Dredging Up the Past
Last Toke: 34 days
Last Smoke: 27 days

Yesterday's radio subject during my ride home was "Do we as Christians participate too much in the media where tragedy -- like Hurricane Katrina -- becomes entertainment?"
I don't have a whole lot to say on this, other than, "Yes, of course we do!" I think that if most of us were really honest about it, we would recognize a morbid fascination with death, destruction and disaster -- as long as it isn't happening to us or someone we care about.

I have to confess that I found the whole destruction of the Towers on 9/11 fascinating. I wanted to see those towers come down. Big time. Now, of course, when I saw those pictures of people jumping to their deaths, it got a bit uncomfortable. I didn't want to think about how it would feel to have to make the choice between plunging 70 or more stories or being roasted alive.
I think that is what makes all the difference -- empathy. A concern for the suffering and struggles of others, as opposed to the enjoyment of sheer spectacle. When you realize that people are suffering and dying horribly, then maybe it's not so much fun to watch anymore.

Yet there is another side to this phenomenon -- that of a scary, evil glee in watching the death of another. Once upon a time, public execution of criminals was commonplace, even in this country. Hanging, stoning, burning at the stake, drowning, even crucifixions, were done with an audience -- women and children included. It's tempting to look at the accompanying fervor on the part of the public as a natural consequence of the serving of justice, but that's being naive.

When Christ was executed, multitudes came to mock, spit, revile, laugh and joke at his suffering. Scripture indicates that the majority of the mob that called for -- and rejoiced at -- His execution probably had no interest in the issues of the case. They were simply incited by the Pharisees and priests of Jerusalem to produce mayhem.

You see the same phenomenon in our society, from riots over the Rodney King verdict to idiots at WVU burning Morgantown over the football team's Homecoming victory. There is something in us that is all too willing to become savage and indulge in destrcution and violence with little provocation.

Of course, this is sin in us. What I often struggle to see clearly is just how bad it really is within me. Then I lose it over something so minor, and experience a murderous rage where I'd like nothing more than to end a life with my bare hands. It's scary, really. And I often wonder why it hasn't just been wiped out by the Holy Spirit.

I think there is a connection between the amount of time spent trying to pretend it doesn't exist within me (or to at least minimize it) and how bad it can get. I am becoming increasingly convinced that without a clear-eyed view of just how bad my sin is, the vigilence necessary to seek Christ's grace will be lacking, consequently affecting my ability to really care about other people.

On a different note, WORD-FM will be bringing one Jerry Bowyer in as the new afternoon talk show host, beginning Wed., Sept. 1. Mr. Bowyer is a staunch conservative politically and will most likely generate a bit of interesting discussion.

He's been around the local media scene for many years now, and is fairly well known as a free market conservative in the area. His biography states that he lives in Boston, PA (right outside of McKeesport) with his wife Susan and 7 children -- all of whom are home-schooled. Mr. Bowyer is an intelligent, energetic, assertive and committed individual, from all evidence. His show should be very interesting topically, doctrinally and intellectually.

I've crossed paths with Jerry Bowyer in a previous life. From 1989 through 1993, we attended the same RPCNA church. The RPCNA (Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America) is the only church that I've ever been part of that practiced what I consider to be biblical excommunication. In the four years that I attended, I saw one person excommunicated for unrepentant homosexuality, another restored from excommunication by virtue of a public repentance over his decision to divorce his wife and marry another (not sure how that worked, since the new wife came back with him), and a third who most likely escaped excommunication for the same adulterous choice by resigning his church membership rather than standing before the elders on this matter.

That third person was Jerry Bowyer. The current promos laud his role as 'a home schooling father of seven', which I don't doubt for a second. However, and I want to be careful here, I don't know if all seven of those children were born to Jerry and his current wife in the years since 1993.

What I do know is that his first wife was tossed to the curb in one of the most egregiously sinful family scenarios that I've ever witnessed in an evangelical setting. After working low paying jobs, giving birth to four children (are these included in the 'official' count?), and sacrificing much to be a 'supportive' wife, Jerry repaid her by beginning an adulterous relationship with a young, fresh-faced, very attractive woman (as I recall) who ended up living IN THEIR HOME.

My ex-wife was somewhat of a friend to the woman who would soon be the former Mrs. Jerry Bowyer. I recall her as an intelligent, funny and committed woman who wasn't the most attractive person on the planet. What emerged in the days following the disclosure of his affair and leaving was the picture of a man who embodied the worst sort of patriarchialism that is so often justified by men using passages like I Timothy 2:11-15, which I quoted in my last post, and was willing to just use this woman until he no longer needed her. Then he took up with someone younger, prettier, and less capable of calling bullshit by its proper name.

In the years that immediately followed, Jerry made the reputation on which he now stands as the new afternoon talk show host for WORD-FM.

Ironically, Jerry was on-air at WORD-FM in those days also. I can remember going to various people wondering how it was that he could be in that position within the Christian community without having to answer for his sin. I was incensed that this guy could just get on with his life, while my family and friends dealt with the wreckage left in his wake.

When I realized (sometime in the middle of last week) that he was probably going to be the new talk show host, that old indignation arose within me again.

Let me be clear that I do not, and have never, known Jerry Bowyer personally. I may have had a few isolated conversations with him during the brief time that we were both members in good standing with the RPCNA. I knew his ex-wife somewhat.

I don't know if Mr. Bowyer has ever publicly acknowledged his sin. I do know that while he was in the middle of it, WORD-FM did nothing to deal with it in any kind of biblical accountability.

So I guess this is more about WORD-FM/Salem Communications than it is about Jerry Bowyer. Jerry's deal is between him and God at this point. He, his wife (current and co-adulterer), his kids, and his ex-wife must bear the natural consequences of what went down over 12 years ago.

Maybe it's even wrong of me to bring this up after all of these years. I just feel that the listeners have a right to know. If this is something that he's already publicly addressed in a repentant way, then I am very willing to move on. Make no mistake, however. What happened in the early '90's was great wickedness on his part.

I don't stand as judge, either. I was a witness to it. That's all.

I certainly have my share of past sins of the same ilk. I've been divorced twice, guilty of adultery, verbal abuse, marital neglect and gross sexual depravity. I am no model of Christian conduct or virtue, and I have no interest in conducting a witchhunt here.

What I would like to do, however, is to make yet another appeal to those who seek to have influence in preserving the integrity of the airwaves to consider prayerfully what it means to support a media outlet like WORD-FM, which has no problem dismissing an unpolished personality for being consistent with his commitment to Biblical authority and replacing him with someone who has managed to play the media game very well in this town, but may just not be all that he appears, from a spiritual standpoint.

Will I listen to Jerry? Most definitely. However, I would like to see this issue addressed. If I'm going to call Pat Robertson to account, I'm definitely going to extend the same courtesy to Jerry Bowyer.
- posted by The Drake @ 9:31 PM 0 comments

 
The Women's Issue
Last Toke: 29 days
Last Smoke: 22 days

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

I Timothy 2:11-15

The discussion topic on the radio today was "Should women be pastors?" I hate this subject, because it really pisses most women off, even if they are Christians. However, there it is, in black and white. And there really is no other passage in the Bible that contradicts it, or provides for an 'cultural' interpretation, in spite of how much I and others would like to see such wiggle room.

Even reading the passage above, I find it hard to believe that Paul could say things that seem so insulting and degrading to my 21st century, American ears.

However, I think we need to be very clear to keep the scope and context of this injunction clear. This is part of a longer passage instructing Gentile Christians in proper worship and church leadership structure. While I don't agree with 'Christian feminists' -- such as my second ex-wife -- that another part of the context has to be the consideration of the patriarchical society of the first century world and the totally subordinate role of women within it, I do agree that the limit of this submission does not extend beyond the context of formal worship and church government. Male chauvinists took the concept too far for far too long, and now women are taking it too far back into the realm of Christ's Body.

There were several callers today who refuted the authority of this Scripture by focusing on an individual's 'anointing' -- yet another indulgence in the subjectivity of spiritual giftedness over the plain words of God's Revealed Will in Scripture. Not even worth debating. Those who continue to choose to believe mystical tricks and games will reap what they sow.

Still others wanted to make a case that the experience of the three women at the tomb refutes this teaching because Jesus chose to appear to them even before the apostles, thus making them the first evangelists. Nonsense. The office of evangelist is a bit more than the ordinary evangelism that we are all called to do. Moreover, these women didn't call a worship service in order to make a formal announcement. They rushed to the apostles in their joy and excitement with wonderful news, bringing the pure light and joy of their feminine calling into the mix. Also, let's not forget that in Luke 8, three women are also mentioned explicitly as traveling companions with Jesus and the disciples, but very much in a supporting, behind-the-scenes role. Mary Magdelene is mentioned in both Luke 8 and the resurrection tomb scene in Luke 24.

Another, more compelling attempted rebuttal involved the episode in Acts 18 where Apollos came to Ephesus, preaching Christ, but the baptism of John, and was taught the more complete doctrine of the Holy Spirit and Baptism by Priscilla and Aquila. But hold on. IN THEIR HOME. Not in the synagogue or the meeting place of believers.

What this means is that certainly a specific woman can and will have a great deal more spiritual knowledge than a man, but based on Paul's teaching (which relies greatly on gender principles embedded in the story of the Creation and Fall that would have been well understood by Jews of the day), whatever knowledge or wisdom she has to give should be done privately.

Finally, a woman caller who had been in the mission field in the '70's made the best point I had ever heard someone make on this subject. She was taught that, even though she had mountains more knowledge and experience in the ways of God, her role was to equip men to fulfill their natural spiritual leadership role in such a way as to not compromise or discourage their growth in that role. She said she hated it at first, but once she began to see how God would move in these men's lives, she saw the wisdom of this teaching.

As I listened to her speak, I thought of how special it would have felt to have had that kind of loving, self-sacrificing encouragement and support. Men and boys are simply not cherished in this culture today. In fact, we are often made to feel as if there is something terribly wrong with us, as the sins of our patriarchal fathers are visited on us by hordes of angry, bitter women out to get their piece of the power pie.

How sad that when I needed so badly to be affirmed in my giftedness, the only adult around -- my mother -- was too busy getting her teaching degree and fending of my father's rage to be that kind of encouragement. How sad that so many boys are cut off from their masculine nature by embittered mothers who've been left, or have left similarly crippled men in disgust, not recognizing that the very thing they find lacking in their failed spouses is the kind of confident, assertive leadership that's been beaten or shamed out of us for the past two generations.

Women we need you. Badly. Not to tell us what to do, but to help shape our vision of ourselves as men of TRUE strength. MORAL strength.
- posted by The Drake @ 9:16 PM 4 comments

 
Nice Recovery, Pat!
Last Toke: 28 days
Last Smoke: 21 days

Well, today's radio subject was a follow up on yesterday's Pat Robertson debacle. The topic: "What should the next step be for Pat Robertson and CBN?"

At the time, the host was unaware that Robertson had come out with a public statement. At the time, all I had read on The Drudge Report was that he claimed to have been misinterpreted in his comment stating that the U.s. had the "ability to take him out", referring to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. He wanted us all to know that "take him out" could have a variety of applications, including kidnapping.

Smooth. I feel much better now, Pat.

He also issued an apology acknowledging that calling for the assassination of Chavez was wrong, and stating, "I spoke in frustration that we should accommodate the man who thinks the U.S. is out to kill him."

Well, he must have been REALLY frustrated for a long time, seeing as his comments were taped, not live, and the fact that it took him over two days to retract a statement that any baby Christian should know was wrong.

But back to the subject on the radio show. Again, the gargantuan lack of wisdom and discernment among the listeners was maddening. I know that I shouldn't be so surprised, seeing as The 700 Club maintains a viewership of over a million, despite the fact that this man has been preaching a false Gospel for decades. One lady was maintaining that Robertson was a lone voice of political insight and interpretation of world events for Christ, and that he "is pretty intelligent." Another woman wanted to try and make this yet another case of the liberal media distorting his comments to trounce on Christians and Christianity.

Sorry, but that dog simply won't hunt in this case. His words were all too plain, and his apologies were just lame excuses to hide his real agenda, which from what I can tell is to try and direct the political agenda of conservative Christians towards a new McCarthyism. The real goal here was to highlight the 'evil' of a little known Latin American thug dictator who Robertson believes is a threat to U.S. national security. More likely, he realizes that this guy has the biggest supply of available crude oil in the Western hemisphere, and is probably crazy enough to try and use it against us for political blackmail.

Is it any coincidence that Hugo Chavez was caught up in this newscycle during a visit to Cuba, and that Fidel Castro was predictably using the controversy to rattle his rusted saber at the Imperialist U.s.? I think not. And why is W so silent? Could it be that he'd rather let the focus of the coverage fall on Chavez, who he is, his antagonistic rants against the U.S., and his close alliance with Castro? I'm betting it is. Politics as usual, especially in the face of rising petroleum costs.

All Pat Robertson has done is to set up a straw man for the Bush Administration to use to counter the current downswing in overall approval and to set the stage for the next round of "Oil! Oil! Who's Got the Oil?"

Sorry to sound like a liberal here, but this whole situation just stinks, and I am looking for a voice of integrity to emerge from this political and religious posturing. Unfortunately, I am afraid that I am going to have to wait for things to get much worse before Christians as a whole begin to speak out.

Conservatism only works if there is a moral foundation to keep greed and corruption in check. Christianity only speaks to the culture when its followers obey the commands of their Lord.
So back to the question of the day. In my humble opinion, the next move by Pat Robertson is irrelevant, as he has declared himself an enemy of Christ by his whole corrupted participation in this political soap opera. George W. Bush has failed to make a move to distance himself from this by his silence, knowing full well that he had only 48 hours to weigh in on this news cycle. Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, and their cronies are teetering on the precipice of making the next upswing of this controversy about them and the threats (perceived or otherwise) that they pose to the domestic tranquility of these United States.

The only relevant next move should come from obedient followers of Christ to wake up and denounce these kinds of geo-political games as outside the scope of our work for the Kingdom of God. Galatians 1:6-9 sums it up for me:

"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!"

I'm feeling a little bit John The Baptist here, but sincere Christians really need to wake up and stop assuming that these self-appointed representatives of the 'evangelical Right' are the mouthpieces of Christ, and the Conservatism equals Christianity.
It simply ain't so.

- posted by The Drake @ 6:22 PM 1 comments

 
Denunciation
Last Toke: 27 days
Last Smoke: 20 days

Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place." (John 18:36)

Today is the first day since the middle of last week that I've had a chance to listen to the Christian afternoon talk show, and boy, what a day to tune in!

Today's discussion centered around the comments made yesterday by the Rev. Pat Robertson on his 700 Club show publicly advocating the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Much to my dismay, but unfortunately not to my surprise, all of the listeners that I heard call in during my drive home failed to denounce this outrageous behavior from someone who postures as a Christian leader in this culture. Oh, some of them were critical of the statement, usually with some sort of defense of this purported man of God's history of integrity. More often, however, I heard support and even blessings on this travesty.

Let me be clear about my position. Pat Robertson has shamed the Name and Mission of the Lord Jesus Christ by making these comments, especially from a teaching pulpit. This type of invective is nothing short of pure evil, and the fact that there are actually people (perhaps even a majority) who call themselves followers of Christ and actually approve it scary to a surreal extent.

How is it that Christian radio and TV reflects such a poverty of spiritual understanding, in both its talking heads and its listeners?

My guess is that Hosea 6:8 provides the answer: "My people are destroyed by a lack of knowledge."

Too many people are counting on the likes of Pat Robertson to be vendors of truth, instead of taking to their knees and their Bibles for guidance. For several decades now, Robertson and his ilk have been at the forefront of worst kind of corruption of the Christian mindset -- one that elevates the personal revelations of those blessed with special 'gifts' above the revealed, infallible, reliable and unchangeable Holy Word of the Living God.

Why bother struggling with the genealogies, detailed descriptions of the ceremonial law, and prophecies of the Old Testament, or the difficult doctrinal statements of the New, when someone like Reverend Pat can just get the scoop right from the Holy Spirit?

Another aspect of what I heard on the radio today that really bothered me was the ease with which these statements were dismissed in the interests of 'national security'. What?!?! Leaving aside that Hugo Chavez is about as much of a threat to us as was Manual Noriega (remember him?), how is it that Christians DO NOT UNDERSTAND that we are citizens of the Kingdom of God, first and foremost, and that a direct contradiction to Christ's command to love one's enemies, bless those who curse you, repay evil with good, etc.... cannot be rationalized away in the name of support of our national security! Jeez, people! Get a grip! Remember who you follow! Not some fat, rich, ego-centric nut job, but the Lord of Glory who died rather than assert His legitimate right to power in order to procure our eternity with Him.

Can you imagine what would have happened to the Christian Church if the Apostles had decided that Nero had to go? It likely would have simply become just another power faction in Roman society, instead of the world changing faith it is.

One final comment on the subject of tyrannicide. Is it ever justified to assassinate an evil ruler to protect other, innocent lives? Dietrich Bonhoeffer thought so, and died in a German concentration camp as a result.

But God took care of Hitler in His way, on His timetable, like He has so many others before and since, not allowing Bonhoeffer and his co-conspirators to succeed in saving what probably amounted to millions of lives (not sure of the timing of the plot or whether it would have stopped anything). This is one of the sobering truths about living in this world knowing God. He allows evil to rise up and do tremendous damage. His purposes for doing so are not always clear, but there is more than enough evidence in the lives, teaching and sacrifices of Jesus and the Apostles to indicate that sometimes we are called to be slaughtered like so much livestock in order to allow evil to be truly exposed and the Truth to be made clear.

This may ring harsh in the ears of we comfortable believers in the West, but God's ways are not our ways. Our understanding of things is limited by our desire for comfort and relief from suffering. The Book of Job is a good tonic for this mentality.

It will be interesting to see if W comes out strongly against Robertson on these comments. I will be very disappointed and concerned if he doesn't.
- posted by The Drake @ 5:22 PM 4 comments

 
News from the Weekend
Last Toke: 26 days
Last Smoke: 19 days

Well, the weekend got off to a bad start, as I injured both my groin and calf muscles (each one in a different leg) playing shortstop for the church softball team. I am still not able to walk normally, and I really need to get in some semblance of shape.

Tonight, I am going to see Styx and Kansas in concert with D and another couple from the church, courtesy of my employer. It's been a while since I've listened to either of them (like high school!), and it should be an interesting night.

Not much else to report, other than a growing preoccupation with taking those final steps towards utter dependence of Christ to provide all of my needs (emotional, physical, spiritual, and financial). This sounds easier than it is, since doing so will prohibit me from looking to anyone else, D in particular, for ANY source of contentment, satisfaction, joy, whatever. Instead, as I understand it, I will have to begin being less and less concerned with anything having to do with how I'M doing.

Christianity sorta sucks, if you happen to take it seriously and be an American.
- posted by The Drake @ 4:48 PM 8 comments

 
Sabbatarianism
Last toke: 23 days
Last smoke: 16 days

Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the
sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. Exodus 20:8-11

Then he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath." Mark 2:27,28

I've not listened to the afternoon talk show for the past two days, owing to circumstances beyond my control. The first being having to share the ride home with my 16-year old daughter on Wed. Just try and win control of the radio dial against her! Yesterday, I worked from home, because I wasn't sure at 6 am if my building had re-opened after the water main break in Pittsburgh on Wed.

So today's subject is borrowed from a show broadcast last week with guest host Sam Siple, and is based on his conversation with Dr. Jerry O'Neill, President of the Pittsburgh Reformed Theological Seminary, on the subject of keeping the Sabbath.

Dr. O'Neill's contention is that we, as Christians, are still obligated to keep a Sabbath observance, setting the whole of every Sunday aside for resting, worshiping, and keeping our thoughts and activities focused on God. Here's what that means in practical terms:

1. Aside from gathering in our local fellowships for worship, study and prayer, we are to remain at home.

2. We are not to perform any work related to our occupations or household maintenance. This means that we should avoid doing things around the house like cooking or doing the dishes.

3. We are not to engage in any commerce or business transactions(i.e. - we are not to buy or sell ANYTHING).

4. All activities that are not sleeping should involve some sort of worship, prayer, meditation, teaching or reflection on God.

5. The only exceptions to the above restrictions are to engage in activities of mercy and necessity. You can feed and water your livestock and family, put out a fire, take care of patients, defend your country, property and family against violation by violence.

My initial reaction was to poo poo the whole concept, having been involved with the RPCNA during most of my second marriage, and finding them a rather legalistic bunch.

The typical modern evangelical rebuke to Christian Sabbatarianism usually focuses on the following arguments:

1. This injunction is part of the Law and invalidated in the New Testament covenant of Christ's Death and Resurrection.

2. The Sabbath is the seventh day of the week (Saturday), while the Christian Lord's Day is on Sunday (the first day).

3. There is no NT ordninance instituting Sunday as the 'new' Sabbath, with the same obligation to keep it holy.

4. Jesus did miracles of healing on the Sabbath, and criticised the Pharisees for their insincere legalism in their Sabbath Observance.

However, there are several reasons why I have decided that Dr. O'Neill was probably right.

1. The fourth commandment, like all of the commandments, is moral (not ceremonial) law and binding for Christian behavior.

2. The day of rest is a creation ordinance, meaning that its implementation preceded the giving of the Law and points to a universal need for mankind to fully rest one day out of every seven in order to be fully enabled to honor God during the other six.

3. Taking the other two premises into account, it is contrary to Christian love to engage in activities which force others to work on the day of rest (i.e. - eating out, watching TV, going to sporting events, shopping, playing golf, or setting up booths at flea markets).

4. The Christian heritage of our nation has made the Lord's Day a perfect opportunity to engage our families in worship, study and meditation.

5. The observance of a day of rest sends a very strong message to the surrounding culture, which treats Sundays as just another opportunity to make money or get 'stuff' done.

I felt this very keenly when I was a waiter and required to work on Sundays, missing church, time with family and friends, and really refreshing naps. I feel it now, because D will use Sunday to 'catch up' on chores, instead of spending time discussing what she's learned from the sermon or Sunday School with me.

I'm not sure how I'm going to work this out in practical terms. I am already wrestling with wanting to re-instate my TV service for football season, and I love to play golf on Sundays. But I am becoming very convinced in my heart that this is a really good idea, especially as a way to strengthen myself emotionally and spiritually for the challenges of the coming week.

I'd really appreciate reader feedback on this one, as I am facing a real battle at home, should I decide to try and implement this.
- posted by The Drake @ 1:31 PM 3 comments

 
Response to talk radio
Last toke: 22 days
Last smoke: 15 days

Beginning today, I am going to blog about things I hear on the local Christian afternoon talk show that I listen to on my drive home from work. Recently, several shows have touched on subjects that I feel are very important for Christians to discuss intelligently. Since that rarely happens on the show, for a variety of reasons, including constraints of the call-in format, host bias and woeful lack of biblical knowledge in the listening audience. I hope to take things to a deeper and more honest level.

WORD-FM has been using guest hosts on the afternoon talk show since they disingenuously dismissed Marty Minto in the wake of his on-air criticisms of Catholic dogma in the days of the death of Pope John Paul II. Predictably, these hosts have been serving up mostly theological softballs that are barely worth the time to consider, although the amount of biblical ignorance displayed by the callers continually amazes me.

The guest host for the first three days of this week is a United Methodist pastor by the name of Eric Park. The predominant topic of the Monday and Tuesday shows was: Why is the church in the West losing membership?

The subject was stirred up within Pastor Park as a result of an article he'd read concerning the decline of church participation in Western Europe. Of particular interest to him was the apparent distinction between 'spirituality' and 'religion' among interviewees in the article.
Understandably, Rev. Park confessed great interest in the issue, owing to being a pastor within a denomination that is undoubtedly affected by this phenomenon. During Tuesday's broadcast in particular, he kept harping on a caller whose belief was that people were leaving the Church because of a 'watering down' of the message of the Gospel, particularly in its response to the epidemic of divorce among professing Christians.

Putting aside for the moment the unbelievable amount of denial implied in that statement, I'd like to focus instead on what Rev. Park did with the subject of divorce in the Church.

While acknowledging that there is inevitably a choice to sin involved in any divorce situation, Rev. Park decided to use two passages from the Gospels to present his own views. In the first example, he discussed the historical backdrop of divorce as practiced in the patriarchy of first-century Palestine when Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for their question on whether it was permissible for a man to divorce his wife. I've heard this before, but apparently it was common practice for Jews of the day to dismiss their wives for what we would consider trifling reasons: burning the dinner 3 nights in a row, not providing adequate sexual satisfaction, or speaking 'out of turn' in a public gathering. Rev. Park asserted that understanding this exchange in its historical context makes all the difference in the world when understanding what Jesus meant when He said, "...anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery" (Matthew 19:9).

In Rev. Park's opinion, this meant that Jesus was only attacking the specific wickedness of these men in disposing of their wives when they didn't please them, in order to be free to marry someone new. By contrast, he went on, Jesus' encounter with the woman at the well had a whole different tone -- one of compassion and empathy for her situation. Rightly observing that we, in our current cultural context, would tend to assume that any woman who has been through five unsuccessful marriages and is currently living with a man who is not her husband is probably a slut. This does ignore the revelation from the prior exegesis that she could very well have been a victim of the convenience divorcing practices of the men of her time. So, Rev. Park put forth the proposition that when Jesus said to her, "You are right when you say you have no husband. The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true." (John 4:17,18), He was actually saying something like, "You poor thing! You've had a tough time of it at the hands of these wicked, wicked pigs of men,"

Contrasting these two 'responses' of Jesus surrounding the issue of divorce, Rev. Park went on to make what seemed to be an argument that, despite his acknowledgement of the pain and sin surrounding divorce, there were numerous scenarios where divorce was understandable, even acceptable. These scenarios included spousal abuse and something he described as 'sucking the life out of one another' where married couples had spent years staying together but failing to work out their core differences.

In other words, Rev. Park seems to have responded to an allegation of watering down the teaching of the Bible by doing just that concerning the subject of divorce. Sorry, but I just don't see the whole 'context' argument in the woman at the well encounter overriding the very clear teaching of Matthew 19. For Christians, I believe that I Corinthians 7 teaches us everything we need to know about marriage and divorce. While this is hard stuff for a lot of us (and I definitely include myself in that number), it is nonetheless what we are called to do. The time to make choices about whether to be with a particular person is prior to marriage, not after. So if a Christian woman marries a man who ends up beating her, that is not Biblical justification for divorce. That doesn't mean she has to continue to put herself and her children in harm's way. Call the police, get a PFA, press charges, insist that he get help. But don't hinder the Lord's work. Not easy stuff, I know, but the Christian life is the hard road, the narrow path.

This leads me to my own response to the overall subject of why is Church membership declining. For me, the issue boils down to a complex interaction between what's going on in society and how the church tends to respond to it.

First, the culture we live in is so highly individualistic that most folks are totally convinced of their own ability to discern truth without exercising the disciplines surrounding teaching, study, and corporate prayer, worship and fellowship.

Second, the church itself has tended to become so influenced by the surrounding culture as to fail to provide a sufficient counterweight to this type of individualistic thinking. In the focus on church growth, there seems to be a corresponding loss of emphasis on the more grinding aspects of the Christian life: meditation, study, catechism and an emphasis on service. Church has become for many little more than the Sunday morning show which is designed to tickle the ears and provide an outlet for some superficial socializing.

Finally, we as Christians MUST recognize that the message of our Lord offer hope and comfort to suffering souls, not ease and leisure. The Bible has not promised us that we wouldn't suffer consequences for both our sins and our faith. Instead, Jesus promised that "In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world." John 16:33

Too many of us have taken passages like this to mean that God will make it all better. Children will obey. Spouses will be satisfying. Money troubles will disappear. Our enemies will relent.

It's just not so.

Jesus overcame the world by voluntarily subjecting Himself to enoromous suffering on behalf of people who could have cared less. Most still don't.

That is the path that true believers are also called to, although we are very fortunate in this country that we don't wrestle with the type of dire trials that afflict our brethren in places like China and the Sudan. Nonetheless, I am becoming convinced in my own life, that I am guilty of expecting, even demanding, way more from God that He's promised.

Or should I say less.

It seems that my infatuation with mega, seeker-friendly, warm and fuzzy Christianity, I have lost sight of the true source of joy and prosperity for which my soul longs: a deep and abiding relationship with Jesus Christ. I, like many of us who profess Christ, talk an awful lot about the wonders and joys of being saved, while at the same time whining and moaning about the absurdly trivial disappointments. Yes, my marriage quite frankly blows, but how does that rob me of joy? Only when I make my happiness of more importance than my obedience.

What is church membership, after all? Isn't it simply a numbers games, consistent with the corporate American mentality that bigger is better? Maximizing profits? A way of making sure that your seats are the most comfortable? Your sound system the most clear? Your musical 'worship' the most affecting and touching among all of your competition?

Isn't church growth rightly thought of as the process by which those who belong go deeper and farther with Christ through the exercise of right teaching, whole-hearted prayer, a life of service and sacrifice to each other and their community?

I belong to one of the biggest churches in my area. Over 1500 people attend two Sunday services each week. And that number is growing. But is my church growing? I wonder. I've recently been approached to take over some teaching duties for adult Sunday school, and I wonder why. My life is not marked by any evidences of spiritual maturity other than the fact that I know more of the Bible than 3/4 of the membership. Not really good enough, though, is it?

Three weeks ago, I was smoking pot and hoping my wife would leave me, so I wouldn't be the 'guilty' one. I led a 3-week discussion on Christians and the media, and people enjoyed it. People didn't challenge the content, or question the theology. They focused on the fact that I was funny, that I knew a bunch of stuff from my studies in college and the Bible over the years. I've made no secret of my shortcomings, yet I'm entertaining and willing to use the platform to fulfill my own twisted need for attention, acceptance and affirmation.

Maybe God is calling me to this. I don't really know. But what concerns me more is the fact that no one is bothering to check my credentials.

So I've come to the conclusion that the churches are often empty, even when the seats are full.

- posted by The Drake @ 10:22 AM 6 comments

 
Fall Ball, and other Sports Musings
Last toke: 20 days
Last smoke: 13 days

Last night, I played in softball for the first time in about 15 years. This morning, my knee is swollen, and every muscle in both legs is sore. Other than that, it was a fun time. We played two, seven-inning games. I got two hits, made a couple of put outs, blew one fly ball over my head (fell on my ass, too), and made about three good stretches at first base to get outs.

One of the things that whatever readers I have may not know is that I really used to love playing sports, until my left knee blew out when I was 19. I really miss not being able to compete, but the risk of injury is just too great (certain would be a better word when playing basketball and football). So a relatively tame game of softball and golf is about the best I can do. I used to play volleyball after my injury with no problems, but I am really too fat now to play my game above the net.

Sports is something that I believe has a tremendous amount of value in the lives of our children, especially boys. However, just making that statement causes a collective shudder of wheezing outrage among so many in our current culture. Women of all stripes hate that statement because either they think sports are a complete waste of time, or because of the "especially boys" qualifier at the end. Personally, I wish there were a whole lot more women who grew up playing sports, because the effect on their bodies is simply awesome. There was a young lady playing second base on our team last night who's obviously been active in sports for a while. Simply put, I woke up in the middle of the night, and all I could think of were her tanned, toned legs and .... well, you get the picture. It's certainly burned into my memory.

But I digress.

Of my 5 children, only one has ever had any interest in playing organized sports, but that desire has not been nurtured or encouraged enough to give him the full benefits available to him. I got him started playing baseball at 8, and he played for the 3 years that I was able to get him to practice. Then my job moved into another county, and I couldn't make it home in time. His mother just simply wouldn't do it, and because I wasn't a 24/7 influence on him, he quickly lost interest.

My oldest is diligent about staying in shape -- working out and swimming. But it's not from a love of sport. My youngest two are GameBoy junkies, preferring to spend all of their time in front of whatever electronic entertainment is available at the moment. They are both overweight and lethargic much of the time, and I am beginning to become concerned for their health in the future.

All 3 of my boys have been declared ADHD by their school system, and are being fed whatever variation of Ritalin is currently in vogue to enable them to concentrate and focus in the classroom. I believe in my heart that this is directly a result of the removal of my influence from their home, and an overall antipathy to the traditional approach to developing the "All American Boy" in our social, spiritual and educational philosophies in this country.

Granted, there is a lot to criticize in that historical philosophy, but it is my contention that between feminism, the homosexual agenda, and the strategies of the entertainment industries to maximize profits, our country is being weakened through this decades-old attack on traditional masculinity.

Even though we are still a sports-loving country on the surface of things, it appears to me that fewer and fewer boys are actually coming into manhood without the benefits that participation in organized sports can bring. Rather, sport in our country has been co-opted by the entertainment industry and turned into little more than a twisted reality show where the antics of someone like Terrell Owens overshadow the beauty of the games that are being played. Meanwhile, the spectating youth of our land are either encouraged to become self-centered, under-educated, over-paid, celebrities of low character, or to simply find another way to spend their time because the athletic "ideals" of this age are simply and obviously beyond their reach.

I could build on this, but this post is already taking up too much space and time out of my day.

I think I can best summarize my position from my own life. I am almost 46-years old. I played sports from the time I was 5 -- either in organized leagues, on school teams, taking private lessons, or just with the kids in the neighborhood -- on a daily basis until my injury at 19. Despite my destroyed knee, I continued to attempt to make sports a big part of my life for the next 12 years, playing tennis, volleyball, softball, and the occasional game of basketball. Occasional, because just about every time I played basketball in those years, I blew out my knee. When I could no longer justify spending my life on crutches or in a wheelchair, I began working out, walking, and playing golf.

As a result, despite other not-so-good personal habits, most people are completely surprised when I tell them my age, believing me to be about 10 to 15 years younger. Trust me, I feel every bit my age -- and then some. But the years of exercise and competition has helped me to maintain a modestly athletic physique and a certain youthfulness in both appearance and demeanor. Some people will say that this is a result of genetics, but I have my two youngest sons to disprove that.

Beyond that, lessons I learned (often unwillingly) playing sports have helped me in my approach to the Christian faith. Cliches like "play through the pain", "no pain, no gain", "shake it off", "take one for the team", and "rub some dirt in it" take on a whole different meaning as I deal with the struggles I often write about in this blog.

Even Paul uses sports imagery in his epistles, comparing the Christian life to a grueling race and alluding to the punishing training regimens of dedicated athletes as a real-life metaphor for the discipline required to "be in the game" for Christ.

The human body is an amazing, beautiful thing, given by our Creator to exercise our dominion over the rest of His Creation. I think that too many Christians give short shrift to this gift by buying into the culture's beliefs that competition is bad, and that a traditional sports mentality does pyschological harm by making people feel bad about themselves. While it may be wrong to judge people by their external appearance, it is certainly not wrong to take pains to maximize one's physical potential.

I wish my ex-wife, for one, would get it. It sure would save her a lot of money on Ritalin and result in less calls from the school.

Or so I believe.

- posted by The Drake @ 10:16 AM 2 comments

 
Mystery Solved!
Last toke: 19 days
Last smoke: 12 days

Dan Piraro, creator of the Bizarro comic, was kind enough to reply to my email regarding the dual captions in his comic published last week. I submit the explanation in his own words:

Thanks for writing, Drake.

Here's the story behind the duel captions.

The cartoon with the "stupid rant" was my original submission. My editor at King Features, however, informed me that he had been getting a lot of complaints from various editors about my left-wing politics and that running this cartoon could result in some cancellations. King is totally on my side in these things, but always warn me when something can potentially affect my client list.
Not wishing to lose my voice entirely, I sent in a replacement caption for the same picture. Here's where it turns into a French farce.

I routinely send in the black and white versions of my cartoons a week before I send the color. When I colored that cartoon and sent it in electronically, I forgot to substitute the tamer caption. So some markets, the one's that buy Bizarro in color and any web sites where Bizarro appears, ran the gay spouse cartoon. The others ran the more tame version.

Based on your indelicate email I'm certain you are among those who support this sort of bigotry, so I won't bother defending my beliefs.

Thanks again for writing, hope this clears things up.

Cheers,
Dan

I appreciate Dan's willingness to respond, being a national celebrity and all. I'm sure it must be comforting to some of my other Internet contacts, that I am no respecter of persons when it comes to insulting and pissing off people of the liberal persuasion.

It's also good to know that there was nothing more insidious than a simple oversight by an artist who is truly gifted, albeit a bit misguided.
- posted by The Drake @ 7:33 AM 1 comments

 
Why Aren't I Good Enough?
Last toke: 18 days
Last smoke: 11 days

Just sitting here at the keyboard, having been up for the past couple of hours putting together my outline for Sunday School class. It's basically just a list of talking points that I hope will elicit spirited debate and challenge people to think Christianly about their media consumption.

Finally had the golf outing yesterday, and we didn't do all that well (3 over, horrible for a scramble). But we had fun. The guys I played with are not frequent golfers (nor am I, for that matter, although I'd really like to be), so we just were not able to put together enough good shots to get a lot of birdies. The winning team was 14 under, so it was never even a fantasy to be in contention. Although, I always hope for/expect the best. Which is probably why I've broken so many golf clubs over the years.

I was the go-to guy, and I just couldn't give them the shots they needed when everyone else blew up. I'd come close, though. I must've missed around 8 putts for birdie that just missed going in. What that really means is that I've gotten close to being good, but will most likely never have the time, money, or help to be anything more than a hacker.

That grates on me more than I can describe. I want to be good at whatever I do. Not just good. Exceptional.

Talking to one of my teammates, S, on the drive home, I realized that this issue has deep roots with me. Performance is the only way that I've really ever known affirmation, acceptance, and the feeling of being loved. With Dad's passing last month, this realization has come bobbing to the surface, bringing with it a buttload of anger.

Why aren't I good enough?

Trying is not the answer. Striving either. Following a program as a cookbook to arrive at change ain't working. I am smart, funny, not horrible looking, and I've even been losing a bit of weight. I quit smoking weed and tobacco. So what gives?

Why aren't I good enough?

More later. Must get ready for church.
- posted by The Drake @ 7:14 AM 2 comments

 
They can't even leave the comics alone!
Last toke: 16 days
Last smoke: 9 days

There was an interesting discovery made by a co-worker in the comics sections of the Pittsburgh Papers. The comic Bizarro, by Dan Piraro, is a single panel laugher in the school of 'The Far Side'. Yesterday, the panel showed a doctor in scrubs, fresh from the operating room, speaking to a man seated on a typical, hospital-style, waiting room bench.

In the Post-Gazette, known for its liberal editorial bias, the doctor's speech balloon contains the punchline: "She's going to be just fine -- she's quite a fighter. The anesthesiologist has a black eye, and I think she may have cracked my ribs."

Pretty funny, right?

However, the Tribune-Review, the conservative paper made nationally famous by Theresa Heinz Kerry's "shove it" incident, had quite a different caption:

"Your husband is in the recovery room. You could go back and see him if you like, but our government-sanctioned bigotry forbids it."

Huh? Not at all funny.

Obviously, someone (not sure if it's the artist, the syndicator, or a homosexual Trib employee) wanted to not only lash out at the conservative readership, but also deprive them of a good chuckle.

I wonder if this happened elsewhere?

Anyway, it gives you an idea how low the liberals in general, and the homosexual lobby in particular, will sink to try and convince intelligent people to believe utter bullshit.
- posted by The Drake @ 8:20 AM 2 comments

 
I wish I was nicer,...
Sobriety: 15 days
Last smoke: 8 days

But I'm not. I've learned to accept it, why can't you?

Here are some things I've encountered today that make me go Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!:

1. Left lane vigilantes. Two kinds, actually. First, there was the bus that made an illegal left-hand turn at the Leetsdale light. I absolutely loathe PAT Bus Drivers! Between nearly causing an accident there and almost running me over in the crosswalk making a left turn onto Seventh Ave. from Smithfield, it would appear that these people are excepted from obeying all known traffic laws! Arrrrrggggh! Then there are the obliviots who seem not to notice that people are whizzing by them while they examine the scenery from the passing lane! Pull over and take pictures, asshole!

2. The latest 'Teamsters' strike. There are apparently some very ill-treated parking lot attendants here in the 'Burgh, so under the umbrella of the Teamsters Union Local ?, they have gone on strike. What? You're going to try and cull public sympathy over your wages and working conditions parking cars?!?! Sheesh! Get a real job! Or else be thankful that they have to at least pay you minimum wage for doing something that barely requires human intelligence.

3. Empty Suits. After shaking my head at how low the Teamsters have sunk and nearly getting hit by an above-the-law PAT driver (I can hardly wait for THEIR next strike), I walk into the Au Bon Pain across the street from the office for my carrot-nut muffin and coffee. There I encounter a group of obviously useless, overpaid, regional office types inspecting the premises and giving the junior shift manager all sorts of shit about stuff that none of us care about. Apparently, it's necessary for these self-important bastards to travel in groups of 3 -- one guy who's actually calling the shots, and 2 wannabes who's only purpose is to give rapt attention to kissing Mr. Big Shot's ass. One per cheek, apparently.

4. Being called ignorant. Unless you are a yinzer from the 'Burgh, you are really pulling at straws. I AM totally an ass, and quite often arrogant (which sounds like ignorant), but I rarely just jump off the ledge and spout uninformed or impulsive opinions. Unless, of course, you are a yinzer. Then you mean that I am rude, which is probably true in this case. But, of course, saying 'ignorant' when you mean 'rude' would be...ignorance.
- posted by The Drake @ 9:15 AM 12 comments

 
Here's a Nut Buster
One of the things I love most about being a blogophile is getting insight into other people's milieu. I particularly love listening to people describe what it's like to be a 'Gentile' in Utah. I can only imagine how simulataneously funny and frustrating it must be.

But I can only imagine.

Sure, I've been to SLC. Once. I took the tour of Temple Square, looked through the wrought-iron fence at the fresh-faced Mormons and their families waiting to get married, and thought to myself, "It would really be weird to live here." However, it never occurred to me to make ridiculous assertions about what it actually WAS LIKE to live there, being as I didn't.

Sure, the idea of this Mormon marriage mill was very creepy, but that comes more from studying what Mormons believe than actually living in SLC -- or supposing that my very limited view was authoritative.

Yet there are people out there in Blogworld who presume to know what it's like to live in America -- nay, that they actually know more about what's going on here than we do. This has an infuriating effect on me not unlike laying my nutsack on an anvil and pounding on it with a 4 lb. sledge hammer.

To all America-haters who don't actually live here -- SHUT UP!

I've been all around this country and have yet to see what it is about us that pisses these people off so much. Yes, there is poverty. Yes, there is racism. Yes, there is unbridled greed and widespread immorality. But there is also wide open spaces, amazing diversity (not imposed, either), tremendous opportunity, warmth, generosity, and tenacity of spirit.

Not having been many places outside of this country (except for Jamaica), I can't speak to your situations. However, I saw much more grinding poverty in a 2-hour bus ride from Montego Bay to Ocho Rios than I've ever seen in this country in my nearly 46 years of living.

These people bitch and moan about how we 'oppress' the rest of the world. Come again? When the tsunamis hit Indochina last year, who stepped up? Not the Arab world, even though more Muslims were affected than any other religious group. Happening on the day after Christmas, I can tell you what it felt like here in the heart of one American.

We are constantly reminded by this and other world events how blessed and privileged we are to live in such a prosperous and secure nation. Our hearts hurt for those who have to suffer because the concept of liberal democracy and personal freedom can't conquer the forces of tyranny and real oppression.

Granted, there are quite a few here who could care less about what happens in the rest of the world, but our CULTURE is COMPASSIONATE at its core.

So what's your problem with us, anyway? Are you afraid that we'll squish you? Don't fuck with us, and you've got no worries.

Are you jealous that you don't have the things we do? The most important thing that I have is freedom. My possessions and money come and go. Good times come and go. Opportunities come and go. My freedom remains. I can re-define myself at any point in time. I can work in IT or foodservice. I can get more education. I can live in the country, or in the city. I can play golf or pursue a threesome with my wife.

So what is your problem?

Really.
- posted by The Drake @ 2:02 PM 19 comments

 
Getting Ready for the Fur to Fly
Sobriety: 13 days
Last Cigarette: 6 days ago

This Sunday I am going to wrap up my series on Christians and the Media, and I am expecting (hoping for?) quite a bit of heated discussion.

My emphasis up to this point has been to challenge the class to 'renew their thinking' about their approach to and interaction with the various mass media. The teaser for this week's upcoming session is the assertion, made in an Internet article I came across last week, that the Harry Potter books are actually Christian in world view.

However, since this is going to be my last week on this subject, I am going to try and lead the discussion to Christian response to and participation in the various media.

My point here is going to be to hopefully raise peoples' consciousness that our current evangelical bent towards boycott activism and retreat into an alternate media is an exercise in futility and bad stewardship.

There are two streams of errant thinking converging to produce what I consider to be a horrendous waste of energy, money and gifts in the name of Christ. The first being the gross misunderstanding of what drives and motivates the operators of the various media, and the second being our irrational fear over the perceived damage being done to our society by the media.

To the first point, it's fairly obvious to just about everyone that what comes to us through the media, in terms of content, is driven by the perception of what will sell. For many in the business, it amounts to simply implementing the 'circus' part of the Marcus Aurelius 'give them bread and circuses' equation for controlling society. Christians rightly understand that this is an amoral (at best) approach to what service the various media could provide in an ideal society.

That's where most of us in the Church get lost. Seeing the depravity of content, and the greed of those who exploit the lowest common denominators in our culture, our response has been to rant and rave and threaten media advertisers with boycotts. Problem is, we're all to often tilting at windmills. We fail to recognize that our real power to effect change in the media offerings is woefully small. Granted, certain targeted boycotts might change some advertisers' behavior, but very little has changed from a global perspective. Take the KMart boycott of Don Wildmon's AFA as an example. The AFA boycotted KMart stores to force them to remove porn from their Waldenbooks subsidiaries. KMart relented and promised to steer KMart in a more 'family friendly' direction. The AFA has touted this as a huge success ever since.

However, a closer examination shows that what Wildmon's group did, and continues to do, is to target the weakest member of the herd for the kill. In the current marketplace, KMart is hardly a player, lingering on the brink of extinction until finally merging with Sears earlier this year. Waldenbooks is suffering a similar fate, being dwarfed by the mammoth success of mega-booksellers like Barnes & Noble and Borders. Basically, the AFA forced KMart's hand by taking a very small segment of their customer base away for a short period of time. This tactic worked, since KMart was already reeling from losing market share to the WalMart and Target expansion. So it was unable to lose even the smallest number of customers over ANY issue.

And did the AFA membership reward KMart for its 'change of heart'? Hardly. You'll find them all at WalMart, a behemoth largely impervious to such puny railings from short-sighted prophets.

Conclusion: The number of Christians committed to sacrificing bargains (or luxuries) for the sake of changing advertiser behavior with a view to removing objectionable or offensive content from TV, radio, film and print is simply not enough to make this strategy viable across our culture. This tactic might work in certain local communities where Christians represent a majority or influential minority. But as a national blueprint? Forget it.

Also, is it just me, or does it seem distinctly un-Christian to pick on the weakest links?

My second objection to the typical Christian response to the media content and execution in our society is the belief that the media is somehow responsible for worsening the moral state of our society. Hogwash! I subscribe to the view that the media more reflects the condition of our culture than influences it. I'm not saying that there isn't an exacerbation effect, but whatever gets into vogue in our media offerings has to connect to its audiences on some level in order to push the envelope. If something in the content isn't resonating, the channel gets changed. Simple as that.

A corollary to this thinking is the assumption that we as Christians have to protect both ourselves and our children from being contaminated by what's being broadcast, printed and produced by the various forms of media. I agree, but it's a bit ridiculous to expect the rest of the culture to just go along with us to make us feel better. Moreover, there's something that's just a bit troubling about this mentality to me as a Christian. First, most of what's offered is just crap and is simply a waste of time. The answer here is not to watch, listen or read that which diverts us from our true purpose. And if we're not doing it, our kids will follow suit. Unfortunately, I believe the reality of the matter is quite different. It's just too easy to put the kids in front of the TV with a video so we can 'get our stuff done' undisturbed. So we are guilty of participating in the culture of convenience, but want to 'Christianize' it so we don't feel so guilty about neglecting our kids. Second, I fail to see how we communicate an attitude of humility and servitude towards our Lord when we're so busy complaining that our craving to be entertained without being offended is not being satisfied.

Moreover, where is the confidence and faith that 'greater is He that is in You than he who is in the world'? Don't we have a better message to deliver to our culture than this? Our children are precious to us, but are we really that worried that they will be corrupted when our God is alive and powerful? So what if their friends are consumed with video games? Who cares if pre-adolescent movies are rife with sexual innuendo? Do we really think that the homosexual lobby will lure our babies away outside of their own volition?

It's time to wake up, people. We live in a fallen world, corrupt to the core. The world system will not be run by the rule of righteousness and perfect justice short of Jesus' return. We will NEVER, EVER have the power to do what only our Lord can do in ruling this world. We can stand with integrity, and reach out in the media with compassion and a message of hope, redemption and repentance.

So why don't we stop bitching about those things we can do nothing about, and get started with the work that the Lord has called us to?
- posted by The Drake @ 6:28 AM 0 comments

 
Weekend Update
Update on sobriety: entering 12th day since last getting high and 4th day without a cigarette. Major crankiness this weekend, and coughing more now than when I was smoking. Also, eating everything in sight.

Ah, the joys of sobriety.

Have been playing quite a bit of golf lately, preparing for our church's outing next Saturday. Shot 46 on Thur, 39 on Sat, and 47 yesterday (on a strange course). These are 9 hole scores, of course. I've been walking these 9's in an effort to jump start an effort to get back into some semblance of shape - a shape that does NOT put one in mind of the Pillsbury Dough Boy.

Led my second of three sessions in Sunday school on Christians and the media. It went well, even though I didn't put enough time into the preparation. Big subject, this, and one that's difficult to lay out in the format. Turns out that several other people had also been tuned in to WORD-FM for the now-infamous comments made by a certain guest host on the afternoon talk show. In case any of her associates read this blog, public opinion in our neck of the woods was not favorable to her perspective. I think I shall have more to say on this subject when time allows.

Sneak peak into the wrap up session next week: we will be debating the proposition that the Harry Potter books are actually written from a Christian perspective, ala the 'smuggled theology' conceits of C.S. Lewis, Tolkien and the Inklings literary group out of Oxford in the 1930's and 40's. Stay tuned, as I'm sure the fur will fly.

Finally, I happened to hear a little blurb on the radio during my drive into work this morning about pending legislation in Spain which will require men to sign a civil contract before marrying which obliges them to split the 'domestic duties' with their wives 50/50. Failure to do so could result in unspecified 'penalties' should the marriage fall apart.

Well guys, brace yourselves. This judicial train has been steaming down the tracks for the past several decades. First, the completely unfair bias against financial support and legal custody of children in divorce. Now this.

So, if I understand this, a man in Spain will now be forced to cook, clean, do laundry and dishes, irrespective of the balance of time, money and strain it takes said man to contribute to the financial stability of the union. Moreover, it would seem at first blush that ONLY the man will be legally obligated to perform (and be able to prove in a court of law such performance) said domestic duties. This, I'm assuming, is because of the widely known, but seldom acknowledged, judicial supposition that women are morally superior to men and don't need the law to enforce domestic compliance.

Once again, the post-modern philosophy of Western jurisprudence has placed the blame for all of the ills in modern society at the feet of affluent, white, males. If only they could exterminate us, I'm sure the world would instantly transform back into the paradise inhabited by Adam and Eve in Eden.

Basically, what I keep hearing from the liberal judiciary is that we men are going to continue to pay dearly for being true to ourselves, while women (and I realize that this is a broad stroke not applicable to everyone) will continue to use the legal system to try and take by force what they've not been able to accomplish on merit.

Knowing that I've now successfully enraged every reader with a uterus, can we be serious for a minute? Why in the world would anyone with half a brain want to get married under such overwhelming oppression? It's been said that a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle, but aren't we assuming a bit much regarding a man's need for a woman in this milieu?

I mean, I'm just as guilty as the next guy of being a total horn dog, and I've sunk to desparate low just to get laid. But at this rate, the cost is just becoming too prohibitive.

Granted, this rant is based on a very sketchy story coming from a morning DJ who can't even pronounce Elgin, IL correctly. The 'G' is soft, dude! However, my own personal experience and the plethora of horror stories that abound all over the media make it all too plausible. Plus, since European law now has precedence-setting power in American courts, I'd be worried.

Or would I?

I predict a significant rise in prostitution, STD's, and sex-related crimes in Spain in the decades after this silly law is passed, as well as a sharp drop in the number of marriages. The last prediction probably won't come to pass, since we're pretty stupidly idealistic when we're young, but you get the point.
- posted by The Drake @ 6:35 AM 1 comments

 
Breathe the Pure Air
I quit smoking yesterday. Can't say that I'm overjoyed or anything. I can only say it was the right thing to do and the right time to do it.

I know that I will stay smoke free because I quit in anger and disgust. I'm not going to give D. the satisfaction or opportunity to slather me with her pathethic whinings on the subject any longer.

On another note, a couple in my church just had a private adoption fall through. You couldn't want to meet a couple less deserving of this injustice. They have been trying unsuccessfully for over 10 years to have a child, and had finally turned to the private adoption option. After spending who knows how much money, renovating their home to accomodate a newborn, and going through all of the paperwork and anticipation, they finally brought a gorgeous little girl into their home.

This couple attends the same Sunday School class as us, and we've been getting regular updates on their progress. I don't really know them that well, so I was just, like, "Oh, that's so cool. Good for them." However, something was mentioned this past Sunday -- almost in passing -- that caught my attention. The prayer leader announced that they had finally taken the baby home. I guess there is some sort of waiting period, since she was at least two weeks old. The leader put out the expected, "pray for X and Y that they would have a smooth period of adjustment", etc. Then she mentioned something like, "and pray for them that everything goes through."

What? I thought it was a done deal.

Apparently not.

I saw them both (and the baby girl) the next night, at a church softball game. It was the league championship game. He plays on the team, along with several other guys from our group. I wanted to go cheer them on. Better than sitting around in the deep freeze that MY home has become.

I talked briefly to both of them. Ogled the baby a bit. She IS precious! You may not know this about me, but I am a huge sucker for babies. It embarasses me, actually. AND I'm good with them, which may surprise you even more. I don't let anyone know, however, especially since one of D's many dissatisfactions is that we can't have any. Like we need any more!

Anyway, I could see how in love with this wonderful child they both were, and this thing started going off in the back of my head. X (the wife) said to me, "Yeah, everyone keeps saying that she looks like Y (her husband)", and something in my mind starts screaming, "Warning! Warning! Danger in your vicinity, Drake!". After the game (we won. because we rock.) Y comes over, takes the little cutie in his arms, and just basks in the glow. I congratulate him, and he says to me, "Yeah, God has blessed multiple times over." Again, "Warning! Warning!" By this time, my heart is hurting, but I'm not exactly sure why. I initially thought that it had to do with the X's whole, "She looks like Y" comment, since there is no shared DNA and I am an anal retentive stickler for the truth when it comes to stuff like that. Plus, I just get uncomfortable with what I perceive as obvious denial. Someone always gets hurt. But I figured, "Hey, it's just the kind of silly stuff people do when they're happy. No harm." Y's exclamation was really more to the point. That little comment in Sunday school asking for prayer that 'everything would work out' just leaped into my mind.

Coming from a family whose major legacy seems to be being bitter over the fact that life is just more of a bitch than we'd like, I sensed a huge trap. "Careful," I was thinking, "The deal's not done yet. Are you still going to feel like God's been multiplying your blessings if this thing falls apart?"

Two days ago, I was at a restaurant with another guy from our group, when yet another guy who happened to be there with two other guys from the group, stopped over and said, "Hey, did you hear what happened to X and Y?" The friend I was with had, but I had not. My heart just dropped.

Oh, no. God, not this.

Sure enough, it turns out that the birth mother had changed her mind, and X and Y had to turn over their precious little angel to her that afternoon. Just like that. After months of praying, pursuing, hoping and investing their time, money and love -- nothing. Worse than that. Returning to a childless home after experiencing the inexpressible joy of having a new life under their roof for a grand total of less than 5 days.

Digging a little further with my friend, I discovered that the laws concerning private adoption require giving the birth mother a period of time (he said 40 days) to reclaim the child. He further told me that this was no teenage or single mother pregnancy, but rather a 40-year old, married woman with 3 other children. In my indignation at the injustice done to my brother and sister, I imagine little baby Z being yanked from a life of comfort and loving nuture back into some grim, trailer trash struggle for emotional and physical survival.

Of course, I don't know the details of the birth mother's situation at all, other than her decision to go the adoption route had to do with financial distress. She could be a loving and giving parent. She could give sweet little Z a wonderful life. She could actually be something other than the trailer-dwelling skank who is either too ignorant or too careless to take advantage of modern birth control methods to avoid being in such a situation.

But the fact of the matter is that her situation and actions have ripped the heart out of two people that I consider to be people of the highest character and moral standards, and who would be the most awesome parents. So I'd personally like to track her down and yank the windpipe right out of her throat.

This raises a number of issues that I don't really have the answers to, but I definitely have a strong opinion about.

First, the legal bias that places the mother's 'rights' over the child's best interests rears it's ugly head once again. From abandoning crack mothers to whatever this particular woman's story might happen to be, our legal system punishes children for the fact that all too many mothers simply can't get their shit together. My opinion is that the bias should swing the other way. Children need to be protected, even if that means that they lose their birth mothers. Whatever this woman's deal, she made the choice to turn over the fruit of her body to total strangers rather than suck it up and care for the child it was her choice to conceive. I think once you sign the papers, you should go to the hospital as if you were having a minor procedure, get it over with and get on with your life. Looking back only causes pain and problems for everyone.

Second, it is a great injustice that a woman with an 'inconvenient' pregnancy can have access to another couple's financial resources to obtain better prenatal care, hospitalization and possible other considerations than she would be able to procure on her own, then turn around and renege on her end of the bargain. Even though no one on either side wants to hear this, private adoption is a financial arrangement to 'buy' a baby. Affluent couples with resources who want a baby, but can't conceive, find someone in a jam and basically pay them (in medical costs, mostly) to have the baby and give it to them to raise as their own. Again, I don't know the details here, but it's not unheard of for the pregnant woman to receive some sort of financial compensation, structured so as to ease the burden of enduring the pregancy and ensuring the resulting health of the newborn. My opinion is that once such a woman receives such compensation from the private sector, she enters into a contract to give up that baby. Period. This 40 days to change your mind thing is bullshit. Is she going to pay back all the money that was spent caring for her and her baby? Is she going to be held accountable for pain and suffering compensation?

Yes, this sounds cold and harsh. It is cold and harsh. But it's the reality of the transaction taking place. It's the typical, politically correct denial of our liberal court system that causes the real pain.

Which leads me to my last point, which is hard for me to have to say. When in the world are we in the Church going to get real about God's Sovereignty? All of us have circumstances in our lives that we don't like, and which cause us pain. But they are God's will, people! This woman, for whatever reason, found herself 40, economically challenged, with 3 kids, a husband (of what sort I don't know), and pregnant. However she got there, whatever choices, sinfulness or outright stupidity she may have been guilty of, God orchestrated events and allowed these circumstances for one reason only: that she might come to Him in reliance and surrender and watch Him glorify Himself for the awesome, unique God that He is. This perspective assumes, of course, what even our legal system takes for granted: that it is best for a child to be raised by the mother who carried it to birth. This assumption is clear throughout God's Word.

X and Y are also constrained by their circumstances. Sigh. This is the painful part.

While some of us can seemingly go and take from the Tree of Life whenever we want (I'm convinced that before I got fixed, I caused a least one pregancy just by sneezing too close to my wife), others like X and Y don't have it so easy in the area of procreation. This issue is addressed on numerous occasions in the Bible, most notably in the story of Abraham, Sarah and Isaac. And Hagar and Ishmael. The teaching here is clearly to trust God in your circumstances, and to be very, very careful about trying to circumvent God's plan by pursuing other available, but questionable (i.e. - risky) avenues.

Oh Lord, please help me say this right. I certainly am not presuming sin on the part of X and Y's attempt to adopt, but it's clearly not God's will to answer their desire for a child through this avenue, at least not now. My personal opinion is that if God wants them to have a child, He will most certainly give them one or more. At the right time to serve HIS purposes.

My heart hurts for X and Y. I have nothing but compassion for them. I even have compassion for TTW (Trailer Trash Woman). Her situation, along with so many countless others in this world, deserves the attention, care and support of God's people.

But the one I feel for most is little Baby Z. May she never have to bear the hurt that's surrounding her now.
- posted by The Drake @ 8:23 AM 0 comments

 
Am I Too Sensitive?
I am majorly pissed off, and I don't really know what to do about it.

In my last post, I alluded to my life being a 'jumble'. I was being deliberately mild, but since being kept up past 1 am last night by D's latest threat to leave, I no longer fucking care.

My life is, simply put, a fucking cesspool of being rejected, abandoned, judged and severely conscious of my personal failings, character flaws and deep-seated anger.

It's been a while since I've blogged, so I'll have to give you a brief overview of what's been going on in my life.

Since my post of 5/26, I've:

1. relapsed into smoking weed
2. starting smoking cigarettes again
3. lost my father to a heart attack
4. allowed myself to be talked out of getting baptized by the pastor of my church
5. endured an ongoing meltdown by D over items 1 & 2.
6. stopped smoking weed for the past week. at least temporarily.
7. discovered that I enjoy my job and playing golf a great deal more than I do my marriage.
8. pretty much told God to fuck off and leave me alone.

In detail:

1. D, ever unsatisfied with something I'm either doing or not doing, suggested we get some weed from the neighbors so she could get a night of hot sex out of the deal. Disregarding the fact that I am a TOTAL addict AND that I had been straight for almost six months AND praying like a drowning man for grace to live alone in a marriage that she is committed to being unhappy in, she went for it. Three months later, I'd rather have a joint than have to deal with living under the same roof with her.

2. After D decided to tell one of my kids that I was getting high, AND having another one bust me in the act, I switched to cigarettes in an attempt to satisfy my oral fixation for smoking. This caused a shitstorm from D, who hates smoking more than anything, I discovered. She went so far as to ask me to go back to weed and stop cigarettes. She pissed me off so much, I did both.

3. Two Sundays after meeting with the pastor and elders in preparation for my baptism (a long story for another blog when I'm not in such a foul mood), I get a voice mail from my sister, who had not spoken to me in 3 years, telling me that my Dad (who also had not spoken to me in 3 years) had died. She went on to tell me that I was not to go to my mother's house (who had not spoken to me in about a year -- she's the forgiving one) and that she would call me when she had info on the 'arrangements'. Dear, old Dad, who spent the better part of his twenties and thirties beating me down, didn't like the fact that I'd emailed him in a group email including his sisters (who he also wasn't speaking to) to announce my engagement to D. Dad had trouble understanding why, after a lifetime of abuse, condemnation and overall withholding of love, I would not choose a more 'personal' method of communicating. And, of course, he needed to let me know that since I was living in sin, he could not offer any blessing or encouragement for my stated intention to marry.

At the time, we all knew that Dad had cancer throughout his body. I sent two emails in response to his response: the first basically telling him to fuck off, being as he'd never been anything other than a source of pain to me anyway; and the second apologizing for the venom in my first reply and stating my concern that if we didn't figure out a way to mend our deal, I'd have stand over his grave not knowing why I never had a real father.

Congratulations, Dad, you miserable fuck. Thanks for nothing. The strange thing about it is that people seem convinced that he's with Jesus now. I certainly hope so, because despite his total absence of any kind of tangible love for me, he's still my father and the only hope I have now for closure is to see him on the other side. Of course, there's more than a smidgeon of doubt on that score in my mind, seeing as it takes some kind of hardness to know that you're on the way out and yet ignore the olive branch I tried to extend in a Father's Day card.

It took 3 days for my family to let me know what the deal was with the funeral. My father has 5 sisters, two of whom go to my church. Yet I was expected not to tell them that their brother had died. "It was his wish that they not be told," my mother informed me when she called me a day and half later wondering why I didn't call her. Um, it seemed pretty clear from sis's message that you had no desire to have my sorry ass around, that's why.

I had to miss the whole week of work while she and my sister decided what they were going to do, which was to basically keep me at a distance and pretend like my father didn't have any other family.

4. In my desire to deal with the whole Dad thing like a real Christian, I put in a call to the church for prayer. When the pastor called, he asked how I was dealing with it. Being high, I told him I was high and struggling not to want to stay high through the funeral. At least. Two days later, he calls back to talk to me about whether or not it was a good idea to get baptized the next Sunday. Not because he was concerned about my emotional state, mind you. I had actually come to the conclusion that it would be a great opportunity to promote healing in what was left of my family. As if my mother or sister would have actually shown up. No, pastor was much more concerned that my active addiction might make a mockery of my public declaration of faith. So, I'm on the phone with him, my mind so consumed with all the shit surrounding Dad's death that I'm not really able to think straight, and he wants to know where I'm at 'directionally' with this whole thing. So I tell him I have to think about it.

By the time he calls back, I'm pissed. Why is it that some Christians can't see the forest for the trees? I mean, my FATHER JUST DIED. I told you that there were issues with the relationship. And you want to pin me down on whether my desire to get baptised is tainted? Fuck off. So I just tell him that I'm not going to get into all of that now. I can get baptized later. Maybe by someone who actually understands what it's supposed to mean. I've been a Christian for over 26 years, and I've just come to the conclusion that I should do it, largely based on one this guy's sermons. He presented it as an act of obedience, not as some sort of public dedication or commitment not to ever fuck up in your life. I wonder if he pays attention to what he's saying. Anyway, after thinking about it, I realized it was best not to stand up, give a testimony and be baptized by someone you're really pissed off at.

5. D. is a total basket case. Two weekends after she got her hot sex, she's up my ass to quit the weed. Now, at the time, I was having a really positive effect from using. After two months or more of praying through tears on my drive to work for grace to regain the will to live and be giving, selfless and Christ-honoring to this never satisfied woman, I was newly energized. I was getting work done around the house and garden, teaching her boys how to play ball and coaching their Little League team, and fucking her brains out nearly every night. I haven't been this productive at home in, well, ever...

But it wasn't working for her anymore. She was pushing me away, and nagging the living shit out of me about it. So I just kept on getting things done, leaving her to stew. She got so pissed off about me not doing things her way, she stepped up to me during Memorial Day weekend like she was going to throw a punch. Seriously. Then she wrote up a will and printed up the Separation Agreement she had done the year before and demanded that I sign it. As if.

Of course, my work around the office was suffering somewhat. That's when I started smoking cigarettes again.

Well, you'd have thought I spit in her face, cheated on her, slapped her around and emptied her bank account all at the same time the day she found out. It was during HER boys' last game of the season. She LEFT THE FIELD, missing the oldest's last nice hit (something I taught him how to do, btw) so she could go home and MOVE HER SHIT INTO THE BASEMENT. The divorce papers came out again, and she told me that she would leave if I didn't quit.

Now, despite my natural tendency to say "Fuck you", I did stop during a trip we took to Florida at the end of June. Yeah, I had a company-paid conference in Orlando, and decided to rent a minvan and take her kids and her to Tampa to see her mother. Because I was still very much into demonstrating love and commitment to the marriage. I knew how much it would mean to her to be able to take a trip. I spent over a grand that I didn't have to in order to make that happen for her and the boys. And I don't regret it. I did the right thing. But gratitude was not forthcoming. By the time we got home, I was ready for a smoke.

She did take a bit of a break during my week of 'bereavement'. However, that was made possible by the fact that only hours before I found out, I took a vow to go another week without cigarettes to demonstrate my commitment to her and desire to make her happy. Afterwards, I wanted a smoke so bad that I actually spent a few hours curled up in a ball on my bed, as if I was going through heroin withdrawal. My cravings were that bad. But I made it clear that I would not break that vow unless she released me from it. Which she was in no way willing to do. But I'm proud of the fact that I made it the full week (8 days, actually) without taking a single drag. Of course, I saw very clearly that I was only going to be loved and supported on a conditional basis by this woman.

Last night, she decided to put herself out there by offering to 'really' love me, if I would just quit. Otherwise, she was out. Again. Or still, depending on your point of view. I declined her kind proposal, unable to make her understand that her offer of love had absolutely no appeal with all its strings. Today she only loves me if I don't smoke. Tomorrow she only loves me if I never fail to mop the kitchen floor whenever SHE thinks it should be done. No thanks.

7. Despite the mountain of pain I've been in over the past month, yesterday I realized that my head had cleared up enough to really focus on my job. I really love what I do. I work at a decent company with generous benefits making nice money. I have a great boss, one who actually values something about me. And I get to work on new challenges every day, steadily building a reputation as the 'go to guy' in my area of expertise. I stand to make a 5-figure bonus next spring, with 3 weeks' vacation and 12 paid holidays. Why fuck with that? This is the best motivation I've had to stop getting high in 3 months.

Plus, I've been playing golf with guys from the church, and will be playing softball with them in a couple of weeks. Good guys. I like hanging with them. They think I'm smart and funny. They don't question my eternal destiny or turn their noses up at my smoking.

So, all in all, I'm doing OK. I could be better, but I sure as hell could be a whole lot worse.

At least I have stuff to do to compensate for the fact that I've got no marriage to speak of.

8. I didn't really tell God to fuck off OR leave me alone. But my prayers are a whole lot less frequent. I want to get back on track, but I don't want to live a joyless life of living just to keep other people happy. I'm not asking for pity, and I'm not giving any either. If God wants me to suffer, suffer I shall. But I'm through denying who I am. I'm pissed, and I don't care who knows anymore.

Diana keeps alluding to being suicidal over my smoking. You know what? Stop trying to lay your emotional instability at my feet. Get help. Get a clue. Get out. I don't care. You think killing yourself is the answer? No one's stopping you. It's time to grow up and realize that God didn't order the universe for your comfort. Or mine. Grab the good. Endure the bad. Nothing lasts forever.

Shalom?

Whatever.
- posted by The Drake @ 4:27 PM 2 comments

 
I'm back, but I got nothin'
OK, time to get back on the blogging trail.

Since my life is so much of a jumble right now, and I can't even think straight, much less describe it in writing, I've lifted the following questionnaire from the Urban Princess. I guess this is a tag game, but I don't really care. No one tags me anyway. I guess I have cooties.

So here we go.

10 years ago, I was sweating and crying in my newly rented, third-floor apartment in New Brighton, having accepted that wife #2 hated me enough to crush my hopes in a happy, Christian family life after 10 years together. I then embarked on the decade-long sojourn to deal with the pain, which I'm not quite sure has ended yet.

5 years ago, I was playing a lot of golf, starting the worst job I've had in the IT field, and enjoying a roommate with benefits.

1 year ago, I was separated from D, but getting very close to convincing her to come back. Stupid, stupid, stupid! I was also enjoying a period of spiritual growth I had seen in over 15 years. Does stupidity equal spiritual growth?

yesterday I taught the first of three lessons on Christians and the Media in Sunday School and played 18 holes of golf in blistering heat. I shot 91. Not bad for not having played in nearly a month.

tomorrow I will hopefully get more done at work than I did today, work in my yard, and maybe have sex.

5 snacks I enjoy: I not really a snacks kinda guy. I snack on appetizers, such as spinach artichoke dip, quesedillas, wings, spring rolls and pot stickers.

5 bands/artists that I know the lyrics to most of their songs: U2 (of course), REM, the Beatles, Neil Young and the Cure.

5 things I'd do with $100M: first and foremost -- RETIRE, build/buy a sweet, but modest, house nearer to my kids, set up a fund for all of the kids to get a decent start in life, play golf every day, and get back in shape with the help of a personal trainer and nutritionist.

5 locations I'd like to run away to: Colorado, Jamaica, Ireland, Arizona, San Diego.

5 bad habits I have: smoking weed, smoking cigarettes, masturbating, eating out when I can't afford it, getting involved with chicks with whom the only I have in common is the desire for sex.

5 things I like doing: smoking weed, smoking cigarettes, masturbating, eating out when I can't afford it, getting involved with chicks with whom the only I have in common is the desire for sex.

5 things I will never wear: a Speedo, a toupee, a thong, a trophy wife, bling.

5 TV shows I like: I don't watch TV since I cancelled satellite, but The West Wing, ER, Smallville, Buffy/Angel (I know they're both gone, but I like 'em, dog-gonnit!), ...er..., I can't think of a 5th. TV is such shit!

5 movies I like: Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me, A Very Long Engagement, Fargo, Napoleon Dynamite, Office Space.

5 people I'd like to meet: Bono, Bob Dylan, W, Condie Rice, Jesus (hopefully, I'll actually LIKE the encounter, seeing He's the only One I know I'm going to actually MEET, and I've got some 'splaining to do).

5 biggest joys at the moment: Their names are Brooklynn, August, Dechlan, Silas and Zeke.

5 favorite toys: my new, used 3-wood; my compound miter saw; my stash of illegal fireworks; my Palm Pilot (I play a lot of solitaire); and ... and... Shit! My life really sucks.

5 tagged (even though no one EVER tags me): Name Hidden, Willow, Thomas, Jeanne, and Sara Zarr.

- posted by The Drake @ 1:56 PM 7 comments