Tiramisu! Gesundheit?

Tiramisu
Ingredients:

6 egg yolks

3 tablespoons sugar
1 pound mascarpone cheese
1 1/2 cups strong espresso, cooled
2 teaspoons dark rum
24 packaged ladyfingers
1/2 cup bittersweet chocolate shavings,
for garnish

Cholesterol, empty calories, fat, caffeine, alcohol, starch and chocolate (for garnish).  The only redeeming ingredient in Tiramisu is the rum.  The chocolate is a close second, but there's only enough for "garnish."  Six egg yolks?  That's a half rack of the worst part of the egg!  One and a half cups of STRONG espresso?  I thought that was the point of espresso, to be strong.  Does stronger eat the enamel off the cup?  A paltry two teaspoons of my favorite part, the rum, before we dig into the twenty-four "packaged" lady fingers.  I think the point of packaging them is so you don't eat more than one at a time as they're fattening! 

 

There are as many variants on the recipe and construction of this tempting high caloric weapon as there are chefs to make it, and not one of those chefs can make it right.  If they could make it right I wouldn't eat it.  As it stands, every variant I have tried has been horrible.  I have had to go back and have numerous helpings in order to finally make the determination, and I ensure my plate is licked clean, but each time the finding is the same:  Horrible, just horrible!

 

Who comes up with this nasty stuff?  I can see some grossly obese pastry chef waking up late one night and sitting bolt upright in bed...ok, let's go with "eyes snapping open," and muttering, "What a great idea!" as drool soaks into the pillow.  Lets face it, and be honest, this is a heart attack on a plate!

 

This is what God should have tempted Eve with, except God knew it would be an unfair test of willpower.  After all, if Eve couldn't resist the apple what chance would she stand against Tiramisu?  Have you seen all the art depicting Eve?  Imagine how wide the canvas would have to be if she were into this!  The only recipe item that could make this dish worse would be to mash it all together and use it as topping for ice cream, and maybe add a drizzle of semi-sweet chocolate syrup over the top, whipped cream and some slivered almonds, and a cherry...or two.  Oh crap!  See!  This is the stuff of sin!

 

I went into the kitchen at work today and saw the dregs of what was left of a Tiramisu birthday cake we'd been sampling all week.  I stared at it and thought, "Get thee behind me, Satan!" 

 

I reached for a fork and plate.  To your health!

Turning 60: More Thoughts

Well, I'm a week away from turning the big six-oh.  Every morning I wake up, look in the mirror and chuckle.  I'm not sure if I'm losing my mind, conceited at how devastatingly handsome I still am, amazed at how I've managed to bullshit my way to this point in life, or if I just have a genuine amazement at God's sense of humor at allowing me the opportunity to grace this planet for even the blink of an eye.

 

I wanted to do something big for my 60th.  Get a whole roast pig and all the southern trimmings, get hammered and have a real blow out.  The closer I get to it, the less important that seems to be.  I'm thinking of a quiet night of reflection with a good glass of brandy and some mellow jazz.

 

I thought about my parents last night, while I sniffled myself to sleep with this cold that seems to be finally waning.  Dad is turning 83 this Sunday and they really wants me to be closer to them.  It makes perfect sense at this point in my life.  It takes very little for me to be happy, and just enough money to get by  is fine.  I can be of more help to him and mom there than here. 

 

In two more years I'll apply for my Social Security that I've paid into for the past 45 years.  I want what I'm owed before the government goes belly up or Obama redistributes my retirement to someone that didn't earn it.  It isn't an entitlement Mr. President, and it isn't yours.  It's mine.  I paid into it and I want it back.  I give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's.  This is mine.  I didn't spend 45 years on a street corner with a sign begging for it, I did spend 45 years paying into it and 22 years in the military defending every body's right to demand it back when it was due.

 

The business I worked with for the 17 years, prior to my recent retirement to Mexico, is moving an hour away to another city.  This breaks my heart in that several of the most beautiful I have ever met will be leaving.  I've have always called them "my girls" and cherish them dearly.  If they're reading this, they know who they are, and know that I love them all. 

 

That's a good thing -- love.  It is something I thought I lost the ability to give, or take, since my divorce in 1999.  Something about allowing a woman to strip you, of those you love and everything you own, that leaves a person feeling devastated.  Patience is not my virtue and it has taken me 14 years to climb out of this self-imposed pit of an emotional wasteland in which I allowed the divorce to place me.  Friendship, support, and the love of those around me has helped enormously in pulling me back into the light of day.  In the end, I have probably fared much better through all of it than she has.  Only now, after these many years, can forgive her and feel pity for what she may not realize she has lost and will never have.  I do hope she has learned, for her sake and before it's too late, it isn't all about her.

 

At this point in life I'd really like to work toward a social center for religious tolerance.  I think this would be a good thing, and a legacy I can leave for future generations.  Some might say it's a fool's errand for someone with so little religious education to consider such an undertaking, especially at 60.  I would say to look at the job those with the education have done.  I would point to the terrorists, the crystal cathedrals, the diddling of children and hookers by men of the cloth, the poor that continue to go unfed throughout the world, and the inability of religions to teach their followers to tolerate others for their beliefs and live together in peace.  Why can't we all just get along?  As for being 60, my dad is 83 so I figure I have at least 23 more years to have fun with this.

Love and have fun.  Be fruitful and multiply. Dance like no one is watching and sing like no one can hear.  Walk around the house in your birthday suit, just don't answer the door.  Be always in pursuit of happiness and God, for to pursue anything else is counterproductive to knowledge and a long life. 

Walk your own path each day with your head held high in the knowledge you have done right, and with the humility of knowing you are not perfect.  Love is as much about sacrifice as it is about emotion.  You can buy fun but you cannot buy happiness.  Know that faith is about asking for blessings and praying for forgiveness.  Death is the last great mystery of this life.

What will you do in the next?

Sunday Thought for October 13, 2013

I thought I'd better get this out early since this weekend is going to be hectic for me and I wouldn't want to miss my Sunday post.  Luckily, the ULC Newsletter came out with a reprint of an article posted in Science & Technology called, Texas Wrangles Over Evolution and Creationism.  As one would expect, I have my own view on this argument, but let's take a look at an excerpt from the post that sums up what they were saying:

 

Giving students a chance to “make up their own minds” is a favorite argument of creationists, but it has flaws. First, if students should be encouraged to weigh creationism with evolution, why should they not also be encouraged to weigh alchemy with chemistry? Second, scientists are not trying to deny students a creationist education, because creationism can be taught in any Sunday school classroom. Third, in a public school science classroom, students are expected to weigh scientific theories with each other, and creationism is not a testable scientific theory.

Encouraging children to think for themselves is exactly what we are doing by reserving public schools for science instruction and churches for religious instruction. Unfortunately, the Texas SBOE does not see how church-state separation achieves this.

  First of all I have to state that I don't believe in creationism as taught in the Bible.  I think it may have some basis in truth, however, if we accept that our gene pool was tampered with, "as ancient alien theorist believe."  Otherwise, we have to accept that humans would have had to suffer through millions of years of evolution to get where we are.  Was God the one doing the tampering?  Very possibly, in which case wouldn't this present an argument that both sides are right?

Let's look at the excerpt above.  "Giving students a chance to “make up their own minds” is a favorite argument of creationists, but it has flaws."   No it doesn't.  Everyone should have the chance to make up their own minds.  This process is what keeps us searching for the truth.  If we only believe one side of an argument, how exciting would that be?

"First, if students should be encouraged to weigh creationism with evolution, why should they not also be encouraged to weigh alchemy with chemistry?"  They should absolutely be encouraged to weigh everything in life!  This is the basis of education and real learning, something our educational system is sorely lacking.

"Scientists are not trying to deny students a creationist education, because creationism can be taught in any Sunday school classroom."  Why teach them separately?  What we're doing is preventing those that do not have a robust religious or spiritual life from having the benefit of creative discussion on an opposing point of view.  How will they be able to intelligently address the issue if they don't have the opportunity for knowledge?  Both views should be taught as a combined subject with no slant to either viewpoint, other than in the context of debate.

"In a public school science classroom, students are expected to weigh scientific theories with each other, and creationism is not a testable scientific theory."  Hmmm...theoretical physics,  medical science, engineering.  That can't be done.  There is no scientific proof.  If medicine is an exact science then, why do we practice it so much and still not cure the common cold?  Most knowledge started as theory until someone proved the hypothesis, until someone asked the question, "Why?"  Scientists that don't accept, at least the possibility, that our genes were tampered with will feel pretty stupid if we find out its true.  Nothing is ever absolute, and the scientist that closes their mind to any possibility is a fool.  Just because something isn't testable, doesn't give it any less possible validity.

"Encouraging children to think for themselves is exactly what we are doing by reserving public schools for science instruction and churches for religious instruction."  Again, although I agree totally with the separation of church and state, offer this comparison course as an elective class, not as required study.  If a student wants a rounded education, they have an opportunity to get one.  If they choose to enter university without a set of tools to form intelligent discussion and debate, that is also their right.

I was fortunate in that my education allowed me to see both side of the discussion.  Although I side with the evolutionists, I see the possibility for genetic manipulation which may have kick started the human species and, even though not yet provable, we may be on the verge of a philosophical shift in the way we view human evolution.  I don't know, and neither do the scientists.  The difference is, I look forward to finding out, one way or the other.

What is your view?  As always, feel free to comment below or send an email to the address above.

Have a blessed Sunday!

Why Are We Here?

“Asking ‘why’ is one of the most important strategies children have for connecting with their caregivers and learning about the world around them.”

Dr. Dawn Taylor, Psychologist, Penn State

"The only problem with an opinion is that most people don't ask that key question that they once asked so frequently - “why?”  Why do I hold this opinion? Why does it have merit? Why is this the best way?"

Matthew Sanderson, User Experience Developer

You find lubricant on the floor, and leakage is an abnormal state. Now you have two choices – clean it up or ask why. Why is there lubricant on the floor?  It leaked from the machine. Why is the machine leaking? Because the seal is damaged. Again, you can simply replace the seal or ask why again. Why is the seal damaged? Because there are metal shavings in the lubricant. Why are there metal shavings in the lubricant? Because the filter on the lubricant pump is damaged. Why is the filter damaged? Because it gets damaged by contaminants falling into the machine.

5 Whys of Root Cause Analysis

Who am I?  What am I?  When am I?  Where am I?  Why am I?

There's that word again, "why."

Many people would add "how" to this list of five Ws.  How is really answered by the five Ws.  "How" does not enter into Root Cause Analysis, as stated in the quote above, but then, neither are the other Ws.  Why?

Try this exercise.  Ask yourself each of the Ws about yourself, as I did above.  Answer each question with, "Why?"  Why are you asking, "Who am I?" or "What am I?"  It is difficult to do it immediately, and it may be difficult to answer at all.

Now do the same exercise and ask each of the Ws about God.  No one can answer, to a certainty, any of the questions.  The most we can do is philosophize about them.  Now, for each question, ask why you are asking.  "Why are you asking, "Who is God?" etc.

 

More difficult?  Of course.  If you can't answer the questions about yourself, you will never come close to having a clue about God.  But, so many religious and spiritual scholars would have you believe they have the answer.  Their way is the right way. 

 

So, what's the point?

 

Everything in your life begins with you.  From the moment your conception begins your perception, and how your perceive is in large part based on "why."

 

I have come to a point in life where I think I have answered, for my own purposes, my who, what, when, and where.  How is a moot point as it either is, or is not.  Yoda would be proud.  I think why it is or is not is much more important.  So, I am left with, "Why am I?"  A question that has occupied me for almost forty-five years.

 

When I was in high school I should have died in a motorcycle accident.  I was hit by a car after I ran a stop sign, the bike and I went under the bumper and the car came to a stop.  Then, I was thrown over the hood of the vehicle as if by some unseen force.  Remember, the car had come to a stop.  Witnesses confirm it as an oddity.  I only remember that, prior to running the stop sign, everything began running in slow motion and I never heard my buddy, on a bike behind me, yelling at me to stop.  Why was I alive?  Why was I saved?  Why was I able to be thrown over a car after it came to a stop? 

 

This was also my first experience with my mind blacking out to protect me from oncoming pain.  I blacked out when I saw the bumper, again after I woke up flying over the car, again after the first bounce as I realized each time that there was more probable pain to come.

 

My first tour in the military caught me driving a 510 Datsun wagon in the desert late one night.  I dozed at the wheel and woke up in time to over correct after going off onto the soft sandy shoulder.  I blacked out as I flipped the car, woke half way through the rolling, woke again after I landed on my back in the desert.  Laid there for a while listening to the wheels until they stopped spinning.  I could just see the upside down vehicle no far from me.  Checking my body, I was in shock but nothing was broken.  A California Highway Patrolman took me out to the vehicle a week later and explained why I shouldn't be alive.  If I'd been wearing a seat belt I would have stayed in the car and been shredded by everything inside that had come loose.  It was a mix-master.  They surmised I must have been thrown out the back hatch as the doors were sealed as it rolled side over side, before it went end over end.  Why was I alive?  And why was I able to be thrown out of the rear hatch of the wagon without serious injury?

 

These were only two of several instances that made me consider the question, "Why am I here?"  Was it my marriage?  No, it went south a while back.  My kids?  Possibly.  My grand kids?  Probably?  It might be this recent spiritual journey I am on, the blog, posting my thoughts on "The Path," and even founding the Congregation for Religious Tolerance.  One thing is certain, I have always known that the answer to my question hasn't presented itself yet and I may not be around when it does.

 

My thoughts go back to the prisoner that was paroled after serving time for murder and dies of cancer before he can be released.  He had found God while inside and was at peace with his death.  He saw it as God's way of letting him be reborn so he could find the man he murdered and make amends.  Is this why I'm here?  Am I, somehow, making amends for something I've done in a past life?  Or, am I a tool to guide someone onto their own path, a catalyst.  Then, if that's the case, maybe the belief that we are all on converging paths, heading toward the same destination is not far from wrong.

 

Why am I here?  Why are you here?

I hope that, in the grand scheme of things, God's answer to this question isn't just, "because."

In the meantime, we need to keep searching, keep believing, and keep asking why.  It is, after all, what we do.

Sunday Thought for October 6, 2013

 

Is this just precious?  I found this face at the Olympia Oysterfest yesterday and had to do a double-take before I asked mom if I could take the photo.  I saw quite a few kids at the fest, most were working the booths, all were having fun making a few dollars for their organizations. 

 

It occurs to me that maybe we don't pay these young people enough mind when they do the "right" thing.  We always seem to be on them when they do the wrong.  I have made it a habit of recognizing those kids working hard to make a difference and expressing my appreciation.  Maybe if more of us gave them a well deserved thumbs up, there would be less of them getting into trouble.  Maybe they would have some respect for us older folks, as well.

 

Friday I was on my way home from work when several young people were waiting to cross the street.  I slowed to a stop and they stepped from the curb.  The last young man had a skateboard and turned right in front of my car, leaned forward, and stuck out his tongue.  Really?  I do a nice thing, and this idiot shows no appreciation.  I could have been stressed out from the day.  I was behind the wheel of a ton of moving metal.  I thought about what he'd look like as a hood ornament, then I just shook my head at him.  I figured he'd be behind bars soon enough.

 

Maybe if he were one of these kids at the fest he would have more appreciation for others.  Maybe if he had parents that cared enough he wouldn't be an ass.  Maybe if more adults would give him the time of day, a kind word, the right path, he might make something positive of his life.  I doubt he was ever dressed like my little friend above.

 

Today, and through this coming week, give some young people the time of day.  Let them know when you see them doing the right thing, even if its just being dressed appropriately, and looking nice.  Respect is a two way street.  Maybe you young folks should do the same for us old farts.  Please don't stick your tongues out. 

 

It makes you look stupid, and you might become a hood ornament.

Why a Congregation for Religious Tolerance?

Why  a Congregation for Religious Tolerance?  I touched on this question as my first post, back in June.  It seems to be a recurring question from readers requesting a bit more depth, so here it is.  I will try not to restate too much of the first post as I also hate it when I feel someone is patronizing.  My feeling is, if I didn't explain it well enough the first time, restating it the same way again is going to accomplish what?  So, I will try to approach it from a slightly different angle and see if this helps clarify my reasoning. 

I have been disenchanted with organized religion for years.  Lately, I have become tired of Christians constantly sitting in judgment of me, and those like me, who believe there might be another path.  These “Christians” show little of the charity one would expect toward those of “little faith,” yet they hold up the Bible quoting chapter and verse, just prior to turning their back on you and walking away.

The ministers and priests flood our airwaves with the gospel, just prior to hitting us up for that blessed donation so they might continue their ministry, and pay for their palatial mansions, limousines, and “Crystal Cathedrals,” all the while pledging their intent to do for the poor, the needy, and the godless.  Really?  Let’s take a quick look at just one of those faithful ministries.

Robert H. Schuler, affiliated with the Reformed Church in America, collects $18 million to build his congregation’s “Crystal Cathedral.”  Upon bankruptcy, they are $43 Million in debt.  The Cathedral is sold to the Catholic Church for $57 million.  The Catholics are working to open it in 2015 with $100 million in renovations.  $161 million spent on a house of worship.  The poor are still hungry, and the congregation is no closer to God than they were prior to following this “minister” into a bottomless pit of debt.  The Catholics will make this property pay for itself, no doubt, and the poor will still be hungry.

I will never ask for your money.  You know better than I how to take care of those around you in need.  Let's start at home and work our way outward.

If you can pound your Bible, quote scripture, waggle your finger in my face, and think for one minute that this egotistical, pious, belligerence was what Christ taught, that this was God’s will, who is the ignorant one?  Who of us is in line to drink the Kool-Aid?  When righteous, religious leadership speaks, don’t the faithful fall to their knees and drink it all in without blinking an eye?  Reverend Jim Jones took this to it's extreme in Jonestown when, in 1978, 909 members of his Peoples Temple cult, including 300 children, drank his poisoned Kool-Aid, dying for the greater glory.  Before they died, Jones felt it prudent to also kill a congressman and five aids visiting Jonestown, on a fact finding tour.  

The world lost 909 souls, one congressman and four of his staff, Kool-Aid got a bad rap, and the poor are still hungry.

Most religions and spiritual philosophies throughout the world expound the ideas of tolerance, forgiveness, love, and morality.  Yet, we have historically waged war in the name of God at the drop of a hat, in order to gain territory and fill the coffers.  On a good day we insist on bad mouthing each other's belief systems, decrying the use of Christmas decorations, and the name of God on public places.

We try to out do each other in the size and beauty of our places of worship with the likes of the Blue Mosque, St. Peter's, St. Basil's, Hagia Sophia, Wat Pho, and the Crystal Cathedral.  And throughout all of this, the poor continue to go hungry while the religious leaders, in the name of their deity, feed off their ignorance. 

Is it any wonder most of us have become numb or disenchanted with God and religion?  Isn't there a better way?

But, how many more "better ways" do we need?  Everybody thinks their way is the only way.  I say, that's fine.  Believe in your way, just don't judge me for believing differently.  It comes down to acceptance and tolerance.  It is all about our ability to agree to disagree.  Our desire to have meaningful, peaceful dialogue about our differences, our similarities, and our faiths.

If people of faith, people of peace and love, cannot have this kind of dialogue, what chance do we have to survive?  If we as religious and spiritual leaders can't have this kind of dialogue, what chance do we have of ministering our congregations down the peaceful path of our philosophy or prophets?  If the congregations cannot be educated about each other's "true" beliefs, learn to be tolerant of them, enjoy the diversity and colorful majesty of those other beliefs, how will they ever learn to accept each other, and live with each other, in peace?

 Why the Congregation for Religious Tolerance?  I just wanted a place to rest.  I figure many of us need a place where we can take a moment and just focus on our own path for a while.  Maybe we can learn from each other.  Maybe we can help each other understand.  Maybe, if we can find peace for just a moment, we can find love, and then understanding, and then acceptance.  We don't have to always agree.  If we agreed all the time what would we ever talk about?  But, maybe we could learn to disagree in peace.  It is not necessary for me to agree with you in order to love you.

 As I said in my Mission Statement and Philosophy: 

The Congregation for Religious Tolerance promotes the idea of religious and spiritual tolerance through education, understanding, fairness and compassion, conversation and debate, while allowing everyone to peacefully follow their own spiritual beliefs without oppression or discrimination.

Tolerance may not necessarily extend beyond religious beliefs to include some religious actions -- particularly those that harm or harass others.  Religious and spiritual tolerance is a fundamental right in a democracy.  It is incumbent upon all of us, at the end of the day, to protect those that cannot protect themselves and to stand up for the peaceful rights of others.

Maybe we can all be a congregation of religious and spiritual people that can agree to disagree on faith, and then, maybe, we can focus on making the world a better place.  Maybe we can finally focus an feeding the poor which will ultimately make a better world for all of us.  We just have to learn to keep our eye on that ball, and quit playing so many games at the same time.  When  it comes to peace, we are lousy at multi-tasking. 

 We are only given one path to travel.  I vote we try to converge our paths and travel together for once.  How colorful and interesting would that be? 

"I love our cultural diversity of food, art, and spiritual faith.  I have known the peace between divergent cultures brought together through hospitality and a meal.  I have laughed with my “enemy,” and cried at their losses, have disagreed with my ally, and raised a glass with all of them at the end of the day.  I have seen us all come together in times of need and despair.  I have to believe that, through all of this, there was a common faith among us that we are better than our disagreements and that, in the end, we are really just one family, trying to get along.  Most of the time we seem to fail, but when we succeed...how glorious is that!"

Bienvenue à mes lecteurs en France!

Bienvenue à mes lecteurs dans la belle France!

 

Pour ceux d'entre vous de nouveau à "The Path", s'il vous plaît prendre un moment pour passer en revue les nombreux postes énumérés à droite. Une explication de ce blog peut être trouvé dans mon prifile, également vers la droite. Mon premier post décrit ma vision de la Congrégation pour la tolérance religieuse, j'espère que vous prenez un moment pour le lire. Il ya une app Google Translate situé au-dessus des messages pour votre commodité. Il n'est pas parfait, mais alors, qu'est-ce?

N'hésitez pas à laisser des commentaires au bas de chaque message s'il vous plait, ou vous pouvez utiliser l'adresse e-mail situé en haut de la page. J'espère que vous apprécierez la lecture des nombreux messages qui sont destinés uniquement à vous faire penser à vos propres opinions sur chaque sujet.

J'espère sincèrement que vous allez revenir et visiter souvent.

Que Dieu vous bénisse ainsi que votre chemin.

Can a Pope Make Mistakes?

Can the Pope make a mistake?  The question falls under the heading of "papal infallibility" and that means the Pope is immune from liability to error.

 

What?  You may be asking the same question that slammed into my mind upon reading this.  As always, I jumped on the Internet to see what else was out there.  I got a quick lesson through Chapter XIV, "Papal Infallibility," in a text called "Things Catholics Are Asked About."  I offer up one paragraph, of this five page chapter, to give you the flavor of the Catholic viewpoint.

Infallibility means immunity from liability to error.  In reference to the Pope it signifies that he is special, divine assistance, preserved from liability to error in definitive dogmatic teaching regarding matters of faith and morals.  Infallibility is sometimes confused with impeccability.  Impeccability means immunity from sin.  A man may be a sinner and yet have correct ideas.  The infallibility of the Pope does not mean that he is impeccable.  It does not mean that he may not sin.  But it does mean that as the official Head on earth of the Church of Jesus Christ he may not officially teach false doctrine; and this is not because he is wiser or more learned than other men, but because Jesus Christ, the Son of God, has pledged His divine word that His Vicar on earth will always be safeguarded against erroneous teaching in his office of visible Head of the Church.

In recent world politics we have come to humorously refer to this as "President for Life."  The, "no matter what I do you can't fire me," mindset. Neener, neener, neener!  If this makes your head hurt, let's take a look at what the authors of this chapter use as the reasoning for imbuing the Pope with the ultimate "get out of jail free" card.

Finally, at the close of His life, on the night before He laid down His life for the life of the world, He clearly announced the infallibility of His Church.  "I will ask the Father and He shall give you another Paraclete, that He may abide with you forever.  The spirit of truth...He shall abide with you, and shall be in you...the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My Name, He will teach you all things" (John 16:16, 17, 26).

Clearly announced?  I can read several other interpretations into this statement, so there isn't anything really clear about it unless you're one of the faithful and believe everything the Church of Christ throws at you.  But, let's look at what they're saying.

 

"Infallibility means immunity from liability to error...in definitive dogmatic teaching regarding matters of faith and morals."  So this immunity only extends to those decisions he makes specifically dealing with church dogma, faith, and morals.  Morals?  Isn't that a catchall blanket for anything?  If so there isn't much the Pope isn't immune from liability for.  I suppose this explains Papal decisions where the Crusades and the Inquisition were concerned.  God's voice on earth?  Must be nice.

 

"Impeccability means immunity from sin."  Yes, believe it or not, one of the definitions of impeccable is -- faultless.  "It does not mean that he may not sin."  So, the Pope must say, "Oops!" quite a bit? 

 

"Jesus Christ, the Son of God, has pledged His divine word that His Vicar on earth will always be safeguarded against erroneous teaching in his office of visible Head of the Church."  I want to see that sentence, verbatim, written anywhere in the Bible.  This goes back to my concern that "church" as a building is an interpretation arrived at by the Christian hierarchy to keep the faithful subservient to that hierarchy for their own good.

 

"A man may be a sinner and have correct ideas."  I suppose this explains how priests have been protected by the Church for crimes against children, as long as they have "correct ideas."

 

To be fair, I don't believe a Pope in our recent history would have intentionally pushed this issue.  The wake up call for the Head of the Church was when he was relegated to a small city state, as though he was under house arrest.  If the Church of Jesus Christ is guilty of anything, it is bringing the "money changers" into the temple.  The Church of Christ today is deeply invested in property and big business.  Even visitors to Vatican City fill the coffers through their purchases.  Like so many other Christian churches, it is all about money.  They seem to have forgotten Matthew 21:13,  

 

He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you make it a den of robbers.”

It wasn't proper in the eyes of Christ, but we are to believe that now the Church is good with it as long as the Pope says it is correct because, after all, he has "Papal Infallibility."  Really?

 

And then there is Pope Francis.  Talk about a breath of fresh air!  He fore goes all the usual trappings of a Pope in preference of more meager accommodations, dress, and a vehicle (including riding public transportation).  He eats meals in the Vatican cafeteria.  He is taking on the timely controversies of priests getting married, abortion, contraception and homosexuality in favor of a more merciful approach.  His latest refreshing comment, "The [papal] court is the leprosy of the papacy...  It looks after the interests of the Vatican, which are still, in large part temporal interests.  This Vatican-centric vision neglects the world around it and I will do everything to change it."

 

Did I equate the papacy to "President for Life?"  Maybe, in the case of Pope Francis, that comparison isn't a bad thing.  Many are saying that Pope Francis may have been a mistake, may not be good for the church.  God made a mistake?  My personal view is that, through Francis,  God might be correcting another great idea that man, more specifically the Church of Jesus Christ, has turned into an abortion.  Perhaps in the future we will see a Vatican that is more interested in feeding the poor than in cathedrals and art.

I leave you with one final quote from a Pope I am learning to love and respect:

 

"A Catholic God does not exist...I believe in Jesus Christ, His incarnation.  Jesus is my master and my pastor, but God, the Father...is the light and the creator.  This is my being."  --Pope Francis

 



What do you think?  Feel free to share, either through the comments below, or by e-mail shown at the top of this blog page.

Sunday Thought for September 29, 2013

 

I haven't been myself of late.  I have been worried about people in my life.  It's the psychic part of me that sets off an annoying "little buzzer" until I pay attention.  It could be nothing.  I have one egotistical trait, however, and, more times than not, it isn't a good one -- I hate always being right.

 

People have lost the ability to listen to their little buzzer.  We all have it, most of us have relegated it to a back closet in our minds and forgotten about it.  I think the atheists would probably find a scientific explanation for it, like, blind luck.  After all, if it can't be proven it doesn't exist.

 

I was concerned about my girlfriend in Mexico.  I had a dream that bothered me about her.  I found out the other day they have a Dengue Fever outbreak in town and several people have already died, including a teenager that worked on her ranch.  He was sick on Sunday so she took him home.  He died by Thursday.

 

This ability is fun when you use it for analysis of Intelligence information to come up with a "best guess" estimate of a situation or possible outcome, not so much when it concerns loved ones.  If I was able to take the percentage I was correct in the military and utilize it in Vegas, I'd be pretty well off.  Problem is, my lion's portion of my tiny bit of talent only seems to tell me when its bad news.  This is why, "I hate always being right."

 

I have said this many times before, but it always bares repeating -- it is important to always stay in touch with those people close to you.  To show your concern, and love, by calling or stopping by to say hello.  It is one reason why I make a point to tell my friends how much they mean to me before I fly anywhere, so they know the last words I spoke to them were words of love and friendship, should anything happen to me.  Don't let your last thought of a loved one be, "I should have called."

 

Today, like every Sunday, is a great day to call those you love and just touch base.  Tell them how you feel about them, how much you miss them.  If you can, stop by and give them a big hug.  Hold them and squeeze them while you tell them.  This is something they will remember, especially if you do it always.

 

Our time on this earth is fleeting.  When we are young it seems we will live forever.  As we get older, time seems to fly by, there is never enough of it.  Family and friends are here today and gone tomorrow.  Make the most of your time with them.

 

I going to call my Dad now, see what he's up to, and tell him and Mom I love them.

 

What are you going to do?

 

I hope you all have a blessed day and a marvelous week. 

Breast Feeding Controversy

Yahoo! Shine posted another article that caught my attention on Wednesday.  It concerned that commodity, that most precious of resources that I consider of some importance and concern, at least to me.  That resource, as many of you followers of my posts know, is BABIES! I know, the picture shows a calf, not a baby, but really, you were expecting me to post a woman's bare breast suckling a baby?  Blogger might cancel me.  I'm not sure how narrow their view of pornography is.  And that comment goes to one point of this post, society's view of breastfeeding, the other concern being the mother's view of it.
 

For the most part, I felt the article did a good job of stating the issues many women feel about breast feeding.  The author's conclusions, however, became somewhat defensive.  As a father, I have my own views on breastfeeding and was going to write a post concerning her article.  As a man I knew the post would be greeted with, "But, you're a man.  Shut up and go fix something."

 

I decided the best response would come from a woman, preferably a mother that has breastfed her child, and preferably at a young age so she has had to confront many of the same concerns mentioned in the post.  I also knew I had to have a dedicated mother that I not only trusted, but respected as well.

 

I emailed my daughter.  (Quit looking at the cows and pay attention.)

 

The article, Study Reveals Why More Women Are Choosing Not to Breastfeed, was originally published by Babble.com in their Parenting section and was authored by Monica Bielanko.  I wish I could tell my readers something more about Ms. Bielanko's qualifications to address this issue, if they are any better than mine (other than being a woman, that is) but nothing was offered up in the article.  I can't even tell if she is a reporter, or just an opinionated woman.  I will pull excerpts from the article, but if you wish to read the short piece you can find it at www.shine.yahoo.com/parenting.

 

A study is a study, is a study, so I won't bore you with the meat.  Bielanko's "take away" on it was "during a baby's first two months of life almost every mom worries so much about breastfeeding they consider switching to formula.  She goes on to explain that the World Health Organization "recommends exclusive breastfeeding until a baby is six months old..."

 

Again, the article is pretty good at covering the reason why mother's should breastfeed, and discusses the stress involved in doing so.  Then we have Ms. Bielanko's personal opinion.  Now, remember my  mantra, "this is just her opinion, and we all have one."

 

"Here's what doesn't sit right with me: the implication that women are quitting breastfeeding because they're uneducated about its benefits and that most women really want to breastfeed, they just don't know how to navigate through the problems that arise or they don't have the proper family or community support.

That's a huge disservice to women who just don't want to breastfeed, for WHATEVER reason. Maybe it's uncomfortable, maybe they feel weird about it, maybe they're so stressed and tired and freaked out by new motherhood they just don't want to. It doesn't matter. We don't need another group of professionals insinuating that our decisions were based in ignorance and that if only we had the proper support we could breastfeed forever.

Newsflash: I'm well aware that breastfeeding is better (health-wise) than formula but I don't want to breastfeed for six months. I don't know if I even want to breastfeed for three months. Does that make me any less of a mother than the woman who's nursing toddlers? Nope. I was all set to get into the reasons why I don't want to breastfeed but I don't even need to. The simple point of the matter is that the act of breastfeeding doesn't make one woman a better mother than the next. We all love our children madly, we're all doing the best we can while balancing what's in everybody's best interest and if breastfeeding isn't in mom's best interest - for whatever reason - that's A-OK. She doesn't need your little "breast is best" guilt trip because inflicting a mother with that kind of stigma is just as bad as you think her decision is not to breastfeed.

Personally, breastfeeding stresses me out and I'm not talking about problems with latching or producing enough milk. Yes, being the only one who can nourish your child is beautiful. Also, being the only one who can nourish your child is really demanding and stressful. With my first two children I breastfed for as long as I could, which turned out to be two months and three months respectively. Ultimately it became overwhelming for me even though I am well-educated and had so much family and friend support, but it felt like peer pressure. Quitting breastfeeding, rather choosing sanity over breastfeeding, was me being the best mom I could possibly be.

So do we really need another study telling us we're falling short if we make choices that we feel make us better mothers in the long run? Nope."

I have highlighted those comments in blue that I feel are important to her argument.  I have asked my daughter to consider these last few paragraphs, in particular, while forming her response for this post.  I was allowed to use all or part of it.  I felt it was best to give you her entire response.  I have put those comments in bold that I feel of particular interest.  She writes the following:

 

"My son was born in 2008, just the second baby born in my group of friends, although several of us were pregnant at the same time. As a young first-time mom I was trying to learn as much as I could about motherhood and what was best for my new baby. One thing I felt very strongly about was breastfeeding and, in my mind, formula wasn't an option. I felt like formula was not only expensive, but the thought of having to get up in the middle of the night to make a bottle when my child was tired, hungry, and crying didn't seem like something I wanted to do. Breastfeeding is free, all natural, and readily available whenever, and wherever, my child needs to be fed. Sounds great, right? But formula companies start early with pushing their product at pregnant women. Somehow I ended up receiving two full size cans of formula in the mail, along with coupons and bottles, without ever having signed up for samples. I was told to keep them, from whom I can't remember, even if I didn't plan on using it because I may need it if breastfeeding didn't work out. Before my child even got here I was being told that I was going to fail!

When my son was born via emergency C-section and spent 4 days in the ICU, I thought my dream of breastfeeding was going away. I had very little help while in the hospital to breastfeed and gave in to the pressure of giving him formula. I remember one nurse telling me "Just shove his face into your breast and he'll start sucking," which wasn't very helpful and didn’t work at all, but I was determined to figure it out. When we were released I bought a breast pump to help with engorgement and so he would still be getting breast milk while we tried to work on it. Then I bought a nipple shield, hoping that it would help with his latch. I spent the first month of his life worrying that he wasn't getting enough to eat, supplementing with formula, crying at the pain, and trying my hardest to give my child the best nutrition I could. I didn't have help from professionals. I didn't have friends who breastfed. I did it all on my own, because I wanted to. I admit that it would have been nice to know a professional to answer questions or someone to talk to, but at that time I didn't know how to get the support I needed. I fought as hard as I could and can proudly say that I nursed my son until he was 27 months old.

Does it make you less of a mother if you don't breastfeed? No. But I still cringe when I see a bottle of formula being given to an infant, because I know that formula and bottle-feeding can never live up to breastfeeding and the connection it gives you with your baby. To know that your body alone spent 9 months growing this little person and now has the ability to feed them and still help them grow, it’s something that only females can say and we should relish in that knowledge. I get that there are important reasons not to breastfeed, like having multiples or going back to work, and I applaud the women who make educated decisions. But more and more often I hear moms say that they "just couldn't" or "didn't want to." Why would you not want to? It's FREE. Yes, it's hard work at first, but what part of motherhood isn't? It’s stressful, it’s painful, it’s yet another task that falls solely on mothers. I can see why mothers would choose not to do it. But breastfeeding, and all the trouble that comes with it, is a selfless act that many mothers choose over freedom and sanity for the sake of their children.

I agree that no part of being a parent should be judged, unless it puts your child in harms way. Breastfeeding or bottle feeding, disposable diapers or cloth diapers, purees or baby-led weaning, to vaccinate or not to, homeschooling versus traditional schooling. There is no single right way to parent. If you make informed, educated decisions then I say more power to you!

In the article the author says "Ultimately it became overwhelming for me even though I am well-educated and had so much family and friend support, but it felt like peer pressure." Pregnant women are pressured from the very beginning to use formula, so if we don't bend to that pressure, if we do nurse for 6 months or a year or even three years, why shouldn't we be excited and be able to share that with others? I am PROUD to have breastfed my son for over 2 years, and I'm coming up on a full year of nursing my daughter too. I will never apologize for breastfeeding or for trying to help new moms by giving them advice and I will never say that formula is better, or even as good, as breast milk because I know it’s not.

In the case of the author, I feel like she is trying to justify her reasons for not breastfeeding, but she comes off as hostile and judgmental towards breastfeeding women. At the end of the article she writes, “So do we really need another study telling us we're falling short if we make choices that we feel make us better mothers in the long run?” I’d just like to add that as much as we didn’t need yet another breastfeeding study, we also didn’t need another article about breast milk versus formula and how we are neither better nor worse mothers based on our decisions. Breastfeeding, more specifically nursing in public, has become such a hot topic of discussion recently and I personally feel like instead of talking about whether or not “breast is best” (because we already know it is), we should be discussing ways to stop sexualizing it in the media so that whichever way we choose to feed our babies we are able to do it wherever and whenever we please."

Is there any question why I love this girl?  I think not!  My daughter is much kinder than I was going to be with the article, and I don't necessarily agree with all of her opinions, because I am a man and have no frame of reference to the discomfort and stress mother's feel with breastfeeding.  This was my whole reason for throwing the issue in her lap.

My own opinion, for mothers that choose not to breastfeed, is that it isn't about you! It concerns your baby, and what is best for the baby's health.  Does it make you a bad mother to choose not to?  Does it make you a bad mother to blow cigarette smoke in your baby's face?  To do drugs or drink alcohol during pregnancy?  To feed your child junk food?  Oh, but that's not the same thing? 

Think about it.

God, or nature, gave women breasts for a good reason, and I don't think it was just to show off their cleavage to attract men (however secondary that reason may be, personally I think cleavage is overrated).  Babies do better with breast milk for the same reason nature gave women breasts.  They were meant to use them to nurse!

Again, these are just opinions about a still controversial issue that even mother's can't agree on.  They are just personal opinions.  We all have one.

For more information on the importance of breastfeeding, try starting with this site: http://www.womenshealth.gov/breastfeeding/why-breastfeeding-is-important/

I'm sure there are contrary points of view, I'd like to think we should always start with the positive side first, then we will be better prepared to deal with the negatives.

Cheesy Pasta with Artichokes, Amen!

The south has a lot of meaning for me.  My father's family are from Sicily, the large southern island south of Italy, and my mother's family are all from Mississippi.  Blending these two foodie paradises takes no talent for someone from these regions. 

 

Anything from the southern U.S. that crawls, swims, or grows in the dirt can be whipped into a Sicilian dish.  Any recipe from Sicily can usually fit between two pieces of bread slathered with mayonnaise, from eggplant Parmesan to lasagna.  Yes, you can put lasagna in a sandwich, the two starches do go well together, and the mayo mixes with the sauce and becomes a taste from heaven.  I always make extra so I have leftovers for several sourdough sandwiches throughout the next week.

 

So, you're probably asking yourself what this has to do with tolerance, religion, or spiritualism.  Plenty!  Food has always been a common denominator between cultures.  It is a way of "taking a moment" from the heat of disagreement, and finding common ground with your adversary.  There are stories on the field of battle where swapping rations would quell the fighting for a short period, reminding the soldiers they were all just people.  Both sides could sit at the same table and remember how similar they actually are.

 

Those of us that were brought up to sit at a table with family for our meals, probably say grace, thanking God for the bounty provided and the family and friends that it might have brought together.  And, personally, I have had some foods which were so flavorful I firmly believe to have had a spiritual experience while eating.  Ok, maybe that's pushing it, but it came darned close!

 

I have gotten out of the habit of buying prepared foods for a meal.  No more ravioli, or chili without beans, from a can.  That crap can kill you.  It always amazes me when they advertise this mess as, "just like mom used to make."  Read the ingredients and ask yourself where in mom's kitchen she stored the xanthan gum, BHT, BHA, or high fructose corn syrup.  Not in my mom's kitchen.  We stopped buying food with MSG long before it became fashionable and the medical community finally realized that it was the cause of a cornucopia of health maladies.  Better living through chemicals.

 

There is nothing like a fresh vegetable, real cream, butter, and an extra large egg with a rich orange yolk to remind you why God gave us the ability to cook.  Not everything you eat has to be made from scratch, I'll admit.  I'm the one that wanders into the mayonnaise jar occasionally, and you just can't make a decent green bean casserole without canned green beans and mushroom soup.  Some things you just can't find fresh all the time, like artichoke hearts.

 

The next time you feel like having a something close to a spiritual experience, I recommend trying the recipe below.  I found this online and was taken by the photo provided of the, almost empty, pan.  Yes, I succumbed to the photographic manipulation. 

I sauté capers in with the butter, but then, I add capers to almost everything and cut I back on the salt.  Parmesan and capers add salt to any dish, as does anything canned, and too much salt can detract from the flavor instead of adding to it.  You can add more salt once the dish is served, and you've tasted it.  I also used the whole pound of pasta.  If you're making it for yourself you're having leftovers anyway, and if you have guests they'll eat it.  The recipe is so easy you can adjust the measures to make up for the additional quarter cup without screwing it up too badly.

 

 Even though this is so easy you will make it just for yourself, set the dinner table, light a candle, be sure to say grace and thank God for all you have, and have a toast to friends and lost loves.  I prefer a nice white wine, like Pinot Noir Blanc, with this dish.

Cheesy Pasta with Artichokes

INGREDIENTS
2 1/2 cups canned, drained artichoke hearts (two 14-ounce cans), rinsed and cut into halves or quarters
1/2 cup grated Parmesan cheese
1 teaspoon fresh-ground black pepper
2 cloves garlic, minced
3/4 pound fusilli (spiral pasta)
3/4 teaspoon salt
2 tablespoons butter
2 tablespoons chopped chives, scallion tops, or parsley
1 cup heavy cream

DIRECTIONS
1. In a medium saucepan, melt the butter over moderately low heat. Add the garlic and cook for 30 seconds. Stir in the cream, salt, pepper, and artichoke hearts. Cook until just heated through, about 3 minutes.
2. In a large pot of boiling, salted water, cook the fusilli until just done, about 13 minutes. Drain the pasta and toss with the cream sauce, Parmesan, and chives.

Peace, or War?

 Sunday morning I went out for my usual cup of coffee, at my favorite roaster, and passed by this display.  This is typical of what one can see in parks across this country.  Freedom of speech and opinion, which many of our fine young men voluntarily die to protect.  These same young men volunteer to serve in order to protect fellow citizens of the world that either cannot protect themselves from tyranny, or need assistance in doing so.   This particular display effects me on so many levels.

 

As retired military I have deep personal opinions concerning war and peace.  I hesitate calling them convictions, because the term offers little wiggle room if you want to change.  Kind of like saying you quit smoking.  It is only true if, at the time of your death, you have never lit up again.  Until that happens, you have stopped smoking.

 

I guess I have to agree with their moniker, after all, don't all veteran's want peace?  For that matter, I think all soldiers would prefer peace to dying alone on a foreign battle field.  I remember we had a banner in one of my offices that read, "PLEASE, put us out of a job!"  Maybe we felt a bit stronger about it because we were planning various conflicts to end all conflict, which was as insane as thinking, "Someone has to do it, might as well be me." 

 

Having said this, I have to admit I managed to be in a position that placed me away from the physical conflict.  Being in the Intelligence field, however, you could never escape the importance, or the horrors, of it.  Nuclear deterrence can have a different effect on one's global view.  All you have to do is look at the effects of radiation on the human body, or imagine a miles wide crater with even more miles of thermal and blast damage, then imagine the heat of the sun creating a vacuum that sucks all of that damage back to the detonation site and up into the mushroom cloud so it can drop as radioactive ash across most of the world.  But, it did away with the Berlin Wall and saw the collapse of the Soviet Union, so deterrence must be good for something even if its just psychological, right?  I'm very glad to be retired from it. 



 

 

 Peace -- War, you decide.  I was a bit thick this morning, as I couldn't figure out what a "peace war" was.  I really don't think this is a question most Americans would have a problem answering.  Convincing the lunatic fringe in the rest of the world is the biggest problem.  I think Americans would just as soon let the rest of the world blow themselves to hell and back, if keeps us out of conflicts.  Realistically?  We can't survive without each other.  We need each other.  When we look at the Syrias, Libyas, and Egypts of the world, one has to think, "There, but for the grace of God..." 

Doesn't the whole issue of what "war" is require more clarification, maybe even a better definition?  When was the last time we had a war?  Korea?  Vietnam?  I think those were considered "police action" by the United Nations.  Kind of the same thing we've been doing in Southern Asia and the Middle East.  By the way, if nations were "united" why do we have war, or police actions?  Isn't the very fact we find ourselves in these situations evidence of the United Nations' total lack of effectiveness?  Maybe if we had a Untied Nations with some balls, we would have peace.  I thought that was the whole concept behind their existence, or maybe I'm wrong. 

 

I didn't enlarge the photo above, or below, out of respect for those that lost their lives. 

 

I found it interesting that the non-American dead, shown above, are neatly printed in a nice, large font.  The names of American soldiers, below, are smaller and scrawled by hand.  I want to think they took the extra time for their fellow soldiers, and not that they deserved a less neat "tombstone."  Also interesting was the sign denoting it as an "Iraq War Memorial."  Most of the names I saw were late of Afghanistan.  One would think they would update their sign to reflect current conflicts.  Why don't they just make it another Vietnam War Memorial?  

 

I would have liked to know if they asked the soldier if they could use their name.  Maybe they asked the family, though sometimes what the family feels is tainted by the loss of the loved one and may not reflect the soldier's desire.  I know I would have minded.  But, then, I'm a patriot that believes we need to do a job until there is no more reason to do it.  I don't think this kind of display makes people give a tinker's damn one way or the other.  This kind of display has been put up many times and I never see anyone, take even as much time as I gave it, walk around and look. 

 

 

I would have liked to ask the questions, but no one was there at the booth.  It was raining, after all.  Maybe they weren't veteran's of conflicts requiring them to follow orders and tough it out in a monsoon, in some forgotten foxhole full of water, in some backwater jungle.  Maybe they never had to walk a flight line in sub-zero temperatures and have to huddle next to a landing gear on some ancient B-52 in order to get out of the bone chilling breeze.  Perhaps they just forgot.  Maybe their cause just isn't as import to them as they would have us believe.  Or, more likely, maybe they're just tired of the killing, remembering their dead comrades, and the insanity of battles that just don't seem to change anything.  I would have liked to ask all these questions though.  It would have been nice to know, and give you some answers.

 

What is better than war?  Peace.  I don't think peace will happen until there is worldwide tolerance and understanding, agreements to disagree, and all people are able to determine their own peaceful, national destiny without tyrannical rulers that have no concept of human rights.  Until that time comes, I believe there is the need to protect the helpless, the thousands of children being tortured and killed, like in Syria.  Do children die in the conflicts?  Without a doubt.  We all wish there wasn't collateral damage.  We all wish we could just take out the bad guys.  We all wish the people could stand up for themselves and move away from the target area to give us a clear shot.  We all wish they had as much respect for their own people to keep them out of harms way, instead of moving the targets into populated areas.  There are civilized rules against using the civilian population as shields, though they would blame us for their own immoral conduct as they shroud a missile launcher with a Red Cross tent, or make chemical weapons in a baby food factory, 

 

Now that I have, once again, probably pissed someone off, I must remind everyone, this is all just my opinion, and everybody has one.  It may not seem like it from my comments, but I give kudos and thanks to this organization for taking the time to try to make a difference in the world.  Whether this is the right way to do it, a waste of time and effort, or counterproductive, I leave that opinion up to you.  Regardless, I feel all those, civilian and military, that die in the horror of war, deserve to be honored by our remembrance of their sacrifice and this is one organization's way of doing that. 

 

Your constructive comments and rebuttal are always welcomed, either below in the comments area, or by emailing me at the address above.

God's Humor?

Really?  You think God has no sense of humor?  Look again!  Look all around you, at the wonders God presents as a gift for us to enjoy.  All too often we just don't take the time too notice. 

 

One reader was astounded to have grown up around this tree never noticing the "booty call" happening right in front their eyes.  There's even some hip sashay goin' on!

 

No sense of humor?  God created humor.  Comedy and drama, the good with the bad, it is all around us and sometimes in the oddest of places.

 

Take a moment out of your busy day and see what you can find.  Enjoy!

Sunday Thought for September 22, 2013

What to write about for this Sunday...I have nothing.  The 100th post pretty much depleted me.  It was hard for me to believe I put out 100 short essays since the middle of June.  I guess, if I have anything to write about for you, it would be how easy it was to find so many interesting things as subject matter.  The majority of it came from just walking around my little piece of heaven, here in sleepy Olympia.  The real eye opener for me was how easy they were to write about.  Most of the posts really wrote themselves.

 

If there is any lesson to pass on to my readers it would be, to write.  Write about anything, but just write.  You don't even need a subject or a destination to put pen to paper, it will come on its own.  While you are out and about, keep your eyes open for those bits of life that amaze you, and write about "why." 

 

Why.  I can't emphasize enough about how important I feel "why" is to all of us.  I think it is the root of all our knowledge.  It is the basis for all explanation.  Is it more important to know who we are, or why we are?  If the bomb will detonate, or why the bomb will detonate?  If you want to have a baby, or why you want to have a baby?  If we should go into space, or why?  If I should continue writing "The Path," or why?

 

I think the question for all of us is not whether we should be on our path, but why?  It does little good to try and discover your particular path until you know why you want to discover it.  What is the purpose of walking it, until you know why you want to walk it?  If you know the "why" then the what, when, where and how fall into place.

 

Why did I get up at 3:30 this morning and make a cup of coffee?  Because I hadn't written the "Sunday Thought" for my readers.  More importantly, I hadn't written it for myself.  I discover more about why I am here through writing than I do any other way.  I think writing can give all of us a chance to reflect on, not only who and what we are, but "why" we are.  I think that if you can answer that, you can find some peace and, in that peace, perhaps a love for God.

 

So much for having nothing to write about.  This makes 101.  I don't know why that matters.  I suppose knowing why it matters would help me know if it matters, or if it is really important to me continuing on my journey.

 

I think I'll have another cup of coffee and fry up a couple of eggs, and ponder 102.  The journey continues. 

 

Have a blessed Sunday!