Homosexuality

Now that the election is over it seems (at least here in southern California) that hype, both for and against, prop 8 now merely glows reminiscently, like a setting sun. But this does not mean the issue has been resolved. Nay, contrary to popular belief, there is more to the Christian life than simply seeing that a proposition securing marriage between a man and a woman stays intact.

It is still our duty to love our neighbors. And whom are our neighbors? Well, the Bible is pretty clear that it is everybody we come in contact with...(even "Christian" advocates who sold their time on street corners over the past month holding expensive signage).

Guys, I must admit, I still struggle with the homosexuality topic. I find, within context, nowhere that Jesus speaks against the lifestyle. This is not to say that I agree with it. I believe that a the biology of a man and a woman fit together so beautifully. And not only that, but nothing compares to the way a man and a woman can complement each other. But I also believe that I am unsure as to how to keep my sin under control. It seems that I do it all the time, and my confusion as to how to live a perfect life becomes even more apparent to me the more I do it. Thus, based off the fact that I sin, and on the fact that Jesus does not seem to tell the homosexuals of his time (see the argument on the link below) to get lost, I too need to look on them with as much love and acceptance as anyone else. I must pray continually for them just as I would by best friends. For my best friends commit willful sin also, right? And do not I also?

I was taken by this article. It is a definite MUST READ. I won't spoil it for you, but basically one man (a self-proclaimed conservative Christian) visits a seminar entitled, “Homosexuality is Not a Sin…It’s a Blessing from God.” This was enough for him (and me) to be hooked. I hope that this article sheds some light on the issue for any of you who also conclusively struggle on this issue as well.

metaphor one

A few years ago, I went to the Getty to see an exhibit of artwork from a monastery (which I believe was near Egypt?). Amongst other things, the exhibit contained many tapestries woven together with thousands of different colored threads that depicted religious scenes and such.

Now with paints, we all know that the artist can mix different pigments to obtain new colors. The same is partially true of threads, although they are not directly mixed (obviously). When I examined a tapestry up close, I realized that two different colored threads running next to each other produce the effect of a third color when viewed from a distance, simply because our eyes cannot focus on the tiny variations from a distance.

So, take a yellow thread, for instance. At times, it runs alongside a blue thread, a red thread, a black thread, another yellow thread. Depending on the thread it is combined with, the overall effect changes. The blue and yellow threads blend to create an effect of green, while up close the two colors cause each other to stand out in contrast. The red and yellow are more sympathetic with each other, and add warmth to the overall scene. When black and yellow meet, the yellow shines bright and is unmistakable, even from afar. And two yellow threads will bolster each other into a band of gold.

We are like this of course, every one of us. There are certain aspects of other people that only we can draw out, and aspects that are drawn out of us only by certain people. At times we clash, at times we sympathize, at times we shine bright, at times we join together in strength. It is necessary to understand the ways that everyone around us brings about these aspects, to understand just how important relationships are. We may be individual people, with our own unique job to play, but from a distance, in the grand scheme of things, we are all part of something greater: a big picture woven by a true artist.

And think of this: it is not just for visual appeal that the threads are arranged the way they are. It is also for structural integrity. Remove just one thread and not only does the picture fade, but the tapestry falls apart as well.

because everybody needs a good laugh!

I subscribe to Brian McLaren's blog and this was one of his most recent posts. I especially like the Japanese example...

http://www.brianmclaren.net/archives/blog/economics-101.html
Thanks Brian.

"For those of you baffled by the global economic meltdown, the following summary of basic economic theory should be helpful. Some of it may seem familiar and you may feel you've heard it all before, but note that fascinating new information has been added, reflecting the latest analysis of recent economic trends ...

21 Economic Models ... explained with cows

The 2008 update

SOCIALISM
You have 2 cows.You give one to your neighbor.

COMMUNISM
You have 2 cows.The State takes both and gives you some milk.

FASCISM
You have 2 cows. The State takes both and sells you some milk.

NAZISM
You have 2 cows. The State takes both and shoots you.

BUREAUCRATISM
You have 2 cows. The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away...

TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
You have two cows.You sell one and buy a bull.Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows.You sell them and retire on the income.

SURREALISM
You have two giraffes.The government requires you to take harmonica lessons.

AN AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows.Later, you hire a consultant to analyze why the cow has dropped dead.

VENTURE CAPITALISM
You have two cows.You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute adebt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get allfour cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows.The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary toa Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder whosells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company. Theannual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on onemore. You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States ,leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with therelease. The public then buys your bull.

A FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.You go on strike, organize a riot, and block the roads, because youwant three cows.

A JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cowand produce twenty times the milk. You then create a clever cowcartoon image called 'Cowkimon' and market it worldwide.

A GERMAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.You re-engineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, andmilk themselves.

AN ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows, but you don't know where they are.You decide to have lunch.

A RUSSIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.You count them and learn you have five cows.You count them again and learn you have 42 cows.You count them again and learn you have 2 cows.You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka.

A SWISS CORPORATION
You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you.You charge the owners for storing them.

A CHINESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.You have 300 people milking them.You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity.You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.

AN INDIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.You worship them.

A BRITISH CORPORATION
You have two cows.Both are mad.

AN IRAQI CORPORATION
Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.You tell them that you have none.No-one believes you, so they bomb you and invade your country.You still have no cows, but at least now you are part of Democracy....

AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.Business seems pretty good.You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.

this foolish heart

i saw your heart
behind the walls
of pain. of sin. of fear.

your scared heart.

my heart swelled
with warmth for you,
to overflow and fill you up.
your heart stayed cold.

my heart broke
with pain for you,
to show you someone cared.
your heart stayed numb.

i felt your heart
inside its prison
of steel. cold, aching steel.

your scarred heart.

my heart bled
with passion for you,
to lift you up from despair.
your heart turned away.

your lonely heart.

i smashed my heart
against the bricks of your soul,
leaving bloodstains
leaving lovestains.

my heart saw the stains
of another, of Him,
on the outside.

on the outside only.

will the blood of Christ heal a concrete heart?
will the blood of Christ heal a concrete heart?

the young lover, aged.

the hyacinths in your eyes are all

i see now. they once 

shook in your hands and lived

as the wind beat our love to tears - 

our blood the frightened 

petals, brilliant and wet. 

i smell each petty

flower, sitting

by my window. the pane lightly

cracked with age and the tepid 

evenings of young love's humidity. 

outside, your bones

are burning below the surface

of an oak tree.  

Vote for...

...good old John McCain (emphasis on old).
...Barack Obama (emphasis on Barack Obama).
...Jesus (sorry Shane, but no).
...Ross Perot (ok, best possible option yet!)

Personally, and give me a big fat slap across the proverbial wrist, via your comments, if you wish, but I didn't vote for president.

That's right: VOTE NO ON PRESIDENT!

Why did I throw my vote away? Why didn't I do my civic duty to vote for whom I felt would best run our country, or at least for the party that I felt would best represent our country?

First, I don't believe I threw my vote away. Really, I think that no matter what a politician says he/she is going to do, not much will actually change, thus, I could have voted for the moon and we would still all be living in a democratic nation, sipping lattes, and gasping at the collapse of the world as we know it.

Second, I think that neither (not either) major candidate is best for our country, thus why I didn't vote (and I didn't do any research on the minor parties, so I didn't feel equipped to make an educated vote for one of the others...though I did consider the Green party ;) ). I truly believe that neither candidate has it right--but if I may pose a question: does any candidate ever have it right? and what exactly is "it"? What consititutes a "good" candidate? I can tell you this much: we will never have a consensus on this, meaning somebody always goes home to cry in their beer.

I am really just ready for this nonsense to be over with and for our country's government to leave the break-room and head back to actual issues: Uganda, poverty, balancing budgets, securing justice, freedom, etc.