Archive for April, 2009

The time’s approaching

Heading out of town soon and keeping busy over here.  Has it all been pleasant?  No chance, but things aren’t bad right now.  Had some interesting conversations with my clients and other hobbyists and been doing a lot of thinking about my role in the industry, like usual.  I could gripe and tell you stories, but it’s getting late and I’d rather not tonight.

I’m coming to believe some men were put on this planet for the sole purpose of pissing womankind off.  hehe  But then there are the good ones, my boys, who keep me in the game.  Nothing major is going on, just pondering why we all do what we do.

Another time…this week is about preparing to see my people (my family).  Just have lots swirling in my mind, tempting me in 40 different directions when I don’t feel like tackling even one topic right now.  No, tonight is about music, pizza, and planning.  Man drama can wait.

Leave a Comment

Back to Pleasant

Can’t stay gloomy 24/7 for days on end, and in fact I’ve been doing pretty well lately, all things considered.  Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (1)

War is never far…

…from my mind.  How can it be when our nation is waging two of them simultaneously with who-knows-what in store for the future? Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (2)

New News of Old

I asked my mother last night for the details surrounding the violence related to my biological father and the other Saudi students and how come she never had the opportunity to tell him she was pregnant, and this is what she said had to say (censored for our privacy): Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (1)

Blurry-eyed and limp-tailed

As opposed to bright-eyed and bushy-tailed.  Today sucks balls.  Should NOT have drank that much wine last night and am suffering all day as a result.  UGH.  Such a painful, sick hangover, though thankfully I haven’t tossed my cookies (might’ve felt better had I done so).  Ugh…feeling ill all frickin’ day on top of it being crummy, cold, and windy out. Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment

More on the future of technology and humanity

Juan Enriquez: Decoding the future with genomics (Feb. 2003):

Hmm…don’t know if I agree with all this man says, but the parts on genome science is very interesting.

Obama gave the green light to stem cell research, as many probably already know.  The research doesn’t bother me, it’s what potentially happens next that’s worrisome, like the patenting of life as is already well underway.  And the marketing of technologies that may prove popular but dangerous.  As much as we want to know about ourselves and other species, there does come a point where perhaps we’re better off not knowing.  ‘Course where and what that is is anybody’s guess – we’ll probably pass it by a longshot before we’re aware of any dire consequences.

Gregory Stock: To upgrade is human (2003):

This man scares the crap out of me.  Creating customizable babies is NOT the best use of science.  Pursuing anti-aging therapy, regardless of the consequences, doesn’t sound like a good idea either.  He’s right though, we can’t really stop it – these technologies will just move elsewhere, out of view, and persist with the help of wealthy supporters.  Hrmm…

Craig Venter: On the verge of creating synthetic life (2008):

Recapturing CO2 to feed fuel-producing microorganisms in an effort to replace the petro-chemical industry.  Amazing.  Makes you wonder how we take technology for granted so often, right?  Hmm…Craig Venter argues in the end that this technology is needed to combat bioterrorism by creating more vaccinations.  I don’t like the sound of that, even with the population expected to jump to 9 billion in 40 years.  He then lightly touches on accusations of “playing God” by saying simply this is science at its best.

Jane Goodall: What separates us from the apes? (2002):

Inspiring, wise words.

Aubrey de Grey: Why we age and how we can avoid it (July 2005):

Not sure what to make of this guy.  Wow.  What’s best to tackle first, improving the current quality of life for people everywhere or increasing the human lifespan?  Well, as with any new technology, the rich will have access to it first.  Keep that in mind.

Comments (1)

Ramblings on Technology, Evolution, and Wild Cards

What’s to be said tonight that hasn’t already been said before?  Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment

Typical Friday Night

Just chilling after my friend took off.  We went out for dinner earlier to one of our favorite restaurants and I am stuffed and sleepy.  No rest for the wicked though.  Tried lying down to no avail; the sound of sirens wailing on a nearby street wafting in through the open windows disrupted the attempt to call it an early night.  So here I am again, like usual, blogging.

Wouldn’t rather be doing anything else since I’m pretty well married to the computer.  hehe

Off to find something entertaining and/or useful to read.

Leave a Comment

Wednesday Blatherings

Back to chilling after my friend just took off.  Loaded him up with leftovers so I can finally dine on something other than pasta tomorrow.  Only so much of any one dish a person can stand and today marks the 4th day.  Bleh. Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (1)

The past never quits

While out shopping for an alarm clock this afternoon I ran into the bestfriend of my most recent ex-lover (or whatever the heck we should call him), neither of whom I’ve laid eyes on since 2007.  We happened to walk past one another where the aisles intersect, and it took a few seconds for his face to register in my memory, prompting me to turn back and say “hello.”  Was I curious how his friend was doing?  No, not really.  All things said and done, I couldn’t give a damn what becomes of him.  That man drilled home the lesson on why not to date my clients, particularly one like himself. Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment

The Political Meaning of Easter

Copied from SleptOn.com / Written by: Pastor Jim Rigby

The Political Meaning of Easter

Even in progressive churches that challenge the political and theological orthodoxy, Easter is a day many people want to find comfort in the traditions of Christianity — a special day for putting on one’s sharpest-looking outfit for church and the family gathering. But especially on Easter I feel called to preach in a way that reminds us that if we take the text and our tradition seriously, we will be uncomfortable in our imperial society.

So, I can’t give a traditional Easter sermon, one that makes us comfortable about Christianity, about our nation, about ourselves. On a day when people typically want to take a break from politics, I feel compelled to talk politics.

A sermon for Easter Sunday

When I was young and heard about the Nazi holocaust, I didn’t ask the question many of my classmates asked. I didn’t ask “how could Germans do such a thing?” I asked, “how could Christians do such a thing? How did the holocaust happen in the very cradle of the Reformation?” The Lutheran faith was born in those same places that eventually embraced fascism. How is it possible, in our own country, that Christians would go to church every week and not realize there was something deeply evil about slavery? What kind of theology allowed that to happen?

Those Christians said the same creeds we say. They sang many of the same hymns. And yet, their theology did not trigger an alarm when an atrocity was happening. And so I asked myself a question: “Do I have that same theology? Have I been propagandized in a way that I will turn against my brother and sister if they happen to be born in a different country or different religion?”

When I first began in ministry, I was popular. I remember someone once said, “Jim, I’ve never heard anyone say anything bad about you.” At the time, that seemed like a compliment, but is it really? If we really love other people, we need to love them enough to risk offending them. Paul tells us to speak the truth in love. We have to do that for each other. You have to do that for me, and I have to do it for you, because we cannot see ourselves from the outside. We cannot always step outside of ourselves and realize when we’re doing crazy or cruel things.

Most people, inside the church and out, were taught a view of the resurrection that had no ethical implications at all. You were probably taught a theology that’s not immoral, but it’s amoral. In that view, the biblical is about magic tricks. A man is born of a virgin, and then, gets up from his grave. If you believe the story, you’re saved, if you don’t you’re damned. And I want to say, that’s bad theology. When we study the life of Jesus, there are clear ethical implications from the day Jesus says he has come to announce good news for the poor, to the day he tells Peter to love Him by caring for other human beings. The story of Jesus has clear ethical and political implications. And Easter is no exception.

I think Paul is giving us three warning labels for doing theology: The first warning is never let religion talk you into surrendering responsibility for your life. The second warning is never to let theology reduce down to hypothetical truth claims. And finally, Paul warns us never to reduce your worldview down to your own group.

Our text today is a passage in Colossians where Paul tells us, “Because you have been resurrected with Christ, set your heart on higher things.” (Col 3:1) Paul says something very interesting here. He says: “Because you have been resurrected with Christ.” He doesn’t say, “Because Jesus was resurrected.” He’s talking about your life. What kind of a theology tells you to surrender responsibility to Jesus? Jesus didn’t say that. What happens when we do that is that someone else always steps in on Jesus’ behalf.

If you’re Catholic, it may be the church hierarchy; a priest, bishop, or pope may step in to tell you what Jesus wants you to do. So, you’re not surrendering responsibility to Jesus so much as to a cleric. In a Protestant church, we’re cleverer than that. We say, “It’s all about the Bible. Just believe in the Bible.” But then we step in to tell you the right way to interpret the Bible. That’s how we disguise what we are doing. We can pretend that it’s the Bible we care about, but if you’re watching, our interpretation of the book always puts us in power and control over other people. We aren’t trying to control others — it’s just one of those darn things that just keeps happening.

In Colossians, Paul is explaining the Resurrection in a different way than the gospels do. The gospels tell you a story at a level that a child can understand. Even when you’re tired, even when you are afraid, the story gives you a compass. What Paul does is unpack the story and show you how to apply it in particular situations. But you can’t take either version of the story literally.

There are types of theology that completely dis-empower the follower. I would suggest that is what happened in Germany when they told people that obedience was a virtue, no matter what. So the first thing we should know about theology is that it would lead us to our own core. Christ is a symbol of your own soul in its fullness. Christ is your own best self that you can’t always find. Yes, Jesus was a person, but a person who completely died into love, and held nothing back. So in following Christ, we should always discover ourselves as well.

The second warning is not to let theology become a set of theoretical assertions about reality. Notice that Paul now moves to a plea for unity in the early church. The symbols of religion should not point outside our experience to hypothetical beings but should waken us to the real people in our lives. So Christ is a symbol not only of your life, but of the life of your friends and your enemies. Paul tells us to bear with each other, to forgive each other as a way of making love real.

When religion becomes hypothetical, we are disoriented from ourselves and each other. The resurrection didn’t take place when a body got up. That would be a theoretical historical claim. The resurrection took place when the disciples could see Christ in each other. Believing that Jesus got up from the grave does not mean that one has experienced the risen Christ. That we find in the eyes of each other.

There is a hidden life in us all. A radiant being, that permeates every plant, animal, and person that you will ever meet. Christ is a symbol of that hidden life in us all. To be a Christian does not mean to join the Christian sect, it means to be irradiated by that one life. It means to live out of that life and for that life.

The third “warning label” is not to reduce your allegiance to any one group. Paul says in Colossians as in Galatians, “in Christ there is neither Greek nor Hebrew, neither Jew or Gentile, neither barbarian or Scythian, neither slave or citizen. There is only Christ, who is all in all.”

When we hear our leaders say that they will do whatever is in the best interest of America no matter what, or when we hear Christians say that people are saved through Christ alone, we should hear and recoil from the same rhetoric that leads to a holocaust. The words are not purified because they come through our lips. Whenever we put sectarian brackets around our ethics, then we have no ethics. When I am ethical only to those within my brackets, I am unethical to anyone outside them. When I only serve America, and you have the bad judgment to be born on the other side of that boundary, guess who pays for my arrogance?

Paul is talking about a universal humanity into which we become members. He is talking about the common body of humankind. If you look at the text, it seems clear to me that the salvation that’s being talked about is not just joining the Christian church. We are being called to the common body of humankind beyond race, gender, or religion.

What good does it do to take up the Christian label, and then serve the selfish needs of any one group? Two thousand years is enough to know that sectarian Christianity doesn’t lead to peace. But what if we loved universally the way Jesus did? What if we saw, neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female?

This is the ethical content of Easter. If I think that Christians are better than Jewish people, then the resurrection hasn’t fully happened for me yet. If I think the rich are better than the poor, the Resurrection hasn’t fully happened for me. If I think my group is superior to other groups just because I was born in it, the resurrection has not yet happened in my life.

When we awaken to our common life, something happens to our fear. Our greatest fear is no longer that someone will hurt us, but that we might harm another. Our only fear is of losing the universal love that Christ has given us. So I need not fear that someone will rob me of my life. If I am true to the virtues of patience, kindness, love — the things that Paul lists there — there is nothing on earth that can rob me of that basic, core energy that early Christians called “eternal life.”

And that is why, even though it’s Easter, I’m not going to say that the resurrection is when Jesus got up from the grave. Or that, if you believe in Jesus’ resurrection, then your body will get up too someday. That’s a religion for children. We all start out as children and that’s fine. But if our faith does not grow, then when we are afraid our immature religion will cause us to hurt other people, our immature religion will cause us to reject those who are different, our immature religion will be capable of taking advantage, enslaving, or even killing other people.

That kind of immature, cruel Christianity is a mockery of the One who died and rose again in a small band of Easter people. To be Easter people means to live out of a radical solidarity with our whole human family. To be an Easter people means to have a radical hope that can look at our dangers and unblinkingly affirm that love is stronger than any empire, stronger than any weapon. You know the Easter has happened when, for human betterment, you are willing to face death itself.

Jim Rigby is pastor of St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church in Austin, http://staopen.com/sermons/, and an activist for universal human rights. He can be reached at jrigby0000@aol.com.

Leave a Comment

Home again, home again, jiggity-jig

Just got in after intending to be back around midnight.  I was with a client, one I haven’t seen in at least 2 years.  Read the rest of this entry »

Leave a Comment

Eye Play

Simply because I can.  Last night came to a close abruptly around 5am when my eyelids defied my wishes, but since I was awoken fairly early today by the phone that hopefully will deprive me of just enough sleep to where my sleep schedule adjusts itself properly tonight.  Or maybe I’ll just take a melatonin tablet around 1am.

‘Tis my crazy sleep schedule.  But I don’t mind it so much, having been this way my whole life and accustomed to accommodating its quirkiness.  Hence self-employment!  LOL

So anyway, today I played with eye shadow, loosely following this helpful tutorial from Miss Chievous: Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (2)

Back to meandering…

Life’s too serious at the moment.  Need to liven it up a bit.  Tina Turner’s singing “Rolling On the River” on the radio and the moon is nearly full tonight.  For some folks today is Easter, for some it’s a celebration of the spring equinox.  party_hatFor me it’s just a holiday others take so I obligingly go along, though I do have a short appointment later in the day.  If ya’ll want to rest and celebrate that’s cool with me.  I’m always looking for new reasons to celebrate.  Read the rest of this entry »

Comments (1)

What’s the primary difference between Obama and Bush?

In trying to think outside of the box and imagine possibilities for why we ended up where we are as a nation, I sometimes speculate on the motives and rationale of powerful individuals and ideologues like Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush, and Obama.  In attempting to compare and contrast their actions and choices, so far as I’m able to understand them anyway, I do my best to make sense of what they’re trying to do here, what objective they aim to serve.  How far have they thought it all out, do you imagine?  Whose interests do they really serve, nevermind the public claims and rhetoric?  And is there actually competition at the top in terms of interests catered to or are they all essentially on the same team?

When I learned of Obama’s military cuts in light of its budget surpassing that under the Bush administration, it took me aback.

None of his military decisions sit right with me, not that this comes as a shock since I openly oppose the invasion of the Middle East, especially his speeches at AIPAC reaffirming his support for the Israeli invaders-in-Zionist-clothing.  Obama immediate change in stance on our illegal occupation of Iraq following his election troubled me, not that I figured he’d behave any differently once in office (plenty of rants on this leading up to the election in the archive), but his shift in focus toward Afghanistan and Pakistan strikes me as particularly sinister.  The increase in military budget confirms what many have suspected all along: Obama is a warhawk as well.

But why?  He’s not tied in with Haliburton interests as Cheney was or oil interests and a close relationship with the Saudi Royal Family as Bush and his father were.  What’s Obama’s angle on this one?

It seems to me that Bush and Co. were largely driven by their private financial interests and potential legacy, which all revolved around oil, private military contractors, and disaster-capitalist schemes in order to amass impressive profits for them and theirs.  That administration didn’t care if it was unpopular; it had it’s own objectives and didn’t bother to ask permission.  Didn’t it seem rather remarkable how little they gave a shit what we the public thought of them and their schemes?  Could not care less.  So long as they have secret service protection.

Obama and the Clintons will make themselves wealthy(ier), no doubt, but they play up to slightly different interests.  Where as the Bush administration let the banks go wild, it was under Clinton’s presidency when the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed.  Obama’s administration has closer ties to the major financial sector, notably Goldman Sachs, and is currently responsible for bailout dollars being handed over to AIG, to then be handed over to Goldman Sachs.

It’s like comparing between “Corrupt” and “Corrupter.”  Both Bush and Obama pledge support for Israel’s “defense” and both intend to keep wars blazing, even within the same regions despite Obama’s previous pandering to the public, ridiculing Bush for getting us involved with Iraq in the first place.  There’s obviously a lot more to the situation than most of us are privy to.

I don’t know.  Just trying to connect some dots in my head.  It’s all so sordid and tedious to make sense of.  Maybe tonight isn’t the best time for this sort of inquiry.

Time to look into other subjects.  It is now Easter Sunday after all.

Leave a Comment

Older Posts »