Fackin Truth Blog

Run now if you hate discussions about RELIGION

So I took a little stroll past the field negro's spot and caught him talking smack about the folks who distribute camouflage Bibles to U.S. troops. Field went to jaw-dropping lengths to find an appropriate Bible reference to begin his blog post (I swore he was allergic to bibles and scripture references):

"Rescue me o Lord from evil men; protect me from men of violence.
[men] who desive evil plans in their hearts and stir up war every day."
Psalm 140:1-2

Apparently, field not only has heartburn with the distribution of religious materials to troops in the field, but he also can't swallow the oxymoron of camouflage appearing on the covers of a religious book as if our self-professed "Christian nation" should experience protection from God during a war with a "Muslim nation."

Disclaimer: Before you get this twisted, I love love love field's blog. He was the first blog on current/political issues that I labeled a personal "daily must read." And I find myself agreeing with field on some major points. But - as commonly happens in households across the country - religion is an issue that we can disagree on for centuries. And don't get this wrong either: Field doesn't dislike Christians. In fact, field doesn't discriminate along religious lines or hold one above the other. What he despises are folks to wield religion like a battering ram to control and otherwise belittle others.

With the disclaimers out of the way, let's start with what I think field and I agree about...

Strict organized religion is one of the worst things that ever happened as a means to represent a good and loving God. The Bible describes the believer's role as an 'ambassador of Jesus Christ.' At times, organized religious groups look more like drunken ambassadors breaking all the laws of a foreign country. "Oh good Lord. Peter p*ssed on the daisies again."

And in the world of critics, Siskel (rest his soul) and Ebert don't hold a candle to random church ladies in big hats. Once a critical mass of flawed humans design a religious experience, the love of God starts looking like a cloud of criticism as filtered through the lens of xenophobia. Here's what a few from field's spot had to say:

"The more I study religion, the more I'm convinced that man never worshiped anything but himself."
~ Dr. Know ~

"I'm with you on this one Christoper, humans need to explain the unexplainable and hence religion. Humans also have the need apparently to control and persecute other humans and hence organized religion." [emphasis mine]
~ classical one ~

"...I'm always disturbed by people who claim we are a Christian nation, because they are usually more concerned with controlling the nation and not with practicing Christianity."
~ kellybelle ~

So while field and his readers and I generally agree that humans have done much to harm each other in the name of organized religion, I believe we eventually walk opposing directions at the fork in the road. Why?

Because no man is God. And organized religion is not necessarily spirituality - the place where we connect with God on an individual basis.

I will never oppose the sale of baseball bats. For every person who uses a bat to commit a violent crime, another may train to become a world-class athlete.

I will never oppose the sale of sharp knives. For every thief who holds a victim at knife-point, 10 mothers are using knives to feed their families.

And along this same thought process, I will not discard my faith because of every fool who carries a Bible but doesn't have an ounce of love for others. Five words come to mind... "The baby with the bath water..." Another commenter from field's spot alluded to this point:

"I always get so frustrated though, when those who don't believe in Christianity seemingly ridicule faith. In this post, maybe you are just ridiculing proselytizers but not the actual faith. I think tough, it sort of think that the same thing.

I'd like to say that it is a difficult path to follow God and "walk in love" all the time. Sometimes you screw up.

But, though I love God I am still fallible and don't always operate in love. (I believe that God is love) Just because I love God does not make me God (perfect). I still face the same temptations that everyone faces, perhaps more so, because I have outwardly chosen to follow a specific doctrine. Now, there are people watching to see if my relationship is real. You see some of you wait to see if we will falter so that you can validate your belief that what I (we as Christians) believe is fallacy.

You can't necessarily judge the faith by its followers; but I know that people do. So, I try to live it in the best way. But, as I mentioned above we make mistakes, too. Allow us the opportunity to make mistakes." ~ anonymous aka SS ~

While many define "religious" in terms of a complex math equation that includes

(church visits) x (Bibles owned) - (the use of expletives) = Holy,

I believe some of the most "Christian" and "religious" things you could ever do in this life are:

1. Love your neighbor

2. Love yourself

3. Fight for justice and equality

4. Treat the planet (e.g. nature) with respect

5. Distribute wealth (i.e. eradicate greed)

6. Treat others exactly the way you would want to be treated

At the end of the day, field and I find ourselves in agreement, that self-professed "Christians" aren't the only people on this planet who demonstrate those truly blessed behaviors and religous labels are far less important than what lurks within the heart.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Where the discussion all started:

IBS Direct.com: Military Chapel Bible Fund (MCBF)

Christianity, Superstition, Rules of Engagement, and the Discussion of Race in America

Warning:
Long post. Go refill your water, coffee, or gin before you settle into this one.

Earlier today, I had an unnecessary argument with a close friend. We'll call him "Vance."

Vance is a professed Christian, believes in God, happily proclaims faith in Jesus Christ, and even gushes about how The Secret - which is also based on a biblical principle - changed his outlook on life.

But God help me, Vance is hopelessly superstitious.

I find this mix quite disturbing. How do you believe in a good and loving God who has power over the earth but also believe that same God would allow seven years of bad luck if you break a mirror? The last time I checked, my bible didn't outline such drastic outcomes for routine clumsiness.

So after Vance had another superstitious episode, and went on to assign bad luck to me for breaking one of the rules of superstition, I asked a simple question:

"How does a man of faith and belief in God also believe in bad luck for breaking a mirror?"

I went on to describe the principles of Christianity that seemed in direct conflict with superstition, and asked Vance to explain how he reconciles this.

Well...  How can I put this...  The depth of Vance's emotional response left him utterly incapable of firing enough brain cells to answer my question. In short - Vance flared his nostrils and became a mental mess. He proceeded to get angry and to put divisive words in my mouth that I never spoke or intended. After trying to defend myself and steer the conversation back to my original question, I found myself angry and frustrated. Vance is still a friend, but for a moment, there was a glitch in trust that left me looking at him out the side of my face.

During some quiet time after that unnecessarily heated exchange, I began to understand why the discussion of race deteriorates so quickly.

• The rules of engagement for any exchange should require one side to carefully consider what is actually said - and to address each issue with care - as opposed to a mental collapse into an emotional mess that destroys any hope of a productive conversation.

• The rules of engagement should require each side to weigh one issue at a time, instead of listening with nail-biting intensity for a chance to jump in on another point.

• And most of all, the rules of engagement should require each side to enter under the assumption that the other party means me no harm.

There's nothing worse than deep-seeded emotional responses that trigger Attack Mode.

If you consider the last conversation you heard about race - between members of each race - wouldn't you agree that improved rules of engagement may have actually steered a more productive response?

In terms of black and white, too many whites write-off blacks as chronic complainers. Too many blacks pigeonhole whites as privileged and uncaring primadonnas. Both sides respond to discussion points based on underlying biases instead of ruminating on what might actually be valid.

I'll leave you with an example of what I consider to be a constructive argument against affirmative action. Not constructive as in "the author is absolutely right'...  But constructive as in "not so peppered with emotional reactions that I can't find a point worth stopping to discuss with you."

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

On January 15, 2008, Glenn Sacks posted this commentary by an Engineer named Dave K. The conversation started after Glenn authored blog posts about Hillary Clinton's candidacy.

Dave works as an engineer and describes the white male response to affirmative action directed at women and minorities (although only women are mentioned in the title). Dave represents what can be right about rules of engagement as related to debates in personal relationships to debates about race relations. I appreciate Dave's candor in describing white (male) backlash against affirmative action:

Engineer Dave K's Perspective on Women in Male-Dominated Fields

I've been an Engineer for going on 20 years now, and I've worked at companies with no female engineers all the way to the large multinational I now work for where roughly 30%-40% of technical coworkers are female. I've also recruited on and off over the years, and I've seen discrimination in both directions in roughly equal measure.

Most large companies have diversity programs, and those programs encourage business groups to maintain a diverse workforce (gender, race primarily). I think this is a healthy goal, and certainly makes for a more interesting work environment, but it often results in pressure to choose candidates based more on diversity considerations than on merit, and this causes a cascade of problems for companies. (Which is why they keep these programs VERY quiet). I'm on the fence regarding the wisdom of such decisions... but I can say for sure that one result of this is a backlash against those benefiting from such programs.

At one notable college recruiting trip I was told straight out by a female soon to be BSEE that she was expecting an offer $10k over what any of her male candidates were expecting solely because she was one of the few women in the graduating class. The sad part is that she wasn't wrong, the company I worked for had relatively narrow salary bands for new engineering grads - but there were two bands, one for men and one that was about $6k higher for women or targeted minorities (even more if the candidate was female AND a minority).

A while back I went through a very large layoff, and while the company handled the situation as well as I've ever seen such a situation handled (a VERY tough thing for any company), a good part of the "postmortem" analysis by survivors was figuring out who got to keep their job because of their race or gender. I have no doubt that many of the targets of this were undeserving, but when a company has a policy of gender and race selectivity - they have a policy of gender and race discrimination. Call it what you want - that's what it amounts to. I daresay that nearly EVERY large company in the country has these programs, so is it so surprising that those who COULD benefit from such programs would suffer a backlash from those who could be damaged by them.

As a quick aside... I think it's a very difficult situation we've put employers in these days, they're beat up on all sides - folks who believe in pure merit, folks who believe some groups need temporary 'help' to bootstrap them into the mainstream, folks who believe that 'equality' means exact 50/50 distributions. If it was just pressure groups it would be a challenge... but in our litigious nation there is a real bottom line exposure for companies who step even an inch out of line to what the flavor of the month government policy is. Personally I think there IS a justification for these programs, but all too often I hear people who are the beneficiaries of such programs bemoaning the inevitable backlash without any inkling that there are valid reasons for coworkers to be upset. NOBODY likes to watch a mid-performing coworker get promoted over them based on their race or gender, and even someone like myself who understands the reasoning behind it finds it a bitter pill. Angry White Men indeed, and justifiably so. The thing I always try to remember though is that corporations are forced participants in these social engineering experiments just as much as we are.

Of course the other downside from this reality is that if a person belongs to the benefiting group, they will be seen by coworkers that don't know them as unfairly gaining even if they ARE the person most deserving a promotion or gain. I can't say I've ever been in that position, but I expect it would be a very frustrating situation.

In the end... we as humans tend to really take notice of thing we see as unjust toward us, and we often aren't as sensitive to things that benefit us at another's expense. White Male engineers see a female or black engineer promoted and from personal experience with the person we know it's not through merit... and we see blatant injustice. That person no doubt feels he/she deserved the promotion, so when the that person feels the backlash ... they see blatant injustice too. Doubly cursed is the promoted person who truly deserved it, because that persons accomplishment will be tainted unjustly.

So in relevance to the situation cited in Glenn article... engineers are a tough crowd, and giving someone a title will not necessarily give them credibility with engineers (we're fairly antisocial creatures after all). There's three possibilities I see for engineers discounting a female or minority coworkers opinions. The first is that the person is not qualified and has gained position through a 'affirmative action' like corporate diversity drive. The second is that the person is deserving but the coworkers have been burned enough that they suspect any female or minority... and they're maliciously lashing out at a person from that target group. The third is that the coworkers are a bunch of bigots or misogynists.

Of the three scenarios, I think the third is least likely, and the distribution between the first and the second will depend on how hard your companies 'drive for diversity' is.

In my professional experience I've seen all three situations, I've seen a minority man COURTED by management even though his professional performance was so sub-par he'd have been fired if he was white. I've listened to guys lump a female into the 'undeserving' group simply because she was female and got a promotion - without knowing anything about her actual skills, and I've heard enough racist comments to know that real racism is still out there. The only encouragement I can offer to the poster is that I also know that engineers and scientists DO tend to be merit based - even if you benefit by a selective promotion or hiring program to get your position, if you're GOOD, you will earn the respect of the majority of your peers... which is nothing more or less than the rest of us have to prove BEFORE we get the position. I have had the privilege to work with some very talented women, which I attribute in no small part to these seemingly onerous programs (which is why I'm so torn by them).

Discrimination is ALWAYS going to create these sorts of situations... so when I read an article where a person who may have benefited from institutionalized discrimination bemoans what could very well be understandable backlash from those who are most certainly the victims of it, I understand where everyone's coming from. I truly feel bad for the talented woman or minority who gets labeled unjustly, but I also feel bad for those (lets face it) white men who have been embittered by what is essentially state sponsored discrimination. In the end I HOPE that this period of turmoil will end with companies being able to shift toward true meritocracy.

A White Christian Male View on Obama's Speech and Obama's Candidacy

At one point, Obama seemed widely viewed as the candidate who "transcends" race. Yet somehow we all knew that the elephant in the room, aka Obama's brown skin, would become an eyebrow-raising issue surrounding his candidacy. Like it or not. Race. Still. Matters.

Well, we have Rev. Wright to thank for unleashing the elephant from the time-out corner. More accurately, we have the offended whites who demanded a reaction from Obama regarding Rev. Wright's comments on race in America.

You can do your own google search on Wright's comments and the resulting storm. In fact, if you don't know about  Wright's "God DAMN America," then you should probably skip this blog post and rejoin your regularly scheduled programming under the rock where you reside.

But if you, like me, took interest in Obama's need to respond with a speech on race in America, then keep reading.

As a black woman, I won't pretend to understand what it's like to be white in America. Thankfully, I don't really care much because I'm more interested in my relationships with people and not the presence of melanin in their skin.

But I also won't pretend that my skin color alone never sparked a hurtful response from a perfect stranger. As an individual, my love, kindness, and respect are legally colorblind. But as a country with an unfortunate cargo bay of baggage... Race. Still. Matters.

Curious about sentiments from white America, I found my way to Deacon Blue. Deacon Blue hits the issue from an interesting perspective of diversity. He's a white American embracing Christian values, married to a black woman, raising bi-racial children. I leave you with Blue's assessment of the recent explosion of race surrounding Obama's campaign - as it blossomed through the "inflammatory" remarks of a Christian pastor:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Shades of Gray
by Deacon Blue

Many Christian bloggers whom I respect greatly and read regularly will never vote for Barack Obama if he gets the nod to be the Democratic candidate for president of these semi-United States. Of course, they probably wouldn’t vote for Hillary Clinton, either, but the point is that they see Obama as a liberal wingnut who will rabidly support abortions and wild social spending and who won’t support family and spiritual values.

I respect their views because we all have it partly right and partly wrong. But for my part, I tend to look at the other side (read, the GOP) and see a bunch of folks who have no problem spending our money on pointless wars instead of rebuilding our infrastructure, systematically enriching the wealthiest at the expense of both the middle class and the poor, and claiming to want government to stay out of our personal lives while simultaneously trying to legislate our morality (OK, the democrats do that last one, too, I have to admit, plus they try to legislate healthy behaviors at the expense of personal freedoms).

Guess I just see it differently. I always did, because I’ve supported Obama from damn near day one and if I hadn’t, his speech yesterday on race in America would have won me over. Because this wasn’t just a speech about race; it showed a real Christian who holds faith close and admits his imperfections. He represents spiritually a lot of what fills and drives me, except that unlike Obama, I don’t have a church home right now.

But from past experience, I know what it’s like to be deeply involved in a church and not agree with everything the pastor says—nor feel like I have to.

People have called Obama to the carpet to answer for why he’d go to a church where a pastor makes inflammatory statements and yet they’ve glossed over the multitude of white candidates over the years whose pastors or spiritual advisers or religious supporters have views and statements every bit as fierce and inflammatory, if not worse.

As the husband of a black woman and a father to two biracial children, I have an insight into black life that most white people don’t enjoy, so let me tap into that just a little bit to let any confused non-blacks in on why we shouldn’t give two shits about what Rev. Jeremiah Wright had to say when it comes to Obama’s presidential ambitions:

The black church ain’t like the white church.

Stop expecting that a black pastor would refrain from incendiary political talk from the pulpit at times. Especially if that black pastor is old enough to have experienced institutionalized racism—government sanctioned abuse of the black race long after constitutional amendments and various laws should have settled once and for all that blacks were every bit as entitled to things as whites were.

I’ll say it again. The black church ain’t like the white church.

Argue all you will that blacks are social services leeches, despite all the numbers that show whites use way more social services dollars—but long before before the government was willing to give blacks shit for help, the black church had to serve as the social service center for blacks. And because whites were so terrified of blacks gathering together in groups it had to be a political gathering place as well as being the religious gathering place. It even had to be the fucking health clinic in many communities.

So if you wonder why passions run high in black churches and why politics are ingrained in them—and even why a black Christian church like Obama’s church, Trinity, might recognize Louis Farrakhan for good works in a community—remember it’s because for too long, America hadn’t been willing to give shit to black folks…and when it finally did, it gave it out sloppily, made blacks feel bad about it, structured it to help continue to destroy family stability, and then f-ing expected it to make up for centuries of mistreatment.

We’ve come a long way in this country, and that’s good. But we have a long ways to go, no matter how much white America just wants to have the race issue just go away.

Obama made clear why it isn’t going away, and why we need to face it together for once. This is a man who is black…because that’s the way the people of America see him for the most part. But let’s not forget he is also half white.

This is a man who can tell it like it is, who can stand up for himself and others, and take what is so often presented in black and white and show how much gray there still is—and how we can make the gray into something more dazzling. He ain’t perfect by a long shot. He might not even be an earth-shattering president.

But he’s our best chance right now for a fresh start racially and a chance to get a real Christian in the White House who wears his faith proudly but also won’t hide behind it (you hear me, Dubya?). He can question his pastor’s views without having to cast him aside; he makes his faith part of his life without blindly following some script handed to him from some religious body.

Yesterday, Obama told it like it was, and I’m proud of him. He’s my brother in Christ, and by God, I hope he’ll be my president.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Deacon Blue is the author of the blog
Holy Shit from Deacon Blue.

This Christmas Prayer

So my father sent this prayer the other day. He had no idea how timely it was. On a day when I needed it, this prayer was soothing to my soul. So this Christmas, I offer this simple gift to my blog readers. Make sure you read it out loud:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Dear Lord, I thank You for this day, I thank You for my being able to see and to hear this morning. I'm blessed because You are a forgiving God and an understanding God. You have done so much for me and You keep on blessing me. Forgive me this day for everything I have done, said or thought that was not pleasing to you.

Please keep me safe from all danger and harm. Help me to start this day with a new attitude and plenty of gratitude.

Let me make the best of each and every day to clear my mind so that I can hear from You. Please broaden my mind that I can accept all things.

Let me not whine and whimper over things I have no control over.

And give the best response when I'm pushed beyond my limits.

I know that when I can't pray, You listen to my heart.

Continue to use me to do Your will. Continue to bless me that I may be a blessing to others. Keep me strong that I may help the weak. Keep me uplifted that I may have words of encouragement for others.

I pray for those that are lost and can't find their way.

I pray for those that are misjudged and misunderstood.

I pray for those who don't know You intimately.

I pray for those that will delete this without sharing it with others I pray for those that don't believe.

But I thank you that I believe that God changes people and God changes things. I pray for all my sisters and brothers. For each and every family member in their households. I pray for peace , love and joy in their homes that th ey are out of debt and all their needs are met. I pray that every eye that re ads this knows there is no problem, circumstance, or situation greater than God. Every battle is in Your hands for You to fight.

I pray that these words be received into the hearts of every eye that sees it.

(Just repeat this phrase and see how God moves!!)
God I love you and I need you, come into my heart, please.

Know that you are already blessed by the person who sent this to you.

Almost Stabbed in the Neck by a Fork in the Road

What happens when the exhaustion of single parenting collides with the personal frustration of goals not met? It's like some kind of algebra problem from hell:

"The train of excessive laundry is traveling south at 60mph. The train of a fading career goal is traveling north at 100mph. At what decibel does a woman scream when the two collide on a dreary fall day?"

My day started with an argument in the car. At the risk of sounding like a fruitcake, I admit that I argued with God. I know that sounds strange, especially to me, since my intent was to pray and give my morning a shot of be-happy. Prayer didn't last long before I started spitting frustrations, countering my own arguments with reasons to be thankful, and then returning to the Articles of my Declaration of Frustration. I had to force the "V" out of my forehead as I walked into work. My face muscles were frozen in a grimace. What a strange morning indeed.

I am actually pleased that I've reached this point. Discomfort - or outright pain - are the best known triggers for positive change. Last weekend, I came to the conclusion that I've been stagnant for several months now. I didn't realize until today that I'm stagnating at a fork in the road - mostly because I haven't chosen a direction. I'm literally standing in a potentially dangerous intersection. What a crappy place to stall and stare at a map.

In the past few years, I have watched some doors close and many more open. Shame on me for not twisting a single doorknob.

My morning was a call to play Sliding Doors. The movie-version provides an interesting look at how a single door can redirect an entire life.  My version will include the best game of hide-and-seek that I have ever played.

The movie of me over the next few months:

I'm leaving the intersection. I'm opening doors. I'm exploring options. I'm enjoying the curiosity of a child as I peek for goodies. I'm squealing with delight as I uncover things I enjoy again, like writing and socializing. I'm returning phone calls that I've put off for weeks. Mr. Washington is first. I'm entering a non-fiction writing contest. I'm accepting the help and kindness of others without feeling guilty. I'm on a roll like a boulder down a mountain. I'm learning to say "no," because only those things rolling with me won't be crushed.

Rock on.