Over the past several years I have been able to be very self-expressive via blogging, keeping a personal journal, and other pursuits. At the root of all of that though is where the seed of inspiration is germinated in the first place, and it is something that the greater society has stereotyped as being a hallmark of insanity, but thankfully recent studies have shown that it is actually a therapeutic practice and may even be a mark of genius. What I refer to is what is often called, in politically-correct language (and one term of this mindset I actually agree with!) "self-directed speech." For the average person on the street, this translates as talking to yourself. Although past stigmas of this still linger, I have actually been "guilty" of doing this since the earliest days of my childhood, and I wanted to just talk a little about it.
When I was a kid, I was often misunderstood and even ignored at times by even my own family - I had disinterested parents, and when I got really excited about something it was often shrugged off by my mother, who at the time was more interested in drinking beer and sitting around in her sock feet listening to depressing country music while doing little else. Some of the pursuits I had as well often would fly over the heads of my friends, and therefore there was little I could relate to them about either. Even today, I find myself somewhat guarded when even sharing with my wife about things, as years of being just sort of dismissed by most people have kind of instilled in me a filter which regulates what I share and what I keep to myself. However, at times, I have an inspiration about something that just thinking about it doesn't cut, and the disinterest of others about it is sort of insulting to me on some level - to share with people who don't appreciate something as you do is like the proverbial casting of pearls before swine, and I have learned it is better to be judicious about what one shares. Therefore, much of that inspiration remains between me and God - thankfully, He always listens, and it was He who gifted us with the imagination and passion to appreciate certain things as individuals. That makes something of that nature more priceless, and it therefore becomes sacrosanct to one as an individual. However, merely meditating on something like that is often insufficient, as the mind can easily forget those flashes of inspiration unless you capture them in some way, and such insights need an outlet for expression. And, that is why over the years I became a master of self-directed speech.
In order to vocalize my thoughts, I have to have time to myself and the inspiration to really hash out the ideas, and at times that is hard to do. As a kid, my mother often didn't work, and it was as if she was always just there, and she was like a bad wart that would not go away many times. So, often I would just go out into the woods near the house trekking around, or I would fish in the creek, and while doing that I was at peace with just birds and bees flying around, and birds and bees tend to be good company. At those times, I could vocalize things I had been thinking about, and it actually felt good to do that. In my adult years, I also learned the value of journaling for the same purposes, and both of these have been tremendously helpful. My journal entries, as a matter of fact, are often "talked out" as I write them, and being able to channel my thoughts into a pen has been something that focused me to articulate better. Even with journaling though, it is still just a great release to self-direct conversation in such a way as to really get perspective on an issue. For instance, if I face a problem or issue that needs resolution, a couple of hours alone "in conference" with myself often helps me sort out what I need to do, and I can then formulate a plan (one the formulation is done, it often becomes an entry in my personal journal as well). Also, if I have to prepare a Sunday School lesson, it often helps to have that "invisible audience" to rehearse it, and that way I can teach it better because I have talked it out beforehand (many of those insights end up on my Sacramental Present Truths blog page as well as in a journal entry). Over the years too, especially in my Christian faith and as far as living that out is concerned, many of those former self-directed conversations are now directed to God as a form of prayer, and this "conversational meditation" has also helped and enhanced my spiritual life. I am not one to say that God is just my "good buddy" or anything like that, but being able to actually converse with Him as a person rather than as a mere abstraction has also helped me in so many ways. For one thing, it has shown me that I don't have to be dismissed or ignored, and that God is always there to listen even when my family or friends are not. Needless to say, in recent years much of what would have been seen earlier as "talking to myself" now has a directed emphasis to someone else, and I cannot say that I "talk to myself" that much anymore. At times, it is almost instinctive too - I will be vocalizing a number of things, and I catch myself addressing God as I talk like I would any person I am having a conversation with - I will say something like "Lord, here is what I would like to see," etc. It is not petitioning God for something either, but rather just sharing what is on my mind and heart with someone who does listen. Understanding devotional life in that way is revolutionary, and now I can understand why in Genesis too Abraham was often called "the friend of God." That would be a whole teaching in itself for my Sacramental Present Truths blog page, and I may explore that more later!
In preparing to write this, I did a little research about self-directed speech, and came across a couple of resources that I want to briefly comment on. The first is an article which was published in The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, and it was authored by two professors, Drs. Gary Lupyan and Daniel Swingley. That article, entitled "Self-Directed Speech Affects Visual Search Performance," was published in 2011. Although most of the article has to do with case studies based on research conducted, what is of interest is the conclusions Lupyan and Swingley drew from their research, and they can be summarized as follows:
1. Self-directed speech affects only the cognitive process of selecting the target, not the visual process of recognizing it - This makes perfect sense in that of course the cognitive process is affected, because as I just noted from my own experience, self-directed speech helps one "hash out" details and doesn't just merely record the obvious.
2. Self-directed speech helps subjects to remember what they are searching for - This also makes perfect sense in that vocalizing an idea helps to reinforce it and also to understand details. When I am doing this, sometimes I have to go over things a couple of times, but then they get into my mind and I have them.
3. Self-directed speech helps via word-to-word matching - Another valid point, in that "connecting the dots" does aid in seeing the "bigger picture."
(Article referenced: Gary Lupyan and Daniel Swingley {2011}: "Self-Directed Speech Affects Visual Search Performance," in The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, DOI:10.1080/17470218.2011.647039. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2011.647039 {Accessed 11/23/2016} pp. 14-15)
Another writer, Shad Helmstetter, wrote in his 1982 book What to Say When You Talk to Yourself (New York: Pocket Books, 1982) that there are some "do's" and "don'ts" to self-talk to take into consideration, and he provides a list of those starting on page 238:
1. Always state your self-talk in the present tense: Now, to be fair, this is not always possible especially when those moments involve a degree of retrospection and reflection. However, when addressing a problem or something, it does pay to be "in the moment."
2. Be specific and state details, covering every possible facet of the problem or goal: This is actually very integral to productive thought on any level, and also works well in journaling as well.
3. Always add self-talk that directs you to achieve your objectives in a healthy and beneficial way: In other words, take the time to think through and "talk out" what's on your mind.
4. State your thoughts in simple language that is easy to recall: In other words, when talking to yourself you don't have to impress anyone, so speak like a real person and be yourself!
5. If talking about dreams, fantasies, or related things, at least make sure such ideas are attainable and are on solid ground. A good point I see Helmstetter is making here is to start with baby steps, and then progress.
6. Self-talk involves honesty. There are two people in this world that you cannot deceive, one being yourself and the other being God Almighty. Therefore, deception is not necessary and honesty should be easier. If there is room for improvement, then a plan to do so can be worked out if the problem is dealt with honestly. However, the problem with the self is that often we can be our own worst critics too, and we can be unduly harder on ourselves than people are with us. That is something to keep in perspective as well.
7. Our own self-talk should bring out the best in us, and to set personal challenges to overcome odds and understand the potential God gave each of us. If we do that, we may surprise ourselves!
Another thing Helmstetter talks about which I used to do is taping these thoughts as I talked them out. Back some years ago, Barbara got me a micro-cassette recorder for a birthday present and I began a sort of "audio journal" project. Problem is, I never followed through with it, although I probably should have. I would add to Helmstetter's proposal that journaling is another way of documenting these personal monologues, although taping is definitely a good idea as well. With the ready technology of "smart phones" and other devices, you can even video yourself now. Although Helmstetter recommends sharing such recordings with a trusted friend, I would have to say that I would be very cautious about that even, and make sure that the person you do choose to share these intimate insights with is someone you can really trust, or otherwise you will be at risk of being either ignored or rejected, or a deceptive person could use your words against you and you may find your voice plastered all over YouTube or Facebook. A written journal is a lot more secure than recordings, and I would personally recommend that. However, a good thing about 21st-century technology is programs such as Dragon, which will actually transcribe what you say into a print form, and this way you can actually capture thoughts you might otherwise lose if you are writing a journal.
In short, "self-directed speech" is actually not a bad thing, and to a degree we all do it, although some are ashamed to admit it. The shame is entailed in the stigma of associating talking to oneself with insanity, which is both unfair and not exactly the case. Self-talk is actually an attribute of creativity, and a person who can articulate complex thoughts and is comfortable with doing so also has a view of the world which is more well-rounded and expressive. Rather than stigmatizing self-talk as a characteristic of insanity, perhaps it would be beneficial to society as a whole if more people would come to terms with it and embrace it. I know I have, and with many years of creative writing to my credit, I probably would have had far less inspiration and far less written material had I not engaged in self-talk.
So, yes, I do talk to myself, and I am not ashamed to admit it. For those who want to stereotype and hate on me due to that fact, all I can say to such people is this - my gain is your loss! For others who may have struggled with the stigma attached to self-talk yet who find fulfillment doing so, it is time you embrace what you do as a gift rather than a curse. If you are really uncomfortable with it, I suggest that maybe you also do what I do on occasion, and allow yourself to accept the fact that God exists, is real, is omniscient, and always has a listening ear. Either way, you may find that self-directed speech is a healthy outlet, and maybe can channel some of those dreams and ideas you had into practical reality as you can now hash out how to make them happen. So long until next time.
Sunday, November 27, 2016
Wednesday, November 9, 2016
Deer Season
As I am writing this today, it is my 47th birthday, and a lot of thoughts come to mind especially this time of year. One of those is the fact that in my home state of West Virginia, hunting season is in full swing this time of year. Unlike other parts of the country where vegetarianism is almost viewed as a cardinal virtue of "political correctness," back home deer season takes on its own festive dimension. It is not uncommon for some kids to take off from school (or at least it didn't used to be) for the week to go out and "bag" a buck, and it was also a great time for relatives whom you may not have seen for over a year to visit and go out on their own adventure of "the hunt." Of course, a big part of deer season was the meat! It has been so many years now since I have had a good "mess" of deer steak, and even as I write this I reminisce about how good it was.
My earliest memories of "the hunt" center around my late step-grandfather, Alonzo Lipscomb. "Lonnie," as everyone affectionately called him, was a skilled hunter despite the handicap of only having one arm (his left arm was amputated due to complications from an injury in a lumber mill many years ago). However, back then my step-grandfather and grandmother didn't have a lot of money, so bagging the occasional deer was more a necessity at times than a sport. It was at Lonnie's house at around the age of four that I had my first taste of deer steak, and I loved it ever since. There are a few interrelated stories I will share in regard to that momentarily, but first, let's talk about Lonnie's hunts.
Although handicapped by the absence of a left hand, Lonnie proved skilled at shooting a rifle, and he had no problem bagging a deer, as well as field-dressing it, all by himself. When he would get a deer, it created a festive atmosphere in the house too, as that meant meat for a while. As he would often hunt in the early evening (he told me once that was when the deer fed, when the weather was cooler out and the sun was less intense), it would usually be after dark when he returned. If he managed to have a successful hunt, his quarry was drug in, and the kitchen table was cleaned off, and the deer was placed on it for prepping. Lonnie would then don a prosthetic hook, and with the skill of a surgeon he would begin to skin the carcass with a sharp pocket knife only. This process could take up to an hour or more, depending on the size of the deer. Once the carcass was skinned, it was portioned, and at this point the fun part of the night started. One of the first cuts Lonnie would remove was what is called the "backstrap," a strip of lean, tender meat which was found along the upper back part of the deer. After all the rest of the deer was carved up, packaged, and stored in the large upright freezer my grandmother kept on the porch, Lonnie would slice that backstrap, and then dredge it in flour seasoned very simply with just salt and pepper, and then he would fry it in Crisco in a large cast-iron skillet. That was such a special treat that we often stayed up late just to eat some of it, and the batter bits that remained in the skillet (we called it "the crunch") were even consumed, as they were as delicious as the steaks themselves. When you have little else you are able to enjoy in life, it is little stuff like this that makes life memorable.
Also at an early age, I recall Lonnie working for the local Department of Natural Resources office as a maintenance man or something at their station in the county seat of Romney, which was about 15 miles from where they lived. Often, animal rescues would be taken on by the game wardens Lonnie worked with, and on one occasion a rescued young male fawn was brought in. Lonnie agreed to foster the little creature, which we named Rosebud, and it wasn't long before the little guy integrated into the house. At that time, I was about five years old, and of a morning I liked having a piece of toast for breakfast. It was not uncommon for Rosebud to jump on my back and steal my toast either, which provided a lot of amusement for my family. However, the oddest thing about little Rosebud was his favorite food - that crazy little buck loved deer steak! I won't debate the moral stipulations as to whether or not he should have been even allowed to eat it, but it was definitely something different!
On another occasion, one of Lonnie's co-workers who was a local game warden named Roger got to be good friends with the family, and during deer season it was not uncommon for game wardens to confiscate deer carcasses from hunters who had exceeded their limits. Fortunately - and a very good virtue of my home state of West Virginia - when a deer carcass was confiscated, the local game wardens had the discretion of donating it to a family in need. In my step-grandfather's case, he and my grandmother were always struggling in those days; they lived in a house with only water drawn from a well on the back porch, as well as having no indoor plumbing (the toilet was an outhouse), and all heat and even occasionally cooking was done on a wood stove. Knowing well the fact that my step-grandfather was not exactly a Rockefeller, Roger the game warden was known to bring a confiscated deer carcass up to Lonnie's and give it to him. On this particular occasion, Lonnie had been on a successful hunt, and he actually was working on a deer in the basement of the house when Roger drove up. Roger offered Lonnie the deer, which he gladly accepted, and with the one he had shot himself he was able to have meat for most of the winter. This type of thing may be frowned upon by some, but to those people I say that maybe they should be in my step-grandfather Lonnie's shoes, and then their tree-hugging utopianism would be rethought quickly!
It is at this point I want to address those people. First off, although I believe veganism is highly illogical and the facts emerging as medical science makes advances suggests that a totally vegan diet may actually be dangerous, at the same time people like that are free to choose - if they want to gnaw on carrots instead of chicken wings, go for it. The problem with such people though is that often they tend to try to impose themselves on others and don't want to extend that same courtesy. Recently, a commercial for Domino's Pizza personified this well. The gist of the commercial is concerning those types of people - vegan freaks - who want to dictate that others eat salads and they get their way selfishly despite the fact everyone else is miserable. The actor playing the Domino's guy - who is great, by the way! - tells some rabbit-lady happily munching on a salad to "eat a pizza once in a while!" At the end of the commercial, he is still taunting the same woman by yelling like a drill sergeant in a gruff voice, "Pizza's good!" This has been one of my favorite commercials of the year, in part because 1) I hate salads, and 2) I love a good pizza (especially those cracker-thin crust pizzas Domino's has). But, watching it made me think of how the PETA crowd (if you don't know who those idiots are, they are the extremely radical animal-rights nuts who want to execute people for eating KFC for dinner) tried to impose themselves on our society and culture. I want to tell some of them "eat a pork chop once in a while!" Many of these same veggie-nuts also have big issues with hunters too for the same reason - many of them think nothing about aborting a human child in the womb, but God forbid you shoot a buck and enjoy some venison steak. They are frankly the type of people that need to be locked up in padded cells somewhere because psychosis (probably from using hallucinogenic drugs of some sort) has overtaken them. I had a little discussion with some of these crazies today as a matter of fact on a social media post where many of them were whining about a picture of a hunter displaying a 47-point buck (impressive!) he bagged. I had a lot of fun satirizing them and feigning grief over "slaughtering innocent tomatoes and cucumbers" in order to show how stupid they really looked, and of course that generated some hate - oh well, what can you do? It was fun to razz these types though, because their irrationality is so insane that it is comical. Do I really care if they eat "innocent" tomatoes and cukes? Not really - they can eat what they want, as long as they mind their own business about what others like. My point was to show them how dumb they are, and how this liberal - or, excuse the term "pansy-assed" - junk has done more harm than good for our society. I think the Domino's commercial gets that same point across too, regardless of the intent of its creators - of course, Domino's is owned by a very solidly Catholic businessman, so I think he has insight to understand how crazy the veggie-lovers can get sometimes. There is a word of wisdom I heard once in a movie somewhere, and it is this - if God didn't want us to eat animals, He wouldn't have made them out of meat.
My earliest memories of "the hunt" center around my late step-grandfather, Alonzo Lipscomb. "Lonnie," as everyone affectionately called him, was a skilled hunter despite the handicap of only having one arm (his left arm was amputated due to complications from an injury in a lumber mill many years ago). However, back then my step-grandfather and grandmother didn't have a lot of money, so bagging the occasional deer was more a necessity at times than a sport. It was at Lonnie's house at around the age of four that I had my first taste of deer steak, and I loved it ever since. There are a few interrelated stories I will share in regard to that momentarily, but first, let's talk about Lonnie's hunts.
Although handicapped by the absence of a left hand, Lonnie proved skilled at shooting a rifle, and he had no problem bagging a deer, as well as field-dressing it, all by himself. When he would get a deer, it created a festive atmosphere in the house too, as that meant meat for a while. As he would often hunt in the early evening (he told me once that was when the deer fed, when the weather was cooler out and the sun was less intense), it would usually be after dark when he returned. If he managed to have a successful hunt, his quarry was drug in, and the kitchen table was cleaned off, and the deer was placed on it for prepping. Lonnie would then don a prosthetic hook, and with the skill of a surgeon he would begin to skin the carcass with a sharp pocket knife only. This process could take up to an hour or more, depending on the size of the deer. Once the carcass was skinned, it was portioned, and at this point the fun part of the night started. One of the first cuts Lonnie would remove was what is called the "backstrap," a strip of lean, tender meat which was found along the upper back part of the deer. After all the rest of the deer was carved up, packaged, and stored in the large upright freezer my grandmother kept on the porch, Lonnie would slice that backstrap, and then dredge it in flour seasoned very simply with just salt and pepper, and then he would fry it in Crisco in a large cast-iron skillet. That was such a special treat that we often stayed up late just to eat some of it, and the batter bits that remained in the skillet (we called it "the crunch") were even consumed, as they were as delicious as the steaks themselves. When you have little else you are able to enjoy in life, it is little stuff like this that makes life memorable.
Also at an early age, I recall Lonnie working for the local Department of Natural Resources office as a maintenance man or something at their station in the county seat of Romney, which was about 15 miles from where they lived. Often, animal rescues would be taken on by the game wardens Lonnie worked with, and on one occasion a rescued young male fawn was brought in. Lonnie agreed to foster the little creature, which we named Rosebud, and it wasn't long before the little guy integrated into the house. At that time, I was about five years old, and of a morning I liked having a piece of toast for breakfast. It was not uncommon for Rosebud to jump on my back and steal my toast either, which provided a lot of amusement for my family. However, the oddest thing about little Rosebud was his favorite food - that crazy little buck loved deer steak! I won't debate the moral stipulations as to whether or not he should have been even allowed to eat it, but it was definitely something different!
On another occasion, one of Lonnie's co-workers who was a local game warden named Roger got to be good friends with the family, and during deer season it was not uncommon for game wardens to confiscate deer carcasses from hunters who had exceeded their limits. Fortunately - and a very good virtue of my home state of West Virginia - when a deer carcass was confiscated, the local game wardens had the discretion of donating it to a family in need. In my step-grandfather's case, he and my grandmother were always struggling in those days; they lived in a house with only water drawn from a well on the back porch, as well as having no indoor plumbing (the toilet was an outhouse), and all heat and even occasionally cooking was done on a wood stove. Knowing well the fact that my step-grandfather was not exactly a Rockefeller, Roger the game warden was known to bring a confiscated deer carcass up to Lonnie's and give it to him. On this particular occasion, Lonnie had been on a successful hunt, and he actually was working on a deer in the basement of the house when Roger drove up. Roger offered Lonnie the deer, which he gladly accepted, and with the one he had shot himself he was able to have meat for most of the winter. This type of thing may be frowned upon by some, but to those people I say that maybe they should be in my step-grandfather Lonnie's shoes, and then their tree-hugging utopianism would be rethought quickly!
It is at this point I want to address those people. First off, although I believe veganism is highly illogical and the facts emerging as medical science makes advances suggests that a totally vegan diet may actually be dangerous, at the same time people like that are free to choose - if they want to gnaw on carrots instead of chicken wings, go for it. The problem with such people though is that often they tend to try to impose themselves on others and don't want to extend that same courtesy. Recently, a commercial for Domino's Pizza personified this well. The gist of the commercial is concerning those types of people - vegan freaks - who want to dictate that others eat salads and they get their way selfishly despite the fact everyone else is miserable. The actor playing the Domino's guy - who is great, by the way! - tells some rabbit-lady happily munching on a salad to "eat a pizza once in a while!" At the end of the commercial, he is still taunting the same woman by yelling like a drill sergeant in a gruff voice, "Pizza's good!" This has been one of my favorite commercials of the year, in part because 1) I hate salads, and 2) I love a good pizza (especially those cracker-thin crust pizzas Domino's has). But, watching it made me think of how the PETA crowd (if you don't know who those idiots are, they are the extremely radical animal-rights nuts who want to execute people for eating KFC for dinner) tried to impose themselves on our society and culture. I want to tell some of them "eat a pork chop once in a while!" Many of these same veggie-nuts also have big issues with hunters too for the same reason - many of them think nothing about aborting a human child in the womb, but God forbid you shoot a buck and enjoy some venison steak. They are frankly the type of people that need to be locked up in padded cells somewhere because psychosis (probably from using hallucinogenic drugs of some sort) has overtaken them. I had a little discussion with some of these crazies today as a matter of fact on a social media post where many of them were whining about a picture of a hunter displaying a 47-point buck (impressive!) he bagged. I had a lot of fun satirizing them and feigning grief over "slaughtering innocent tomatoes and cucumbers" in order to show how stupid they really looked, and of course that generated some hate - oh well, what can you do? It was fun to razz these types though, because their irrationality is so insane that it is comical. Do I really care if they eat "innocent" tomatoes and cukes? Not really - they can eat what they want, as long as they mind their own business about what others like. My point was to show them how dumb they are, and how this liberal - or, excuse the term "pansy-assed" - junk has done more harm than good for our society. I think the Domino's commercial gets that same point across too, regardless of the intent of its creators - of course, Domino's is owned by a very solidly Catholic businessman, so I think he has insight to understand how crazy the veggie-lovers can get sometimes. There is a word of wisdom I heard once in a movie somewhere, and it is this - if God didn't want us to eat animals, He wouldn't have made them out of meat.
"Pizza's GOOOOD!!"
Any rate, I got off on a rant and almost rabbit-trailed past the original intent of this article, which was about memories of deer season. Although it has been some time since I have had a good "mess" of deer steak, I am encouraged when I see people like the Robertsons from Duck Dynasty promote the virtues of responsible hunting, and as all of them have said many times on the show and in their respective books, hunting is a gift from God, and it is utilizing our duty to "take dominion over the earth" and may even be beneficial and wise stewardship over God's creation. After all, if it wasn't for controlled hunting, populations of animals could get out of hand and that could be potentially an issue. Besides, if it is not wrong for a lion to ambush a gazelle on the savannahs of Africa for a similar reason, then why are the veggie-nuts attacking their fellow humans for doing exactly the same thing, only with a gun instead of fangs and claws? Again, the logic of this stuff escapes me, but suffice to say, hunting is not evil, and neither is the consumption of meat. So, if you like being carnivorous, enjoy.
That all being said, for those of you who do hunt out there this time of year, please stay safe, and take the precautions to prevent yourself and others from being accidentally shot. May God bless your hunts, and all I ask is that you keep me in mind as you partake of that delicious backstrap steak, or make venison jerky. About that, venison jerky is my cousin Buzz's specialty - for years, he has made his the old-fashioned way by coating it in a highly-peppered "cure," and then air-drying it on a clothesline-like apparatus he has over his stove. Whenever I visit my hometown of Parsons, WV, this time of year, I always look forward to some of Buzz's jerky; he gets a little impatient with it too, as he is eating it by cutting pieces off as it dries (who can blame him though - it is good stuff!). As we have an anticipated move at the end of this year back up to the area, maybe in a year or two I can get into a little hunting myself and bag my own venison supply. Until then, I will have to rely on the kind generosity of friends and relatives, or spend a fortune having it mail-ordered. Happy hunting, and happy holidays, especially to all my family back home who may be undertaking their own hunts this year.
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Some Thoughts on the Election
With a very important election for our nation's highest office coming up in less than one week, there is a lot on my mind about it as I meditate on everything I see on social media, the news outlets, etc. What occurs to me personally is that this is an important election which has been reduced to a two-ring circus, and what could be at stake is the future of over 200 million people who call the United States home, of which I am one. That is why I wanted to take a bit of time to address some of this personally.
Facebook and a number of other social outlets have been abuzz with election-related blogs, comments, cartoons, memes, and not a few dogfights among "Web Warriors" at their keyboards. What really concerns me most though is how fellow Christians have reacted to this election, and that is something I want to address now.
It is a general consensus among thinking and conservative-minded people that the Democratic front-runner, Hillary Clinton, is a reprehensible and crooked old hag that most of us would not want running the maitre d' counter of a hotel bathroom. Hillary is not the real issue - we all know what she is, and she even looks like a nasty, unpleasant person. The person I wish to focus on here is her Republican challenger, billionaire entrepreneur Donald Trump.
Trump already has it all - he has a wealth that the majority of us could not even fathom, he is fairly well-known in the media, and you don't have to waste time on a lot of biographical background to know a lot about him. However, the other side of Trump is what is of concern - despite his status, he has the manners of a horny badger, and his personality is not really much better than Hillary's. Considering his sudden interest in the Presidential race, I am wondering also if he is not just doing this because he is a bored rich boy who needs a new hobby, and if he would even take the office seriously if elected. In years past before he wanted to chase his bucket-list fantasy of running for office, Trump was also a huge supporter of things such as Planned Parenthood and research in transhumanism and eugenics, yet to hear him talk you'd think he was a pro-life saint now. Being we Americans have short-term memory to a fault, we also forget that Trump was at one times close friends with the Clintons and other liberal Democrats, and no doubt Trump's monumental fortune has funded a lot of Democratic campaigns over the years. Yet, as mentioned, we have short-term memories which make the rest of the world look at us (rightly) as a bunch of idiots. And, of all people, conservative Christians have gotten into this and have supported someone that doesn't share their own convictions, and that is troubling. Let us talk about that a moment, shall we?
I am a committed Christian myself, and have many like-minded friends. Many of them have bought first-class tickets on the "Trump Train" and think now he is the greatest thing since sliced Wonder Bread. Yet, here is their issue - many professing Christians cruising away on the "Trump Train" have resorted to the most un-Christian of attacks in regard to people who don't agree with them, including other conservative Christians like myself who support more qualified third-party candidates. I have heard Christians so flippantly "revoke" the salvation of others for disagreeing with them (this is a common tactic among some Evangelicals, including a couple of my own family members I am sorry to say) and even are saying that to oppose Trump is somehow "demonic." It is really of interest to me, because I have yet to read in the Bible or in official Church teaching that any of this is valid. This is going to lead to a couple of other points I want to address.
One common contention that the "Trump Train" travelers have to those of us who are independent and vote third-party is this - by voting third-party, you somehow are "empowering the enemy." To be honest, I have heard that ridiculous argument for years ad nauseum, and it is symptomatic of a greater ignorance within American culture which is far too evident but rarely addressed - many labor under the delusion that only candidates of the two major parties - Republican and Democrat - matter, and that third-party candidates don't even deserve to be heard. This is so wrong on so many levels. First, by telling people that, a person is in essence trying to bully people into voting like them, and that is ethically suspect. Every person is given a right to vote their conscience, and in my case I have done that for almost every election save two - in 1996 I didn't vote at all, because the Republicans put up one of the most spineless, ineffectual candidates in Bob Dole, which pretty much handed Clinton the White House unopposed for a second term. Then, in the last election (2012), I actually voted for the first and only time in my adult life for a person I really didn't support - Mitt Romney. That was a wasted vote - he was the Republican front-runner, and I should have done more research then into third-party candidates I liked better but did not. However, I was starting to actually believe the groupthink that only a major-party candidate was worth voting for, and we saw where that got us - four more years of Obama's White House. I want to now say to you that if you are perhaps a member of a third party and want to vote your conscience, you should do so - it is your Constitutional right to do so, and no one has any grounds to influence or bully you to vote for someone you don't want to vote for. I have gotten to the point that I have told some of my friends who bought into the Trump-mania to bug off and leave me alone, and if they want to vote for Trump, more power to them. I am not trying to influence their votes, so they need to get out of my business. I will exercise my Constitutional right my way, and you do it your way.
Another issue I have is with people who think Trump is "on the level," and those people are sadly ignorant of how politics work. Trump is tapping into a legitimate dissatisfaction with many over the past eight years of that despot Obama, and what he is doing is telling people what they want to hear to get their votes, and apparently he is being effective at that deception. What boggles my mind about all this however is how an inexperienced hack like Trump got the Republican ticket when they had many more qualified candidates running - Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Michelle Bachmann, etc. I would have voted for any one of those people had they gotten the nomination, and it makes me think America is in deeper trouble than I originally thought because it is as if the Republicans want to hand the White House to Hillary by running a person like Trump as their candidate - have they completely lost their minds??? This is why a serious election - much is at stake in this one - has degenerated into a sideshow of a circus. Of course, Trump is par for the course for the "Establishment" Republicans in recent years - just look back at the 2014 elections for Congress as an example. Any of you remember that Senator from Iowa, Joni Ernst, saying she was "going to make them squeal" in the White House? Yeah, that sure happened didn't it? All I hear from Joni Ernst these days is the sound of crickets chirping - she tickled the ears of the voters, got her seat in Congress, and then sat on her butt and did nothing while Obama went plumb-crazy the past couple of years. She and so many others - I choose her because she is a huge disappointment for me.
Facebook and a number of other social outlets have been abuzz with election-related blogs, comments, cartoons, memes, and not a few dogfights among "Web Warriors" at their keyboards. What really concerns me most though is how fellow Christians have reacted to this election, and that is something I want to address now.
It is a general consensus among thinking and conservative-minded people that the Democratic front-runner, Hillary Clinton, is a reprehensible and crooked old hag that most of us would not want running the maitre d' counter of a hotel bathroom. Hillary is not the real issue - we all know what she is, and she even looks like a nasty, unpleasant person. The person I wish to focus on here is her Republican challenger, billionaire entrepreneur Donald Trump.
Trump already has it all - he has a wealth that the majority of us could not even fathom, he is fairly well-known in the media, and you don't have to waste time on a lot of biographical background to know a lot about him. However, the other side of Trump is what is of concern - despite his status, he has the manners of a horny badger, and his personality is not really much better than Hillary's. Considering his sudden interest in the Presidential race, I am wondering also if he is not just doing this because he is a bored rich boy who needs a new hobby, and if he would even take the office seriously if elected. In years past before he wanted to chase his bucket-list fantasy of running for office, Trump was also a huge supporter of things such as Planned Parenthood and research in transhumanism and eugenics, yet to hear him talk you'd think he was a pro-life saint now. Being we Americans have short-term memory to a fault, we also forget that Trump was at one times close friends with the Clintons and other liberal Democrats, and no doubt Trump's monumental fortune has funded a lot of Democratic campaigns over the years. Yet, as mentioned, we have short-term memories which make the rest of the world look at us (rightly) as a bunch of idiots. And, of all people, conservative Christians have gotten into this and have supported someone that doesn't share their own convictions, and that is troubling. Let us talk about that a moment, shall we?
I am a committed Christian myself, and have many like-minded friends. Many of them have bought first-class tickets on the "Trump Train" and think now he is the greatest thing since sliced Wonder Bread. Yet, here is their issue - many professing Christians cruising away on the "Trump Train" have resorted to the most un-Christian of attacks in regard to people who don't agree with them, including other conservative Christians like myself who support more qualified third-party candidates. I have heard Christians so flippantly "revoke" the salvation of others for disagreeing with them (this is a common tactic among some Evangelicals, including a couple of my own family members I am sorry to say) and even are saying that to oppose Trump is somehow "demonic." It is really of interest to me, because I have yet to read in the Bible or in official Church teaching that any of this is valid. This is going to lead to a couple of other points I want to address.
One common contention that the "Trump Train" travelers have to those of us who are independent and vote third-party is this - by voting third-party, you somehow are "empowering the enemy." To be honest, I have heard that ridiculous argument for years ad nauseum, and it is symptomatic of a greater ignorance within American culture which is far too evident but rarely addressed - many labor under the delusion that only candidates of the two major parties - Republican and Democrat - matter, and that third-party candidates don't even deserve to be heard. This is so wrong on so many levels. First, by telling people that, a person is in essence trying to bully people into voting like them, and that is ethically suspect. Every person is given a right to vote their conscience, and in my case I have done that for almost every election save two - in 1996 I didn't vote at all, because the Republicans put up one of the most spineless, ineffectual candidates in Bob Dole, which pretty much handed Clinton the White House unopposed for a second term. Then, in the last election (2012), I actually voted for the first and only time in my adult life for a person I really didn't support - Mitt Romney. That was a wasted vote - he was the Republican front-runner, and I should have done more research then into third-party candidates I liked better but did not. However, I was starting to actually believe the groupthink that only a major-party candidate was worth voting for, and we saw where that got us - four more years of Obama's White House. I want to now say to you that if you are perhaps a member of a third party and want to vote your conscience, you should do so - it is your Constitutional right to do so, and no one has any grounds to influence or bully you to vote for someone you don't want to vote for. I have gotten to the point that I have told some of my friends who bought into the Trump-mania to bug off and leave me alone, and if they want to vote for Trump, more power to them. I am not trying to influence their votes, so they need to get out of my business. I will exercise my Constitutional right my way, and you do it your way.
Another issue I have is with people who think Trump is "on the level," and those people are sadly ignorant of how politics work. Trump is tapping into a legitimate dissatisfaction with many over the past eight years of that despot Obama, and what he is doing is telling people what they want to hear to get their votes, and apparently he is being effective at that deception. What boggles my mind about all this however is how an inexperienced hack like Trump got the Republican ticket when they had many more qualified candidates running - Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindal, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Michelle Bachmann, etc. I would have voted for any one of those people had they gotten the nomination, and it makes me think America is in deeper trouble than I originally thought because it is as if the Republicans want to hand the White House to Hillary by running a person like Trump as their candidate - have they completely lost their minds??? This is why a serious election - much is at stake in this one - has degenerated into a sideshow of a circus. Of course, Trump is par for the course for the "Establishment" Republicans in recent years - just look back at the 2014 elections for Congress as an example. Any of you remember that Senator from Iowa, Joni Ernst, saying she was "going to make them squeal" in the White House? Yeah, that sure happened didn't it? All I hear from Joni Ernst these days is the sound of crickets chirping - she tickled the ears of the voters, got her seat in Congress, and then sat on her butt and did nothing while Obama went plumb-crazy the past couple of years. She and so many others - I choose her because she is a huge disappointment for me.
I just wanted to share these thoughts of my own frustrations, and as St. Thomas Aquinas in his teachings affirms to us, as articulated by Germain Grisez in his online book Christian Moral Principles, in voluntarily acting for human good(s) and avoiding what is opposed to them, one ought to choose and otherwise will those and only those possibilities whose willing is compatible with a will toward integral human fulfillment. What that means is that we have a moral obligation, under God-created natural law, to seek a "greater good," and when it comes to this election, we should ask ourselves, "who is the greater good?" rather than settling for the "lesser evil." The problem with so many is just that - instead of looking for greater good, they settle for "lesser evil." The end result of that will never actually be good either - choosing the "lesser evil" leads to deeper evil. So, for those who want to settle for Trump as the "lesser evil," let me tell you something - there are greater goods out there if you know how to look for them and take them seriously, and maybe it is you who sells yourself short by failing to realize it. You talk much about how a vote for a third party candidate is "a vote for Hillary," but if you are supporting Trump, nine chances out of ten it may be you who is empowering the enemy. Trump was set up by powers-that-be to empower Hillary, and no matter his popular support, there is a potential for danger there. We as Christians need to have more God-given sense than that especially, and it is time we wake up. Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)