Looking Beyond Scam-Nut Friends for Facts

 

 

Yet another encouragement regarding fact-checking…

In early October of 1969 I was having a discussion with a friend who insisted that the World Series would run the full seven games. This friend asserted that “it’s all a scam to get as much money out of people as possible”. And so, my friend insisted that “every World Series runs the full seven games”.

   Seriously skeptical of that notion, I referred to my 1969 World Almanac in which I could read previous years results of Series played.

I discovered that while there had in fact been many series that went the full seven, not nearly enough had done so to conclude that it is all “a scam”.

If I had not had my almanac, I would not have been in a credible position to refute my friend with any evidence or confidence.

It is easy for people, talking off the tops of their heads, speaking in a manner which is driven by emotionalism rather than reason, to make a statement that bears no resemblance to reality.

Today I see such behavior on social media.

And so, I offer to people who care about the facts the following links of credible and original sources:

Regarding White House news…

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/

 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/news/

 

Supreme Court Opinions…

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinion/24

 

Congress…

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/active_leg_page.htm

 

https://www.congress.gov/browse

 

Economic information…

 

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/

 

Executive orders…

https://www.federalregister.gov/presidential-documents/executive-orders

 

Want to know if the Constitution actually says what people say it says?...

 

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

 

I fully acknowledge that these sources may be cumbersome and take some time to read, but that is the only way for a responsible citizen to know for a fact the actions that were taken, decisions made, and conditions in play.

Otherwise, you’ll just be relying upon your favored news cast, social media, or “1969 World Series scam-nut” friends to tell you what to think.

A Focus on the Twenty-Seven Grievances in the Declaration of Independence

 

Picture from https://allthingsliberty.com/2019/07/the-declaration-of-independence-the-twenty-seven-grievances/

Independence Day, the Fourth of July provides me with an opportunity to, once again, express my sense of patriotism, which is seated on three documents: the Declaration of Independence, The US Constitution, and the Gettysburg Address.

I wish to take this opportunity to focus more deliberately on the true nature of the reasons for Independence.

I begin with political philosopher John Locke, who lived well before Thomas Jefferson…

From Second Treatise by John Locke published 1689…

“ It is evident that all human beings—as creatures belonging to the same species and rank and born indiscriminately with all the same natural advantages and faculties—are equal amongst themselves.”

What also is evident is that neither Thomas Jefferson, nor the American colonists created this idea.

All the lofty ideas at the fore of the Declaration, of which we are so proud were actually in existence and well-known long before the Declaration was written.

Equality of individuals is not a uniquely American idea.

But where the words of the Declaration get personal, and truly relevant to America are found in the twenty-seven listed grievances. These grievances give us a much more accurate idea of the motivations and reasons for the colonists to separate from England.

It was not so that “We can do things our own way” or exercise “anarchical, indiscriminate license”.

It was to be released from the dangers, indignities, and atrocities which had been perpetrated by a tyrannical King George III.

This section is preceded by the sentence “To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.”

I refer the reader to a good explanation of each of the grievances as presented by the National Park Service at this website:
https://www.nps.gov/fost/blogs/the-declaration-of-independence-what-were-they-thinking.htm

Of interesting note, none of the twenty-seven grievances accuse King George III of interfering with the religious life of the colonists.

Though equality of all individuals is not a uniquely American idea in all of history, all the documents on which my patriotism is seated aspire and commit to that notion.

Let us not stop making it a reality.

The Originally Ratified Constitution Did Not Provide the Bill of Rights

 

As I am an enthusiast of American history and founding documents, my wife is always diligent about discovery of items that relate to such interests.

Here I picture a coffee mug upon which is printed the first ten amendments to the Constitution, also known collectively as “The Bill of Rights”.

According to the National Archives the first ten amendments to the Constitution were ratified and became effective on December 15, 1791.

It is worth noting that the U.S. Constitution was originally ratified June 21, 1788.

This means that a call by some to return to the original Constitution would then leave us without a First Amendment which protects speech, religion, assembly and other rights. Such a return would leave us without a Second Amendment…well, you get my point.

Ah…in light of this awkward piece of information, I suppose the call would then be modified to original Constitution with the Bill of Rights.

But then what shall we do with that pesky (and original) Article V which provides for the amendment process. Shall we amend it to allow only the first ten amendments?

But, if limited to only those ten, we could not further be able to amend the amendment Article itself.

Perhaps those who call for a return to the original Constitution could enlist M.C. Escher to help them create something more toward their intentions!

It appears, committed to living in the practical world, that we are stuck with what the framers of our government intended: a constitution which could provide an orderly governance yet also be responsive to the needs of a growing population and changing of culture.

And for those truly eager to become acquainted with the Constitution, check out Article VII, the second clause (or paragraph).My accolades to Secretary William Jacson.

Resist the Temptation to Oppress the Non- Christian

 

As a follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ, it troubles me that there is language and intent in the current social mindset to “eradicate Anti-Christian Bias” through government action.

I shall soon make my case that it is the church, through invitation, not government, through coercion, that makes the case for Jesus.

But to begin. I shall assert that atheists, Buddhists, Muslims, and all others who do not subscribe to Christian belief have an absolute, fundamental 1^st Amendment right to their conscience and their speech. Also absolutely true is that none of us have a right to extend our conscience and speech into actions or incitements that may cause harm to ourselves, others, or property.

But for sure, people are entitled by the 1^st amendment to express however much anti-Christian bias they may hold.

I base and center my approach to establishing a Christian society on the Gospel of Matthew 28: ¹⁸ Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. ¹⁹ Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ²⁰ and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Please note: Jesus was not standing before the Roman Emperor, nor the Roman Senate to give this commission. He was not attempting to recruit government to create a “Christian” form of government or nation. He was standing before and speaking to his disciples, the founders of the church. Jesus was giving charge to disciples and the church to:
Make disciples (not reluctant victims of indoctrination)

Baptize

      In the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (not in the name of the government or the nation).

Teach them to obey everything he commanded. (Not what Moses commanded, not what Paul would later write, not what a self-aggrandizing, inhospitable religious movement would seek).

Our best approach to being and making disciples and teaching the commands of Jesus is to invite people to hear, read, and learn about Jesus through the gospels, or as I like to call them…biographies of Jesus.

The Christian faith is by personal invitation, not government coercion or indoctrination, or even proclamation.

Far from attempting to eradicate anti- Christian bias by persecution of those that hold such bias, we, as Christ-followers, the church, should be out front, in actions of hospitality, defending those who think differently.

When Jesus was approached by Pharisees and Sadducees with questions, he had discussions with them. He reasoned with them. He did not call upon the Roman Emperor or Senate to silence his opposition. He, through discussion, made his case himself.

And I remind Christians who meet in houses of worship, often with much acreage of play area, picnic area, that you do not pay property tax on that real estate.

And in any county in Indiana (and probably all across the nation) there is much  church real estate exempt from taxation.

In fact, because your church is contributing no revenue to the county budget, that means that others in the county actually pay more in taxes. In a very real sense, atheists and others are subsidizing your church and ministries.

It is not those with anti- Christian bias that are burdening Christians and churches. It is churches that are imposing burden on non-Christians.

Churches should realize this fact and, with a sense of humility, be thankful to people in the community that they don’t launch a class action lawsuit to have churches actually pay taxes to support law enforcement, fire protection, maintenance of streets, and all other services of which churches benefit.

If we, as Christians and churches, cannot make the case for Jesus without government coercion, then maybe there is no case to make.

I call upon Christians and churches to be faithful to Jesus rather than chasing the emptiness of coerced indoctrination.

I call upon Christians to behave in ways that show hospitality to others rather than hostility.

I call upon Christians and churches to follow through on the teachings of Jesus.

 

 

 

 

Meanderings on Diverse Merit, Equitable Merit, and Inclusive Merit

 

  

We condemn racism, ethnocentrism, tribalism, and any ideology or social practice based on false and misleading beliefs or ideologies that one group of human beings is superior to all other groups of human beings.

From the 2024 Social Principles of the United Methodist Church, Social Community-Other Social Issues-L

  Having been born and lived my youngest most formative years in an exclusively white county in Tennessee during the late 1950s and early 1960s, and having been born into a family that believed that “white” was the only authentic people in society, my first perception of non-white people was that they “are not quite the fullness of white people”.

   And then, at some point while I was in grade school (or elementary school as I was soon to learn) my family moved to Detroit looking for work.

   The school I attended in Detroit in 1964 was A.L. Holmes which had a large population of black kids, Puerto Rican kids, and South American kids. At this school I was introduced to new and interesting ways to think about music, poetry, and world-view. Silly as it may seem, my transformative moment occurred when I was standing in line for lunch. Black kids in front of me, black kids behind me, and I felt awkward. I did not know how to relate to anyone but a white person. And then, from down the hallway, I heard a gathering of black girls talking and one said “Hey, let’s go talk to that cute white boy.” At that moment my mind had changed and my heart was open to allowing these girls into my friendship construct.

   At some point I transferred from A.L. Holmes to Carstens Elementary.

It was at Carstens that I found new friends, one from Egypt, one from Saudi Arabia. I learned about Islam. My Egyptian friend next door taught me the meaning of the phrase “people of the Book”, meaning Quran. I learned that Jews and Jesus followers are people of the Book. We have a favorable place in their faith.

    By the time I had moved from Detroit to Elkhart County Indiana in 1969, I had accepted that many races, nationalities, and religions gave life much more meaning and fulfillment than just being around Baptist white people all of the time.

    I had also learned that I, as a white person, experienced much more ease of social mobility than did nonwhite people. While in Detroit, it seemed that the white teachers, intentionally or not, showed favor to me over black kids regarding just about any opportunity including serving on Student Council. This type of favor tends to instill within a person a sense of preference or superiority. But, having developed friendships with black kids, I learned that they were very smart, talented, and capable. I learned early that many people are left out of opportunities and “social place” merely because of their race.

    Regardless of the contemporary push against the Diversity, Equity, Inclusion movement, I assert that America, and every State or Territory of the United States, will benefit from proactively providing opportunities for nonwhite people to have opportunities in employment and education.

    I encourage intentional efforts to reach beyond the most prevalent demographic (white people) in employment and education, to give nonwhite people equal opportunity. Perhaps Human Resource departments can devise methods of providing to the interviewer/hiring agent only job-relevant information which does not include name and address. Perhaps identify the applicant as Candidate 10 AM, Candidate 3PM, or some other blind nomenclature. Often, name and address can inadvertently allow the interviewer a prejudiced pre-opinion even before meeting the applicant. The applicant, regardless of race, age, gender, nationality, or religion, should have equal opportunity to apply.

    Notably, in all of the current movement against DEI initiatives, it is worth pointing out that the Congressionally passed Equal Opportunity Act is still in effect. You may visit the official eeoc.gov website to see that such laws still pertain. Particularly informative is the eeoc site https://www.eeoc.gov/employees-job-applicants  which explicitly states the protected classes.

   I acknowledge that many white people have felt discriminated against.

   I have not escaped negative discrimination in my life. As a student in school, elementary, Junior and senior high, I was the last person chosen for a sports team. Any time I tried out for a sport I did not make the cut. This was because, compared to other students trying out, I was short, frail, non-muscular. And so, the team was fixed before I had a chance to prove myself. But, what I lacked in the previously identified attributes, I more than compensated with my agility, responsiveness, and quickness. Yet, how was a coach to discover those attributes without looking beyond my appearance and giving me a chance to prove myself in action.

   I remember a time when, in high school, during Physical Education class I committed myself to exceeding my previous number of pull-ups each day. One day, while the teacher was watching and counting, he replied “If this had been a sanctioned competition, you would have broken a school record”. One would never have guessed by looking at my arm muscles. But I had previously learned the trick of cadence, breath, and focus to achieve the objective.

   Records can be broken if we take the initiative to look beyond appearance, race, religion, nationality, language, gender and all other personal attributes that are not relevant to the job or task.

    To borrow and repurpose a phrase from Thomas Payne: We have it within our power to remake America. Let’s prove our exceptionality by making real the idea of “all men are created equal”.

Our Long- in- the- Making Constitutional Crisis

 

“The National Archives Building’s architect, John Russell Pope, designated space for two large murals in the Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom. These oil-on-canvas paintings were painted by artist Barry Faulkner in 1935–36. Faulkner created allegorical scenes depicting the writing and adoption of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. These massive murals, each about the size of a city bus (14 feet by 37.5 feet), add life and color to the space.”

This mural is of the signing of the Constitution. George Washington stands front and center.

There is already a Constitutional crisis existent. But it is not merely a recent one, nor is it the result only of elected officials who blatantly disregard its provisions. The preponderance of fault lies with much of the American electorate who have cared little to naught about this most fundamental expression of American nature, character, and construct.

Oh, for sure, many, when they were in high school memorized the Preamble. But I doubt that they took the time or cognitive energy to learn or discover that the Preamble describes the scope and purpose of the Constitution.

We the People of the United States,

 in Order to form a more perfect Union,

 establish Justice,

 insure domestic Tranquility,

 provide for the common defence,

 promote the general Welfare,

 and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,

 do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Aside from the much cliched throwing about of the first three words and maybe the Second Amendment, most citizens have not read the fullness of the Constitution. Nor do they refer to it to ascertain the accuracy of some statement a candidate or elected official may state. Nor yet do they even have a copy in their possession or know where to find one on the internet.

    It is no wonder that we are in a state of Constitutional Crisis. Few people are aware of the Constitution’s significance. Many people do not care.

Upon entering service in the military, elective or appointive office, serving as a Election day poll worker, we speak an oath to support and defend the Constitution.

I think most people raise their hands and in a perfunctory manner recite the oath out of a sense of mere bureaucratic correctness. I assert that one cannot in sincerity offer reverence to something with which they have not become familiar.

If ever you have had to file for bankruptcy protection, or think that you may need to one day, the Constitution makes that provision. If you are a songwriter, publisher, artist or other person of the creative arts or inventive processes, the Constitution provides protections of your works for you. If you enjoy driving state to state without having to acquire a different driver’s license for each state, thank the Constitution.

    Without the Constitution, without the diligent adherence to the Constitution, we will become an unpredictable hodgepodge of “who’s got what rights today?”

It is not only the responsibility of schools and teachers to make the content of the Constitution well-known, much more so, it is the duty of each citizen to become sufficiently informed of the content that they will know when elected leaders are abdicating their own oath which they had taken.

The first three words of the preamble of the Constitution are not words that place burden on elected officials, they place the burden to maintain the Constitution on the citizenry…

We the people, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

You can become familiar with the Constitution at:

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution

 

 

For Lent, Let's Give up National Idolatry and Permanently Replace it with Christ-like Compassion

 

I question the sincerity of those who claim an importance of legal versus illegal means of entry into the country…

If a person values legality so highly, then I suggest that the next time that person discovers they are driving over the speed limit that they should immediately drive to the local police station, confess their infraction, and insist on paying the fine.

 Perhaps you think I am being silly in my argument. I refer you to the following information found at https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/speed-campaign-speeding-fatalities-14-year-high

There we read the following information…

“Speeding accounts for nearly one-third of all fatalities on our roads and puts everyone at risk, including people in other vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists and people with disabilities,”

Illegal driving causes deaths. It is a serious concern.

Anyone with personal integrity who insists that those who enter the country illegally should be deported, that person should insist on paying the fine for their infraction of speeding, however many times it may happen.

I think the concern about illegality of immigrants is merely a convenient veil to disguise the ugly face of hubris-infected nationalism.

What has troubled me since I was fourteen in 1969 is this fear: Many, if not most, Church-goers in America are first and foremost National Idolators who fit Jesus in so long as he does not interfere with their national idolatry, national pride, and cultural and financial comfort.

What continues to trouble me are church-goers that resemble Pharisees much more than Jesus.

A Pharisee will be quick and eager to pick up a stone to throw at someone accused of infraction. An imitator of Jesus will show compassion and defense.

Imagine if Jesus, instead of defending the woman, had opened his Scriptures and following the verses with his finger, said to the woman “I want you to know I am sympathetic. But it says right here to stone you.” And then, looking at the Pharisees, said “OK boys, have at it!”

Or let’s say the woman had been brought to Jesus a second or third time. Do you think Jesus would have said “Well, woman, you had your chance!” And then thrown the first stone?

Jesus never let anything get in the way of showing compassion. We should imitate Jesus.

Matthew 25:

³⁵ For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, ³⁶ I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

Sing the National Anthem in the Style and Manner it Moves You

 

My elementary school days were in Detroit Michigan during the 1960s.

Those formative years introduced me to much cultural diversity which has enlightened and informed my worldview.

While in Detroit, my next- door neighbor was a Muslim kid from Egypt. We had much verbal exchange of religious ideas. A girl at school was from Saudi Arabia. Again, I learned much about Islam. We had kids from South America. We had kids from Puerto Rico. Detroit was home to many languages, religions, art and musical tastes.

   Because I value multiculturalism very much, I become bewildered at a movement to demand that the National Anthem or “Star Spangled Banner” be sequestered to some particular or standard manner of performance to exclude any variation which would be natural to the singer.

   The song lyric and melody (like America itself) are of sufficient strength to maintain integrity while also accommodating various styles of performance.

  In 1968, when Jose Feliciano sang the national anthem to open a World Series game, many people were angry at how he sang it. I felt that it gave the song a freshness which helped the words actually have more meaning and definition.

I said to classmates and teachers “He’s a citizen, isn’t he?” I figure a citizen should have liberty to interpret the national anthem as it moves them.

I am hoping that whoever may sing the national anthem at the Superbowl this Sunday will sing it according to their fullest authenticity and personal integrity.

If you want to hear Jose Feliciano’s interpretation of the song from 1968, the Youtube video link is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQkY2UFBUb4

By the way, the “Star Spangled Banner is much more that just that one verse we sing at sports events.

Perhaps if we want to be truly respectful, we should sing all four:

O! say can you see by the dawn's early light,
⁠What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming,
Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,
⁠O'er the ramparts we watch'd, were so gallantly streaming?
And the Rockets' red glare, the Bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our Flag was still there;
⁠O! say does that star-spangled Banner yet wave,
⁠O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
⁠Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
⁠As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines on the stream,
'Tis the star-spangled banner, O! long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
⁠That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,
A home and a country should leave us no more?
⁠Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave,
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

O! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand,
⁠Between their lov'd home and the war's desolation,
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n rescued land,
⁠Praise the Power that hath made and preserv'd us a nation!
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto—"In God is our Trust;"
⁠And the star-spangled Banner in triumph shall wave,
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Churches Should Be Diligent to Observe Property Tax Exemption Law

 

Disclaimer: I am not an attorney. Consult with your attorney regarding your specific situation in the following matter.

I am a pastor of two churches and I serve as a member of Elkhart County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals 

 

    The purpose of this blog- post is to make an appeal to church leadership to attend to Indiana Code regarding property tax exemption of their real estate.

The Code to which I refer is: IC 6-1.1-10-21

As, in Indiana, real estate used for religious purposes is exempt from taxation, this has the practical effect of shifting tax burden to other property tax- payers. Whatever county you may reside in, a quick survey of the number of religious institutions will reveal many thousands of acres exempt from taxation. If we were to assume a low-end value of $10,000 per acre, we can conclude that there is much community subsidy of those religious activities.

   Churches and other religious institutions should find ways to be good neighbors in their local communities.

   A more pressing matter is the use of parsonages, again, IC 6-1.1-10-21 will provide information as to when a parsonage can be tax exempt.

  If  a church, which is renting its parsonage, is not compliant with IC 6-1.1-10-21, then they are operating as a landlord with an unfair advantage over legitimate landlords in the community who do in fact pay taxes.

    Churches and other religious organizations should be proactive and diligent towards making sure that they are in compliance with Indiana Code regarding their parsonages.

    If we are to have authentic witness in the community, we need to do more than express love and care for the community with words. We need to take the initiative to make sure we are not passing along undue burden of taxation to them. And also, we must see to it that we are not exercising an unfair advantage over landlords in the community.

Give the relevant code a read, you may be surprised.

IC 6-1.1-10-21