Have you ever looked at the stats of your blog? I find them interesting and I also find myself motivated to blog more because of them. This may be a poor excuse to blog though...to tweak stats. It almost sounds like I am making the first move toward learning how to be a public figure. I have been enjoying my blog though. The thoughts in my brain always seem better than after I type them out or speak them, but I do seem to be refining the process so they match up a little better over time.
I am a 'bloggernacle' or ldsblogs.com peruse-er. There I find commonality in thought when I don't feel it at church. Lately I have been feeling like quite the outsider at church. I find I side with the atheists and general nonbelievers at work more often than the believers....whatever the denomination. I skip Sunday school because I can only take two hours of 'it' on most Sundays. I am surprised I haven't bitten my tongue clear off by now after all the misconceptions, misquotes and false doctrine that either explicitly or implicitly gets thrown around like the common cold on Sundays at any given church house.
The problem from my point of view I hesitate to say. Only because I feel I am kicking a dead horse. I feel that I have thrown this argument down for everyone to see, and it's getting old. I recently spoke of truth and error on here. I was and still am guilty of spreading myth and rumor. I also spoke of history and how pictures painted of certain histories has more color than those that are eternally posing for their pictures to be painted.
One of those rumors is a popular one about the judgment bar at the very end. We stand there and get to review not only our lives but the history of the world in one form or another. We will 'view' events like a movie that is playing. One take on our lives is that repentance 'edits' out parts of our lives like they never happened and the rest we get to watch with Jesus, whether we want to or not. I just think it is interesting what people come up with.
Should I feel guilty and ashamed for how I act and feel? Should I, as a fellow Christian argue against silly doctrine that sprouts from ignorance and flourishes in the hearts of blind followers? Should I be expected to sit and listen to self-righteous 'Saints' give their superior perspective on life, faith, history and doctrine? I keep analyzing my life and how I want my kids to be raised. I am always questioning what path I want them to follow. Do I want this to be their life? Do I want them to be able to take their religion seriously, but be able to look at it and laugh as well? I always considered my ability to do so unique, something not everyone can do. You either have to choose to embrace one version or choose to stop believing altogether. A small percentage can look at many aspects of the church, say I don't believe that, and still go to church and worship. How do I give that to my children?
I am just finding myself tired. I am tired of feeling alone in my thoughts. Ironic, how I just posted about the need to have alone time.
Yet, it would be nice to interact with people with similar belief systems. I remember just not too long ago back at my last base, seeing fellow members on the flightline. It gave a sense of validation to my Mormonism and it felt good. I don't have that in my current squadron. True, my current squadron isn't even a fifth of the size, but that doesn't make me feel any better at work on any given day. The only 'home' I can give my thoughts and feelings in this aspect is in the small world of the bloggernacle at ldsblogs.com and similar 'homepages' where blogs are listed. Granted not all of them share common threads of opinion. This is the point; to have your blog linked to a mothership of blog links on a one page to share your opinions, whether they are in line with church teachings or not. I don't feel my thoughts are coherent enough, consistently posted, or even 'smart' enough to be there, among many other reasons.
Anyway. 'tis the season to miss home and miss my dad. I don't know why, since the recent run of dreams of dad ended weeks ago. Always pleasant, always with a theme of wishing he was there to spend time with. I miss his tired arms wrapped around me, speaking just as much of an "I love you" as they are "let me rest here a moment". I miss the bike rides. I know when I take my boys out that it just isn't the same without a car radio hooked up to a car battery and a dog. I miss the woodpiles oddly enough. I grew to love them. The sense of security they gave...always translating to a warm house. I miss the quiet yard at night when all you hear was the creaking of the tree house and the trickling of waterfalls. I miss helmet and 'The Cyclist' store where we went for all our biking needs. Dad let me go pick out a new cogset one year as I thought I needed a smaller-toothed one for descents. I remember getting bar-ends, after Bryan I think got them.
So many miles. So many emotions. So much longing for yesterday. I will get up tomorrow morning and put all these childish things aside for another time. I will put them aside, not forgotten, never resolved.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Sociability
What makes a person inclined either way for sociability? Why does Sarah literally go crazy if she is stuck on an island alone, while I thrive? What inside me goes crazy when I don't get sufficient alone time? It seems quite interesting to me given the possible range of sociability in humans, and Sarah and I maybe aren't polar opposites, but are quite far off the middle in opposite directions. My day can be determined by how much social interaction I get, including my family (although they aren't as bad as outside that realm) and Sarah's day can be determined the same way (I won't presume to know if it is reversed for family members in her case. I would guess that she needs outside interaction, but not as drastically as I need to not). I will say I have gotten better over the years, the military being one big help in this regard. Yet, it hinders my relationships within my own home. If I have been overloaded socially at work, I come home to a wife who misses my company and I just want to be left alone. It is hard because it is to a point outside of my control how much interaction I get, especially with multiple roles at work requiring multiple interactions. As an introvert, I relate to song lyrics often, this time being no different.
Linkin Park's new cd has a song with a chorus that goes like this:
Do you feel cold and lost in desperation?
You build up hope but failure's all you've known.
Remember all the sadness and frustration
And let it go. Let it go.
I don't really feel cold or lost in desperation, but the part I like is the last: remember all the sadness and frustration and let it go. This is one of those lessons I learn over and over again and keeps coming back so I can tweak it and adjust it until I am a calm individual who doesn't yell at inanimate objects or people who can't hear me. Unfortunately, this probably won't happen for a very long time. Anyway. Thank goodness for the internet where I can interact with other people without interacting with actual people, just their digital representations. :)
Linkin Park's new cd has a song with a chorus that goes like this:
Do you feel cold and lost in desperation?
You build up hope but failure's all you've known.
Remember all the sadness and frustration
And let it go. Let it go.
I don't really feel cold or lost in desperation, but the part I like is the last: remember all the sadness and frustration and let it go. This is one of those lessons I learn over and over again and keeps coming back so I can tweak it and adjust it until I am a calm individual who doesn't yell at inanimate objects or people who can't hear me. Unfortunately, this probably won't happen for a very long time. Anyway. Thank goodness for the internet where I can interact with other people without interacting with actual people, just their digital representations. :)
Truth.....or....Bliss.
The coined term "Ignorance is Bliss" seems to be the argument, whether spoken or not that is the predominant message getting across when an opponent argues for the uncovering of truth. The recent publication on wikileaks of more war logs got me thinking a little bit about truth vs. ignorance. I understand both sides of the argument to a degree. Truth side says that 'people' deserve to know the truth. The other side says 'people' are better off not knowing, or, the DoD is better off with the public not knowing, etc. etc.
What has happened in the past? Have we not had whistle blowers who have uncovered ugly truths about other wars? Vietnam quickly became a scar on our military and political history that we can't get over, partially thanks to whistle blowers. We now know from that experience the mistakes we made and what we shouldn't be doing at home and overseas. Did we learn? I suppose many Americans did. Did we learn as a nation? That may be the question.
As a member of our current nations military, I am always being trained on proper conduct. I am told my career depends on it. I am told my future promotions depend on it. I am told the Air Force crumbles if nobody adheres to the principles put forth as to how to conduct ourselves in time of war and in time of peace. Yet on day one, after getting off the plane in our deployed location, the book of conduct changes. Granted, it doesn't change to a significant degree, but the point is that rules change for Americans on non-American land, LOAC or not. Believe it or not, however many books of conduct there are, and however correct they are, they are written by someone in a position of authority over multiple personnel. Otherwise, it wouldn't get made into a book.
the truth vs. bliss argument seems to apply to religion as well. I am speaking specifically about historical aspects. What did the catholic church do to scientists during the dark ages? In the beginning, I am sure these truths were dangerous to know. Now, it is common knowledge. Even today, it isn't common knowledge that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. Brigham Young is famous for his many wives, but he got it from Joseph and his 30-something sealings to various women. Within the church this isn't common knowledge. 'People' either wish to remain ignorant for it seems more blissful or they just don't know because other 'people' don't want to talk about it.
This brings me to the extent of my thoughts on this for now.
Why? Why do 'people' wish to sweep these sorts of things under the rug? To me it seems that it is an embarrassing aspect of history they seem to be attached to or partially responsible for. Conduct of military personnel overseas is kept quiet because our authorities know about it, knew about it, condoned it and are embarrassed by it.
Conduct of religious leaders isn't fully understood, thus kept quiet. 'People' don't know how to take it or interpret it so they pretend it isn't relevant and either try to hide it, ignore it, or deny it.
There are many examples of truth vs. bliss. These are instances that I am more familiar with. I'm not running on too much brain power today so I didn't take it very deep. Just in case I do eventually, I have something to springboard off of.
What has happened in the past? Have we not had whistle blowers who have uncovered ugly truths about other wars? Vietnam quickly became a scar on our military and political history that we can't get over, partially thanks to whistle blowers. We now know from that experience the mistakes we made and what we shouldn't be doing at home and overseas. Did we learn? I suppose many Americans did. Did we learn as a nation? That may be the question.
As a member of our current nations military, I am always being trained on proper conduct. I am told my career depends on it. I am told my future promotions depend on it. I am told the Air Force crumbles if nobody adheres to the principles put forth as to how to conduct ourselves in time of war and in time of peace. Yet on day one, after getting off the plane in our deployed location, the book of conduct changes. Granted, it doesn't change to a significant degree, but the point is that rules change for Americans on non-American land, LOAC or not. Believe it or not, however many books of conduct there are, and however correct they are, they are written by someone in a position of authority over multiple personnel. Otherwise, it wouldn't get made into a book.
the truth vs. bliss argument seems to apply to religion as well. I am speaking specifically about historical aspects. What did the catholic church do to scientists during the dark ages? In the beginning, I am sure these truths were dangerous to know. Now, it is common knowledge. Even today, it isn't common knowledge that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. Brigham Young is famous for his many wives, but he got it from Joseph and his 30-something sealings to various women. Within the church this isn't common knowledge. 'People' either wish to remain ignorant for it seems more blissful or they just don't know because other 'people' don't want to talk about it.
This brings me to the extent of my thoughts on this for now.
Why? Why do 'people' wish to sweep these sorts of things under the rug? To me it seems that it is an embarrassing aspect of history they seem to be attached to or partially responsible for. Conduct of military personnel overseas is kept quiet because our authorities know about it, knew about it, condoned it and are embarrassed by it.
Conduct of religious leaders isn't fully understood, thus kept quiet. 'People' don't know how to take it or interpret it so they pretend it isn't relevant and either try to hide it, ignore it, or deny it.
There are many examples of truth vs. bliss. These are instances that I am more familiar with. I'm not running on too much brain power today so I didn't take it very deep. Just in case I do eventually, I have something to springboard off of.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Publicity
What is it about publicity that gives authority?
Is it the fact that people get paid to go on tv/radio? Is that where the authority comes from? Whether it be acting or reporting news or playing a role in the media, people are getting paid to talk in front of a mic and read cue cards and ad lib about whatever that particular channel wants them to. Somehow our culture tells us there is a certain amount of authority that automatically comes with those roles. Otherwise what option do we have to conclude with?
Let us not forget the people that get paid to perform on tv/radio, yet do not act but perform in competition. Our professional athletes are raised on a pedestal as well.
We have been shown time and again that these roles are a let down. We have been shown that we obviously put too much 'authority' into these roles than they are fit for. Whether they tout such 'authority' or not, we have been shown that they cannot keep upright the ideals, principles or ethics that they have been given by us.
Another form of publicity is in written form. Some unethical politician or wannabe politician writes a book (or ghost writes a book), and suddenly they assume some authority on what they are writing, they hold weight in the public arena as long as their book gets in the hands of the public.
The only reason why I don't have this 'authority' is because I have the disadvantage of not being in this public arena. Do you ever wonder what you would do or say if you knew millions or at least thousands would at some time see it? What would you say to America? What do you find are your frustrations after listening to someone you thought represented your worldview, or you thought you looked up to but just didn't quite say what they should have? The only difference here is limelight, popularity and pedestal.
This chain of thought leads me to think of our forefathers. What made them special? No cameras around, no radio, yet the written word was ever present. The written word got their ideas out and made them popular. Next thing you know they hash out some things that are still affecting all Americans today. Yet people had to read. People had to invest time in what they wanted to find out about politics and news. The mix up today with news and entertainment in our current media spoon feeds our preset worldviews and we unconsciously entrench our minds in a perspective that could be completely false, is most likely misrepresented, and is spewed out of a mouth that has no intelligence, real authority on the subject and few if any principles to stand on.
What am I talking about? I just snapped out of it and realized I was just typing words...
Is it the fact that people get paid to go on tv/radio? Is that where the authority comes from? Whether it be acting or reporting news or playing a role in the media, people are getting paid to talk in front of a mic and read cue cards and ad lib about whatever that particular channel wants them to. Somehow our culture tells us there is a certain amount of authority that automatically comes with those roles. Otherwise what option do we have to conclude with?
Let us not forget the people that get paid to perform on tv/radio, yet do not act but perform in competition. Our professional athletes are raised on a pedestal as well.
We have been shown time and again that these roles are a let down. We have been shown that we obviously put too much 'authority' into these roles than they are fit for. Whether they tout such 'authority' or not, we have been shown that they cannot keep upright the ideals, principles or ethics that they have been given by us.
Another form of publicity is in written form. Some unethical politician or wannabe politician writes a book (or ghost writes a book), and suddenly they assume some authority on what they are writing, they hold weight in the public arena as long as their book gets in the hands of the public.
The only reason why I don't have this 'authority' is because I have the disadvantage of not being in this public arena. Do you ever wonder what you would do or say if you knew millions or at least thousands would at some time see it? What would you say to America? What do you find are your frustrations after listening to someone you thought represented your worldview, or you thought you looked up to but just didn't quite say what they should have? The only difference here is limelight, popularity and pedestal.
This chain of thought leads me to think of our forefathers. What made them special? No cameras around, no radio, yet the written word was ever present. The written word got their ideas out and made them popular. Next thing you know they hash out some things that are still affecting all Americans today. Yet people had to read. People had to invest time in what they wanted to find out about politics and news. The mix up today with news and entertainment in our current media spoon feeds our preset worldviews and we unconsciously entrench our minds in a perspective that could be completely false, is most likely misrepresented, and is spewed out of a mouth that has no intelligence, real authority on the subject and few if any principles to stand on.
What am I talking about? I just snapped out of it and realized I was just typing words...
What?
I don't know much about all the processes and behind-the-scenes action that goes on with politicians. I came across a movie trailer about gerrymandering, or redistricting and it opened my eyes. They even use a quote from our current President that tells us that one person's vote won't mean anything because of it. Of course, if nobody votes, or if the entire country votes one way, it wouldn't matter how you redistrict, but it struck a chord inside that made me a little less shameful for any year I decide not to vote. If you know the city you live in, or the political district, even better, you might be able to make an educated guess as to how you will be grouped for an election. Does this happen for all elections? Are the people being manipulated at every turn? Why isn't this a slightly bigger issue? It just makes me even less enthused about the processes politics have espoused and we the common people have allowed them to do so. My faith in our system has left the building. There is no representation, no matter how much our worldviews align-that is merely coincidence. There is no 'for the people' when there are so many voices 'the people' have. A representative can pick and choose which voices he/she aligns with and still make a case that they represent 'the people'. How about this: we all get a representative in D.C. Every political viewpoint gets a voice. They can all gather and argue in Washington just like they do today only we know exactly what group they represent, where their money comes from, what kind of ethical code and moral conduct they carry, and what to expect from them come legislation time. That way, we aren't guessing what the Dems or the Gop parties will be doing next, changing next in their own party, or attacking internally. If a group wants their rep. out, they kick them out and put a new one in. They are responsible. States have minimal power nowadays anyway. This could do away with two-party politics as well. Fire Fox news and Msnbc, do away with two-party politics, gets reps in gov't. who actually represent all walks of life, get rid of the plethora of 'tricks' they play to maximize their winning hand, and maybe then we could stop hearing about the idiocracy being carried out in completely-out-of-touch-ville, er, Washington.
But I digress......gerrymandering is stupid.
But I digress......gerrymandering is stupid.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
I should stay out of this one...
http://www.nine-moons.com/?p=1275
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_mormon_church_protest
I find it more interesting than anything else. Ever since Prop 8 in Cali., this political issue has been hotter than any others when it comes to faithful Saints and church policy. I also find it interesting about how talks change after conference. This isn't the first time it has happened as I have experienced it firsthand. My understanding is everything is ready to go well before conference. If so, why the need to edit after?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_mormon_church_protest
I find it more interesting than anything else. Ever since Prop 8 in Cali., this political issue has been hotter than any others when it comes to faithful Saints and church policy. I also find it interesting about how talks change after conference. This isn't the first time it has happened as I have experienced it firsthand. My understanding is everything is ready to go well before conference. If so, why the need to edit after?
A Real Fear
What is worse than a horrible candidate for an important office such as senate or President, where the candidate knows little more about politics, history or much of anything for that matter than your average second grader?
The fact that these people actually represent a good percentage of Americans and those Americans don't see anything wrong with the picture and will vote for them. Christine O'Donnell, Sarah Palin and Sharron Angle are just a few names that come to mind presently. I admit they represent one side of the political spectrum and one can find good examples from any political sway....but we all know which side I despise less.
The fact that these people actually represent a good percentage of Americans and those Americans don't see anything wrong with the picture and will vote for them. Christine O'Donnell, Sarah Palin and Sharron Angle are just a few names that come to mind presently. I admit they represent one side of the political spectrum and one can find good examples from any political sway....but we all know which side I despise less.
Southern Baptist Leader Ignorant
(Since I don't have facebook or twitter, my blog is slowly becoming a social update tool, as effective as that is may still need further evaluation).
So a Southern Baptist leader apparently claims yoga is directly contradictory to Christianity. I don't know much about the deeper aspects of yoga, but I am going to assume the popular yoga practices done among the mainstream American yoga classes is a bit less than harmful or contradictory to faithful or semi-faithful Christians.
Thus, I claim that this so-called leader is a horrible one and doesn't know Christianity, rather, he knows a superficial facade of Christianity....a shell of a belief system if you will. Of course, I claim most people proclaiming adherence to the Christian faith is doing the same thing, not going much deeper than what the occasional sermon from a lost or black sheep teaches them.
So a Southern Baptist leader apparently claims yoga is directly contradictory to Christianity. I don't know much about the deeper aspects of yoga, but I am going to assume the popular yoga practices done among the mainstream American yoga classes is a bit less than harmful or contradictory to faithful or semi-faithful Christians.
Thus, I claim that this so-called leader is a horrible one and doesn't know Christianity, rather, he knows a superficial facade of Christianity....a shell of a belief system if you will. Of course, I claim most people proclaiming adherence to the Christian faith is doing the same thing, not going much deeper than what the occasional sermon from a lost or black sheep teaches them.
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Belief
I have been thinking a lot about belief as of late. A big reason for this is due to a very hostile person at work who likes to bring religion up, but turns into a pompous jerk who belittles others and demeans their beliefs. He claims he doesn't do this but it is quite clear to a returned missionary.
I haven't put my finger on it yet, but it seems that many people, no matter their belief system has quite an arrogant worldview. As if they had inside information that nobody else knew about. I myself am guilty of this of course since I belong to a restorationist church which believes they have restored what has been lost since Christ set up his church in the beginning. Yet, I am very cognizant of this fact and try to break myself of it constantly.
It is amazing to me though how hostile people can get and how unwilling people are to talk to each other rather than talking at each other and having the conversation just fly by and land nowhere. I also find it amazing how closed off a certain worldview or set of beliefs can be. How impossible it is to integrate a new idea into a worldview that is already established. How utterly ridiculous it is to be able to accept something for what it is, and not for what others say it is or how others view it.
I am sad really to be surrounded by such minds. Minds that have stopped expanding. Minds that are as stubborn as any. A favorite quote of mine touches on this very topic: "Be unafraid of new ideas for they are as steppingstones to progress. You will of course respect the opinions of others but be unafraid to dissent -- if you are informed...only error needs to fear freedom of expression" Hugh B. Brown.
It is quite easy to explain this quote from any worldview, as the last bit talks about error. One can assume that any view not espoused by them is in error. The key to the quote is progress and being unafraid to test new waters, new ideas. If they don't fit, they don't fit, but only you can decide that for yourself.
The arrogance and self-righteous stubborn stupidity I have to drudge through I am sure is familiar to all. Yet it is making me quite nauseous and weary. What happens to a mind to prompt such attitude? "Oh, well I have read so many books in the so many years on this planet, so I know everything." Or, "The books and education I obtained is clearly superior to yours so I am not going to listen to you as it is also clear you have nothing to contribute."
Another day, another rant. I seem to be quite full of whining as of late, ay?
I haven't put my finger on it yet, but it seems that many people, no matter their belief system has quite an arrogant worldview. As if they had inside information that nobody else knew about. I myself am guilty of this of course since I belong to a restorationist church which believes they have restored what has been lost since Christ set up his church in the beginning. Yet, I am very cognizant of this fact and try to break myself of it constantly.
It is amazing to me though how hostile people can get and how unwilling people are to talk to each other rather than talking at each other and having the conversation just fly by and land nowhere. I also find it amazing how closed off a certain worldview or set of beliefs can be. How impossible it is to integrate a new idea into a worldview that is already established. How utterly ridiculous it is to be able to accept something for what it is, and not for what others say it is or how others view it.
I am sad really to be surrounded by such minds. Minds that have stopped expanding. Minds that are as stubborn as any. A favorite quote of mine touches on this very topic: "Be unafraid of new ideas for they are as steppingstones to progress. You will of course respect the opinions of others but be unafraid to dissent -- if you are informed...only error needs to fear freedom of expression" Hugh B. Brown.
It is quite easy to explain this quote from any worldview, as the last bit talks about error. One can assume that any view not espoused by them is in error. The key to the quote is progress and being unafraid to test new waters, new ideas. If they don't fit, they don't fit, but only you can decide that for yourself.
The arrogance and self-righteous stubborn stupidity I have to drudge through I am sure is familiar to all. Yet it is making me quite nauseous and weary. What happens to a mind to prompt such attitude? "Oh, well I have read so many books in the so many years on this planet, so I know everything." Or, "The books and education I obtained is clearly superior to yours so I am not going to listen to you as it is also clear you have nothing to contribute."
Another day, another rant. I seem to be quite full of whining as of late, ay?
Friday, October 1, 2010
Day late, dollar short.
So now that it's October, I managed to do more bike riding than I did all spring and summer (over a week's period. The century, 'tour de cure' with Andy was the single longest ride I did in June). I did 105 miles just this week (not very impressive compared to Andy, I know), over the span of three rides. I got excited about losing a bit of weight that I gained since 2008, and the Air Force has revamped the PT program yet again, putting the stress on passing the test on everyone a bit more. I have done more running this year than ever before, but since I can't ride a lot of the winter, I feel the need to get out on my bike. The AF Academy is a perfect place to ride in the Springs. Much less traffic, bigger shoulders for the most part, and good climbing on a 12-mile circuit course. Anyway, it felt good to do so much riding after being bike-lazy all year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)