An amalgamation of sundries and miscellany.

It’s amazing, the amount of trust, the amount of faith, that we need to have in our day-to-day living.

How do you know that Africa exists? How do I know? I’ve never been there. Now, I’ve known people who’ve said they’ve been there. But even there, by necessity I’m presented with needing to decide for myself whether or not a.) I believe that what they are saying is what they believe, and b.) even if it is, that I believe their information to be correct and factual.

“But there’s so much information supporting the existence of Africa! Everybody believes it.” By and large, we as a society believe that people during the time of Columbus believed the world to be flat, when in reality this theory was not taken seriously at this time (See Wikipedia’s “Flat Earth” page). But do you believe the explanation that is contained on this entry?

Faith is being sure of what you hope for and certain of what you do not see. There’s nothing mystical about that. The necessity of faith does not require the allowance for the existence of the supernatural.

I’m sure that I hope the red light at the intersection that I stop at will turn green in the imminent future. I’m certain of it doing so, even though I don’t see what is going on inside, mechanically or electronically. I’ve developed this faith because I’ve experienced traffic signals that have functioned similarly, where they are red and then they turn green.

Faith does not happen in a vacuum. It is logical conclusion based off of observation.

THE CONNOTATION
So, up until recently, I’ve had no use for the word “religion”. It has too many negative connotations, one (of the many) being, “A belief system with a stringent ruleset that must be adhered to, usually to the end of appeasing a deity.”

AN ALTERNATIVE DEFINITION
So it was with surprise that a friend of mine stated that she actually liked the word. Through her education as a massage therapist, she learned that “religion” means “the re-attachment of two ligaments.” Looking at the word, it makes good sense. I just never thought of looking at the etymological roots.

APPLICATION
So, with that word picture, things kind of started to click, as far as what it was that really tied all the religious systems in the world together. I believe there to be an innate sense in all of us that we are separate from something that would make us whole. So we devote much of our lives in pursuit of the objective of re-joining ourselves with it. We can (and have) taken many paths towards that feeling of wholeness; pretty much anything in the world has been used in an attempt to feel whole. I would argue, in a sense, that every person in the world practices religion in some fashion.

Now, almost unilaterally, the term has spiritual connotations, and for good reason. All the religious systems in the world have this in common: The desire to join or be re-joined with the spiritual. There are almost as many methods of this as there are people in the world, and even organized religious systems number easily in the thousands. Anything from wicca to Mormonism to Christianity to Islam to Zen to Buddhism, animism and more are joined in this common goal. They just go about it in largely different fashions.

So, back on the actual word. For a religion to occur, at least one force must be actively attempting a reconnect. There is a part “A” and a part “B”. Let’s take “B” as those who are attempting the reconnect, and “A” being the spiritual thing which A desires to be re-joined with.

Without an exhaustive study of world religions, it seems evident to me that the vast majority of them function under the principle of B getting to A under B’s power. Humans develop, via various sources, a ruleset that is the means to the end of reconnecting with the spiritual (usually, but not nearly always, in the form of a deity). By following these rules, adherents hope to get into the deity’s good graces, keep off their bad side, and work toward being counted worthy of entrance into an eternity of spiritual connect (”heaven”, “nirvana”, etc. are both concepts along this line). These works can be rituals, laws to be followed, things to do and things to avoid, etc. This is a broad-brush generalization, but in my experience, this seems to be the case.

A DIFFERENT METHOD
There is, however, a religious system that functions very different in a fundamental fashion, as far as how the re-connect is initiated and its use of laws and rules. This belief is Christianity. The main difference I see is that instead of B (us) initiating the reconnect, it is A (God) that does so. Instead of building a stairway to heaven out of works, God extended His hand down to us, with the only requirement on our part being to grab hold of it. Thus is the reconnect initiated.

My post “Know, Live, Live” expresses my belief as to why God chose to behave in this fashion. I think I would be needlessly retreading if I re-explained it in its entirety, so I’m just going to give a nutshell explanation. Basically, God wanted kids, so He made us. He wanted children that would choose, of their own free will, to seek relationship with Him. When Adam and Eve sinned in Eden, the disconnect occurred, and it has been since that event that God has desired a reconnect.

SIN AND THE LAW
Regarding sin, I am going to re-hash a bit, because I think it’s important. Sin literally means, “to miss the mark”. So, it’s deviation away from an ideal path. God has a plan for our lives, and that’s the path. When we stray from that path, it’s sin. This act also creates a divide from God, as we’re moving away from His path. We can also sin with regards to each other, and we can sin without realizing it.

In my family, we keep our shoes on in the house. Kick ‘em up on the coffee table, who cares. That’s just how we roll. But say I go to someone else’s house with my clodhoppers on, not considering that their rules and expectations may be different from my own. So I go on in, walking on their carpet and messing it up. I’ve broken a house rule, and I’ve sinned against them. Even though I don’t even know, there’s now that deviancy from their rules, and a resultant divide. The only way to rectify and reconnect is for me to know that the transgression existed. The burden of notification is placed on the offended. If they were of a charitable and graceful mindset, they might say something like, “Yo, I know you totally didn’t mean to offend. We have a house rule here where we take our shoes off before we go further into the house. Now, you didn’t know, and we’re not holding it against you. Yeah, it will take some work on our part to clean the carpet, but that’s life. In the future though, would you be so kind as to adhere to this rule you are now aware of?” And we’d go on from there (ideally).

Like in the above illustration, the law is not an end in itself, but rather a means to the end of shedding light on a course deviation. It’s like the traffic bumps (”turtles”) on roads. They show us the edge of the path. So God’s intention of the law is not to create hoops for us to jump though; there’s no need for that, because He (the deity, the desired spiritual connect) has already accepted us and considered us worthy. Why would He, who desires real relationships with us and extends Himself to us unconditionally, make us do tricks for his approval?

Jesus says, “My yoke is easy and my burden is light.” We all have burdens in this life. It is inescapable. It doesn’t matter who we are or where we are, burdens are common to all man. A yoke, then, when viewed from this angle, is a good thing. A yoke serves to balance out a load. So, in effect, Jesus is telling us that He has the right way to balance out our burdens instead of us trying to carry them in a lopsided duffel bag. And in addition, He offers us a lighter load.

The law’s purpose is to keep us on the road. But even if we disregard the law and crash and burn, as we so often do–multiple times daily–we are still firmly in His grasp, and nothing we can do or choose not to do has any bearing on that. We are powerless to alter or weaken His grip. Once we accept His hand, He wouldn’t think of letting us go.

Greetings Interwebers.

My good friend Jinky Williams approuched me some time ago and asked me if I would be interested in posting upon this here blog. Now here we are. I am definitely excited to get the ball rolling and see what will come up next.

I guess I should say a wee bit about myself. When I am not playing Bagpipe Hero or crafting tasty treats, I seem to find myself goofing off with my wife or Jinky. I enjoy shooting the breeze, reminiscing on old video games, watching clouds, Seattle Stouts and attempting to be a good husband. I do not really have much to say as introductions really are not my thing. Maybe you all will have to let me know if I am doing theHouse of Jink any good.

Jinky and I have talked about putting some avatars to use.

Best regards and looking onward,

Splintofewnious

“I fight for a better tomorrow not because I believe one is necessarily forthcoming, but because I believe a better tomorrow is worth fighting for.”



If you’ve been following my Twitter feed recently, or have received an email from me in the past couple of weeks, you may have seen this quote.

I know I’m hardly the first person to have ever felt this particular sentiment, but I’ve not heard it stated in this way.

Idealism seems to be absent from our present society. Often times, when someone states that they have an ideal of any sort, they are mocked and derided for their lofty aspirations. They are told they need to “come back down to earth”, that this is “real life”, and “that’s impossible.” Those around them, often even their close friends and loved ones, try to pull them back to a world of compromise (of self and values).

I argue that we desperately need idealism, and that the concept is misunderstood and/or undervalued. An ideal is not meant to be attained; it is meant to be pursued. It is an overarching goal, a “true north” that we can set our life compass by so that we don’t lose our way. It’s a guiding light and a distant spot on the horizon.

When driving a car, if you look only just beyond the hood, you’re going to be weaving around and having all sorts of trouble keeping on track. Your reference point is hardly a constant, leading to course corrections, each more radical than the next. You attempt to stay on the road, though you can’t tell where the road is even going.

It is only when you look to the horizon, a location far away, that your course begins to be consistent.

So is it in life. If you elect to pursue short-sighted goals, your life will be likewise short-sighted. You will lack direction, frequently and arbitrarily change course, and compromise your beliefs. You will be a double-minded person, unstable in all you do. The decision to pursue a course of action is based on if you feel like it or not. The target keeps on moving, and you keep changing direction to chase it.

The world has enough double-mindedness to last a thousand lifetimes. What we need right now are people who have ideals and the conviction needed to adhere to them, regardless of circumstances. Even when there is no hope of that ideal being realized, they still press on uncompromisingly.

An example of an idealist can be found in David, my cousin-in-law. He’s an awesome guy, and I am well-pleased that my cousin found him. I am proud to call him family.

He writes about his conviction to not eat meat here. It is an eloquent expression of his belief, the origins of said belief, and why he adheres to it. Although he fully acknowledges that his actions will not amount to more than a droplet in the comprehensive ocean of the meat industry, he is compelled to adhere to his conviction. The understanding that quite possibly no more than a handful of people will ever know about it or be affected by it does not faze him in the least, because it is a burden his heart has.

While I may not share this particular conviction, I have the utmost respect and regard for his decision. He is standing for something he believes in, being true to his heart and fighting for a better tomorrow.

We need more people who are willing to stand up for what they believe in, even in the face of evident futility.

Freedom fighters fight because they believe in freedom. It is this ideal that keeps them fighting, even when they don’t see freedom happening. So should it be for us. We need to keep up the fight, not because we think we’ll win, but because the fight is worth keeping up.

In the latest “anti-terror” movement, the UK police force has seen fit to dole out another round of suspicion-mongering posters.

Their whole article reads out of something that could easily have been something Sutler’s PR spinners turned out, pre-election. I think I hear the theme song to Brazil.

Sigh, I’m done with this. It’s too easy to write about all the junk that’s going on in the world. I’m not really a negative person by nature. And besides, it’s not so much an amalgamation of sundries and miscellany when most of the words on this site (especially in the past two weeks) have been used to explain or express unhappiness with the current state of the world.

Look for some lighter-side stuff to come.

This is a bit of a rant, so bear with me.

So look. I gotta ask you all: What is with the malady of superfluous apostrophe usage that is holding America (and much of the world) in its grip?

I am talking about things like this. The fact that it occurs in hand-written public notices and in memos by district managers is bad enough, but what really escalates it to proper epidemic status is when it occurs in high-visibility advertisements.

I mean, stuff from McDonald’s.

And this one I find particularly hilarious and tear-inducing at the same time. Save our schools, indeed.

Apostrophes are not used for pluralization.
Apostrophes are not used for pluralization.
Apostrophes are not used for pluralization.

Apostrophes are not used for pluralization.

Purdue University has a good explanation of proper usage of apostrophes.

“We have pizza’s for sale.” = incorrect.
“Our employee’s are amazing!” = incorrect.
“This store’s pizza is delicious!” = correct.

Now, I’m only what I’d consider to be a two-and-a-half-star grammar nazi. However, with the bar being so drastically lowered (universally), I guess maybe I’d be considered a 4.75-star. Anyway, all that to say: I am admittedly sensitive to grammar and spelling. Incorrect usages of “your/you’re” and “their/they’re/there” drive me batty, but this extraneous usage of apostrophes confuses me. In this world, it has become the norm (even in professional communications by district managers and by those who have college degrees) to use “u” in favor of “you” and to eschew all manner of punctuation and capitalization to reduce the number of keystrokes by a paltry amount of characters. Yet these same people use apostrophes for pluralization, needlessly increasing their (evidently incredibly precious) character count. I don’t understand it at all.

So I put it to you, you faithful readers (all two of you), as well as anyone else who happens upon this post: Why do people do this?

(This is the last “serious” post for today.)

In my last post, I referenced an article about policemen having a large political network to cover for them. I think this article deserves a post of its own.

In a nutshell, it details what amounts to the assault, battery and kidnapping of a twelve year-old girl by three plainclothes policemen in Galveston, TX.

I don’t want to believe what I read here, but after doing some searching around the interwebs, I presently conclude that this is not a fictitious account. This particular incident is the closest that I’ve ever been to right out calling for someone’s head be displayed publically on a pike. It’s not the correct way to go about things, and it’s truly not what I’d do. But the depth of anger and frustration and disbelief that I feel in reading this account brings to the forefront emotion that leads to a temporary desire for this action to take place.

There’s a growing problem here bigger than many people are aware of, or are willing to confront.

I try to be a careful man who attempts to objectively consider how things come into being, and have never wanted to be considered a conspiracy nut. But after reading this account and countless others, reading the observations of others, and generally trying to have an ear to the ground, I have strong convictions that we as a country and a global community are but a few generations away from a society incredibly similar to the one set forth in the movie Brazil. I don’t mean this as hyperbole in any sense of the word. I truly believe that we’re quickly and unchangeably heading in the direction where posters like “Suspicion Breeds Confidence”, “Trust in Haste, Regret at Leisure”, and “Don’t Suspect a Friend, Report Him” will be commonly seen. Heck, posters like this are already appearing.

We’re heading toward another age of book-burnings, ladies and gentlemen. But it’s going to be on a global scale. Because, as V said, “truth be told, if you’re looking for the guilty, you need only look in a mirror.” (for the full quote, go here http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0434409/quotes). We all, including myself, have been letting, and will continue to let, things like this go on without making waves. It’s incredibly difficult to choose to make waves, because the one or ones making the waves are the ones taking the hits, being publically-humiliated, being beaten, arrested and put in jail. And even if we feel that we’re standing up for what is right, who’s to say if the person on our left or on our right is going to come to our aid, even if they believe as we do? Surely the price of a little part of us dying inside so that we can avoid being hurt is reasonable; and in the big scheme of things, it’s going to not count at all. Besides, there will be people who are more active and more powerful who will spearhead efforts to stop X or Y. They will do it; others will do it. I am just going to sit and, “eat microwave dinners and watch cable TV.” (Morgan Freeman, “Chain Reaction”)

So we will continue to allow things–things that should be stopped dead in their tracks–to not only continue to exist, but to flourish and propagate.

It’s a hard thing to take and accept, that no matter what we as individuals do, we may not affect much, if any, visible change upon the world. And it is precisely why the motive behind our words and actions must not be because we think we are going to change the world; rather, they should be because we believe them to be right and correct. Our conviction in the unchanging truth of the ideals we choose fight for is going to be the only thing allowing us to adhere to them as the rest of our world falls around us.

I am sad. But I choose to fight for a better tomorrow; not because I believe that a better world will necessarily come about, but because I think a better tomorrow is worth fighting for.

I did martial arts for a while, mostly JKD. Nothing serious, no belt or trophies. Anyway, I was talking to a friend about it, and they said something to the effect of, “Well, I’m not really a violent person, so I don’t really have any reason for martial arts.”

That floored me for a couple reasons. Firstly, because I’ve never considered myself to be a violent person, yet I am interested in martial arts. Secondly, because the person misunderstood completely why I, and many hundreds of thousands of others, practice martial arts–and I know they aren’t the only ones.

At some point in their life, many people get CPR training. This can be either compulsory (job-related) or voluntary. It makes people feel good that, if the need arises, they have the ability to confidently step in and render some assistance. It does your heart good to know that you’re at least somewhat prepared to help in a state of emergency. People with CPR training do not walk around with eagle eyes, willing someone to drop because of a heart attack, or to drown, or what have you. They hope the situation never occurs where that particular service is needed, but at the same time they realize that it does occur, and may well happen in their presence. It is because of this that they take the training.

For the vast majority of martial arts practitioners, the thought process is the same. I don’t train with the hope that I’ll be able to drop some fool on my way home; I’m not on the look out for someone to duke it out with. It’s training along the line of CPR: I want to be ready if the situation arises. You don’t have to be “violent” to get martial arts training; you just need to want to be prepared. And the confidence that even rudimentary training can give you is invaluable, and just your posture goes a long way in being a deterrent. Aggressors are predators, and they like easy targets. If you feel prepared, you’ll look prepared, and they will more than likely pass you by. Why would they choose you when there’s a hundred other targets that don’t look as threatening? So, you don’t have to throw a single punch or even confront anyone for martial arts training to get you out of situations.

This can also be applied to concealed pistol carriers. These people aren’t cowboys or buckaroos waiting to squeeze off a couple of rounds at the guy who just knocked over the corner mini-mart. On the contrary, the weight of knowing that you are easily able to terminate a human life is incredibly present, and a concealed carrier’s actions are tempered by this. Remember, these are the guys who have voluntarily applied for a license and are on government lists. They want to do this the correct and above-the-table way. We should feel as safe around them as we do around armed police officers, if not more so. One reason is that civilian carriers do not have a huge political network to cover for them if they mess up; they also know that they are much more likely to be demonized by those around them if there’s a rumor breathed that they are carrying, so they aren’t going to even consider drawing unless it’s absolutely necessary. The fearmongering that is directed at people who are trained in the use of violent force is staggering and completely misdirected.

This article by Vin Suprynowicz is really the reason I wrote this post. Please read it and circulate it. Vote it, rank it up, whatever you need to do. It paints such a vivid picture of where we are at, how history has repeated in the past, and the warning signs that we need to be aware of. I’m not advocating rebellion or anything, and I want to be clear on that. But we can always be more aware of what is going on in the world around us, and what forces shape it.

In our society, “sorry” is a swiss-knife of conversation. It can be used in multiple ways, and is used interchangeably with “I apologize”. In this, I have a problem.

“I’m sorry” and “I apologize” are two different concepts entirely. “Sorry” comes from “sorrow”. It is an emotion, and something felt. You feel sorrow that your friend’s pet died, or that your sister lost her job. Apologizing, on the other hand, is the acknowledging of responsibility in a situation. You would apologize for being late, or for not completing something on time.

Properly used, “Sorry” acknowledges a feeling, while “I apologize” acknowledges an action.

Our using “sorry” to cover both of these concepts is dangerous. If one says “I’m sorry” for things that they feel sorrow over as well as things that they are apologizing for, it can begin to blur together in the mind. Pretty soon, you start feeling guilt for your friend being late to work.

Just as dangerous is the use of “sorry” as a weasel word. It’s allows you a free “Get out of jail” card without ever having to really admit responsibility. We can lie to others and lie to ourselves, and can become extremely adept at smooth-talking our way through things without ever confronting the possibility that we’ve wronged someone.

The word “apologize” is so powerful, and has tremendous restorative powers. People will notice when you use it, and will respect your willingness to step up and admit wrongdoing.

I urge you to take some time and consider how you use “sorry” in your day-to-day conversations. If you feel sorrow, please feel free to use “sorry”. But if it is something you have to ask forgiveness for, use “apologize”. Rise above the standard.

How many times have we heard the phrase, “You have too much free time?” Usually it’s said by someone who is making it fully evident that they are dubious of the merit of the activity in which time was used.

I think what they are really saying is, “I find it hard to believe that you would actually prioritize this activity high enough to deign to spend even your spare time to engage in it.” Because really, we all have a decent amount of spare time. Some definitely more than others, but the average person has a fair allocation of it. Some have it in bigger chunks, some have it more spread out. But it’s there.

This saying irks me, because it seems to me to be saying, in effect, that they hold your selected activity in such low regard that to even spend recreational time on it is a waste. And that it may well be. But we are not the same, you and I. And one man’s garbage is truly another man’s treasure.

We have a virtually limitless assortment of quick videos (Yatta, All Your Base), countless images, lolcats, entire websites devoted to WTF humor, and websites cataloging WTF websites. And that’s just internet stuff.
I don’t think that one activity (hitting a white ball with a stick to try to get it in a hole) is necessarily worth more (or less) than another (making a stupid video and putting it online).

Basically, there’s a whole lotta ways that people choose to spend their recreational time on; that people feel is an enjoyable use of their time. Recreation doesn’t have to be an end to something productive, doesn’t have to necessarily enrich those around you or make the world a better place. So much the better if it does, but that’s not mandatory in my book.

So, ultimately, I feel that most of the people who supposedly have too much of this so-called “free time” are really just electing to use their time in a fashion that many people would not choose to.