiots. Well, not quite on that last bit. And this is what caught my attention, verse 3:21:
The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them.

Really? This is God angry, cursing the ground and throwning the kids out. But first, he clothed them.

"I can't believe you did this! You disobeyed me! I gave you everything and only asked one thing in return. Get out! Get out and never come back!" but as the kids are walking out the door, "Wait, you'll need these. It's cold out there. Before you go, here, take these."

God's love and care didn't end.

This is what struck me in this story, that "Wait, wait, you'll need this." What parent doesn't understand that? Anyway, this caught my attention and I thought I'd share.

Y'all know I love ya.

The Road Ahead

2011-06-22T18:02:00.000-07:00

Alright, so I watched the president's speech announcing the withdrawl of troops from Afghanistan in what seems a relatively gradual fashion and there was a bunch of other stuff in the speech as well but that was the meat of it.

Just at the outset here, I want to say that I agree with what Obama said nearly across the board. I disagree with using the Libyan model in the future and a couple other small things, but in a general sense, he said what I wanted to hear.

Now, the Republicans, and I used to number myself among them before defecting to the Panty and Pillowfight Party (aka P3), were quick to respond with a three pronged arguement. First, how can we announce a withdrawl when the war isn't over? Second, this is going to leave us open to disaster in that region in a number of different ways, and finally third, this is all about politics.

On the first, I guess I would need to ask when the people making this point would consider the war to be over. We knew at the outset that this was not World War II, there would be no signing of an instrument of surrender on the deck of a battleship, no Treaty of Paris or any other such thing. So when would they say the war is over? This has always been unclear to me. I guess what we want is for the Afghans to be able to police and govern themselves without the Taliban coming back to power. After ten years if this can't happen, it's never going to. We could continue for another ten years and the threat of the Taliban returning will still be present. Meanwhile, we're bearing the cost both financially and in blood. It needs to end. At some point in time, every sentence needs to be followed by a period and I think it's time now for this sentence to end and the page to turn.

As to the second, this is true. Of course, we're open to disaster now. In fact, look at our economy, that's pretty disastrous. The potential for disaster is always there, always will be.

Finally there's the accusation that this is all about polital maneuvering. Maybe, but that doesn't make it the wrong move in and of itself. It can be politically beneficial to the president, and I suspect it is, and still be the right thing to do.

By the way Republicans, don't screw this up just to play your own political game. Remember P3 is out there and I will steal your members as soon as I find a viable candidate and believe me, she will be hot. 'Nuff said on that.

Seriously though, we need to decide what we are going to be. I'm a history person and I see a lot of ancient Rome in America right now. This is not a good thing. I will most likely disagree with the president about how we need to go about "nationbuilding" here at home, but I think that's what we need and it will take all of us to do it. The national belt needs to be tightened, extended palms need to be withdrawn, we need to stop villifying each other, and as much as anything else, I think the Constitution should be required reading for all of us along with the Federalist Papers and the Declaration of Independence. We're not perfect, nor are these documents. But reading them could have a twofold result both of which I see as equally important: 1) The documents are the foundation for our country, and a great deal of founder intent can be gleamed in them. While the constitution is a living thing, the ideals expressed in it should be well known by all Americans, and I don't think they are. 2) These papers are to some extent our national soul. They bind us together and make it clear that whether you prefer port, starboard, bow, stern, below deck, or crow's nest, we're all in the same boat and as such, our fates are tied together.

Anyway, sorry for the rambling and at the same time, for all the half thoughts in this post. Trust me, it all makes sense in my head. To try to include everything is one post would be impossible though. I could be wrong, and I'd love to hear what you think. The road ahead is like the picture at the top of this post, many forks. I have no GPS and your guess is as good as mine as to which one to take. I hope you're not just going for a ride.

Y'all know I love ya.

I Think Too Much About Twitter Posts

2011-03-26T10:20:00.000-07:00

So, I have Twitter on my mobile phone and I don’t post to it all that often. The idea of posting “Watching SpongeBob,” and then two hours later tweeting “Still watching SpongeBob,” just doesn’t seem all that interesting. It is kind of cool to read other people’s posts though. It’s almost a kind of voyeurism. One real attraction is that you’re only one step removed from anyone you follow, including celebrities. Kevin Smith responded to me once, it was super cool.

Lately, I’ve been following Megan Phelps and Shirley Phelps-Roper, both of the Westboro Baptist Church. These are the folks who protest the funerals of servicemen killed in action, have declared Barack Obama the antichrist, and picket anything gay related or that they consider sinful. More on this later.

For anyone who’s interested, I was raised a Roman Catholic. It never spoke to my soul. Never once in all the time I was a Catholic, did I feel moved in any way. That’s not to say that they’re wrong or anything like that, just their message, as I said didn’t speak to my soul. So I became an Episcopalian. Episcopalians, interestingly enough (at least at my church), described themselves as “Catholic Light.” For me though, the light version wasn’t any more insightful than full calorie Catholicism. This concerned me a little. I would see other people moved by their faith, but I was not, at all.

I didn’t understand why. I’m really a pretty emotional being, why was none of this connecting with me? Maybe, because it’s all crap. God, faith, Jesus, all of it is just an elaborate lie for those who need a crutch in life. For those of us who are not so weak, science and reason eclipse such foolishness. The problem was that something inside my guts told me otherwise; I simply couldn’t not believe.

So one day, my boss invites me to Promise Keepers. I was Episcopalian at the time and had set my mind to simply believing the theology I was being given, whether or not it spoke to my heart. In this mindset, Promise Keepers seemed like a good idea, a great, big pep rally for God. This is exactly what Promise Keepers is. So I’m standing in front of my seat, clapping along and doing the things I’m supposed to do at God’s pep rally and a video comes on. The video was by a group called Nooma, it was called Dust, and I started watching with a great deal of skepticism because the guy in the video seemed too young to know anything but in less than fifteen, that’s 1-5, minutes, my life, my worldview, my notion of my relationship with God, and my heart had changed. If you’ve never had that kind of an experience, I hope you do some day. It was like some bit of truth, something real and eternal, and more than anything else, something BIG, really BIG, had collided with my most unused part, specifically my soul. I still watch Dust when I feel the need to, which is frequently.

The guy in the video, turns out he’s a year younger than I am, was Rob Bell. He preaches at Mars Hill Bible Church in Grand Rapids, Michigan. He also writes books, goes on speaking tours, does Nooma videos, and much more than that, I’m sure. Anyway, I started listening to his podcasts, not just his but others as well, and a whole new concept of Jesus exists for me now. One that speaks to me. One that feels true. One that challenges me. One that doesn’t make me feel evil for listening to Eminem. One that is with me when I’m conflicted. Most of all, a Jesus that is worth believing in and having a relationship with.

So back to the Phelps pholks. Their message doesn’t speak to me. My feelings toward them alternate between confusion on how they got that message out of the same bible I read, and quite frankly, a little pity. Love is such a more powerful force than condemnation and far more enjoyable but seems from their Twitter posts, that they don’t find much of it. Also, as may people as it seems they declare God hates, well if it were me… I don’t know, I guess I wouldn’t want to have to defend those statements to Jesus. Now don’t get me wrong, Jesus loves them as much as he loves me or Rob Bell or anybody else, and I don’t think God would send them to hell for the things they do and say. That’s kind of ridiculous and the height of pride to think that I would know the mind of God. But, I wonder if they’re creating their own hell in separating themselves from people who, like it or not, are brothers and sisters. That’s entirely their bag though, and for all I know, they may be right. But their message doesn’t touch my soul or resonate with me.

Here’s the thing though, they shame me. They’re out there acting on their faith, the most I’ve done is write a little bit. It’s easy to make excuses, and I do. My kids are young, I have this to do, that to do, and on and on.

I believe that God is acting in an effort to reconcile the world, to bring heaven to earth. We all have a part in that work. As much as I think the Phelps pholks may be hindering this, I’m doing very little. One billion people in the world don’t have access to clean water. It’s the single largest killer there is. To this massive issue, I’ve donated $10. That’s it.

Now as much as I don’t want to have to defend the Phelps position to Jesus, I don’t know that mine is any better. I can hear it now:

Jesus: “Now, you got the message, I saw you watch the video, where was the action?”
Me: “I donated $10 to Charity:Water and wrote a couple blogs.”

Fortunately, I think both interviews end with Jesus laughing and giving us a noogie before saying “Welcome home, knucklehead.”

I understand that we don’t all paint in broad strokes, but I don’t know that I’ve picked up a brush.

To be honest, I’m kind of a chicken shit. To some extent, the Phelps pholks have it easy. Condemnation is simple. Reconciliation is hard and scary, so much unknown to it. I may need some help from the rest of you.

I guess all I can say right now is that I’m want to be a part of it all. I’m not sure where or how, though the answer to that is wherever and however. The good thing is that Jesus is with all of us in the process.

Anyway, I wish you all Grace and Peace, and you know I love ya.

© Carl Mealie, 2011

Prop 8 and Mosque at Ground Zero

2010-09-07T07:32:00.000-07:00

I’ve been avoiding this one largely because it just doesn’t interest me all that much, and actually, it’s not this one topic so much as these topics. The problem is that I keep getting asked about these things, usually by someone who assumes my opinion without hearing it and then wants to argue with me about it. I don’t know why people do this. Anyway, I’m just gonna do a blanket post in an effort to exorcise these demons though I’m sure it will fail.

First, I’d like to touch on this Prop. 8 mess. Should anybody read this that is not a citizen of the Golden State (not that I have an extensive readership), Prop. 8 was a ballot initiative that declared marriage to be exclusively between a man and a woman and it passed, carrying 52.24% of the vote. California politics are weird in that after an initiative is passed, we then all go to court to decide whether or not said initiative is constitutional. Seems that it might be easier to determine that before hand, but whatevs. Before I get into my opinion, let me just say this. Some months before Prop. 8 was even introduced, same sex marriage had been legalized in San Francisco and thousands of couples flocked to the courthouse there in order to be married. Gavin Newsom, the mayor of San Francisco, gave a speech and said that same sex marriage is legal now and “there’s nothing you can do about it” to raucous cheers from a very friendly crowd. Bad idea, Gavin. Never tell a group of people that there’s nothing they can do about something. They will immediately set out to prove you wrong and they did, using that excerpt from his speech in pro 8 television spots. In a very real way, Newsom galvanized the Prop. 8 crowd. Gloating is never a good idea. Sit down and shut up, sir. Americans have a short memory, sometimes it’s best to allow them to forget.
Ah wells. My opinion here covers all discussions relating to gay rights or anybody else’s rights for that matter and not just marriage but military service or whatever. The United States of America is founded on several principals that for the most part boil down to freedom and equality regardless of qualifiers like being a homosexual, or black, or Jewish, or Italian, or handicapped, or fat, or any other basis one can find to discriminate on. Here in America, those things don’t apply. Two consenting adults who wish to marry, I don’t see how we can deny that. Does that mean that some guy can marry his dog, no. Is sex with children okay then as well, no, you dickhead, it’s not. Those last two statements may seem weird, but when you support same sex marriage, the weirdest shit gets thrown at you.
I don’t want to get into refuting every little argument about this which is a lot of why I didn’t want to bother with this to begin with and certainly there are implications here as well. Having the right to marry does not equate to having the right to marry in a Catholic church. They have the right to refuse as does any other religious organization. The state, and only the state, should be required to recognize the union. Otherwise, you can’t bitch about separation of church and state. If churches can be forced to perform same sex marriages then that line blurs and arguments against Prop. 8 evaporate, the argument flows both ways.

The other thing that won’t go away for me is the Ground Zero mosque. Quick and simple on this: is it in bad taste? Without question. Does the Cordoba Society (the mosque’s political and financial backers) have an alternate motive, an “agenda?” Maybe. (Tangent alert: Isn’t it strange how the word “agenda” can sound so evil? I always just thought it was a list of shit you had to get through in a meeting.) All that aside, I don’t know how we can refuse to allow it. Religious freedom is a big deal. So long as they’re not breaking the law in some other way, I don’t see how we can deny the thing. Again, let me say that it truly is bad form to pick that location.
That said, you Muslims need to grow the fuck up. Stop being offended at everything when you have no problem offending others. You want to be taken seriously and treated like everyone else, here’s an idea, stop issuing death sentences on random people who annoy you like Salman Rushdie (btw, I don’t like his writing either, but I’m not going to kill him for it) or some Dutch cartoonist, or even some church in Florida that plans to burn the Koran to mark the 9/11 anniversary. That offends you? Too fucking bad. Is it bad form to burn the Muslim holy book? Yep, really bad form, but it’s freedom of speech and expression, just like burning or standing on American flags and chanting “Death to America.” “So what are we supposed to do, just let a bunch of religious radicals burn what we believe to be the words of God?” Yep. Sucks doesn’t it. Welcome to the world. These religious radicals are going to burn a few copies of the Koran. Don’t worry, the Koran will still exist. What are your religious radicals doing?

Good God people, is that hard to recognize the humanity within each other? Is it really so hard? Must we pick sides, wear armbands, and throw rocks at each other? As a Christian, I can’t abide any of it. Who is my neighbor? Can I rule someone out of that circle and still wear a cross or fall to my knees before one? If you don’t believe, is this the world you would choose? If not, are you still promoting it?

Y’all know I love ya. Please know I’m serious when I say that and when I wish you all,

Grace and Peace.

Carl

P.S. I know I cuss a lot for a Christian. Sorry if it offends you.

© Carl Mealie, 2010

Independence Day

2010-07-04T11:28:00.000-07:00

So I'm in a coffee shop yesterday and I hear two people talking and one asks the other what they were going to do on "the 4th" and the reply went something like: "I don't know, probably nothing. I don't agree with this country's politics and the stuff we do and all that stuff, I just don't want to celebrate it, really." Not verbatim, but that was the gist of it. Anyway, this got me thinking because I also have a few issues here and there but then it occurred to me that this was not the point of the holiday anymore than the existence of greed should prevent the celebration of Christmas.

The point of any holiday is to honor the ideal, I think. In essence, to recognize that there is a perfect state and though we fail to attain it, it is worth striving for. Check out this quote:

"What we truly and earnestly aspire to be, that in some sense we are. The mere aspiration, by changing the frame of the mind, for the moment realises itself" --Mrs. Jameson

This is actually worth considering. The ideal is not simply a standard to measure our failures against. The ideal is out ultimate aspiration, and if we are to believe Mrs. Jameson, as an aspiration it in some way actualizes itself within our beings. That's pretty cool. The ideal is simply there for the taking, it's not unattainable, it exists and you, quite frankly, are it's vehicle.

So let's bring this back to the holiday we celebrate today. A little over 200 years ago, a group of individuals, flawed as they were, recognized that there was a better way than the one they were a part of at the time. Though their motives included some degree of self interest, they envisioned an ideal and in doing so were able to create a level of critical mass within their geographic area which, mixed with a tremendous amount of courage, changed the world forever.

So what was that ideal that led a relatively small group to stand against one of the greatest empires of all time? I think it's really quite simple once you get down to it. I see it thusly: Here you will be judged by your own actions, not your bloodline. Regardless of who or what you are, you are no different than the folks standing to your left and right and you all are subject to the same laws, privileges, opportunities, etc. I think that's really all there is to it but as simple as it is, it was a revolutionary notion at the time. Our forefathers, black, white, Native American, and whatever else, staked blood on that ideal. There is a level of nobility in that and it is certainly worthy of celebration, even 234 years later. Everything else is just details meant to support that. In short, and I think this is an Oliver Wendell Holmes quote, "My right to swing my arm ends where your nose begins."

That's really it I guess. Enjoy your freedom but don't infringe upon another's. Oh one last quote if you don't mind, and this is for sure Oliver Wendell Holmes and it ties Mrs. Jameson's idea to actual action.

"Man is born a predestined idealist, for he is born to act. To act is to affirm the worth of an end, and to persist in affirming the worth of an end is to make an ideal."

Anyway, I need to start baking, got a bbq to go to later. Y'all know I love ya.

Carl

P.S. Oliver Wendell Holmes was one our most influential Supreme Court justices and is responsible for the "clear and present danger" limit to free speech.

Mrs. Jameson is a rather interesting character and an English writer in the 18th and 19 centuries. Check out her bio on wikipedia. Just search for Anna Brownell Jameson.

A Bit on Afghanistan

2009-10-15T14:22:00.000-07:00

So I’m reading this article on Yahoo news, it a Reuters story about Obama and his aides in tense meetings regarding what to do in Afghanistan. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said that he wanted to be clear that the only options being discussed were maintaining current troop levels and increasing the current number of troops. Not to be confrontational or anything, but why is that? The only good thing in the article is that Obama doesn’t seem manipulated by winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

We’ve been in Afghanistan for what, eight years now or so. For the larger part of that time our operations in Afghanistan were overshadowed by what was happening in Iraq. It almost seemed to me that Afghanistan was some kind of side show with Iraq being the main event. At least until recently when the news came out that things weren’t going well; in fact, things were and are going badly. We have around 65,000 troops there now and the commanders in charge there think that they need another 40,000 or so, bringing out commitment to a little over 100,000 U.S. service people.

I guess I have a few questions at this point. The first being, what exactly are we trying to accomplish that the addition of another 40,000 would effect? Finding Osama. Clearly the answer. The increased troop levels would do this how? Things are going badly. The constant military response to this is to send in more people. Unfortunately, it doesn’t tend to work that way. Troop levels in Vietnam topped half a million in 1968 and ultimately the return on the human investment was simply more casualties. There’s a lot of writing on the web about how we actually won in Vietnam. At the time of ground force withdrawal in 1972 (U.S. forces remaining after ’72 were largely air units) the U.S. had accomplished its objectives. Okay, fine, if those objectives were to create an eggshell-strong government and leave them to fend for themselves only to be crushed less that three years later, then we succeeded brilliantly. I think these efforts to repaint the outcome in Vietnam are, for the most part, an attempt give some credit to the service people who fought there and in my opinion that is damn well overdue. On the other hand, I think there’s a forward looking effort here that is aimed at an eventual spin on a withdrawal from the Iraq and Afghanistan theatres.

Anyway, back to this troop increase thing. After the Soviet pullout from Afghanistan and the fall of the Soviet Union, American and former Soviet analysts got together to figure what happened to the Russians in Afghanistan. One of their conclusions is that the Soviet Union would have had to put 750,000 to 1 million troops on the ground there before success would have even been possible. Of course, that’s in 1980’s Soviet troops, and there is a difference. Technology and superior training should lower the amount that we would need there, so let’s use the 750,000 number and cut that in half to 375,000 modern U.S. service people, multiplying our current commitment nearly six times. Does that solve the problem?

I guess part of my issue is that I’m unsure of the victory conditions myself. Is it simply to find Osama or is it to establish a functioning democratic state, or to destroy the Taliban? All of the above, maybe? When exactly do we pull out the last few tent stakes and leave? I’m confused. Will 40,000 more people actually move us towards some amorphous goal that will become clear when we reach it, or are we considering sending 40,000 more Americans into harm’s way because we can’t think of anything better to do? If it’s the latter then maybe we should consider pulling out the other 65,000.

I heard a historian talking about the Civil War once and he said that a country truly does lose its best when they go to war and I think he’s right. These are people that are willing to endure the most outrageous hardships, kill others, and risk being killed themselves or ending up in some kind of horrible not life but not death limbo for a cause that they believe in, and that cause may just be that they believe in our country and that we would never waste their lives. I guess ultimately we should ask ourselves if we are doing right by them with staying in this thing or escalating it, and if what we gain is worth the price of a percentage of the best we have to offer. More and more, my answer is no.

Is it a defeat if we pull out of Afghanistan? Maybe it is. If we determine that we should never have been there then pulling out is correcting a mistake. I don’t know if that is considered a defeat. Let’s say it is a defeat though. The United States defeated by a little country like Afghanistan. Humiliating, absolutely. Loss of American lives in vain, perhaps. Something that we hopefully learn from this time, God, please let it be so.

I’m tired of writing this and thinking about this so I’m done, at least for now. One last thing though, if President Obama chooses to escalate or even to leave the troops there, which he is going to pretty obviously do, then he and his supporters can no longer call it Bush’s war or imply that it’s an inherited affliction. It’s Obama’s war now.

Y’all know I love ya, even if you think my opinion here sucks.

Carl

© Carl Mealie, 2009

Just a Little Background

2009-09-10T13:36:00.000-07:00

At the risk of putting some of you off, I’d like to talk about religion for a few. Please don’t stop reading, I’m not going to try and convert anybody or anything like that, in fact, I think evangelism as it’s currently thought of is a complete failure and a waste of time. I’m a Christian, and nothing makes my skin crawl like someone coming up to me and saying “I’d like to talk to you about Jesus.” Really, is there anybody out there who, in all seriousness, says “Great! I’ve been waiting for somebody to tell me what’s up with Jesus.”

To be honest, I have a real problem with a lot of what Christians do and judging by the response I get when I get into blogs on the subject, they have a problem with my opinions as well. Can I give a little background here? Indulge me for a moment if you will.
I was raised a Roman Catholic which led to a rather emphatic atheism by the time I was in my twenties. Later, when Cherie and I got married my opinion started to change a little but I had no idea what to do (that’s quite a woman to get a man beleivin’ in God without even tryin’). When we moved here, we thought we should find a church and I of course went straight back to the Roman church. Cherie, in her wisdom, was opposed to this and we eventually settled on the Episcopal Church. A few years later, I’m thinking of ditching all of it. What was the point, really? As far as I could tell, being a Christian meant roughly three things: (1), I’m essentially an evil sinner and if I acknowledge that fact and beg God for forgiveness then I will be forgiven, which (2), qualifies me for participation in the rapture (when God calls all the believers to him at the start of the end times) a concept that still scares the snot of me. Seriously, it does. I used to hear people talking about what a glorious day that would be and people I knew had bumper stickers that said something like “In the event of rapture this vehicle will be unoccupied.” I was never, ever able to identify with that. Oh and (3), congratulations, you’re a republican. Should you disagree with the republicans, not only are you unpatriotic, buy you’re clearly a heretic as well.
I was unable to handle this set of rules. Strangely, I have no problem with creation or any of the other stuff in the Bible. I’m a rational person, but I recognize that some things have to be taken on faith. I’m okay with that (faith and science are not incompatible for me), but the notion that the whole thing, meaning the Christian faith, was about forgiveness and separating the Godly from the ungodly didn’t jive for me. Would an all powerful, all loving, supremely compassionate, omnipotent, and omniscient God, be so trivial and arbitrary? Also, a lot of what I was being told in church and through other Christian outlets didn’t mesh with what I was reading in the Bible. There was either more to it, or it wasn’t worth being a Christian at all. Now, understand, this was not garden variety doubt. I’m still occasionally crushed by doubt. All Christians are whether they admit it or not, and it’s okay. That’s another thing that was a problem for me. The Christians I was supposed to look up to were always talking about ridding your heart of doubt. I never could, still can’t. Oh, and don’t even get me started on their version of prayer, how unappealing was that? Verbal self flagellation followed by a plea for forgiveness and hopefully an arbitrary miracle here and there; wow, sign me up. (Sorry for the tangent.) Anyway, this was a serious evaluation about whether or not being a Christian was something worthwhile.
Then one day (cliché transition intentional), my boss asked if I wanted to go to Promise Keepers. Hoping that this would clarify things for me, I went. PK is exactly what you’d expect and really a lot more of the same I’d been hearing but in a festive, concert like atmosphere. But, I saw a video called “Dust” and it absolutely shook me, hard. It was all I could do to keep from breaking down in front of my boss, a crap load of co-workers, and a whole group of others that I was at least acquainted with. I’m not going to go into this any further because I don’t want this to be preachy, but starting with the video and some lengthy study afterwards that goes on to this day, I found a God and a Christianity that was worth it, that I’m excited to be a part of, and that truly speaks to my heart.

Now why do I bring all this up? Mostly to provide some context for other things I want to say. If I wanted to talk about same-sex marriage, or war, or veganism, or whatever, my theology plays a part in what I think since everything is spiritual.

Answer the Phone!

2009-07-07T13:38:00.000-07:00

When was the last time you called someone outside of your normal circle? You know what I mean, someone who isn’t programmed into your cell phone and who wouldn’t know your number if it came up on their caller ID. Did they answer your call? Did you expect them to or did you have a message already in mind? If the situation were reversed, would you have answered the call? I ask these questions because in recent years, I’ve noticed that I’m leaving messages more frequently and I’m answering the phone less when I don’t know who’s on the other end. Just yesterday we were calling the parents of a few of our son’s friends to invite them to his birthday party. Nobody answered their phones. Incidentally, the thought has occurred to me that people just aren’t answering my calls, but I don’t think that’s the case.

So, how come nobody answers their phones anymore? Of course, sometimes people are unavailable, out of the house, in the bathroom or shower, maybe even knockin’ boots in which case, please don’t take my call and by all means continue. I’ll call you later. Also, I understand that sometimes, a person just wants to be left alone, totally understandable. I think that if you ask most folks they would say that they’re tired of telemarketers so they just don’t answer the phone at all anymore, likewise with bill collectors and such, though caller ID really negates all of that. Anyway, that seems to be the reason why everybody call screens, phone borne spam. I call bullshit.

Like most things, the lack of phone answering is a symptom of something else. This is always about that. There’s a canned response here too, isn’t there? “Well with current electronic media, Facebook, Twitter, e-mail, and all that there’s not as much need to…” Whatever. Now, all of that may be true, but it’s also true that Facebook et al allow for very tightly controlled access to our profiles. I have to “approve” my friends and I can block access to my Twitter updates which are usually something intensely private like “Drinking coffee” or “Off to Target.” In truth, we don’t want people in our lives and likewise, we don’t want to be in theirs. We bemoan the lack of community, but screen our calls and make sure that our electronic profiles have as many privacy filters as possible.

This obviously just leads to another “Why do we do that?” I can’t think of any reason except that we’re all afraid of each other. So why are we afraid of each other? It’s an environment we’ve created for ourselves, and a profitable one. How many people make a living out of “keeping us safe.” I’m not talking about at the national level, but at the personal. Home alarms, private security, guns, nanny cams, home security cameras, home monitoring, car alarms, lojack, and on and on we go. And we’re not just afraid of each other, but the world at large and I don’t mean terrorists. Flesh eating virus, anyone? How many more people are employed in maintaining that state of fear? I would guess probably a quarter to a third of the country is working hard to make us feel safe while at the same time clearly demonstrating how unsafe we really are in order to keep sales or ratings up. The national level is much the same but with bigger numbers.

Of course there’s a trade off all of this safety, and the real cost there is compassion. Of all the resources we have, compassion seems to be the most scarce to me. Why don’t we answer each other’s calls, we don’t care. “I don’t have time for somebody else’s problems; I’ve got problems of my own.” Really? We have time to watch Jon and Kate and that implosion, but we can’t talk to each other? We can poke fun at them, I guess. Some guy collapses in front of you outside the mall, do you help him or keep your distance for fear AIDS, Hepatitis, being mugged, being raped, or any of the various kinds of animal flu? Fuck, I don’t even know what I’d do.

I know people who think that the biggest threat to this country is terrorism, others who think it’s globalization in the financial world, and even more who think that ultimately our demise will be due to the erosion of morals and family values coupled with the over-celebration of diversity which fractures society thus destroying us like cancer from the inside. I guess I probably disagree. They can all make strong arguments that I can’t necessarily answer but I think that if we ultimately fail, it will be because we’re stopped caring about each other altogether and have started classify each other into various threat levels.

I’m not anti-corporation, anti-police, anti-military, or anti-anything for that matter, except maybe anti-stupid and that’s what I think we’re being a lot of the time. I’m not saying don’t watch your kids, or don’t be careful or anything like that, just be a damn human being. Recognize humanity in others and act accordingly. Don’t be so afraid of other people, they’re most likely just like you, trying to get through life. And for God sakes, answer your phone, there’s more a chance that the person on the other end is normal, healthy, and okay than there is that it’s a threat of some kind. Unless you’re getting it on, then don’t answer the phone, we’ll call you back.

One More Thought Here, Won't Be The Last Though

2009-06-18T08:32:00.001-07:00

What’s going on in Iran remains a source of amazement for me and one of the more impressive aspects of it are that the protests have been nonviolent; in fact, the entire opposition movement seems to have adopted nonviolent resistance as a strategy. That’s not passive in any way. Government computer systems are being hacked, I believe there’s probably some level of general strike with some obvious exceptions like hospitals, and the demonstrations are incredible. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen crowds that large. The use of new media is overriding the regime’s efforts to squash information, and in general the thing has been brilliant so far.

Now, to some extent, nonviolence is the only strategy available here since the opposition has no guns. Righteous indignation is great, but it has yet to stop a bullet. Should Mousavi’s supporters turn to violence, the movement would end within a couple of days. Violence would allow the regime to claim that they are restoring order, thus placing them on the side of justice regardless of whatever action is taken to restore that precious order. Like it or not, the strategy must remain nonviolent.

That doesn’t make it a lesser strategy. Nonviolence is always the greater avenue for one main reason: it is the path of the human. Animals fight it out. A pack of wolves does not stage a debate about who will be the alpha-male. They rip each other to shreds and the last one standing wins. This is not the way with humans. We are endowed with the gift of reason, whether one believes that it is God given or it has evolved in some way, humans are designed to exercise reason. Nonviolence will absolutely test that. Nonviolence requires a creativity that violence does not. Nonviolence requires a resolve; it requires faith in one’s self, one’s comrades, and one’s cause. As much as anything else, nonviolence requires a commitment; for it will not save the practitioner’s life; it will only preserve their humanity. That for me is key.

One always hears about how committing troops “was the hardest decision I ever had to make and…” Really? What if a country like the United States were to say, in the face of something like 9/11, “we choose to oppose the perpetrators of this act with every fiber of collective being, but we will not fire a shot, drop a bomb, launch a missile, or waterboard anybody because it debases us and we are simply above that, not just as Americans but as human beings. We choose not to act as animals.” How hard would it be to make that choice? Would we suffer more attacks? Most assuredly, animals will act as animals, but do we think that having taken the actions that we did that we have in some way forestalled future attacks? Anyone who thinks this is fooling themselves. Again, I’m not suggesting passive non-action, just a different action, a human action.

No doubt, should anybody ever read this, which is unlikely; I’ll be called an idealistic fool. Mea culpa. But let me ask you this first: How do you know that the road seldom traveled was not the right one? Did the cobwebs at its entrance dissuade you so easily? Or was that old saying, “to a man with only a hammer, everything looks like a nail?” (We’ll discuss our reliance on hammers some other time.)

I’m going to let this be the last word here though it may seem to hurt my argument, for me it strengthens it, but I want this clearly understood. I am a Marine. I left active duty nearly 14 years ago, but it is without question one the attributes that defines me. I am honored to have stood on line with those that I did and to have worn the uniform of so many incredible people that made the Corps and this country what it is both before and after my time including those who serve now. I don’t in anyway devalue their sacrifice.

You Say You Want A Revolution?

2009-06-14T20:08:00.000-07:00

Then take a look at Iran. Is it a true revolution, only time will tell I guess, but a few things that are going on there are just amazing to me and have me absolutely captivated. First of all, let me say that I generally write in Word and then C&P over, right now I'm typing straight in mostly because this really struck me as something...inspiring, I guess. The point of saying that is: please forgive the typos and and random thoughtness that might appear over the course of this entry.

The first topic I want to hit on here is the way the world, and by "world" I of course mean me, is finding out the details of what is happening in Iran right now. The news as I've seen it is pretty generic and benign. Stories like "Unrest in Iranian Capital After Election," "Rioting Continues in Tehran," and the sort. Random thought: "Unrest" is an odd choice of term, isn't it? I know it's used frequently now but if you look at what is going on there, "unrest" is about as accurate as "pillow fighting." Anyway, back to the point, the news stories that I've seen (admittedly few), have been sterile. Take a look at these Twitter posts from persiankiwi who is in Tehran:

confirmed - tehran uni dorm 17 seriously injured. no deaths reported yet. will post link.

have no more news from uni dorm. i must go to pray now. today we will need god.

dawn is breaking. can hear prayers from mosques.

occasionally hear gunshots in distance. no idea where. seems to be all over city. just like 79.

everytime i press refresh, system cuts out. no incoming at all. crazy.

internet very slow. dialup only. no facebook, no bbc, cnn nothing. even arab stations blocked.

have lost mobile contact in university dorm. cannot recoonect. cannot get info.

moussavi demo at 4pm this afternoon in 19 cities announced. expect millions. this will not stop.

4am and people still on streets and rooftops shouting 'death to the dictator'.

students being killed in tehran uni dorm in amirabad right now. this must stop, ahmadinejad must stop.

apparently there is running battles in tehran uni right now. i can hear shooting on the phone line.

gov trying to arrest all people suspected in organising demo tomorrow and strike on tuesday.

i have just been told that moussavihas called national strike on tuesday.

i am hearing that students beaten severly at tehran uni tonight. am speaking with someone on the scene now on mobile.

i am not sure if students killed in tehran uni dorm. unconfirmed that there was shooting heard there. no students seen.

tomorrow if army come we will greet them with roses

All the above posts were made over about a 2 hour period today (6/14/09) but they went on all day, all similar in vein to those above, varying in intensity. I can't stop reading these posts. This is what the news is unable to capture, this is human conflict at its most human. The regime in Iran is filtering all press, and an earlier post from persiankiwi stated that they (m or f is unknown) had found an unfiltered internet dial-up line and that is the source of all the posts they have made.

So what's the big deal? I guess what I find fascinating aside from the humanity that oozes through these posts is the nature of the posts themselves. There is a song from 1970 by a guy named Gil Scott-Heron called "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" and it's a line that has persisted for a while. What is going on in Iran, is not being televised, it's being tweeted. This is an amazing shift in history. At least to me.

The other thing that stands out for me, and I've already touched on this, is the humanity. I don't just mean the level of human emotion, but the out and out humanity. Take a look at the Twitter posts again. Let me just restate a few:

i must go pray now. today we will need god.

this must stop

tomorrow if army come we will greet them with roses (this is beautiful to me)

I've also seen two cases, so there are for sure more, where riot troops who were sent in break up protests and were doing so brutally before being thrown from their motorcycle or overwhelmed by the crowd, were sheltered and protected by the people they had been beating. This is amazing. This is humanity. This is the divine in the human. It just impresses the shit outta me, it really, really does. How do you get this from people? I have come to expect the opposite, absolute brutality, as a default and I'm not naive, I know it's happening, but it's not always happening, and in an odd way, I guess it gives me hope.

(c) Carl T. Mealie, 2009

Riffin' on the Word "Field"

2009-06-11T21:36:00.000-07:00

I can’t hear the word “field” without thinking of baseball. I just can’t. I’m not even a huge baseball fan in the way one thinks of a baseball fan. I like baseball, I love the Dodgers, I can appreciate the Yankees, I watch the World Series and a game here and there, but I don’t have the time or the inclination to follow the day in day out of the thing. I don’t even know who the big stars of the game are right now and haven’t known the Dodgers’ line-up since Steve Garvey was a part of it. Sorry all you baseball purists (though all of none of you are reading this), I can’t go there. I refuse to pour over sports pages for obscure stats or watch Sportscenter four times a day, just can’t do it.
But there’s something almost magical about baseball, isn’t there? A few years back, my family (only one kid at the time) and I were L.A. with no plans one evening in early September 2001 so we decided to go to a Dodgers game. It’s difficult to describe how that game made me feel, but it was like taking a bath in Americana. I’ve been to several games since and each time I walk into a ballpark and gaze down on the field it’s like I’m taking my place in American history and culture, and I don’t care what anybody says, baseball is an American game. It may have its roots in Rounders, which was an English game, or some other thing, but for me, that just makes it more American.
This is our game and I’m not a kooky nationalist or anything like that but I can’t help believing in what America can be. We fuck up a lot, no doubt, but there is nothing like us in history. Americans will do the most ridiculous things for the most noble of reasons even to our own detriment. We may misguide ourselves and look like we’re falling apart, but we haven’t yet. There’s a strength to us that is so far impervious to damage. But this is about baseball.
That said, can the two be separated? I don’t know. Baseball is much the same, huh? It’s has survived the Black Sox, a World War, labor issues, and steroids but it still keeps going, never relinquishing it’s place in our national heart, it just keeps going and we keep watching, even if only part time. Is there anything like watching a no-hitter? Even if it’s being pitched against your team, you can’t help but pull for the pitcher. After all, it’s a long season and you’ll get it back. Is there anything like the sound of a ball smacking the sweet spot on a bat? How about a diving catch? A perfect 4-6-3 double play? Or how about this:

It’s late in the game and your team is up by a couple runs. Your closer is on the mound and has inherited a couple runners in scoring position and the opposing team has their power hitter strutting to the box. The crowd has been chatting, eating hot dogs, drinking beer, swatting a beach ball, or any number of things while the closer warmed up but now that he’s in position and the batter is stepping into the box they stand nearly in unison, there’s no prompting, everybody just knows that this at bat is the game. The closer going to bring the heat and the batter is waiting for it. You stand in the crowd, silent, watching, waiting for the pitcher to start his wind-up. The smell of hot dogs, roasted peanuts, and beer still permeates the air, but crowd chatter is almost gone, save for the occasional father answering a child’s question, even the beach ball is gone. The pitcher winds up and you can tell already he’s got his mojo going and this thing is gonna be smokin’ and it is, 99 m.p.h. heading for the inside edge if the plate and leaving nothing but a vapor trail. The batter is no weak-kneed rookie, however, and he launches the thing deep down the third base line. You and the crowd hold your collective breath as the ball hooks just outside the foul pole. The crowd resumes their positions with a sigh as the base runners return to second and third while the batter never left the box, knowing it was either foul or a homerun. The pitcher receives a new ball and kicks at the rubber on top of the mound like it wasn’t even close. The next pitch is going to be the heat again and everybody knows it as the batter steps into the box. The pitcher starts the wind up and…

Does it really matter how it ends? The point is that between the months of April and October, this happens every night. Sometimes in New York, sometimes in L.A. or St. Louis or Durham, or Williamsport, Modesto, Visalia, Helena, Bristol or most any town in America. After all, this is our game.

(c) Carl T. Mealie, 2009

2009-05-06T11:22:00.000-07:00

My intent for this blog, is, as the title suggests, to post whatever strikes me. Short stories, comments or whatever. Hopefully I won't bore myself and anyone masochistic enough to read this.

short bio

2009-05-06T11:17:00.000-07:00

I thought for my first ever blog, it would be a good idea to post a short bio. This was written a writer's conference last weekend. The assignment was to write a six word memoir. So here's mine.

Took wrong road, wound up home.

(c) Carl Mealie 2009