ask not what government can do for you?

The question of the day, which started at around 11:00 EST last night, is what should government do? What is it? What is its role in our country?

To some, government is like a parent. It’s supposed to be older and wiser with life experience and resources in its toolbox, guiding the “youngins” along the way. And much like parenting, government can take the strict disciplinarian approach, the hands-off laissez faire approach, or any combination of the two.

As an example, little Adam smacks little Evie in the head and as a parent your instinct may be any number of responses – watch to see if Evie smacks him back. Let them duke it out. Scold Adam with harsh words. Smack Adam in the head on behalf of Evie. Give them both loaded semi automatic weapons and tell them to behave.

Another example, Adam and Evie are hungry. It’s not quite dinner time. You fix them a light nutritious snack to hold them over. You tell them to wait for dinner because they will be really hungry by then and sometimes waiting is good for you. You microwave easy mac and load it up with bacon bits and random animal parts aka hot dogs. You yell at them to get a job and make their own dinner, mommy is busy reading “How to Get  a Man to Marry You in 10 Days or Less” (step one happens to mention easy mac and bacon).

These are only superficially veiled metaphors for how our government does / does not work.

In my mind, I think about any group of people and how they function. No matter how random a sampling you can achieve, place any group of people in a room and tell them to coexist, and you will inevitably run into government at its best or worst. Someone will rise up and take control, someone will abuse power, others will secretly plot to overthrow. It will happen. The “need to govern” presents itself nearly immediately and even the staunchest of advocates for anarchy will find traces of order in some fashion in any society where living things are present.

Enter Gov. Jindal.

“We oppose the national Democrats’ view that says the way to strengthen our country is to increase dependence on government. We believe the way to strengthen our country is to restrain spending in Washington and empower individuals and small businesses to grow our economy and create jobs.”

There was a day I might have actually understood this statement. But now, I am totally unsure what exatly “individuals and small businesses” would do. Sure, I’m concerned as the next guy (well if the next guy is not Jindal) about all the spending and where all that lovely money is coming from. But I also don’t see how the way we’ve been doing it all along will suddenly do a 180 and get us back to the glory days.

To be fair, there’s a part of me that really really digs laissez faire, though I also am realistic to know that doesn’t work a lot of the time. I just really want everyone to be “good” and think of others responsibly and with compassion. But we know that doesn’t happen that way and so we’re back to square one. And somewhere there is balance, always balance.

As JFK said, (and I wonder what more he could have done back then) history will be the final judge.

Now the trumpet summons us again – not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need; not as a call to battle, though embattled we are – but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, “rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation” – a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself… let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God’s work must truly be our own.

- John F Kennedy, inaugural address, 1/20/1961

the path ahead of us

My generation (and I use “my” loosely to encompass the ones slightly before and all those since) grew up with the freedom to question authority. No, not just question – outwardly challenge and rebel against if need be. It wasn’t something we worried about or belabored, we just did it, instinctively as if it was a human right, as if no ever wondered if it was, in fact, a human right.

It may have been our partly our fault to be this spoiled, or you could blame the gnerations before us who tried to convey the sacrifices made to get to this kind of freedom, not just on paper, but in word and deed. But whoever it was at fault, we sometimes still forget what it is like to get to CHOOSE to embrace and actively trust a person in a position of power, regardless of who put him there or who wants him there in the first place.

President Obama himself heralded this for us in his inaugural speech, reminding us of the “bloodless” transfer of power, this idea that we get to choose and we get to voice our choice openly, willingly, defiantly, and proudly. And we can stand proud or raise our fists in anger.

I remind myself of this as I listen critically and actively engaged in the address to the nation. I remember how many years of dissent I have felt, wondering who are these people and what did they do with Reason and Common Sense? I recall nights, similar to this one, with a voice nagging in my head raised in agitation at the half truths and bothersome excuses.

So it makes it all the sweeter to hear what I’m hearing, someone who gets it, someone who isn’t hiding or deceitful. Someone whose love for his country and his family shines through so brilliantly and undeniably. And a clear thought echoes in my head: I trust this man. For the first time in a very long time, for at least as far back as I can remember that I cared any way, I really like a politician.

Is he human? Absolutely. Will he make poor decisions? More than likely, depending on your definition of “poor.” Will he get the job done? No doubt in my mind.

I have so much more to say. So many questions and thoughts. More another time. For now, I am humming God Bless America and saying a prayer and falling asleep in peace. It’s about time.

oh no! not science!!

To some Christians (the wacky ones) science is like a curse word and you just cant use it without sending them into hysterics. Judgmental hysterics at that.

Somewhere along the way of oh let’s say the past two thousand years, followers of Jesus took it upon themselves to decide what knowledge was necessary and what was not, as well as how to establish an acceptable “canon” if you will of said knowledge.  There were meetings, rather large ones, called for the sole purpose of discriminating against certain information and inclusion of other bits. Not to be overtly sacreligious (I seem to be often enough) but a quick review of the history of the church is fraught with the exclusion of material and The Church which came to the fore (namely the Roman Catholic one – not the catholic little “c” one) ruled out what they felt was information contradicting what they proposed as truth and factual.

Glance over a bunch of bloody messes and you arrive at the conclusion that science was frequently front and center of any kind of debate or ritualistic tortures and beheadings. Of course i’m generalizing a bit to make a point. But roughly speaking, “Science” and “Church” are not the very best of friends.

But the tide changes as tides tend to do. And the intelligent design debate notwithstanding, science is a largely overlooked area the church MUST urgently and fully embrace. I’m not really sure what we as Christians are afraid of. Suppressing knowledge is never the way to go. And I’d be happy to hear your arguments against that statement.

I am excited about our President. Whatever everyone else says about him, and their concerns are not few nor always completely unfounded, he is a Thinker. He is incredibly intelligent and critical (in the good way) and well read. He is keen to appeal to the intellect in all of us and purposes to surround himself with those who not only have an opinion but often have a dissenting one. This shows great strength and confidence in himself AND in others, to be open to the debate and to truly hear all sides. I love this about him and deeply respect any and all leaders who have this approach. It’s essential to true lasting success of any kind.

So one of the goals of his administration is particularly interesting to me and while I have no idea how it will all play out, I hope to see some “big name” Christians at the forefront banners in hand (not hateful ones mind you) supporting the push to get answers and to analyze facts. It would be nice to see Christians rally around something positive for a change.

(thanks G. as always, for keeping me informed)