responsibility

Spectacle.

Standard

The stage has been set for Trump’s fight on the White House lawn. The UFC octagon is set up and ready for the big June 14th event showcasing championship bouts between a series of professional athletes. A spectacle purported to celebrate the President’s 80th birthday and officially commemorating the nation’s 250th anniversary.

To many Democrats this is travesty of epic proportions. California Democrat Senator Adam Schiff suggested it is “out of touch” and others questioned the price tag to the American people (apparently the UFC CEO Dana White eats the entire cost), there was even a lawsuit filed to stop the event. But to the Trump faithful, and many in America, it’s the entertainment they love.

The UFC is wildly popular. No, probably not with cat lady’s (although I can’t be sure), but with just about everyone else. Millions will pay to watch UFC Freedom 250. This won’t offend anyone who matters so far as Trump is concerned and—if anything—this outrage of the Democrats only strengthens MAGA.

This country is full of those blue collar beer (not Bud Light) drinking types who—in act of rebellion against the decades of being lectured, shamed, and policed by coastal elites, corporate HR departments, and woke scolds—thrive on “liberal tears.” They more or less live for laughing at all those hand-wringing and pearl-clutching talking heads at CNN or MSNBC. They revel in being the hated ‘deplorables’ for not being politically correct according to the left.

And in the other corner? Those transgender and drag queen types who—for reasons not entirely clear to me—want to do a story hour for kids?

From the Biden administration going out of their way to fill positions with men wearing dresses to those attention-seeking displays at state houses. Republicans, for their part, play right into this, introducing bills and thus spark a backlash of “transphobia” accusations from the over-the-top sashaying activists. The great irony is that this mess of confused sexuality, gaudy woman-face flamboyance, originates in psychology that is similar to the MAGA hat wearer in NYC.

Trump loves spectacle. He loves being the center of attention, praised and celebrated—or even attacked—as long as he’s always the main event. The abnormal spray tan, the cartoonish signature hair, the provocations that dominate every news cycle: Yup, he is extraordinary and in nearly the same way as some drag queen diva. He tries to provoke a response. They call him thin-skinned, yet he thrives on the negative attention as much as the positive, so long as the whole planet is watching him own the room.

The biggest difference between Trump and the left’s woke spectacle is the audience he caters to. He wins the Boomers, those who think Lindsay Graham represents them over Thomas Massie, whereas LGBTQ+ presents as an exaggerated individualism and giving special exemptions to those who can claim the most intersectionality points. Both from an outsider looking in are just absurdities—people gaining aura by deliberately making a show of themselves.

Had Trump decided he would have had an easier road to the White House on the blue team the only thing different is he would be surrounded by a line of prancing men doing high kicks in long boots. That’s the irony of it all. If Trump were still a Democrat the left would see him as a crazy uncle, at worst, or a man breaking down conventions. Switch his UFC Freedom 250 with a drag show with a similar name, in this scenario, and Adam Schiff would certainly be calling it stunning and brave—a ‘historic’ moment!

The fall of Rome was a historic moment. So was the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, where Josephus described rebels adopting women’s dress, perfumes, and effeminate mannerisms amid the moral collapse which had preceded the city’s ruin.  The bread and circus of Rome.  And what we’re witnessing today is not ultimately a matter of right versus left, but it is emblematic of a broad decline in American culture—a triumph of spectacle over substance.

Our Precious Sticks—From a Child’s Hand to a Community’s Legacy

Standard

My little daughter loves to clutch small objects she finds while meandering in the yard or park. A googly eye, a washer, a stone, small flowers, or just a stick on the path that caught her attention. This behavior—part of childhood development—could be about security and comfort, a sense of ownership, establishing independence, or simply having something to hold onto in an otherwise overwhelming world.

Now I suppose I could pry these silly objects out of her tiny hand, break them or throw them aside, and make her cry.  And yet why would any decent person ever intentionally destroy what someone else cherishes? No, even if we don’t personally understand the need for something, only an awful monster destroys what others love simply because they can. It’s vindictive and cruel.

House Upon the Hill

Taken on May 19, 2020.  My caption then read it was a museum.  I had not realized they had quietly shut down the museum.

A few years back, on a walk around the long block, I took this picture. This house, with its Italianate Victorian charm and surrounded by trees, was absolutely a postcard picture—despite the ugly senior care facility built to the right. It was also a familiar landmark and a place I had gone as a child on a school trip. I remember the high ceilings, floor-to-ceiling windows, and wide wraparound porch. On private land, it served as a community site: a place of births, and a few weddings, and a memorial garden where ashes of the deceased were spread.

This was a symbol. A waypoint. A place for people to reflect on where we came from to know where we are going. On that day, with my pace broken for a moment, I thought the legacy was secure. It was well-built in 1861, and still in great condition (better than my own house), certainly far too important to the local lore to be at risk. It was like a grandparent, an elderly voice, a legacy of a time past that deserved the respect we gave it for the role it served in the community. This wasn’t just a house—it was our heritage.

We need these landmarks—especially in the age of Walmartization where everything is cheaply made and disposable.

I remember when Walmart first came, how exciting it was, but now it’s sad to go to a completely new town, have all of the same corporate brands, and only an illusion of variety or choice.

In the Bible they would use a pile of stones as a marker to memorialize important events. I do believe common physical spaces, the locations connecting past with present, are as important today as ever in this age of endless abstraction. Sacredness is imbued on a site by the work and attention spanning time, creating a location for moments of grounding in a world that seems to be spinning out of control.

The old house built of stuccoed brick stood as a silent witness to a changing world. That tower overlooking River Road. For over a century and a half it endured seasons coming and going, lasted through decades of conflict and uncertainty, and watched over the flood waters that rose and fell. It was a guardian of the Susquehanna River, even on the day the body of a young drowning victim—the daughter of a close friend—took her final journey on the waters. Civil War reenactments were held on the grounds.

So, one may say it was just an arrangement of sticks, stones, and glass.  But it was built with human hands and human creativity, and thus carries a shadow of the human souls that built and carefully preserved it.

A Microcosm of Corporate America

The Slifer House, an immaculately preserved example of Samuel Sloan architecture and personal residence of Colonel Eli Slifer—a significant local businessman and Civil War figure (recalled as “one of the few unobtrusively great men of Pennsylvania” in the Philadelphia Times)—later used as an orphanage, the original home of Evangelical Community Hospital, then a museum, and listed on the National Register of Historic Places—has become a victim of cultural vandalism and corruption.

Through a combination of corporate greed and local government apathy—namely Asbury Riverwoods and Kelly Township—a treasured landmark is now a pile of rubble.Decades of effort. The equivalent of three hundred thousand dollars in today’s money raised in 1975 to keep the house in perpetuity—a past generation’s gift to us—has been forever destroyed. Why? Asbury, an out-of-state “non-profit” with a CEO Doug Leidig paid $1.4 million, seems to exist mainly to extract value from the elderly. A museum simply wasn’t going to produce the cheddar. The move likely came down to balance sheets or bonus structures—all while claiming the desecration of history was on behalf of their elderly residents.  Sure.  They destroy our inheritance and don’t even have the decency to admit the enterprise is motivated completely by their own exploitative machinations.

Maybe there was one miserable old coot who had wanted it gone and a dozen others fooled by their claims it was on the verge of collapse.

As touched on in my last post, our property rights are not absolute. Biblical law went as far as to mandate leaving crops in the field for the poor to glean—a Year of Jubilee when all land would be returned to the ancestors of the original owners. This recognized that economic outcomes aren’t all a matter of merit or morality. The authentic Christian tradition has always taught that our individual success is always a gift from God—thus we cannot be inconsiderate of others and should be open-handed.

The Slifer House could have been transferred to those interested in preservation. If the true reason was cost to residents, this would have been the obvious solution. Sadly, it wasn’t about the residents. The current regime prefers profits for the few over preservation for all. It gives priority to faceless corporations led by men who mimic human empathy as part of their manipulations, over community and genuine connectedness. It is not illegal for Asbury’s executives to have a historic treasure smashed and the site desecrated—but there is certainly a question of morality and ethics.

Those who have done this to the Christian village of Yaroun will also claim it is justified—maybe invisible terrorist tunnels?

Those who ruthlessly climb the ranks pride themselves on being forward-thinking and making the hard choices. But in these cases it is only ambition without reflection. They are calloused and unappreciative people who only care about money. That’s why the country is spinning out of balance. The “finders keepers, losers weepers” mindset—where merely having the legal basis to do something is enough—goes against good morality and enables elites to loot this country. When corporations think only of shareholders or those being compensated, the common good is sacrificed.

Capitalism only worked as part of a nation where Christian ethics provided restraint. When ownership is concentrated in the heartless machinery of distant corporations rather than distributed to actual people who live locally, we are dismantling the heart of the Constitutional Republic. We’ve reached a critical point: AI is unprecedented in power and this technology already concentrated in a few hands of men who aren’t even stakeholders in the nation—let alone local character. Small men, bound by convention that has outlasted design, will enable those who will steer us into the abyss.

Valuing Humanity Above ‘Progress‘

The sticks in the hand of a toddler seem useless to some, yet they serve a purpose. It is what the psychologist Donald Winnicott described as “transitional objects” (blankets, toys, sticks, stones) and they are a bridge that helps children move from total dependence to independence. Familiar objects provide comfort, security, and a sense of control in an overwhelming world. One may say they are points of orientation. And deliberately destroying or dismissing them disrupts this process and causes real distress.

Adults have similar needs, most especially in a world of rapid change and reminders to “touch grass” as the way to cope with the disconnect from reality that grows given an increasingly artificial environment.

Slifer House was a place solace to many—a small refuge where things didn’t change. The old rose bush that bloomed magnificently, the memorial garden, the tower overlooking, a hospital where people were born, and a final resting place where their ashes were spread. The desecration of this site deserves far more attention and beyond just Asbury Riverwoods earning the new lower star rating on Google.

We need a conversation like what is taking place in Albania. There are mass protests over an island compound for elites that has been legally approved and yet is now being challenged with chants of “Albania is not for sale” and “cancel the project.” Sadly, in the corporate U.S., we’ve been so conditioned to believe all that matters is money and even our cherished cultural heritage must give way to new development if that’s what the wealthy (and the corporations they control) want for themselves. It is Capitalism without any of the moral restraint the founders viewed as being mandatory:

The spirit of commerce…is incompatible with that purity of heart, and greatness of soul which is necessary for a happy Republic.

John Adams, Letter to Mercy Otis Warren, 1776

Unfortunately our government prefers those exempted from taxes and foreign interests over the good of taxpayers. My home could be seized if I was delinquent in paying local dues, but not those granted their non-profit status while no longer providing anything of a public good. No, Asbury Riverwoods does not technically profit from destruction of property at our expense—but those who hide behind this legal structure most certainly do. Kelly Township’s fault is not having a framework established, the initially flippant attitude elected supervisors had towards those of us who were concerned. They failed at vision, to care enough to have legal protection in place and their negligence will now cost every generation that follows.

What I could sense in the eye rolls at public meetings, sighs in the CC I wasn’t supposed to see, was just a passive-aggressive nasty streak under a plastic smile. The problem with evil in our time is that it conceals under layers of PR, manufactured consent, and insincere “I feel your pain” politicking. Yes, you’ll catch those glimpses of the truth and you know when someone is just going through the motions, but they are just so slippery and hard to pin down. P. Diddy soaked in baby oil is more easily held accountable.  And I do wish for the villains who would openly reveal themselves and just admit they just love breaking another child’s toys for sadistic pleasure.

Like the Dr. Seuss classic Horton Hears a Who!—where a stubborn elephant fights to save a dust speck as others conspire to boil it, what other people cherish should be protected and collective desire to preservation even be treated as being as valuable as a deed. Even if we can’t hear the little voices ourselves or can simply dismiss it as silly sentimentality, this basic lack of hidden value felt in human hearts is currently undermining the pillars of humanity itself—and at this moment when we need respect for feelings the most: As we blaze forward in our mindless commerce, and enter this new age of super intelligent machines without consciousness, will there be a rational reason for these decision makers to keep us?

What will ever stop the elites from bulldozing or boiling us when they find a ‘better’ use of world resources?

At this pivotal time, we need a generation of Eli Slifers to rebuild what was lost and to build the new foundation of morality and ethics.  Trust in institutions like corporations or government will not be sufficient.  If anything the powers that be are in cahoots as they divide us up and pawn us off like the artifacts of Slifer House.  No, we need to rise up like the people of Albania, and reassert ourselves, or  humanity will die with a wimper as the machine of indifferent ‘progress’ pulverizes everything in it’s path.

Motte-and-bailey Fallacy and a Better Defense of Jewish People

Standard

The US House passed a resolution which decried a rise in anti-semitism and declared in the text that “anti-Zionism is antisemitism.”  Which is to say any criticism of this form of blood and soil nationalism can be misconstrued as a hatred of Jewish people.  If you think that the displacement of the indigenous people living in the West Bank by settlers coming from New Jersey is immoral and wrong?  Well, congratulations, because you are now an anti-Semite!

It’s an absolute absurdity. 

But it is also part of a general strategy of using Jewish people, as a whole, as a human shield for a supremacist ideology that many Jews entirely reject.  And, furthermore, this conflating Jewish identity with the Zionist state is contributing to a rise in actual anti-Jewish sentiment around the world.  It is very disturbing to see a vile ideology trying to avoid the rebuke that it most certainly deserves by wearing Jewish identity as a mask for what it truly is. 

Zionism is just blood and soil nationalism using ancient history as a cover story no different than those who called themselves the third Rome.

Zionism is not the same thing as Judiasm and thus taking an anti-Zionist position is not hatred of Jews.  Just like we can both be opposed to a political party and still not be unAmerican, we can oppose a Zionist state of Israel in favor of a country where all people of all faiths have the same rights—where indigenous people are not harassed or killed so settlers can steal their land.  It is okay to hate a regime of rape, theft, murder and collective punishment.  It is also okay to hold those accountable who perpetrate war crimes calling it defense.

What this conflating is is the Motte-and-bailey fallacy (also a strategy) where you pair a position that is defensible with one that is not.  In other words, you say something like “Israel has a right to defend itself,” which everyone will generally agree with, and then use this statement to defend the IDF knowingly bombing children in Gaza.  The two things are not the same.  Defense and killing babies are two vastly different things.  If a neighbor, from an apartment complex near me, assaulted me, and then I go burn down his whole building in response, nobody will accept that this is a defensive action—it is just murder.

This strategy of hiding Zionism behind the Jewish ethnicity and faith comes 100% at the expense of innocent Jews who have no connection to the modern state of Israel.  Merging Jewish identity with Zionism and Zionist atrocities only serves to feed anti-Jewish sentiment.  Decoupling the two words is separating a hostage from a hijacker and focuses our critique on the bad actors who falsely claim to speak for all Jews.  The best way to protect from riding anti-Jewish sentiment is to hold Zionists to account rather than allow them to hide behind Jewish suffering.

Four Ways To Fight Anti-Semitism:

1) Apply opposition to anti-semitism to all Semitic people.  The word Semite is derived from the language people use.  Specifically Arabic, Hebrew, and Aramaic.  The rights of all people, indigenous Muslim or Christian, as well as Jews, should be protected.  It is anti-semitic to argue Palestinian lives and the lives of Arab neighbors, are worth less than that of European settlers.  The Zionists have not only hijacked Judiasm and the land, but the word Semitic as well—we need the term to be returned to original use.

2) Make the Holy Lands a safe refuge for all good people again.  All Abrahamic religions have significant ties to the territory where a modern state of Israel is formed.  Christian and Muslim communities which existed for centuries are under threat by the invading settlers.  The first Christians were Semites—Jewish coverts—so why are we privileging only one religious group on a land home to Christians and other Semitic people?

3) Stop protecting the bad people simply on the basis of religious identity.  This applies just as much to any religion, but especially to a country that regularly shields evil people on the basis of their Jewish-ness and loyalty to the apartheid regime.

Jonathan Pollard, a US Citizen, who stole nuclear secrets and gave them to Israel (who, in turn, sold them to the Soviet Union), was a traitor to the degree that would be hanged for treason in times past.  But he got life in prison and was released after thirty years due to the lobbying pressure of the Israeli government.  He arrived in Israel, on the private jet of Sheldon Adelson (the late husband of the Trump mega-donor Miriam Adelson) to a hero’s welcome under “right to return.”  In fact, Pollard was greeted by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after kissing tarmac in Tel Aviv.

There are also similar stories of corrupt men fleeing to Israel from Ukraine.  Pedophiles and rapists, of Jewish identity, are granted this same escape from justice by “right to return” and an Israeli policy of protecting all Jews regardless of if they are good or evil.  This undermines the trust in Jewish people worldwide.  It contributes to the othering of Jews and breeds resentment and contempt.  Sure, two separate standards may be okay for a racial supremacist, but it is totally unacceptable for those who reject all identity politics and tribalism.

I would stand shoulder to shoulder with a good person who happens to be a Jew, Muslim or any other religion over a person who claims to be a Christian and yet does not love their neighbors.  To me, those who confuse genetics with goodness or their own tribal identity with innocence are the problem.  A truly good person cares about genuinely good character—and not skin color or religious costume.  

Jews are safer when Zionists abusers are made accountable.  The world is a better place when nobody puts tribe over a commitment to justice for all people.  We don’t need the Holy Lands to be a haven for the world’s traitors, pedophiles and identity thieves.

4) Treat AIPAC as a foreign lobby and trim back the Zionist control over our political institutions.  If Congress were taking the same amount of money from supporters of any other country in the world that they did from AIPAC they would be in jail.  How is it not collusion?  However, you’re not going to hear about this scandal on CBS News, after it was bought by Zionist billionaires, with a new editor-in-chief Bari Weiss.  Nor will the truth be told on TikTok after it was scooped up by the same people—now moderated by a former IDF soldier searching for ‘antisemitic’ content which could be anything that tells the truth about Israel.  

Frankly, the US desperately needs a policy of de-Zionization after years of our Middle-East mayhem.  When we have US ambassadors to Israel, like Mike Huckabee, meeting with a man convicted of treason, and Presidents unable to act independently from a foreign regime—even when that foreign regime kills more children than it foes true combatants—drastic measures need to be taken.  We can’t simply vote this out.  When then the candidates for mayor of NYC show fealty to a foreign nation this goes beyond normal corruption.  There truly needs to be more prosecutions for actual treason.

A Better Jewish Defense Strategy 

The current Zionist strategy—the fusing Jewish identity with an apartheid regime, shielding war criminals and traitors behind the label “Jew,” and branding every critic an anti-Semite—has sadly produced the most dangerous environment for Jews in decades: surging street-level hatred, synagogue shootings, and a global resurgence of real anti-Jewish bigotry fueled by rage at Israel’s actions. The four steps above break that fuse.

When Judaism is decisively decoupled from Zionism, when “Semitic” again and protects Palestinians and Lebanese as fiercely as Israelis, when the Holy Land is a shared home rather than an ethnic fortress, and when Jewish criminals no longer enjoy impunity under “right of return” or AIPAC protection, the primary pretext for hating Jews evaporates. Jews become what most already are: Just ordinary citizens judged by their character, and not scapegoats for a supremacist project most never voted for.

Paradoxically, the safest future for Jewish people is not more tanks, walls, or lobbying billions—it is the dismantling of an ideological human shield that places them directly in the line of fire.

The Madness of Nietzsche and Amish Mothers

Standard

A religious fundamentalist might see Nietzsche’s “Madman” parable as an attack on faith. The German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche’s mental decline and tragic end could seem like an obvious consequence. His bold claim that “God is dead” would naturally lead to madness, wouldn’t it?

Recently, I came across the story of Ruth Miller, an Amish woman whose religious convictions led to an unthinkable act. In a state of spiritual delusion, she drove her 4-year-old son, Vincen, to a lake and “gave him to God” by throwing him into the water resulting in his drowning. This awful tragedy following immediately after the accidental drowning of her husband Marcus during a failed attempt to swim to a sandbar in an effort to prove his faith.

Both belief in God or disbelief really does not make a difference as far as our mental health. We can attribute beliefs to actions, like the divisive assumption—of black and white thinkers—that Decarlos Brown Jr. was motivated by racial animus. Or realize that our human psyche is capable of dangerous misfires no matter our skin color category or ideological affiliation. Black, Amish or Atheist, all can have psychological breaks from reality originating from family history or environmental factors.

In the case of Nietzsche, who suffered from a breakdown at the age of 44—while seeing a horse being flogged—the theories of why he declined range from neurosyphilis to the possibility of frontotemporal dementia and a brain tumor. It could be a combination of factors, and maybe the very thing that made him brilliant also part of his downfall?

Nietzsche had a busy and relentless mind, his “will to power” philosophy itself perhaps a way to cope with a world that didn’t align with what his cultural heritage told him. He had to take things to their ends, he was not content with the answers he was given and this tendency of his mind being rooted deep in the composition of his brain—progressive disease and circumstances finally pushing him over the edge into insanity?

Likewise, the Amish mother, a pious woman by appearances, didn’t process her religious teachings the same as others in her church and tradition. For better or for worse, most claim to take the Bible literally would never attempt to do the things that they’ve read in the book. In a modern context a parent who is willing to sacrifice a child to God is rightly considered mad. But for Abraham it was a proof of his righteousness:

By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had embraced the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, even though God had said to him, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” Abraham reasoned that God could even raise the dead, and so in a manner of speaking he did receive Isaac back from death.

(Hebrews 11:17-19 NIV)

That’s one way to explain away an irrational act of Abraham tying up his child, and then putting him pyre to be a sacrifice to God. It is just plain madness otherwise. Is it really any wonder a delusional mind would follow this pattern in the Holy texts? I mean, truly, the crazier part is how we can read through this in Sunday school class without being a bit disturbed. Only when someone starts to act in this kind of ‘faith’ does anyone notice it is completely unacceptable.

Faith or lunacy?

But then we’re all mad. Half of us claim it is okay to dismember a living human being in the womb because their existence is a big inconvenience for an adult woman. While the other half thinks it is okay dismember a living human being in Gaza because of what Hamas did a couple of years ago. All seem willing to sacrifice little children in the ‘right’ circumstances. We’ll praise those who end the life of the innocent when this aligns with an imagined ideal outcome or future. We’ll all say the other is irrational and evil while justifying our own violence.

But, I digress, we should not blame the blackness of Decarlos Brown Jr. for his evil deed any more than the Amishness of Ruth Miller for what she did. The idea that we should not change our standards based on race should come with the general non-judgment based on race. Mental illness is mental illness, unbound by category. To judge actions without prejudice—based on race, faith, or even agnostic philosophy—requires us to comprehend the universal fragility of the human mind and our own susceptibility to delusion.

“You’re Thirty Years Old Living In Milton”

Standard

The quote in title, an unintentionally honest comment from a pious young woman, will continue to ring in my ears for decades to come. Scripture describes the word of God being “sharper than any two-edged sword,” but her romantic rejection came more like a hammer blow to my Mennonite worldview where spiritual was supposed to outweigh physical gain. I had patterned my life, up to that point, around a sort of practicality over flash and suddenly realized what I thought was an asset was actually liability.

I was reminded of these words again as my wife’s glowing approval of the monstrosity in my driveway, a Ford Explorer ST, still feels out of place for me. I mean, granted, I was not keen on transitioning to family life with a pedestrian option like a minivan or boring SUV. But I didn’t expect my always frugal—cost conscious—female counterpart to go along with it 100%. She was supposed to pump the brakes and did not. I’ve realized, in this, that every woman is happy with the nice things and won’t say no if you provide it for them. We’ve both agreed to blame the baby for our reckless financial decision.

So, back to Milton, a place I’ve since moved on from and to the higher cost town across the river. Up until the words from the mouth of this wholesome girl, I had thought having a little house completely paid off would be worth something—even attractive. After all she claimed to be interested in missionary service and what better place to get a start, right? From what I had believed, there are needs anywhere there are people and where better to start than a deteriorating industrial town? Milton is an example of the rust belt, a place of declining opportunities and costs of outsourcing production.

The phrase “you’re thirty years old living in Milton” was simply accurate conveyance of her underlying priorities. There’s always the difference between what we say we are and the actual truth. Even in the secular culture there’s a romanticization of the love of two impoverished people who stand together in desperate circumstances. And those raised in an environment where Christian mission is supposed to be first, living as one poor as a church mouse amongst common people would seem the ideal.

But it is not. No, this young woman, like the one who had rejected me for not pursuing a title of “missionary” or “pastor” years prior, was clearly after status. They will not say it outright, probably are not even aware, but it is a kind of glamour they seek in service. A call to some exotic location to impress their religious peers. Sure, a Bentley may not be status in a conservative Anabaptist church, but the ability to jet around the world (often on someone else’s dime) is thrilling where it is considered sacrifice. It is currency, a way to gain status in a community of faith or be seen as righteous.

Resources are showered on the ministry or mission. Sure, it comes with stress, my 9-5 does as well, but the payoff is proportional. And not talking about “treasures in heaven” or God’s favor. A pastor has access to the community resources. It is social power as much as it is a position of responsibility and there are always those who want to curry a little favor. Again, it also comes with more scrutiny as well, but most tend to minimize the costs when they set off in a particular direction. Besides that, for the Mennonite woman, this is for the broad shoulders of her husband to bear, right?

The high expectations of my wife have been a little surprising to me. To her credit, she has been putting up with a partly finished remodel of old house since marrying and moving in. But yet, despite coming from the Philippines, her standards are now close to that of an American woman. We comment about our son’s demands for what the other kids have, but often fail the test ourselves. I mean, is it at all coincidence that I decide to finally pull the trigger on a new vehicle after a Mennonite workmate showed up with his new truck? Probably not.

And that’s the bottom line here. We are all after power in different forms. Be it money, be it land, access to resources or just status in our peer group. What I’ve found is that a religiously trained (or ‘spiritual’) person is no different. No, all they do is give a righteous cover to their personal ambition. They live in a delusion. Materialism is bad, they will say, but they are fine with your donation of money so they can buy a bigger missionary compound in Southeast Asia. And, under the fluff of my own pursuit of love was the same sexual motivation of all men.

I hated when a physiatrist summarized my obsession with the impossibility as being a “sexual attraction” and dismissed it initially as a woman who knew nothing of my heart as a man of God. But now I realized this is undoubtedly the correct assessment. Men want sexually attractive women and women want high status men. This is an essential part of our nature—a matter of survival for our genes—a young healthy woman is able to bear children and a wealthy or connected man can give them much more than a thirty year old living in Milton.

I’ve moved on from Milton, but cannot move on from the reality I have encountered head on, we’re sexual creatures living in material reality and can’t escape this by denial. I had been better to learn this decades ago rather than cling to a naive notion of love where it ends like a storybook. But I am now living the best life available to me and hope that my wife is happy with her decision. She’s won my heart asking for the “simple and happy life” and now I want to give her that and everything else wonderful this world offers. The best thing we gained was the child born almost a year ago now…

It’s never too late to live the life that you should—which is more about perspective than what you possess—even if you were denied love for being thirty years old and living in Milton.

From Tribal Vengeance to Universal Justice: In Pursuit of One Higher Standard 

Standard

The default position for most people is some form of tribal ethic. If it is done to them or their own family by another tribe it is a horrendous and terrible crime. But, when only those in another tribe are hurt or if they are afraid that confronting the abuse will hurt their own tribal agenda—then suddenly the unforgivable becomes a “Who cares, everyone does it, why are you bringing that up again?”

Tribal ethics amount to doing only what is good for the tribe—usually sacrificing the rights of an individuals in the tribe and always denying the basic humanity of those outside of the tribe. Individual rights of those in the tribe are generally honored, but only so far as protecting them is useful to the collective and not as something that is absolute or immutable. If a few die for sake of the tribal order—are stoned to death for daring to pick up sticks on the Sabbath—that’s just how it is.

The Old Testament is full of this. Your own are completely free to enslave, rape or take from those outside the tribe and yet would be enraged if one of their own were treated in the same way—like when vengeance was taken by Dinah’s brothers who wiped out a whole city for sake of the family’s honor. If it were within the tribe the attitude would be quite a bit different. Under Moses law this was simply a matter of paying the price of the bride and not a death sentence. And it is clear that things morally abhorrent by a modern standard, like genocide, were done by the command of God.

Tribalism is a feature of politics, a natural or default condition, where we defend our own and demonize the other. To the left Charlie Kirk deserved to die for his sins of hate they claim were harmful to their woke collection of identities. The Evangeli-cons soak up the propaganda from Israel that paints children in Gaza as future terrorists. We protect the people most like us because and adjust our moral rules according to the situational and immediate needs of our tribe.

A Case For One Higher Universal Standard

But a Christian ethic is completely different from this. It says sin is sin.  Evil is evil no matter who is committing it or who it is against.

And, if anything, those who are in the church, who profess their faith in Jesus, should be held to a much higher standard. There is no room for favoritism (James 2:1, Romans 2:11) or carving out exemption for elites or even our friends and family. Jesus said to love our enemies (Matt 5:44, Luke 6:27) and even ‘hate’ our own family (Luke 14:26) if necessary to truly be his follower. Even our thoughts subjected to a standard of love and forbearance.

Jesus didn’t get hung on a cross for saying cutesy stuff that is easy to do. And I really do not expect anyone to live by that code. It requires actual faith and a true belief Jesus is what he said he was to make sacrificing ourselves for his ethic reasonable:

Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.  Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord. On the contrary: “If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

(Romans 12:17-21 NIV)

But even if you don’t truly believe in a future eternal reward or God, there is a reason why universal morality is better than our default tribalism. And that is an idea of what goes around comes around. Sure, you might not care about someone else’s daughter being sexually exploited by wealthy and powerful men—most especially if they are furthering your partisan political agenda—and yet we want to have a society where there’s justice or the injustice will eventually spread to us.

This is the big difference between my own understanding and the one that is far more popular: Good and evil never change on the basis of who is doing it or if I benefit. If it is wrong for the neighbor to kill my dog under most circumstances it is wrong for me to kill theirs. And if I (or one my own) start to act with impunity—are continually forgiven for things others are always condemned for—eventually this will piss off enough of the ‘others’ that they’ll dish out their version of justice against their abusers.

The Fallacy of Judeo-Christian Values

Evangeli-cons want the world to forgive for all their infractions and yet never forget if a victim fights back against their aggression. It is the very opposite of what Christ taught and anti-Christ. Jesus would likely warn us that how we judge we will be judged and the measure we use will be measured back to us. Which should make us tremble when we consider the slaughter and razing to the ground of Gaza using bombs we provided—there will be no call for mercy on the behalf of those who claim that young children are terrorists so they can kill them:

We are imposing a complete siege on Gaza. There will be no electricity, no food, no water, no fuel. Everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly.

October 13, 2023, Isaac Herzog, President

Just as it is clear that the right wing was right, today everyone says it is clear all Gazans must be annihilated… There is no logic in differentiating between uniformed [Hamas] and the rest of the inhabitants there.

September 2025, Moshe Saada, Likud MK

Every child born in Gaza is already a terrorist, from the moment of his birth.

January 15, 2024, Nissim Vaturi, Likud Deputy Speaker

And they were stating their genocidal intent long before October 7th:

Huwara needs to be wiped out. I think the State of Israel should do it… Water, electricity, and food must be cut off from the Gaza Strip. Those who do not die by bullets will die of hunger.

February 2023, Bezalel Smotrich, Finance Minister

This shows the absurdity of what is called Judeo-Christian values. Tribal logic says it is okay to kill man, woman and child of the rival so we can take the land for ourselves. Whereas Christian morality calls for all to be saved (1 Tim 2:4, 1 Pet 3:9) and erases the boundaries of tribal identities based on gender, race or social status. It is the polar opposite of having a chosen people with a license to take and kill. Jesus offended his ‘righteous’ ethnic audience by saying that a pagan had greater faith than all of Israel. To embrace this radical ethic is to reject the tribalism that fuels division and violence, choosing instead a universal justice that holds all accountable and protects all, not just the chosen few. Only by abandoning the hypocrisy of tribal loyalty can we hope to build a world where the measure of our judgment does not return to condemn us, but instead fosters a shared humanity that is grounded in love of Jesus.

A Fundamentally New Way of Thinking

The Christian ethic really is a total reversal of fundamental attribution error. It is easy to attribute what others do to us to a matter of their immutable character, they’re just evil and irredeemable, therefore do not need to be heard or understood. But for our own or ourselves we tend to blame only the circumstances and call it a mistake—one of those forgivable offenses. The reverse is to never make excuses for our own while also showing grace to those who offend us.

When someone cuts us off in traffic is it because they are a terrible driver? Or did they just have a bad moment? Or if we do the same, is it truly just an isolated incident or is our confirmation bias simply forgetting all of those times we transgressed with an “oops, sorry!” Reversing our fundamental attribution error is simply to apply grace we give to ourselves to others. It is, at the very least, to apply the same standard we do for ourselves as we do to others.

When a person of our own tribe does some kind of horrific deed, do we dismiss this as not representing us as a whole? Maybe we justify it? When the US Navy shot down Iran Air Flight 655 flying a routine route over the Strait of Hormuz, back in 1988, and killed all 290 on board—the US didn’t even apologize and, adding insult to injury, gave medals to the crew that did it! That is tribalism and is how fundamental attribution error works. If Iran did the same the US population would be calling for our military to turn the whole country into a smoldering ruin.

But the Gospel of Jesus Christ starts with a call for repentance. Repentance being an inward turn where we identify and confess our own faults rather than hide them behind rationalization or claims that our hand was forced by the other side. And, finally, after this deep introspection, we show the fruits of a changed spirit by showing the grace we have been shown to even those who we feel are most underserving. A true Christian will strive to love their worst enemies while also holding their own to a high standard.

If we want forgiveness of our sins we must show mercy and forgive others.

Evangeli-cons want all grace for themselves and yet give none to the enemies of their ‘Christian’ empire. They don’t want sins of some in their midst to count against them, they will deny the inconvenient violence of those on their side politically, but then make the whole left or all of Islam responsible for everything ever done by one of their own. It is a tribal ethic that has nothing to do with a Jesus of repentance. Or a spirit of grace to others that exists in those who understand their place before God.

Cultural Erasure in the Age of Corporatism: Preserving Local Identity and Sovereignty

Standard

Cultural erasure is often discussed in the context of dramatic examples. Communist efforts to eradicate religious practice or the forced assimilation of Native Americans are two clear instances. Another is the British schoolgirl punished for wearing a Union Jack on a day meant to celebrate cultural diversity. Yet, a more insidious form of cultural erasure is sweeping through the United States, infiltrating every small town under the guise of free markets and capitalism.

What I’m referring to is corporatism, partnered with consumerism. This country was once defined by businesses owned by average people—those “mom and pop” shops. That is no longer the case. Capital and control are increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few (see this video on BlackRock), and choice is largely an illusion in this age of mega-corporations. We have become a nation of employees. Yes, small businesses and boutiques still exist, but they are the exception. Our regulatory regime favors economies of scale, benefiting established players who can absorb compliance costs.

Illusion of choice

On the road—hauling commodities—this economic transformation is alarming to anyone who cares to notice. Local mills and grain elevators have been bought up or are in the process of being acquired by major players. Businesses where locals once knew the owner have been transferred, one after another, to corporate boards far removed from the operations.This trend spans every industry. Thriving downtowns and corner stores have been replaced by Walmarts. Ironically, when communities regain a “local” option, it’s often a Dollar General. The impact extends beyond retail. Doctors can no longer afford to practice independently, and hospitals are absorbed by larger systems to manage ballooning compliance costs. Local communities have lost true choice as corporate brands dominate.

Even decisions within our towns are outsourced. Consider the plan to bulldoze Slifer House, a local landmark designed by a notable architect, listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and honoring a man who played a significant role in the town’s history. This building, originally a private residence, later an orphanage, and then a hospital, faces demolition. The board deciding its fate is disconnected from the community, concerned only with maximizing revenue at the expense of our shared heritage.

https://www.change.org/p/save-the-historic-slifer-house-from-demolition

I spoke with a township supervisor, a relative, and received the typical canned response about property rights. But this boilerplate conservatism fails in an era where BlackRock owns vast swaths of the economy, and we all now owe our souls to the company store. It’s not a free market when Larry Fink can mandate DEI policies across every place we shop or work.  Consumer choice doesn’t exist when all options on the shelf (see this video on BlackRock) are owned by the same entities.  Property rights may have built the middle-class, but appeals to them cannot address this systemic erosion of agency and destruction of ownership society by the current corporatism.

A town known for its Victorian charm and yet can’t protect this heritage from corporate interests.

This corporatist-consumerist machine erodes local identity and sovereignty by homogenizing communities. Regional dialects, traditions, and histories are drowned out by standardized corporate aesthetics and practices. The local diner with its quirky charm is replaced by a chain restaurant with identical menus and decor nationwide. The family-owned hardware store, where the owner knew your name, gives way to a big-box retailer staffed by transient workers. These shifts strip away the unique character of our towns, leaving behind this sanitized, generic, board approved and predictable landscape that could be anywhere—or nowhere.

Retaining local identity and sovereignty requires deliberate resistance to this tide. Communities must protect what matters to them, prioritize policies that support small businesses, such as giving tax incentives for independent retailers (rather than Jeff Bezos) or simply streamlined regulations that don’t disproportionately burden the little guy. Local governments should not side with entities outside of town, but rather should empower residents of the community to have a say in decisions affecting historic landmarks like Slifer House, ensuring that distant corporate interests don’t override community values. Grassroots movements can foster local pride by celebrating regional festivals, preserving historic sites, and promoting artisans who embody the town’s heritage.

Better options closer to home?

Sovereignty also means reclaiming economic agency. Communities could explore cooperative business models, where locals collectively own and operate enterprises, keeping profits and decision-making power in the hands of residents. Supporting farmers’ markets, local craftspeople, and regional supply chains can reduce dependence on corporate giants. Education plays a role too—teaching younger generations the value of their town’s history and traditions fosters a sense of ownership that no corporate boardroom can replicate.

Ultimately, the fight against cultural erasure through corporatism and consumerism is a fight for self-determination. It’s about choosing to preserve what makes our communities distinct, even when the deck is stacked in favor of scale and sucking out profits. By valuing local identity over corporate convenience, we can reclaim the soul of our towns and ensure they remain places worth calling home. Property rights were meant to protect local control—not to consolidate then outsource all decisions to out-of-towners.

Saved In Childbearing

Standard

My own views have migrated from spiritual imagination to sustainable compared to the unsustainable.  Civilization was built by the participation of many who assumed roles that fit their qualifications and now is on the brink of collapse as we deny nature.  We’re on a path that is unsustainable because we deny nature.

What is nature?

Nature is that, as we mature beyond the age of childhood, inborn sexual desires lead us to seek a partner.  And, when successful, “A man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” (Gen 2:24 NIV) The purpose of this joining of man and woman? A multiplication from two to three, four, five, or more.  That is to say that in marriage we’re fruitful.

The point of this blog is not to be preachy or tell anyone what to do, rather it is to outline a problem and share a few Bible references for fun.  Scripture is part of the tradition and foundation of our civilization and could help us to diagnose where things are possibly going wrong as we stumble.  All across the developed world population collapse looms and it will be a disaster for little old you.

This is a topic even more important if you’re irreligious, think this is all there is, and aren’t aiming for “treasures in heaven,” because it could impact your retirement plans.  This is purely a numbers game how it plays out, if there aren’t enough people to make stuff or provide services, there is nothing for you to buy—your current lifestyle might be the high point of your life.

But even if you are ‘heavenly-minded’ there is still plenty of reason to reconsider some of the attitudes that I’ve witnessed within conservative groups.  Truly, fundamentalists need to fix their courtship gambit more than anyone else.  There are plenty of women in those circles who are ‘married to Jesus’ and are really only married to themselves, their idealistic visions—and in total denial of the real cause of their lack of success.

I call out women, in particular, because they are the true gatekeepers of romance.  If you are a half-ambitious guy you just know this, I’ve been turned down so many times that I have lost count.  There were some, basically average, girls who would sooner get cancer and die than go on a first date with me or a man who did not fit a long list of superficial or social status requirements.

Yeah, it worked out for some of them, but a great many wasted their fertile years trying for unattainable perfection.

What does the Bible say?

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. (2 Timothy 3:1-7 KJV)

I don’t think this is the end of all, but it might be the end of us.  Typically verses like those above get applied to those who are outside the group.  It is “the world” that is full of narcissistic self-seeking types.  And indeed the secular-minded have led the way as far as being unbound to any natural responsibility.  But the church is often guilty of the same things albeit covertly and wearing a righteous disguise—in the manner of the Pharisees:

And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!  For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’  But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)—then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.” (Mark 7:9-13 NIV)

What Jesus is addressing is how the most pious of his day would use sanctimonious claims to override practical commands.  In the example he gives they were claiming to be saving their resources to give to God and thus not able to take care of their parents. It was an excuse.  They used the missional as a cover for their big neglects closer to home and, likewise, many today say that they are fully dedicated to God’s kingdom by doing fun projects in Uganda—but are they loving their brothers and sisters in Christ?

I suppose we could blame St Paul for being seemingly all over the map on marriage and if we should pursue it.  Then again, maybe the point of 1 Corinthians 7 where he makes singleness a higher calling is simply for the sake of encouraging those who did not find that special person and basically reminding them they have greater freedom to do God’s work while not married.  But it is abundantly clear that church growth comes through the production of children.  And women, those most likely to be led astray, play the most vital role in this: 

I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety. (1 Timothy 2:12-15 NIV)

Again, I don’t expect anyone to believe this, this could simply be the misogynistic blathering of an entitled Jewish guy who found Jesus as a means to advance his social agenda.  But, if you’re a Christian, then what exactly does “Women will be saved through childbearing” mean so far as the church today?

First, this is an allusion to Mary and her role in the salvation of the world.  According to the Gospel, God chose to come into the world through the natural means of pregnancy and birth.  Second, it tells us something about the vital role of women in the church and matches or supersedes any speaking role.  This absurdity that shaping the world comes only through opening our mouths is why many women sacrifice their potential as the literal creators of the future.

Motherhood Is Most Important 

Feminism measures value in only the most masculine terms.  It tells us that the natural and traditional role of women is worthless and that women need to compete with men for money and political power.  But the core of this ideology is an attack on motherhood and doing that one thing no man could ever do—only a woman can give birth.

But the degrading of motherhood is not only a matter of women being told that they need to be toxically independent of men economically, but also in turning children into a burden, a parasite and something to be exterminated before they have a chance to say, “Momma.”  Birth control and abortion send a message that the next generation is not important, that it is a liability rather than an asset, and there is nothing further from the truth.

During COVID the same people who told us to mask up or we’re killing Grandma or had made shrines to George Floyd continued to lead the assault on the youngest and most vulnerable population.  It makes no sense, old people will die no matter what we do to protect them.  Black women terminate their pregnancies five times the rate that other women do, but the topic of the day is black lives matter and protecting others through our own self-sacrifice?

The reality is that the war on motherhood is sacrificing our own future.  We really should be thinking of our Grandma and what the world will be like if we don’t follow in her footsteps by raising the next generation.  The reality is that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme and can only be sustained through population growth.  Even if it were paid for, money has no value unless there is someone to offer their labor in exchange for it.  That savings of dollars is useless without any qualified people to fill positions.

Our narcissism will catch up to us one way or another.  The short-sighted pursuit of a career will have consequences.  Taking the pleasures while denying the responsibilities that nature has intended will inevitably lead to a snapback.  We can artificially cheat the system for only so long before nature starts to push back to eliminate a threat.  History is littered with those who thought themselves to be gods only to be humbled.

The Sustainable Church

Evangelicalism, in particular the focus on conversionism, the Bible out of context of the religious tradition that formed it, and a focus on activism, has eroded communities and put the primary conduit of the Gospel (children of Christians) in second place to information distribution efforts.  The true Church is about Communion, about bringing a little of the heavenly kingdom to Earth, it is about households being saved.  And that is where a woman’s role of bringing new life into the world—which is what sustains any ‘spiritual’ movement.

We need less talk.  Rather than push more speaking roles or more of those glamorous foreign adventures, as if this wasn’t only what St. Paul and a handful of others did in the early Church, there should be a move to what has been most effective for centuries and truly where grows a community of the faith.  We need to give the men who wish to be married and provide for their wives and families the opportunity to be fathers.  We do it by normalizing the natural good again.

There is an overabundance of glory-seeking men and women, desperate for higher social rank and more attention.  They love to have their name on a prayer card while living on the dime of others.  They’re too busy with information warfare to realize that the most powerful witness of Christ is love closer to home.  It was the ‘important’ people who Jesus had condemned for ignoring the bloodied man left for dead along their path or stepping over Lazarus as they went about their business—they thought themselves righteous and were on the road to hell.

There are many reasons why the Christian West is dying and declining birthrates are the biggest contributing factor.  This is partly due to the emphasis on missionary work rather than the ministry of motherhood.  We would save more people—save even our own future—if we shifted back to fruitfulness and being multiplied.  If you have a worldview to spread you don’t do it with tracts shoved in faces.  No, you do it by doing it or good old-fashioned procreation.  So get married young, have many babies, and you’ll be blessed in your old age.

The role of mothers is as important as any man in the church and most will find out too late why that is.  Don’t be one of those who has only regret to accompany them in their twilight years.  You’ll need to decide if holding out for Mr Right is truly worth postponing your greatest calling.  Many men, currently banished to singleness, would make good husbands and fathers if given a chance.

“You Idiot!”

Standard

As Grady’s ears laid back and he launched, I knew it was already too late.  CJ had thrown the ball not thinking about the cable that we had attached to the harness on the German Shepherd.  The words slipped “you idiot,” as the slack very quickly disappeared with each eager bound, none of this could be reversed as the K-9 finally reached the end of the line and was abruptly jerked off his feet.

As the bewildered pooch collected himself, my choice of words continued to reverberate in my mind.  I had just pronounced a serious epithet against my son.  I’m doubtful he had weighed my use of that language as heavily as I did.  However, when I later apologized to him, he also admitted that he doesn’t always think things through.  My own impulse a few days earlier, upon seeing the picture of this handsome pup, had led to this moment and now I was wondering if we were truly ready for this kind of responsibility?

Disruptive Force

Despite my being warned about the breed by several friends, we decided to drive the four hours to meet Grady and basically planned to take him if there were no glaring issues to convince us otherwise.  I wanted a dog that would offer protection to my family when I was away from home and also could match the energy of an eleven-year-old boy.  I knew it would be disruptive.  I had long avoided pet ownership because I did not feel that I could ever provide enough attention.  But now this care and training obligation would be spread out to the three of us, right?

Grady was indeed very energetic and friendly too, or at least he was once we got past his initial trepidation.  But was also bigger than I had imagined.  His nose and eyes were level with the kitchen countertop.  And could do a lot of damage fast, as we soon learned after we had left him tied (rather than crated) and in a bout of separation anxiety he decided to lay waste to the cucumber plants.  That was a definitive moment, in his short time with us, that left a dilemma.  What do we do with him when we leave the house since he can’t be trusted not to go into tornado mode?

The Real Costs

Dogs are a time-consuming liability and we knew this going in.  For us, we had avoided the purchase price and yet still had to drive the four hours to pick Grady up and then stock up on items he would need.  Dog food isn’t cheap.  We needed a good crate, the cable, a water dish, a food dispenser, and a couple of toys as well.  But the real costs of having a large pet would be much greater.  He would need to be licensed.  And heaven forbid that they ever get sick or injured.  Someone has to pay for that beautiful veterinary clinic!

It is no wonder many Americans struggle to survive.  The family pet, while it does provide companionship and therapy to some, rivals boats and race cars as far as endless money pits go.  And, unlike fishing or hunting gear, is also a threat to your leather couch.  You’ll pay a premium for rent.  But the real problem is that every suggestion people gave us for correcting Grady’s undesirable habits would take more of our money.  Don’t want him in a crate?  Get a kennel.  Oh, obedience school is great for discipline issues and keep the dog sitter on speed dial!

I couldn’t afford the additional expense right now.  But the cost I really could not afford is the time it was taking from my family to give the dog attention.  Grady paced from one of us to the next, wanting to be played with and we would rather be left to our own devices.  I felt guilty about this neglect.  My son was already overwhelmed (to the point of tears) cleaning mounds of manure and Charlotte is ready to start working soon this won’t have time to spend with the dog either.  So what happens when we’re all at work or school during the day?  Is it fair to leave a large animal penned in a small cage?

Anxiety Embodied

I’m sure, over a period of weeks or months some kind of routine would emerge.  Grady would learn some rules and calm down as he became a little more comfortable in his surroundings.  However, there was still that undeniable reality that this creature, lovely as he is, was going to bring a level of disorder and chaos.  He was an embodiment of the anxiety that runs around in my brain, and a source of additional stress that outweighed the benefits.  We would need to plan the rest of our lives around him, worried about what he was doing at home, finding a caregiver if we wanted to travel, and my plate is already full enough.

All this had been anticipated.  And, after the flower pot incident, the honeymoon period was already over.  It’s just one thing to think about possibilities and another to wonder if it is wrong to leave a howling dog crated all night downstairs.  This only really added to my problems, he created more work for my wife and son, and every dollar I spent on him is another that isn’t available for those more pressing needs.  And his rescuer, who had stipulated he be indoors most of the time, had offered to take him back if need be.

Sunday morning brought the last straw that finally broke the camel’s back.  I had gotten out of bed early and took Grady out to the yard to give him an opportunity to relieve his bowels and bladder.  After he did, and I considered the light drizzle, I decided he should come in with me.  I was just thinking about how this would be in the wintertime, preparing some coffee, when a commotion erupted from the front room.  CJ announced, “Grady pooped on the carpet again!”  That was a third strike, the third time he took a dump inside the house in the four days with us, and I finally had enough.

“The Dog Days Are Over” 

There was a lot to love about Grady.  Those hilarious heavy sighs after he would give up on us and flop on the floor.  The way he laid his ears back and tugged us down the sidewalk out on walks.  I wish I could have seen him at the park with CJ when they both played together in the creek.  We all liked the oaf, all except the family cat which was banished to the front porch for her own safety, and it was sad to have to return him.

But, as if to confirm the decision, as we sat in the restaurant free of an obligation having cut our losses an hour prior, the song came on “the dog days are over.”

We weren’t ready, or at least not for a Grady, and at least I’m relieved to have the routine return to normal.  Once the vomit is cleaned off the back seat of my car life can go on as it did.  I knew the moment I used the words “you idiot,” my frontal lobe was too overwhelmed to restrain this bark, that I was probably in over my head.  My son is owed my care and focus, and my wife and I need our quality alone time as well, it just does not make sense to divide my attention in more directions.  

I suppose one is only an idiot if they can’t admit their mistakes and make necessary changes?