Some quick religious/political comentary

IN POLITICAL NEWS

The Republican National Committee plans to raise money this election cycle through an aggressive campaign capitalizing on “fear” of President Barack Obama and a promise to "save the country from trending toward socialism."

The strategy was detailed in a confidential party fundraising presentation, obtained by POLITICO, which also outlines how “ego-driven” wealthy donors can be tapped with offers of access and “tchochkes.”

The presentation was delivered by RNC Finance Director Rob Bickhart to top donors and fundraisers at a party retreat in Boca Grande, Florida on February 18,

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/33866.html#ixzz0hXhIFXx

It has been clear since 9/11 that fear has been a major GOP tactic.
"There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love." ~1 John 4:18


GAY MARRIAGE
Recently a student asked me to fill out a political survey for a story he was writing for the school newspaper. There weren't any questions about the deficit or Afghanistan, jobs or the economy. He did ask about health care and gay marriage.

Ordinarily I try to avoid forming opinions (let alone sharing them) on this issue, but that morning my devotion had been on Matthew 22. In  Matthew 22:30 and Mark 12:25 the Sadducees, a group of religious teachers who didn't believe in the resurrection and Heaven, challenged Jesus. The custom was that if a man died without any children, his brother was supposed to marry his widow and have children for him. The Sadducees gave Jesus a scenario where seven brothers all marrying and dying in turn. They asked Him who's wife she would be in Heaven. Jesus knows it's a trap and corrects them, "For when the dead rise, they will neither marry nor be given in marriage. In this respect they will be like the angels in heaven."

This got me thinking- mind you, I am not condoning homosexuality or promoting gay marriage, but good grief, it seems to me that what Jesus is saying (in part) is that marriage is a temporal, human, perhaps even a civil institution, not necessarily something quite as perfect and Divinely ordained as many of us seem to think. Don't get me wrong, besides my salvation, I personally think that my wife and our marriage is one of the greatest things God has given me. I try thanking Him for Bethany every day. But if marriage is in fact, a covenant, a contract between two people, the 14th Amendment prohibits states from denying everyone equal treatment under the law.

I do not think that church bodies should be forced to perform, recognize or "bless" same-sex unions, however, marriage licenses are issued by the state, not churches. "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's" (Luke 20:25, Matt 22:21, Mark 12:17).

Both of these "mini-editorials" are probably enough for some people to want to burn me at the stake as a heretic- guess that's why I'm posting them here on my main blog instead of on my religious blog. Because pretty much no one ever reads this one anymore since I stopped writing a weekly column for my local newspaper. And because the other one is programmed to automatically post on facebook. And I don't feel like having to listen to the negative feedback. Guess I'm a coward. Sorry Gay people. I think you have rights, but I'm too much of a wuss to argue on your behalf. 

In the interest of self-disclosure; Where I’m coming from and why you wouldn’t think so

The Apostle Paul once made an impassioned declaration of his credentials as a Jew to Jewish members of the new sect that followed “the Way,” (aka Jesus). He described in detail his lineage and pedigree, down to the denomination (Pharisee) to the point than no one could dispute his authority in matters of Jewish laws and traditions.

Much of my adult life I’ve felt like I had to defend my credentials as a conservative. By that I mean as a traditional, straight-laced, straight-shooting, hard-working, family-loving, small-town, middle class, Midwestern white guy. People tend to question my middle-America, middle-of-the-road, stable, straight-arrowness because I vote like a bleeding-heart and I wear that bleeding-heart on my sleeve.

I came from a very stable home in the very sterile suburbs of 1970’s Phoenix Arizona. My parents moved there in before I was born. I’d like to think that it wasn’t a case of “white-flight,” my older brother suffered with asthma and allergies and my parents suffered from family infighting and unrest, but they did leave the Detroit area in 1968. 1969 may have been known as the summer of love, but 1968 was a year of race riots, anti war demonstrations and political assassinations. “Out West,” and the sun belt seemed like the New Frontier that JFK had promised back in 1960.

I choose to believe that my parents were more concerned with our safety than with property values or integration because they taught us to be tolerant of and kind toward people of all colors and creeds. Once upon a time “tolerance” was considered a value rather than a vice.

My childhood was textbook example of stability and normalcy. My parents never divorced and to our knowledge never faced any challenges of infidelity. My Dad had a good paying, union job with an airline. He used to say that part of the year we were middle-middle class, and part of the year we were lower-middle class. I’m not sure if that depended on over-time, holiday bonuses, or tax refunds, but we always had food on the table and clothes on out backs, even if we never had a brand new vehicle or as many of the newest toys that little boys drooled over in the Sears-Robuck Christmas Wish Book catalog.

Surely I was the product and chief beneficiary of the American Dream.
My Mother was a stay-at-home mom most of the time. Some years she took secretarial or temp jobs, I suppose to help pay for home improvements, vacations or to put my brother and through parochial school. While she demonstrated for us that women were as smart and capable and worthy of respect as men, she never burned her bras or pontificated about the need to be “liberated” or to have her own career or identity apart from my Dad. If anything, she often preached to us about how the husband was to be the head of the household and the wife should defer to her husband and honor him- much to her consternation whenever he disappointed her or disagreed with her, which was plenty.

We lived in the same three bedroom, two bath ranch on the same suburban street in the same suburban subdivision my entire life. Mom and Dad still live there. I believe Dad’s got his 30 year mortgage paid off as a matter of fact, which may be why Mom wants to get a condo in a small town on California’s central coast where she can paint all day with her friends.
They scrimped and saved and sacrificed to send us to Christian school from kindergarten through eighth grade. They took us to Sunday school and church every week and made sure we studied catechism and were confirmed. They had nightly devotions with us at the dinner table (not just during Advent and Lent, either) and prayed for us every night. I ask you, what could be more conservative?

In my mind, I adhered to an Arthurian mythos. I aspired to be God’s knight, abiding by the credos of “right makes might” and “by serving each other, we become free.” What could be more conservative?

For my part, I read, marked and inwardly digested as much of God’s word as I could, not to mention church doctrine and Reformation history. In high school, while it seemed like everyone else was studying Bud Light and wine coolers, I was exploring journalism and foreign policy. While other kids were listening to Megadeath and Metallica, I was absorbing Theloneous Monk and George Shearing. I shunned piercings and tattoos. Even with temperatures in the 100s most of the year, I believed it was unmanly to not wear socks and unclassy to wear an undershirt. I was square before Hewly Lewis sang that it was hip to be so. How conservative can you get?
I was about as rigid and repressed as a teenager can get. I can honestly say that I’ve never even tried pot once, even though it was offered to me. I dated some girls but held onto a chivalrous, romantic ideal so tightly that I could never settle for less than the deepest, truest love. Just as well, I spent three of high school’s four years in love with a girl I held on a pedestal. Even so, I valued a relationship with her more than any mere attraction to her, so we remained platonic. Best friends. I was her blood-brother, her confessor, counselor, protector and defender (at least in my mind). For me, women were to be respected, treasured, and treated as intelligent, capable, individuals- not as objectified body parts or recreational play things. Surely that’s conservative, right?

Just like I can genuinely boast that I’ve never tried drugs, I can honestly say that I’ve only had one sexual partner my entire life, which is my wife of 18 years. Again, I ask you, have you ever known ANYONE so conservative?

I contend that even my initial interest in politics was what I would consider conservative- fiscally conservative anyway. My perception of Reaganomics was that it was irresponsible. Skyrocketing deficits and mounting national debt were what incensed me. Boring, huh? Wonkish. My heroes were so called “Blue-Dog” democrats like Paul Tsongas of Massachusetts and Paul Simon of Illinois. I followed my Arizona Senators, Barry Goldwater and John McCain and appreciated that neither of them felt obliged to tow the party line on every issue. I’m telling you, I may have been a charter member of my high school’s Young Democrats club, but as Democrats go- conservative.

As I studied history, I observed that with the exception of Teddy Roosevelt, the Democratic party of the 20th century tended to be on the side of the working class, and more often than not, in my opinion, the side of right. Corrupt Republicans hamstrung or dismantled Roosevelt’s progressive reforms after he left office. Republicans pulled us out of the League of Nations, abdicating the world leadership we accumulated by winning WWI. Republicans favored the robber-barons and led us into the great Depression. Republicans brought us McCarthyism, the red scare and black lists. After LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act, racist Southern fundamentalist Democrats flocked to the Republican party and opposed civil rights, desegregation, economic justice and women’s rights under the mantra of states rights and libertarianism. Nixon, a Republican escalated our involvement in Vietnam- including with secret bombings and intrusions into Laos and Cambodia even though he had promised Vietnamization and peace with honor. And everyone knows now that Watergate was a matter of his stealing the presidential election and tried to cover it up. Reagan’s campaign secretly negotiated with Iranian revolutionaries to prevent them from releasing American hostages until after they were sure that Jimmy Carter lost the election and in spite of the fact that Reagan swore that America does not negotiate with terrorists, his administration sold Iran missiles (through Israel, of all brokers) and used the proceeds to fund the Contra Rebels in Nicaragua in direct violation of laws passed by Congress. Now, sure, these reasons are partisan, but surely my reasons for mistrusting the GOP are reasonable, if not reasonably “conservative.”

One summer, I applied to work at the phone banks for the state Democratic party. I supported the blue collar, Midwestern candidate, Dick Gebhart. I’m ashamed to say that one of the reasons I found a different job was that I just wasn’t comfortable with how many of the men who worked there shaved their legs and how few of the women who worked there didn’t. Than may make me bigoted, a hypocrite, or a homophobe- but I believe it also made be quite conservative.

I attended a Lutheran Church~Missouri Synod college, Concordia in small town in Nebraska. A small, church run teacher’s college with fewer than 2,000 students, established in the 1890s with a small professor to student ratio where I was discipled directly by old, white, male Ph.D.s and Th.D.s and Rev.s for five years. Again, I absorbed a culture of reserved, humility, piety and servanthood. My mentors ingrained in me a healthy skepticism of secular humanism and new age nonsense. I virtually minored in Religion, meaning I took the classes required for a Lutheran Teacher’s Diploma, qualifying me to become a Commissioned Minister of the Gospel, that is a Called teacher at a Lutheran school trusted to teach Religion or Bible classes. Well versed in denominational history, official church teachings and Synodical doctrinal positions. Again, I ask you, what could POSSIBLY be more “conservative?” For decades I struggled and wrestled in my soul about whether God was calling me to pastoral ministry. Decidedly, un "liberal."

So what makes me a liberal? Maybe it’s because I believe in Teddy Roosevelt’s promise to give EVERY American a “Square Deal.” Maybe because, (even though he was also an honorary Grand Wizard of the KKK) Wilson’s 14 points of open treaties openly arrived upon and self-determination for emerging nations was egalitarian and responsible. Maybe it’s because FDR’s New Deal ushered in the longest era of economic expansion and prosperity for the middle class in history. Maybe it’s because I think that great thinkers like Henry Wallace, Elenor Roosevelt, Adali Stevensen, and Eugene McCarthy were visionary in their perspectives on race, class, economy, and foreign policy. These aren’t radicals, these aren’t Marxists, these are people who loved America and believed in the dignity of every human being.

Maybe I’m a “liberal” because I buy into the optimism of potential and public service espoused by JFK. Maybe I’m a liberal because I admire the courage and sacrifice of men like Martin Luther King and John Lewis. Who risked life and livelihood to hold America accountable to her promises. Maybe it’s because even though an overdeveloped and misguided paranoia about Communism led him to mire us in a tragic mess in Vietnam, LBJ still brought us the Civil Rights Act and had hoped to battle a noble, if ill fated war on poverty. Maybe it’s because Robert Kennedy spoke of renewing our cities, our environment, and our faith in government as a tool for the common good. Maybe it’s because in spite of is short comings, I appreciated that Bill Clinton paid-as-he-went (fiscally conservative), that however short lived it was, he eliminated the deficit and was reducing the national debt. I find it amazing and ironic that the number of abortions was lower under Carter and Clinton than under Reagan or either Bush. And no president has ever demonstrated Christian service, or dedicated himself to the study and teaching of God’s Word than James Earl Carter. Conservative. Preserving democracy, protecting the little guy, protecting the Constitution and our precious traditions. Conservative.

And yes, call me hopeful or too easily inspired by soaring rhetoric- but I have to tell you, so far, I am enthusiastic about the bottom-up grass roots movement, the savvy use of the internet, the cabinet of rivals, the transparency, accountability, civility, attempts at consensus building, the consummate professionalism, tireless work ethic, and gritty pragmatism of Barrack Obama. All these attributes seem bone-deep conservative to me.

So I don’t like xenophobic demagogues bullying people on their AM talk radio shows and their “info-tainment” shows on Fox News. So I think that you don’t have to be straight, so long as you can shoot straight to enlist in the Army. So I think that the 14th Amendment entitles everyone to equal rights, even if they’re gay. So I believe in protecting women from back alley clinics and coat-hanger abortions enough to want abortion to be legal and safe, even though I find it heinous that so many people think if it so callously and nonchalantly as just another form of birth control. So I can’t get passed the part about a “well-regulated militia” whenever I read the 2nd Amendment. So I see the anti-establishment clause of the 1st Amendment’s wall to separate church and state ass something that protects and benefits Christianity, and government. So I actually support a progressive tax structure because I feel like with much privilege ought to come much responsibility AND because I believe that demand-side economics is far more sustainable than supply-side.

If these things make me “Liberal.” Than label me Liberal. If they make me “Progressive,” label me Progressive. If they make me “Socialist,” then I must be guilty as charged.

But please, don’t begin to think that I somehow don’t love my country, my community, my family, or my students. Please don’t fear for my salvation or question my relationship with or loyalty to Jesus, because I beg Him to renew my baptism and drown my sinful nature and make me His instrument every morning. Don't say that I'm not smart and for Heaven’s sake don’t assume that I’m a conformist or that I prefer not to think because I have followed the crowd and value few things as much as reading and learning.

I strive to help people see and come to a better understanding of both sides of every issue. That does not make me less moral or less aware, or for that matter, less conservative than anyone.
Please refrain from impugning my patriotism. If you detest and are repelled by the things I stand for or the way I vote, let’s either try to find what we do agree on or simply agree to disagree.

And if you don’t like what I write- don’t read it. If you’re offended or annoyed by what I post on the internet, don’t revisit my blog or why not write your own? You may even delete me as a friend or block me on facebook- I’ll never know. But please, please don’t pretend that because we disagree, that somehow means that I’m bad or less valuable or your enemy. And if you do, just remember, Christ told us to love our enemies.


St. Paul used his credibility as a hard core Jew to oppose those Jewish Christians who were telling people that they had to be circumcised to become a Christian. I think that what I've tried to lay out her is that if anyone deserves to be able to call themselves a conservative, it's me- yet I choose to be called a liberal democrat because I believe that with a few (in Republican opinions glaring) exceptions, I believe that most liberal political values are more in line with my Christian religious convictions.

I didn't even mention George W. Bush or Iraq or torture. I could probably write another whole page just on how radical, rather than conservative I believe "neo-conservatives" are. And you don't want to know how strict and conservative my parenting style is.

Love Perseveres

So you call yourself a “Christian?”

A “Little Christ?”
“Little Anointed One?”
Set aside for a purpose?

Are you sure you’re ready for His purposes?

Love perseveres.

Are you patient?
Are you kind?
Do you envy?
Do you ever brag?
Pretty proud of yourself, aren’t you?
Are you ever rude?
Are you ever self-seeking? Never? No Ambition? Never any ulterior motives?
How easy is it to make you angry?
Do you keeps track? Are you keeping score?
Oh I know you rejoice in the truth, but do you rejoice with THE Truth?
Do you ever delight when harm comes to others?
Do you always protect? Or do you just over protect?
Do you always trust?
Where is your hope?

Love perseveres.

If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ,
if any comfort from his love,
if any fellowship with the Spirit,
if any tenderness and compassion,
then make my joy complete by being like-minded,
having the same love,
being one in spirit and purpose.

Are you sure you’re ready for HIS purposes?

Love perseveres.

Do you do ever do anything out of selfish ambition?
Are you ever vain or conceited?
Are you humble?
Do you consider others better than yourself?
Or do you look after your own interests?
What about the interests of others?

Love perseveres.

Is your attitude the same as that of Christ Jesus?
Don’t you consider equality with God something to be grasped?
Do you make yourself nothing?
Are you a servant?
Do you humbled himself?
Would you be obedient to death?

Love perseveres.

Do YOU love?
Are you joyful?
Are you a peacemaker?
Are you patient?
Are you kind?
I bet you think you try to be pretty good, don’t you?
Are you as faithful as you think?
Do you let your gentleness be evident to all?
You want to control society, but how much self-control have you got?

Love perseveres.

Do you love your enemies?

Do you do good to those who hate you?
Have you blessed those who curse you?
Are you praying for those who mistreat you?

Love perseveres.

"You have heard that it was said,
'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'
But I tell you:
Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.

Love perseveres.

He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good,
and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.
So you may as well get used to it.

Love perseveres.

Do you love your enemies?
Do you do good to them?
Do you even give them to them without expecting to get anything back?

Love perseveres.

Believe it or not,
Like it or not,

Jesus is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.

While we were still His enemies, Christ died for us.
Would you die for your enemies?

Are you merciful, just as your Father is merciful?

Lord, forgive us,
for we know not what the Hell we're doing to each other.

Believe it or not,
Like it or not,

Love perseveres

---

Matthew 5, Luke 6, Romans 11, 1 Corinthians 13, Philippians 2, Galatians 5, Romans 5

Sex, Politics, and Religion

Lately, this has been a kinder, gentler blog what with the poetry and pictures and feeble attempt at fiction and all. But just for a little bit, I'd like to return to it's original mandate and talk about sex, politics and religion for a little bit. I posted a quote from and a link to an article by Evangelical pastor and Liberal social activist Jim Wallis on my "Prophet, Priest, and Pirate" blog-

"The Religious Right was a Christian mistake. It was a movement that sought to implement a ' agenda' by tying the faithful to one political option -- the right wing of the Republican Party. The politicizing of faith in such a partisan way is always a theological mistake. But the rapid decline of the Religious Right now offers us a new opportunity to re-think the role of faith in American public life.

Personally, I am not offended or alarmed by the notion of a post-Christian America. Christianity was originally and, in my view, always meant to be a minority faith with a counter-cultural stance, as opposed to the dominant cultural and political force. Notions of a 'Christian America' quite frankly haven’t turned out very well." ~Jim Wallis

Read the entire article at Sojourners.com

THAT blog as an RSS feed into my Facebook profile page and I tagged several friends (both Red and Blue) to share it with them. What wound up happening is that a former student who's very much a religious conservative commented on it and kept the discussion thread going for several days. Rather than post a full transcript of everything everyone said, I'm just presenting what I wrote here, so it may read a little choppy . You may want to imagine what other people wrote to me.

Recently right-wingers were attacking Sen. Chuck Grassley, an opponent of gay marriage for not being outspoken enough or moving quickly enough in response to Iowa's recent Supreme Court decision calling a ban on gay marriage unconstitutional. They're accusing him of drifting away from socially conservative values. I guarantee that if Jesus was traveling 21st century America as He did first century Palestine, Christian Conservatives would criticize Him for cavorting with sinners and tax collectors and for not fasting and not ceremonially washing His hands and gleaning grain from the edge of fields on the Sabbath and healing on the Sabbath etc. etc.

One of my biggest beefs with my fellow Christians is that we too often lean too heavily on the Law at the expense of the Gospel. We cannot and will not turn people's hearts toward God by legislation or judicial decision or constitutional amendment or for that matter by ranting and raving and protest and boycott. We can never save someone from their sin by coercively preventing them from sinning. It's as ridiculous as thinking that we can extract reliable intelligence from an enemy by torture.

People who genuinely want to follow Jesus and can't give up on their precious "culture war," should consider that we are not battling against flesh and blood and therefore conventional (and by that I mean political, practical, and especially Machiavellian , Tzu-ian and Rovian) tactics. The way to win the hearts and minds of unbelievers (and first of all, we can never do this, only God, with Holy Spirit can do it- perhaps using us as His tools) is with love, compassion, example, and prayer. And by addressing their needs, not what we perceive as their faults and errors.

---

I've always felt that Christianity should be leery of associating itself too closely with either party and that Christians need to keep Jesus and His cross central to our theology, and beware of letting our moralist agendas eclipse Him. Admittedly, I am often just as guilty of this as anyone who is passionate about conventional wedge issues or "values" issues (depending on whether you see them with red or blue glasses). Call me chief among sinners, but my point is, that the true kingdom will only advance AND American civil discourse will only thrive when we all stop using "religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon."

Don't we need to love our enemies and pray for those that persecute us? Even when our most treasured issues are at stake?

---

You'll all notice that I tried not to say anything about gay marriage or my opinion on it, I only meant to use Sen. Grassley's predicament to highlight how we go off the rails with our legalism sometimes. I'm not prepared to condone what God disapproves of- however, my don't see how my marriage needs defending from gay people and even if I'm uncomfortable with it, I don't think that the secular, Constitutional right to equal protection under the laws is not something that God, Scripture or the Church deny to non believers or any kind of sinners. These positions may confound many of my dearly loved brothers and sisters in Christ. It is interesting to consider that while the Catholic Church considers marriage a sacrament, the Lutheran Church does not. And, Moses and Paul both write about homosexuality but Jesus Himself didn't address it directly.

I've always been of the opinion that the state should license civil unions and the Church should offer marriages.

Be that as it may, my original intention with this post was never to get involved in a debate on gay marriage. It was to consider our balance on Law and Gospel. I was wondering if sometimes (and this may be as true for me and liberal issues as it is for anyone else with conservative issues) do our temporal, social, political, and moral concerns like meat offered to idols, all things are permitted, but not all things are helpful.

---

To look after orphans and widows in their distress, do not mistreat an alien or oppress, love your neighbor as yourself, love your enemy and pray for those that persecute you, judge not lest ye be judged, mercy triumphs over judgment... these are God's values as I read them. America, just like every single individual has always and daily failed to... Read More uphold these values- indeed may very well be incapable of upholding them. We all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Sure, I was knit together in my mother's womb, but I was also conceived in sin. Sure, the United States may have been founded by people who called themselves Christian and modeled our laws after Judeo-Christian traditions, but don't kid yourself, they were business men, politicians, even pirates and privateers, ambitious, sinful mercenaries who killed and enslaved for selfish gain.

Be careful not to fall prey to the Hegelian notion that says that God blesses us more than other countries because we're somehow more Christian than they are. Remember who the Puritans were seeking religious freedom from? King James, as in the King James Bible- a very Christian monarch.

Calvinists, Thomists, Augustinians, and Lutherans (and for that matter in a secular vein- Hobbsians and Lockeans) all have drastically different concepts of human nature and I suppose sin itself, for that matter. As a Lutheran, I believe that on this side of death we all live in a perpetual and inescapable state of sin. Only Jesus' death and resurrection saves me. But during this life the best we can do is make allowances because, like Moses found, people have hard hearts. I agree, as Jesus, we shouldn't shy away from calling wrong wrong, but Jesus still loved and died for people who got divorces, or committed adultery by lusting after someone with their eyes and commit murder by hating people.

---

John Adams once warned that "power always thinks it has great soul, vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak, and that it is doing God's service when it might be violating all His laws. Our passions the powerful are assured... posses so much metaphysical subtlety and so much overpowering eloquence that they insinuate themselves into the understanding and the conscience of the weak and convert both to their party."

---

One American thinks that permitting gay marriage or teaching evolution are a betrayal of God and the values which America was founded on. Another American may think that employing torture or violating 4th and 5th and 14th Amendment rights, or fabricating intelligence reports to support unprovoked military action is just as much an unconscionable betrayal of those same values.

Sen. Charles Grassley is deliberative and thoughtful, not reactionary. Whatever ways I may disagree with him, I don't think he deserved to be attacked by people whom he agrees with because he isn't speaking as loudly and angrily as they as quickly as they have. It just seems to me, that we often fault on the side of Law because we are motivated by anger and fear, whereas the Gospel is always motivated by love- not weakness or trying to please everyone, but genuine love and concern. The goal is that all would come to Christ and salvation, not for me to defend God FROM them.

Like it or not however, for one person protecting and preserving how our society operates is damaging it and preventing it from operating how it how it ought to. Po-tate-o Po-tOt-o. One Christian says God instituted infant baptism, another says... Read More God wants young adults to decide to be baptized. One Christian says Christ is really present in the bread and wine, another says it's just symbolic. Likewise, one American loves the 1st and 4th and 8th Amendments, another loves the 2nd and 10th most. One American looks at the 2nd Amendment and focuses on the "well-regulated militia," another focuses on the individual's right to bear arms. One looks at the 1st Amendment and emphasizes that the right to practice one's religion should not be impeded, another emphasizes that the state should not establish, favor or promote any one religion above another one. Yet, E pluribus unum, from many, one.

---

If you really want to nit pick- sure, God created woman out of man when He saw that he should not be alone, and the Bible says, for this reason a man should leave his mother and father and the two shall become one, but there is no clear legal definition given for a marriage. Adam and Eve didn't get a license from the county clerk or have a ring or a ceremony. Abraham, Jacob, David, and most notoriously Solomon all practiced polygamy. Fundamentalist Mormons are convinced that that should be legalized. Less than fifty years ago many states prohibited Blacks and Whites from getting married. Most states now have a concept called "common-law" marriage in which it categorizes people who've been cohabiting without the blessing of the Church.

---

Pluralism sucks, and you may be scared that God will punish us for it, or that He'll withdraw His blessing for it, but would you prefer a theocracy? Who'd get to be the Mullah? Yours or mine? I'll take pluralism.

When is the culture that influences the church the worldly, unchurched culture that seems so relativistic and when is the seemingly pious and religious subculture of religiosity that is nevertheless human, but imagines itself from God?

Zwingly and Calvin and Wesley insisted on bending the world's culture into our Christian expectations, whereas Luther called us to influence and participate, but not get overly hung up on it because its more valuable to keep our eyes on the cross, and of course then there's Benedict who thought we should remove ourselves from the world. It's a little like Mary and Martha, the busy body (who, mind you, is working for God) or the open heart with eyes and ears focused on higher things. If you're focus is truly on Jesus, how can you have time to notice all the specks in other people's eyes?

---

Lutherans teach that we can never fulfill the Law, but thanks to Christ's work on the cross, we now live in the freedom and grace of the Gospel. Whereas Baptists believe that once one's saved, you are obligated to start following the Law, keep every thought captive etc. It seems to set up some unrealistic expectations on Christians to be perfect. Granted, we shouldn't abuse our freedom by thinking of grace as a license to sin. But my point is, one of the problems with the "Evangelical" or Conservative-Christian movement in America is that rather than having the Law precede and direct us toward the Gospel, we're starting to think that the Gospel precedes and directs us into Legalism.

THAT is the main point I hoped to communicate by posting the quote from and link to an article by Jim Wallis- not get into a heady debate about the so-called culture wars. One of my OTHER problems with extreme right wingers is that they seem to be constantly on the defensive, itching for conflict. I wanted civil, academic, abstract, discussion- not all out argument. I think that if the truth is truth it stands by itself, Share it, explain it, but why feel like you need to defend it? God is God and I am not. He can defend Himself.

I still think that right-wingers went to far when they came down on Senator Grassley -who is on their side!

---

One of my OTHER problems with extreme right wingers is that they seem to be constantly on the defensive, itching for conflict. I wanted civil, academic, abstract, discussion- not all out argument. I think that if the truth is truth it stands by itself, Share it, explain it, but why feel like you need to defend it? God is God and I am not. He can defend Himself.

I'm a compulsive teacher, I want people to think and discuss, even if it takes cognitive dissonance to start the process. Unfortunately it comes of as me being a muck-rucker because I upset the applecart by not simply marching in lock-step with everybody else on every single issue.

---

Writing, speaking, extrapolating, defending, try to cajole and convince and apply apologetics till we're blue in the face, someone will always disagree and worse, someone will always take offense. Obviously there were several times in there when Craig felt that I didn't hear him and a few when I did probably misread his points. There were also several times where I think he felt like I may have been attacking him when actually I was desperately trying to convince him.

⁸ All things are wearisome,
more than one can say.
The eye never has enough of seeing,
nor the ear its fill of hearing.

⁹ What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.

Why be angry at the sun or chase after the wind? I still say, let the rain fall down on the just and the unjust. Jesus knows the weeds from the grain, let Him sort it all out in the end.

Reader Appreciation Day

Reader Appreciation Day
Charter Oak-Ute NEWSpaper — Schleswig Leader, Thursday,March 29, 2007 – Page 3

Five years ago when I began writing this column I decided that my mandate would be “Sex, Politics, and Religion… not necessarily in that order.” I figured that I didn’t know enough about sports, farming, or the weather to talk about any of them very well. I also hoped to provoke some thought and discussion once in a while, even if that risked rattling a few cages once in a while. Thank you for reading.

Obviously, I indulge in plenty of politics and religion. I’d like to think that my approach to both comes from the angle of a former history teacher; informative, analytical, perhaps even persuasive- rather than lecturing or preaching- but I know that I lapse into ranting pretty easily. As a polite neighbor I ought to apologize for doing that when it comes to politics because it seems like taking advantage of the having a forum to blow off steam without having a lot of consideration or empathy for those who would disagree. I ought to apologize, but I guess I’d rather rely on your understanding that I’m entitled to my opinions and so are you and have you either take me with a grain of salt, take my ideas under advisement, or take page three and use it to wrap a fish, line a litter box or start a fire, whichever you prefer. Thank you for still reading.

We can agree to disagree, I only hope that you appreciate that my intentions are sincere, I love my country and believe in the ideals embodied in it’s founding documents, including the Constitution and Bill of Rights. No doubt many of the people who most vehemently disagree with what I write feel the same way. I hope that you all know that I my love and respect for the hard working, God-and-country-loving, proud families of rural Iowa is deep and unwavering, even when I can’t begin to fathom why on Earth they can hold some of the harebrained opinions that they do. I’d like to think that such affection is not unrequited, even when I irritate you so much that you can’t see straight, but I’ve had at least one reader threaten to cancel their subscription, so I know that it may be that I’m far more enamored of you than you are of me. Thank you if you’re still reading.

By the way, as antagonistic as I may be toward the current administration, I’m still pretty much a moderate centrist by national standards. Anyone who really thinks that I’m outrageously liberal wouldn’t know one if they bit you in the posterior, and while we’re at it sociologists predict that the entire country is gradually shifting back to the left again after about a forty years of leaning the other way, so if you think I’m bad, you may as well try to get over it. And thank you for reading anyway.

As for religion, the late Charles Schultz, creator of the Peanuts comic strip would’ve argued that it is a cartoonist’s prerogative to sermonize. Since I’ve never received any feedback to indicate otherwise, I am under the impression that where we may differ on occasion politically, we must see more eye to eye theologically regardless of any of our denominational differences. Thank you for that.

I probably get the most responses when I write about the funny things my kids say and do or the trials and tribulations of parenting. Thank you for letting me know you enjoy it.
My wife is always trying to steer me away from the politics to the humor. I know she just wants people to like me and I have to admit that if I could, I’d love to be another Dave Berry or Erma Bombeck, but I have to tell you, even when you have kids for inspiration, it’s really hard to be funny. It’s actually a lot easier to be full of facts and fury. Still, I’ll admit that a secret ambition of mine is to be taped to a refrigerator, a work cubical or bulletin board, or a college professor’s office door and all of those things are far more likely if you’re funny and heartwarming than poignant or a blood pressure stimulant. That goes for cartoons too, Garfield and Family Circus make the front of the refrigerator a lot more than anything on the Op/Ed pages. Thanks for putting up with me, Honey.

By the way, one time our baby-sitter was laughing so much about something I wrote about our five year old daughter, Ellen, that her older sister Grace told her “Thanks a lot for embarrassing me, Ellie!”

All this introspection may make it sound like I’m leading up to an announcement that I’m quitting or something. Not at all, (sorry to that person who wanted to cancel their subscription). It just occurred to me how lucky I am to get to write here every week, I thought that you deserved to know that I appreciate it. Thank you for reading. Please don’t stop.


WEB EXCLUSIVE: By the way, the fact of the matter is that there is selfish motivation there too- not so much that I have some sinister agenda to proselytize every reader to Christianity or to Missouri-Synod Lutheranism, but when all is said and done, it’s in me and I have to let it out. They say that you learn the most by teaching and that love isn’t love until you pass it along, well what can I tell you, but I read the Bible or learn about God and I want to share it. It just happens that I write a weekly small-town newspaper column, so guess how it comes out. Thank you for reading when it does.

When I first started writing four years ago I’d only lived here for about a year, although I’d wanted to for at least ten. I’d also moved here from Los Angeles, the second largest metropolis in the U.S. and the most widely strip-mall infested, billboard laden and concrete-covered one. Consequently I was very enamored of living in the beautiful, sparsely populated, rolling prairie countryside. So as each new season came on, I’d wax poetic about how lucky we are to smell wet grass and cattle instead of smog or see green, yellow, brown or white instead of grey. I guess that’s something I don’t do so much anymore, sorry if you liked it. Thank you for not littering.

There’s at least one reader who’s asked me two or three times over the years why I don’t publish these columns in a book (and it wasn’t even my mother). As they used to say on the wine-cooler commercials, thank you for your support.

Unfortunately, the surest way for that to happen would be to self-publish and I just have to tell you that I haven’t got the time or the money. The traditional way for that to happen is to compile them, edit them more, print them out, copy them off, compose cover-letters and proceed to submit them to publisher after publisher until one of them miraculously would choose to buy them and put them out as a book. Humbly, I don’t know that I’m that good of a writer. Frankly, I don’t know that I have the time, energy, ambition, or attention-span enough to do it, And candidly, my ego is way to fragile for that much rejection. Getting cartoons syndicated is an even more brutal process that I won’t even get started on. Thanks for your pity.

I never have talked about sex much and I suppose that I’m better off not doing so, mostly it’s just not polite, and while I’d like to be frank and even a little personal with you, gentle reader, I’m afraid that we’d both agree that that would be a little too personal. You’re welcome.

Ted Mallory lives in Charter Oak and teaches at Boyer Valley Schools in Dunlap. ‘Ted’s Column’ has appeared weekly in the Charter Oak-Ute NEWSpaper since 2002. If you’d like to see any of Ted’s editorial cartoons bigger and brighter, you can visit http://tmal.multiply.com/photos/album/2

Gay Marriage- among other topics

I recently had an interesting volley of emails with a friends. Thought I'd share them here:
Cool Stuff. Here is the first one from my friend who's a Lutheran Middle School teacher:

One of the best things to happen to me was that I've had to teach
Civics for a couple of years now. I rather enjoy it. We just finished a rather long simulation dealing with the Constitution. Check out the Interact Simulation Website to see what I'm talking about. Way cool. Anyway. They had a good time learning about parliamentary procedure if nothing else. I think for such a long time I focused on the History side of things that I never really dealt with the mechanics of government. Now I'm rather enjoying
myself in what I'm learning. I'm no expert by any means. I must say I learned a lot from you. Thanks for the insights that you provide.

We have a principal now whose a bit on the freaky conservative side. I admit that I'm not too crazy about gay marriage business and all but I'm also quite sure that there will be Democrats in Heaven. My principal, who's also the 5th grade social studies teacher, has made statements to the effect that being a Christian and a Democratic party member are next to impossible. NOT!! I have made it quite clear in my Civics class that that is not the
case. My mantra is "If you don't know how the Constitution works, you will be at the mercy of those that do." AND...I refuse to use my influential position as a teacher to make little Republican clones--or any party clones for that matter.

Well, I better go. Dinners ready. Thanks again for your insights.


And here is my first reply to him:

As good as all the history shows on History Channel and Discovery Channel are (that ne Dogfights on Friday nights is SO cool) I think that one of the best that I'd show to kids if I was still teaching HIstory is History Detectives on PBS.
They show the actual reseach process based on doccuments and evidence. Don't get me wrong, I agree that there are certain names, dates and battles that kids need- absolutely, but I've always felt that understanding, analysis and application are more useful and valuable than mere knowledge at least that's my perspective on Bloom's taxonomy.

I always tried to help kids see the dynamic tensions, the balances of divergent interests. That may be safe when you're talking about the Whiskey Rebellion or Federalism and Anti-Federalism but even when you get into Manifest Destiny or Reconstruction, if there are colleagues or parents who are wing-nuts, they can freak. Am I wrong that scrutiny and using critical thinking skills are good things? Non partisan things?

Unfortunately there are people who don't believe we should teach, they send their kids to a parochial school to be indoctrinated, not to learn how to think for themselves.

"It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."
~George Orwell, 1984;


Whats funny is, you know how when you're a kid and somebody farts, you say "whoever smelt it, dealt it!"? What's funny is that the firt people to accuse others of revisionist history are the people who either have swallowed some propaganda or don't know enough about history (or government) so they're victoms of revisionist history themselves.

I still LOVE your mantra.

And another from my friend:

Hello again,

More food for thought.

Personally I cannot condone the homosexual lifestyle. It is immoral. Yet these are people who desperately need to hear the Gospel message. Hate the sin but love the sinner.

Just thought I'd say that so that up front. Now let's move into the political realm. I like your analogy of defining marriage to calling the sky blue. However, can one not also argue that a Christian in a democratic society has the glorious opportunity to help further the Gospel's spread by voting on issues such as this? Churches throughout the country (at least in some states where the marriage amendments were on the ballot) worked the issue of marriage into Bible studies and sermons out of growing concern that the institution was under "attack". True, I concede to the fact that parties would use this as a means to further their own agendas. Alas, this is politics. But couldn't it also be the Holy Spirit nudging people to witness through their votes, or across their dinner tables with their families as they discuss the issue? Granted, there are some real goofballs out there that have some serious hate issues, but what if out of perhaps hundreds of conversations about marriage amendments that a handful of marriages were strengthened and maybe some members of the gay community were given perhaps a moment of pause to consider the possibility of repentance and begin a journey that could ultimately bring them closer to our Lord? If that were the case for at least one person, then I guess I'd be happy to call this controversy over marriage a success. God has blessed us with the gift of democracy, wouldn't it be foolish and even sinful not use that gift to ultimately spread the Gospel?

Now, I will say that I would not likely favor ANY national amendment to define marriage because I feel that, based on the separation of powers under the federal system, it is the states that have the power to make laws concerning marriage, NOT the central government. Allowing the federal government to step in here would probably not be wise or a good use of our national government's time and treasure. However, if society elevates the gay lifestyle to the same status as say the African or Hispanic community, making this a civil rights issue, well, I guess then, as a civil rights issue, perhaps this is how the question will
have to be settled someday.

Forgive me if I don't sound clear, I'm trying to articulate my views as I write here. It's helping me to better understand my own position. You know, I recall teaching a unit in my U.S. history class about the labor unions. I recall how some early unions fought for political and economic reform by attempting to radically change the political landscape in order to accomplish their goals. Populism? Yet then you look at folks like Samuel Gompers and the collective bargaining process. They ended up playing the system better. Kind of like practicing your basketball layups rather than trying to drastically change the overall rules of basketball to fit your playing style. Okay, maybe I'm stretching this a little, but couldn't America's Christians take a cue from this? Try to be better Christians and share the gospel
BETTER instead of getting the government to do it. If the Grace of God were made more readily accessible through the witness of believers to nonbelievers, maybe we wouldn't have such a problem with issues like gay marriage. Maybe if the love of Christ was more readily evident through works of service and sincere praise, hearts would be turned Christ BEFORE people could be suckered into counterfeit feelings of love offered through such things as
homosexuality, pornography, and materialism. Let us be firm in our doctrine but also loving in how we treat others and strive for a better balance between Law and Gospel.

Well, I'm tapped out. Chew on this for a while and fire back when you have time.

Hope your family is well.



And another response from me:

Just so we're up front- I'm not gay, nor have I ever played a gay person on TV. (just trying to lighten the tone a little) Seriously, the older I get, the more I read and study Scripture, and the more I learn about the process that theologians, including early church fathers use to interpret scriptures, two hot-button issues become clearer to me: 1) that no matter how you try to dice it, God has prohibited homosexuality and 2) He probably did not intend for us to exclude people from roles of responsibility because of their gender as much as we have.

Hows that sound? Conservative on one issue and Liberal on another? Maybe.

I seem to want to talk about Luther's Doctrine of the Two Kingdoms. My understanding of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution leads me to believe that even though my religion considers homosexuality a sin, it would still be unfair in the eyes of the civil law to deny a monogomous homosexual long-time companion from providing for their partner financially or legally in ways that a traditional married spouse could.

I know a Republican law maker who has killed anti-gay marriage legislation in committee because if it came up to a vote, he knew he'd have to vote for it. The solution some progressive Christian leaders like Tony Campolo have suggested is similar to what's been done in Europe; civil authorities issue civil union agreements, and churches conduct marriages, but neither institution may do the other. As it is the Roman Catholic Church does not recognize Lutheran marriages, so if one district/synod of the American Episcopal Church blesses gay unions, the LCMS certainly shouldn't be cumpulsed to recognize that union. If marriage is from God, either as a full blown sacrament as the Catholics believe or as a metaphor for Christ's relationship to His Church as we do- why should we cede the ordination of marriages to any temporal, civil authority anyway? Doesn't that profane the institution? Teddy Roosevelt, not a particularly devout Presbyterian, didn't want "In God We Trust" on our currency because he believed it was blasphemous!

I guess I'm more comfortable as a Democrat, even when there are Democrats who do, accept, or believe things that make my skin crawl, is because Democrats are pragmatic and practical, they believe in detente' and compromise because they know that we live in a broken world and we have to make the best of it. What I have observed over the last 36 years is that because the Republican party chooses positions that are inflexible, they promote hypocricy. Wittness Gambling Bill Bennett, thieving Ralph Reed, drug-poppin' Hatian hooker employing Rush Limbaugh, and most recently pediphile Mark Foley, and Meth using gay hating gay guy Rev. Ted Haggard.

Love the sinner, hate the sin. Yeah, maybe the Holy Spirit may convict someone in their heart because our pastors and politicians are all up in arms about a wedge issue like gay marriage. Or... people who are struggling feel persecuted, hated and alienated. They're like Luther who practices self-flagilation because they look up at the cruel, unempathetic Christ as a heartless, angry judge, instead of as the approachable, patient, compassionate, yet hold you responsible and don't indulge your selfish sinful nature Father that He really is? Are we driving people out of the Church and making it less likely that they will hear the Word and come to repentance? What's the most effective means to influence our society? By voting? By legislating? Maybe, there's certainly room for that and I'd even agree that it is our duty. But so is by being salt and light, by being Jesus' arms and legs, in our relationships. "A Christian Nation begins at home" is one of my mantras. Walk the walk yourself, rather than screaming and shouting at others when they don't.

Unfortunately it is a sticky, complicated mess. It involves theology, civil rights, and biology too. Is society "elevating" homosexuality to the level of race? Is it a choice? A decision? Some conservatives are libertarians and even if they hate gays, they don't believe the government shoud interfere. Is it a disorder? Like a desease? If so, maybe we should regulate it like smoking, alohol, and drugs. If it is, surely we can't be more judgemental of them than we are of aloholics, adicts, or other people with disablilities. Thank God that through the Grace of our Lord, Heaven will be filled with drunks, smokers, pot-heads, adulterers, people who kuss and have looked at porn or cheated on a math quiz.... Yeah, see, I guess it gets down to how if I've even looked at a woman with lust in my heart I just as well pluck my eye out, huh? Or... if it's not a choice or a disorder, is it a genetic trait- can they help it? Would a black man choose to be black in a racist society? And if they can't help it, they what do we do with that, especially in the light of what the Bible says? Some scientists believe that biology suggests that sexual preference is not something one can help. Can't change genes. Not fair? Blame Adam & Eve? Blame Satan? Blame God?

Detente' (thank you Mr. Nixon & Mr. Kissenger for that one) Coexist. How do you put the toothpaste badk in the tube? All things, including society suffers from atrophy. And finally, don't be a control freak like the parent or principal who wants to produce clones instead of wanting to disciple children and equip the saints. Like it or not, we live in a pluralistic society. Many of the new Democratic Congressmen and Senators are pro guns, pro God, anti-gay marriage and anti abortion, but they're also anti-supply-side-economics or anti war.
This is a fallen world, and human, temporal law is about making it as fair and survivable as possible, not about making it right or godly or perfect- only the blood of Christ can do that. Too many "Christian Conservatives" today are confused about Law and Gospel. They think it's our job to prepare America for Christ's second comming, that we're somehow supposed to make this world obedient for God. That's not our job. Our job is to spread the word that we don't HAVE to work, we just have to accept His gracious gift because the work is done.

I'm sure plenty of Christian NAZIs thought that Deitrich Bonhoffer should go to Hell for lying to and dissenting against the God-instituted government in Germany. Thank God they would have been wrong, just as people who don't think that Christians can be Democrats may be well-meaning, but wrong. Or as John McLaughlin might say, "WRONG!"

Whew. Sorry to be so dang long-winded. I think, therefore I can't shut up.

Thanks for the forum and the fellowship.

Fairly balanced, sometimes, sorta

Fairly balanced, sometimes, sorta
Charter Oak-Ute NEWSpaper - Schleswig Leader, Thursday, October 26, 2006 -Page 3

A reader from Ute pointed out to me that a couple of weeks ago, when writing about how many things are observed in October, I omitted two important ones; Domestic Violence Month and Respect for Life Month. I’d apologize for the omission, except that as the reader noted in their letter to me, neither of these things are “much good for joke fodder.”

There’s never any reason to harm your spouse, children or any other family members or cohabitants. Wrong is wrong and domestic violence is wrong.

Respect for life is always a good thing. The problem is semantics and how insanely passionate some people get about life. One person may think that respecting life should include opposing war and the death penalty. Someone else may be vehemently opposed to abortion and euthanasia, but can’t for the life of them, can’t see how I can that first person can be possibly defend their positions. A third person may include all life, not just humans, so they’re opposed to butchering any animals or stepping on bugs or even cruelty to plant life. Pretty soon all three of these people are so angry with each other that they just about want to kill each other.

So there you have it, these are not things that are easy to joke about.

Well, wait..let’s at least try: Mutt: “Hey Jeff, how many times a week do you hit your wife?” Jeff: “Why you $X%&! Who told you I hit my wife? I’ll KILL ‘em! Ya hear me?! Tell me or I’ll kill you too!”

Okay, you’re right. Neither of those things are all that funny.

The point was that here we think that it’s fire-safety month or some people get bent out of shape because they hear that it’s Hispanic Heritage month and really it’s everybody and their brother’s cause-du-jour month. Or actually “du mois” or maybe “de la semaine,” but I don’t know because I don’t speak French.

Call it satire, call it trying to come up with an idea every week and looking to the calendar for inspiration.

And by the way, it’s that way every month. Mark your calendars now for “Waiting For the Barbarians Day” November 4, “Marooned Without a Compass Day” November 6, and the ever popular, “Start Your Own Country Day” November 22.

But thank you, you know who you are, for your letter. It’s always good to know that someone, somewhere is actually reading. Unless you want to send hate mail, then you can keep it to yourself, I’m very sensitive.

No, seriously- whether you agree with me, or disagree with me you should always write a letter to the editor. If you disagree with me, they your opinion will be heard, if you appreciate anything I write, then the publishers will have concrete evidence that might persuade them to keep me around.

I’d just as well take this opportunity to remind you that The views expressed here are not necessarily those of this newspaper, the publishers, Enterprise Publishing, the other staff members, or any of the subscribers.

I say that not only so you don’t assume that any of them condone any of what I write here, let alone share any of my opinions, but uh, well, uh...nope, that’s pretty much why I told you that.
My mother worries that maybe I should apologize to gubernatorial candidate Jim Nussle for the cartoon that I drew of him and Congressman Steve King weeks ago comparing them to NAZIs for proposing that America declare one official language. I’m sure he’s a nice enough guy, from everything I’ve read and seen, he’s more reasonable than Steve King, I have nothing personal against Nussle, I certainly hope his feelings weren’t hurt- but I still think that it’s an unnecessary, discriminatory, nationalistic, jingoistic policy and those are the kind of policies that NAZIs came up with in Germany, also he looked funny. That’s the point of a political cartoon, to make a point and be funny.

Besides, Nuissle is the Congressman for the First District, over by Des Moines, so I hardly imagine that he saw that cartoon. Combined, the Charter Oak-Ute NEWSpaper and the Schleswig Leader have a readership just over 2,000 and we’re in the Fifth District. There’s probably just as slim a chance that Steve King has seen my columns or cartoons either, even though he is our Fifth District Congressman, but you know what? He’s put his foot in his mouth enough and basically made a nest that he has to sit in as a wing-nut, so I don’t feel too sorry for him.

My wife considered the body of work of cartoons since this summer and suggested to me that I may be a little biased. “Where are the cartoons criticizing the Democrats?” she asked.
Who’s in power? Hard to make fun of people for doing stupid things when they aren’t in a position to do anything...

Ha ha, okay, okay, you’re right, that was a pretty good line, though, right? No? You were saying, “yeah, and I bet you have some great ocean front property to sell us in Arizona too?” You got me, I’m biased. In fact, I’m worry that if the Democrats gain control of the House and Senate next month it will be like baseball in October without the Yankees- there won’t be anyone to be mad at.

Be that as it may, I promise to TRY to be an equal-opportunity offender, if the opportunity should ever arise. Let’s just wait and burn that bridge when we come to it, shall we.
Now, I’d like to tell you why I think that you should vote for Democrat Joyce Shulte to represent the Fifth District in Congress...

Shoot! Dang, drat! Look at this? People are going to keep saying that Democrats only criticize the opposition without- (sorry ran out of room).

What would Jesus Talk About

This column was started with a mission, to talk about “sex, politics, and religion- not necessarily in that order…” and I might add, the kitchen sink too. The point being, this is somewhere were we’ll talk about more than work or the weather, not that those things aren’t vitally important.

Actually I’m not sure I ever have written about sex. Of course that’s why the phrase “sex, politics, and religion” was invented, to tell you what not to talk about in polite company. You can see why. Talk about sex and you might be embarrassed or else people will think you’re some kind of pervert. It’s an intensely personal and intimate issue, so it should just as well be private.

Religion is also an intensely personal and hopefully intimate thing too. I think it should be personal and intimate anyway, maybe you don’t believe that way. Because religious beliefs are held so intensely and deeply, it can be dangerous to talk about it without offending people. No one really wants to compromise on what they interpret to be sacred or even what they consider to be primary fundamental doctrine. “I’m always right and you’re always wrong,” is the perspective we assume when we become absolutist about our religious beliefs.

Don’t get me wrong, I certainly don’t mean to promote “relativism.” Certainly there are absolutes, there is truth, and if Jesus said that He is the way the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but by Him, a whole lot of other people must be wrong. What they think is truth, must not be.

But the problem there is, I’m not God. I hope you’ll agree that you aren’t either. While they may imagine that they’re God’s personally appointed spokesmen on Earth all those televangelists, denominational leaders, and “faith-based” politicians aren’t God either. None of us has a monopoly on the God-breathed, inerrant truth. No one but Him.

Too often we decide not to talk about religion, not because we don’t want to offend someone else, not because we’re afraid they’ll judge, reject, or persecute us, but just because we know it’s likely to make things tense, maybe even lead to argument.

You know it’s true. One of the biggest complaints I hear from atheists is that all the wars have always been caused by religion. I tell them, no people cause wars. Jesus didn’t cause the crusades or the holocaust. Saint Mary and Martin Luther didn’t start the 100 year’s war. You can’t even really blame Muhammad for terrorist attacks or jihads. People go to war, people full of hate, fear, jealousy, greed, and anger. Religion is only their excuse, a convenient pretense.

Then there’s politics. It’s about control. You think my candidate is a liar and a philanderer, so you want to wrest control away from him. I think that your candidate is ill-equipped, ill-advised, has ill-conceived notions and at best made grave mistakes and at worse abuses his power- guess what, I won’t want him in control anymore than you wanted the other guy.

It gets even uglier if our politicians wrap themselves in the banner of faith. How may abused spouses stay in a bad marriage because they love their abuser. Do we sometimes defend politicians like someone enabling an addict because we think that they share our beliefs, and by God, we know our beliefs are absolutely right- so somehow no matter wrong they do, at least they’re right about a few things.

Here is a true story that involves all three- sex politics and religion:

Once there were two people. One was a white, middle-aged man. He taught Religion at a Christian school. The other was an Hispanic teenaged girl who attended that Christian School.

The man and his wife could not have children. They were staunchly pro-life. They boycotted companies that supported candidates or charities that condoned abortion. They marched for the right to life, admirable civic participation. But rather than a day or even a unit of one or two of his Religion classes, anti-abortion indoctrination dominated most of the time in most of his classes.

The girl lived with a single mom. She was interested in history and politics. She especially enjoyed learning about the civil rights movement and women’s rights. The girl grew more and more depressed as she attended the Religion teacher’s class. She became silent and sullen, she doubted her faith and God’s love for her. At one point later in college, she even thought about suicide.

The girl had been the victim of incest as a child. But of course she kept it a secret. There are some things you just don’t talk about.
__________________________________________________________________________________
A note just for blog visitors: I'm no more "pro-abortion" than I am actively "pro-life" I just want Christians to see that the "Religious Right" aren't as compassionate or as conservative as they claim to be. It's okay to vote for Democrats, it's not immoral and your eternal salvation is not put in danger. Likewise I want Democrats and Republicans both to be GENUINE and open about their own personal faith experiences and convictions, but not coercively impose their faith traditions on anyone.

The last few posts on this blog (bellow this column) have links to organizations that are BOTH Christian and progressive or liberal. If you're struggling with your faith because of the current political climate, you're not alone.

Jesus was a dirty, barefoot hippy, radical who was executed by an unjust political establishment because the entrenched institutional religious power brokers didn't want to hear about turning the other cheek, going the extra mile, loving your neighbor, and selling all you have and giving it to the poor!

Of course, He forgave them, for they knew not what they were doing.

And by the way, He loves you, no matter who you are.

"To disagree, one doesn't have to be disagreeable." ~Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater

Posted by Hello

Advancing historic principles and ideals

I love to use this column to talk about those things that you’re not supposed to talk about, sex, politics, and religion. Well, two out of the three anyway.

Some people think that politics and religion don’t mix. How can they not? Religion, by definition is what is most important to you, what determines your values and helps you make decisions. Politics, at least in America is who leads and how we influence our society.

Let’s face it, they’re gonna mix. The key is which influences which. Ideally, your faith influences your politics, but you have to be careful not to make your politics into your religion, making your party affiliation too important a part of your sense of identity is a form of idolatry.

The Bible is God’s Word, therefore it is inerrant, infallible and dependable. Neither major political party’s platform is God-breathed, they’re put together by human beings and are therefore imperfect.

That last paragraph is very “theologically conservative,” or “orthodox” in church-jargon.

Plenty of people can’t understand how I can call myself a Christian and remain a registered Democrat. That blows my mind. I mean, I can understand why some Christians would choose to be Republican, why can’t they accept that some Christians may disagree with them on a myriad of issues and that God’s okay with that?

What tactful language should we use to talk about our distinctions? Republicans and Democrats? NeoCons or “Righties” and Progressives? Conservatives and Liberals? None of those labels really work because none of them is clear enough, black and white enough.

Case in point, I strongly believe that massive deficits are grossly irresponsible. That’s a fiscally conservative point of view.

Meanwhile I also think it’s irresponsible to not have any regulations whatsoever on automatic weapons. I happen to think that’s socially conservative- but right-wing Republicans would accuse me of being a liberal for wanting to protect my family from gun violence.

Now, I get that many people identify themselves with the Republican party because it appeals to their religious convictions, their “family values.”

The values of “the right” include personal responsibility, personal morality, living a pious and righteous lifestyle. Traditional families, opportunity, justice, self-reliance, self-sufficiency, free-market competition, defending our way of life, not forfeiting our sovereignty to outside forces, and support for Israel based on what some consider false interpretation of Bible prophecy.

I totally admire and respect most of those values, heck, I share some of them. But please, my dear Republican friends and family members, please allow me to suggest that Democrats actually have values too, and some of them are acceptable:

The values of “the left” include social-responsibility, social-morality, social-justice, fairness, progress, moral leadership in the world, self-government, and community.

The right has literally turned liberal, compromise and tolerance into dirty words. I appreciate that no one should have to compromise their principles, but democracy is about balancing diverse interests, and sometimes pragmatism, practicality and reality require compromise.

I appreciate that we shouldn’t tolerate sin, terrorism, or perversion. But God wants us to tolerate people who are different from us, and people who we disagree with. Jesus ate with the prostitutes, lepers and tax collectors. Jews of His day didn’t even associate with Romans or Samaritans.

I hear you asking, “what about homosexual marriage, what about abortion?” You know what, I’m a Democrat, but I’m not an advocate of gay marriage, but I don’t think we should discriminate against gays or demonize them or allow violence against them.

I’m a Democrat, but I consider myself pro-life. I’m much more comfortable than many liberals with bans on partial birth abortion and the Lacy Peterson law. Safe, legal, but rare.

But I know Democrats who say that they’re pro-choice, not because of feminism or privacy, but because of poverty. They say that they support Roe v. Wade because they hope to reduce unintended pregnancies. That may be misguided, if like me, you consider the baby a life, but as misguided as it is, I can respect it. When you’re a public school teacher you see hundreds of kids who are neglected and abused, their so-called families are plagued with divorce, adultery, drug and alcohol abuse. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe than any child is an accident, God loves each and every one, but Republicans would have to agree that not everyone should be a parent.

I may disagree with my pro-choice friends, but I can try to understand that their opinions are just as based on compassion as mine are. Years ago the GOP tried to distance themselves from the religious right by referring to themselves as a “big tent” with room for everybody, but my experience has been that the Democrats are the real party is a party of inclusion. They respect my individual conscience on difficult issues like abortion.

Former Republican Senator Bob Dole wanted to put inclusion into the 1996 GOP party platform:

“While the party remains steadfast in its commitment to advancing its historic principles and ideals, we also recognize that members of our party have deeply held and sometimes differing views on issues of personal conscience like abortion and capital punishment. We view this diversity of views as a source of strength, not as a sign of weakness, and we welcome into our ranks all Americans who may hold differing positions on these and other issues. Recognizing that tolerance is a virtue, we are committed to resolving our differences in a spirit of civility, hope and mutual respect.”

Unfortunately the Grand Old Party declined Dole’s proposal, it was adopted in 2000 as part of the Democratic Party Platform.

So, how can I be a Democrat and call myself a Christian? Because the historic principles and ideals the Democrats advance are the same as these in Psalm 146, “He upholds the cause of the oppressed and gives food to the hungry. The LORD sets prisoners free, the LORD gives sight to the blind, the LORD lifts up those who are bowed down, the LORD loves the righteous. The LORD watches over the alien and sustains the fatherless and the widow, but he frustrates the ways of the wicked.”

No, I will never say that you can’t be a Christian and be a Republican, but I wish that people will stop writing me off as stupid and illegitimate or less of a Christian because I’m a Democrat. We both love our country and what what’s best for it, we just have different notions of what that means. Last time I asked Him, Jesus was still an independent.

About the author: Ted Mallory teaches journalism and art at a public high school in rural Iowa and serves as a youth counselor at his St. John Lutheran Church in Charter Oak, Iowa. Ted lives in Charter Oak with his wife Bethany, and their two daughters. Bethany & Ted taught for seven years at Los Angeles Lutheran Jr/Senior High School.

A little Sex, Politics, and Religion

I think I’ve shared with you before that I always hoped that this would be a place where we could talk about many different things, including the things people often avoid talking about. I even thought about naming the column “Sex, Politics, and Religion.” I certainly tend to write an awful lot about at least two of those three.

Almost every week I feel guilty about writing too long. This gets compounded when the paper comes out by Bethany’s sighs. Sometimes I get a little too heavy politically or preachy and I honestly do try to balance stuff out with some humor the best that I can. I even try to make every third column a light and fluffy humor column.

Some of you have shared with me that you actually enjoy how diverse the subject matter is from week to week. One person even told me that they liked how I tend to wander from topic to topic within each individual column. I knew my Attention Deficit Disorder would pay off someday!

Charles M. Schulz, the creator of the Peanuts comic strip once said “…if you do not say anything in a cartoon, you might as well not draw it at all. Humor which does not say anything is worthless humor. So I content that a cartoonist must be given a chance to do his own preaching.”

I realize that a picture is worth a thousand words and believe me, I know I'm no Charles Schulz, but I like to think that I apply his philosophy to this column. Interestingly enough, I noticed that long time political cartoonist Pat Oliphant has a syndicated column too now. No doubt Dave Barry will be drawing his own illustrations soon.

I can't resist the chance to talk about sex, politics, and religion all in one paragraph. Here goes-CNN.com recently ran a headline that read "The House of Bishops voted Tuesday evening to confirm the Rev. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire, making him the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church's history."

Now that I've done it, I really shouldn't touch that one with a twenty-foot pole. Okay, I'll say this much, I understand that their own canonical law doesn't allow divorced priests to become Bishops. Robinson divorced his wife and now lives with a man, to whom he's not married. Therefore, although it's not my place to say since I'm a Lutheran, but whether or not he's gay is irrelevant, even if the Bible didn't call homosexuality a sin, the Episcopal diocese of New Hampshire still violated church rules.

Now, let's try giving sex, politics, and religion each their own paragraphs.

Politics: I'd have written Randy Steffen's name, but I showed up five minutes after the polls closed. I guess I drove too slow coming back from parent/teacher conferences in Dunlap.

I think I'm leaning toward Dean mostly because it looks to me like Gebhardt and Kerry are opposing him, more than they are Bush. It would take two or three columns to explain why I'd choose any of them over Bush, but I'll spare you today.

Religion: We took in the movie 'Luther' at the Donna Reed last week. It was much better than I expected. Of course, being a History major, you could expect me to enjoy a period piece like that. Even with the peasant's revolt included there wasn't nearly as much gore as 'Braveheart' or 'Gladiator.' There also wasn't any nudity, and barely any explicit language so it won't be a major box office hit.

I'm not only no Schulz, I'm no Luther either, but it was kinda neat to learn that he posted his 95 theses when he was only 33, since I'm only 33. Of course, he had a doctorate by the time he was 29 and I'm a long way from my Master's.

They sort of made it look as if Luther was a political cartoonist on top of being a theologian and musician. If I'm not mistaken Lucas Cranach the Elder and Albrect Durer handled most of Germany's propaganda art during the reformation.

Sex: no comment.

Humor: Well, Bethany tells me that I should update you about Halloween. The Spiderman costume came on time and Grace had a ball. Boy, that was funny. I missed trick or treating again. I was not sitting in a pumpkin patch waiting for the Great Pumpkin, I was freezing my tail off watching Boyer Valley get beat up in Lake View. Or was it Wall Lake?

The cheerleaders didn't bug me about wearing costumes. That's because the boss (our principal, Becky Panzi, a former cheerleading coach herself) read one of my columns where I anticipated that problem, came into Yearbook class and read them the riot act. God bless her.

Hey, I just got an idea! Let's see how few words I can use in a sentence and still mention sex, politics, and religion…"God bless Senator Clinton." Okay, okay, I know that how many Republicans read this, but I refuse to damn anyone, even if I don't like them. For the Republican's sake I'll add race and humor (but not racist humor, at least I don't think it is): "God bless President Carol Mosely Braun." See, her candidacy is kind of a joke because she's not even one of the front runners, so that's the humor. Okay, it wasn't all that funny. Okay, that also went from just four words to six. I guess we'll have to keep trying

I really wasn't sure what to write about this week. Did it show? Well, as the German philosopher Goethe once said, “One never goes so far as when one doesn’t know where one is going.”

As I was saying

As I was saying... (say, that would’ve been a good title for the column. “Ted’s Column” is so plain. I thought about “Mallory’s Mind,” but I decided that was to pretentious.)

As I was saying... sex, politics, and religion are difficult to talk about without offending people, but I think they’re the most important things to write about. Last month, one of my students wrote an editorial for our school newspaper. His opinion was that student’s should think twice before becoming too sexually active as teens. He cited an article in Newsweek that noted that sexually transmitted diseases are a huge risk, even if you don’t “score,” but are only getting to “third base.” The student author, without making any religious or moral judgment, shared his opinion that sex should NOT be considered just another leisure activity.

You would not BELIEVE how many students were outraged that we’d print such a thing. One even threatened to drag me before the school board unless I told her the name of the student who wrote it.

She said to me “Well, how would you feel about it if someone wrote something against God or something?”

I was thinking to myself, “so sex is YOUR god?” What I said was something more along the lines of...

“There are more than 6.5 Billion people on the planet right now, I doubt that more than a third of those are Christian, so what? So no one should publish anything if SOMEONE somewhere might be offended by it?”

What followed was an invigorating discussion about the first amendment. That’s an opportunity I hadn’t had since I taught U.S. History, so I relished it.

My point is, I hope I haven’t offended too many of you with my column, and I hope I don’t in the weeks to come. Chances are, I already have and I probably will. Please write in and tell us. Challenge my thinking, express yourself. This is YOUR community newspaper, you ought to participate in it. I know Mike Lyon, our publisher will enjoy it if you do. We love to print letters to the editor.

As I was saying... or was just about to say last week. Ellie wasn’t sure what to make of the holidays. It seemed like the celebrating would never end. But why don’t I let her tell it:

Holiday Hullabaloo By Ellen Mallory

First of all, what’s the deal with my big people dressing me up in a bee suit so that I can hardly move and hauling me around from neighbor to neighbor so my big sister, Gracie could collect candy? The whole thing bored me, I fell asleep after the second neighbor.

Thanxgetting was fun. I grew two more teeth and learned how to crawl down stairs. All the big people did was eat and sleep and watch other people play games on TV. I don’t know what they were all eating. I ate cat food. Mommy and Aunt Brenda didn’t want me to eat cat food. I don’t know what the big deal was. I saw kitty eat lots of big people food.

Then my Greatest-Pappa Adolph’s turned something called “eighty.” He didn’t look like he turned anything. I got to dance with my because-ins in the doorway of a rest n’ rant.

Then we all stood in line for a long time to see this scary old man called Sanity Claws. He already knew my name even though I’d never had met him afore. And he was all dressed in red and wanted to put me on his lap. Excuse me? I don’t think so. Daddy laughed and said I must be Claus-traphobic. I still don’t get it.

Pretty soon my big people said it was my turn to turn something. They said I turned something called “won.” I must have won because all of my because-ins brought me prizes. I liked the ribbons and bows, but I wasn’t very interested in unwrapping them.

So then my big people put this big huge colorful thing in front of me. “Now what?” I thought. Eventually I figured out you could eat it AND paint with it too. That was great. My big people took lots of pictures of me eating my big colorful thing. That was after all my because-ins sang at me. Plus I got a big ball that floats up to the ceiling. It stayed by the ceiling for a long time.

After my Gracie and my because-ins and me played with a baby sitter. I didn’t see her sit on any babies, she just played with us. I guess my Grammy and Pappa have a really old wedding or something because they had a partly to celebrate their four teeth Annie first story.

Daddy said it was neat because somebody said, “Well, I guess we’ve run around together and our folks ran around together and their folks ran around together for near a hundred years.” Daddy said that’s one of the things that’s so neat about this town.

Anyway everybody there must have turned won because Grammy gave them all a prize. The flu, only first she got it first. I got it too and that wasn’t any fun. Mommy and Daddy thought I was getting more teeth onna count of how my bottom turned red. I got to drink this stuff called Petey-light instead of formula. It was purple.

Uncle Mark says its funny how our famlee always gets flu on Christmas time.

Before that though my because-in Nolan turned something too. Something called five. He got cool prizes like toy tractors. I like to play with his green tractors. I make them say Shhhhpppzzzzzzzfg. Our Greatest Grandma Cuddles thinks everybody at a party should get prizes. Daddy thought only Nolan should have gots prizes at Nolans party. Daddy says its no use cause you can’t tell an old German anyting.

Then Mommy and Daddy stopped going away in the morning. I liked that. One day we all went to Grammy and Pappa’s farm and all our because-ins were there too. Everybody got lots and lots of prizes and ate lots and lots too.

Then HE came. That Sanity Claws again. He came to my Grammy and Pappa’s farm! How did he know where they live? He’s scary.

He gave people prizes and they laughed and Pappa wanted me to go see Sanity Claws again. I struggled as much as I could to get away. I arched my back to try to break free. Now Pappa likes to call me “Archie” since I arched my back.

One of the best things about Christmas is that they grow a whole tree right in your house. Overnight. You wake up one morning and there it is. I like to pick the shiny fruit off of our inside tree. But you can’t eat it. In fact Mommy and Daddy take it away from you every time and put it back on the tree only higher so you can’t reach it.

I think I heard Daddy singing about it, “The first Noel-en, No!.”

Only I fixed them. One day when daddy was reading and Gracie was playing with one of her prizes, I grabbed onto a branch and pulled the inside tree down so I could reach the shiny fruit on top. Most of them broke. Daddy made me sit in a big chair while he picked up all the broken shiny fruit. He said something about a “time-out.”

Anyway, I know I didn’t hurt it too bad, because When I woke up the next morning, it had grown lots and lots of prizes under it! But a day later it was gone.

My Grandma Mallory says when Uncle Bart was my age he beat their inside-tree up with a broom because he was so scared of it. I heard Gracie say that the prizes under the tree came from Sanity Claws, so I think Uncle Bart was right to be so ascared. Anyway, we haven’t had a tree inside our house since the day after Christmas.

The End.

Sex, Politics, and Religion

A few people have asked me, “how do you decide what to write about?” Last week it was by turning on the news in the morning and hearing the startling claim that humans had been cloned.

Most weeks I would have to answer with the old English teacher’s question; “why do writers write?” Ideas just come and I need to get them out. I either write about it, or bore my students I suppose.

A compliment was passed on to me about the column recently. Someone had mentioned that they thought it was good to have someone writing about religion and politics “and things like that” in our newspaper- Thus this week’s headline.

They’re the three things we aren’t supposed to talk about in polite company, but if you don’t what else is there to talk about? In high school, things like cars, stereos, bands, and sports facts didn’t stick in my mind long enough or well enough to be able to carry on a conversation very well with most of my peers. I watched CNN like other guys watched ESPN.

Here, I’m at even more of a conversational disadvantage. I don’t know much about agriculture and even after living here two years (and being married-into the community for 12) I still can’t remember everybody’s names, faces, families, jobs, spouses, kids illnesses and histories. How do you keep track of everybody?

So, should we just talk about the weather? Been nice. Got colder lately. Yep, Mm Hmm.

Mind you, one has to be CAREFUL how one discusses sex, politics, and religion.

I know a woman who lives in a mostly Catholic town, she drew up Methodist but she’s taking classes to become a Lutheran Pastor (ELCA, not LCMS.) Did I mention that she’s served as a Labor Union representative for contract negotiations? She is also the mother of triplets!

There. I talked about all three, sex, politics, AND religion, all in one paragraph. You may not like unions, you may not think women should be pastors, but the fact that I’m aquatinted with she and her husband shouldn’t offend you. Does it? Will you forgive me and continue to read this column? I sure hope so.

Thank you for reading. And thank you to those of you who have either said something to me in person or who’s comments or complements have gotten around to me second or third hand.

I’ve always wanted a chance to do this, so it means a lot to me if you enjoy it. I hope I’ve given you some chuckles, made you think about something in a new way, or maybe even tugged your heart string once in a while.

I also want to say thank you to all you expatriates. We have many, many readers outside of Ute and Charter Oak. Thank you Herb Neddermeyer for sending us your thank you a few weeks ago. Herb has been renewing his subscription for decades. How’s the weather in Fairfield, California Herb?

Herb, I was thinking about you while I watched the Rose Parade from Pasadena last week. That sapphire and cobalt blue sky must be due to all the rain you’ve been having. Then it started snowing during the bowl games and I remembered how beautiful our rolling hills are around here, like a painting most days. You really don’t know what you’re missing if you haven’t been back “home” lately, Herb.

There, now I’ve talked about the weather AND sports. All I needed was some practice. Hello to ALL the folks who no longer live in the area, but still read the NEWSpaper.

We have cousins, originally from Ricketts that live near Charter Oak, California. Then there are all you folks who moved away when you retired or when you went to college. Hello to you, and thanks for reading. On Tuesdays, when they stuff and fold and label these papers, it’s fun to think about the distant places they’re mailed to.

Hello to all you college kids. I’ve always felt that you’re not just graduates of COU, you’re alumni of the towns too. I hope you keep in touch and think of Charter Oak and Ute as places to come back to, not just places to get away from. When you dorove home for break this year, did you see the lights they put on the Ute sign on the east side of town? Cute huh? Hey, did you ever stop to think that you can’t even say “cute,” without saying “Ute?”

How can I forget to say hello to Aunt Marylin and Uncle Mike? She saves all her NEWSpapers and makes sure to pass them along so the whole family gets to read them.

You should know that I actually thought about naming this column “Sex, Politics, and Religion,” but I was afraid that might scare some people off. I was going to just call it “The Column,” but I thought that was too generic. By the way, thank you to the gentleman who wrote to “Ted Lyon.” Mike Lyon is the publisher, he’s much taller than I am.

One of my New Year’s resolutions was to try to make these columns shorter, they always end up being about one page typed. But many people make suggestions.

Jackie likes it when I write about my daily commute to Dunlap on L51. Of course, Boyer Valley has been on Christmas Break, same as COU, so I haven’t been able to drive it, let alone write about it.

My brother-in-law Mark was waiting to see my daughter Ellie show up in the column. But two things have just happened, I just got to the end of this page and she just woke up from her nap and has started dismantling the den.

You’ll just have to read about her Christmas misadventures next week.