Some Things I Must Say

I’ve always taken a casual attitude toward the term “Evangelical,” considering it benign. I neither took particular umbrage when someone associated me with it nor did I seek to wed myself to that rather diffuse and ambiguous group. It just seemed a fixture of the American religious landscape; part and parcel of general protestantism as it were. I grew up in a faith community that did not place trust in a particular title or denominational organization or hierarchy. We considered such affiliations as unnecessary. The term Christian seemed good enough. In my travels as an officer in the Army, I normally worshiped with the “General Protestant” group at the chapel and was quite comfortable in that association. Occasionally, someone might refer to me as an “evangelical” and I usually did not make the effort to alter their opinion. Now, after much thought and prayer, I feel I must clarify my position regarding the term. I will no longer let my name be associated with that group, either by direct claim or casual association. Recent events force me to distance myself from the evangelical movement. This is a personal decision and not one that I force on anyone else. I will not censure those of my friends that still feel comfortable with the group or the term or seek to persuade them to change their view. I take this action on my own, feeling compelled to express my beliefs regarding this issue.

I cannot associate myself with a group that so easily embraces powerful men and women whose character and behavior is so opposed to what I understand as Christian norms. I have listened patiently to the anemic excuse of, “Well, they’re all corrupt.” In this last presidential election, there was a measurable qualitative and quantitative difference in the candidates regarding personal truthfulness. And, as far as I can determine, empirically and anecdotally, the evangelical community, that voted, overwhelmingly embraced the candidate of moral turpitude. When I speak with my evangelical friends regarding this, they invariably bring up the issue of abortion and supreme court justices. Those are two important issues, but they are only two of many, and I cannot trust a known liar to remain true and faithful to my standards. Besides, the president can do precious little to affect abortion. However, this is not the only reason I must take this step.

I cannot truck with a group that so easily turns its back on the poor and destitute. Jesus clearly expected His followers to do their best, in all areas, to alleviate the suffering of the poor, the sick, the downtrodden, and alienated. I often hear the platitude of, “the church should take care of that, not the government.” I agree. The church should, but the church should also agitate, speak out for, and influence the government to take a charitable stance toward the disadvantaged. We enjoy the privilege and responsibility of influencing or bending or government toward kindness and benevolence. We of all people should be most generous toward those of lesser means. After all, Jesus reached out for us when we were at our most weak and despicable. And if we are truthful, He extends grace toward us today, even when we fail miserably. If you and I fully expect His grace for our failures, how can we, in good conscience, limit grace toward others. I cannot associate with a group that so easily accepts government assistance, in all manner of forms, for itself and then churlishly clamors for the withdrawal of such aid for others.

I cannot lend what little influence I have to a group that embraces and encourages policies that exploit our fears and baser instincts. As far as I can tell Jesus never turned someone away. He let them leave of their own volition; but, He always welcomed. In this, Jesus did not do something new or unusual, He simply remained true to the father, who He was. In Isaiah 16:3-4, God, through the prophet, instructs His people to welcome the outcast, offer refuge to the sojourner, and shelter them from the destroyer. If we wish to wrap ourselves in the mantle of a “Christian Nation” we must do the same. We must build communities and not walls. We must willingly expend our energies and capital, personal and national, in helping the halt, the sojourner, and the outcast. We should set a large table, one at which all are welcome, no matter their state. We too easily forget that God extends His grace to us, even though we are not worthy. We are, in fact, miserable wretches that depend solely on His kindness and benevolence. As a group, evangelicals have lent their support to those who utilize fear and demonize those who are different. I can no longer treat such a divergence from the heart of God casually. I cannot associate with policies that easily trample scriptural witness.

I cannot condone such a reckless embrace of a culture of violence, and in this, I speak of the unstinting support evangelicals have given the National Rifle Association and other Second Amendment groups. In all other areas of modern endeavor, we accept licensing, training, and other requirements designed to show responsibility, fiscal and personal. But, in this arena evangelicals have cast their lot with those who refuse to even consider such ideas when it comes to this issue, refusing to even engage in thoughtful discussion. Jesus came as the prince of peace and I will associate with those who try and remember that salient fact when interpreting our Constitution and other such legal documents.

I cannot associate myself with those who so willingly support policies that ignore the human suffering among us. The Lord makes it abundantly clear that He blesses us to help those in need, not to engage in extravagant and lavish lifestyles. I will ally myself with those kinds of groups that seek to develop and implement plans and policies that work toward a broader prosperity. We live in an era of unparalleled abundance. Yet, there are many in the evangelical community that enthusiastically support those who would savagely curtail access to quality education, healthcare, and retirement; all in the name of cutting off the freeloaders among us. The dismal irony is, that those of us who claim the mantle of Christ are all freeloaders. We do nothing to earn the largess of the Lord. He blesses us spiritually, physically, and fiscally despite our miserable state. Sadly many in the evangelical community back policies that demean and bully the poor and destitute among us. And this includes our relations with other nations.

I cannot wholly embrace a group that encourages and supports policies designed to intimidate other nations. I understand that nations always employ policies they believe will ultimately benefit themselves; however, we can work toward peaceful equitable solutions to the international problems that vex us. The Bible speaks of a day when nations will get along, a day when people will turn swords into plowshares (Isaiah 2:4). We often view that as a spiritual matter or something far off in the future return of Christ. But, what if we read that passage, and the others like it, more literally and worked to bring that about. Unfortunately many in the evangelical community seem to more inclined to support those politicians that threaten and saber rattle. It seems that many of the politicians they support consider armed conflict a preferable diplomatic choice. As one that has born arms in conflict, I discourage military action as a choice of early resort. Let us instead seek dialogue. It is hard to engage in conversation at times; however, negotiation is usually much better than armed conflict. As Christians, we should clamor for a return to international leadership and support those leaders that eschew thuggish tactics and bluster. Again we ought to remember that the Messiah, Immanuel, is known as the Prince of Peace.

I know that not all evangelicals embrace those things listed here, but enough do for me to feel compelled to clarify my position. We cannot be so enamored with and desirous of a seat at the table of power to give up our prophetic voice. When we wed ourselves to a particular person or political ideology, we end up conforming to it instead of transforming it. We also end up carrying their baggage. Instead, let us join Jesus, outside the seat of power, and clamor for the things He felt were important. 

Taking a Knee

            A little over thirty years ago, I took an oath to solemnize my enlistment in the U.S. Army. The hustle and chaos of the day obscured the import of that moment. Like most young men, I missed a chance to give serious thought to what I was doing. As the years passed and my service stacked up, the impact of those words sank in. I’ve reproduced them here for your perusal.

I Matthew E. Robinson do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

            Unlike many militaries of the world where service-members take an oath to a leader or to protect geographic territory, our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines swear to protect the ideals expressed in the constitution. And that is how it should be as the true strength of our nation flows not from our might in arms, but from ideals and ideas that elevate all of us and when we depart from those ideals it erodes our strength and worth as a nation. And this especially applies to recent demonstrations by athletes who choose not to stand during the playing of the national anthem and those who take umbrage at such displays.

            When we seek to deny them their freedom of speech; we ignore one of the most basic tenants of our nation and we insult all those that have sacrificed for the advancement and survival of it. We may disagree with their statement, but we need to be strong enough to let them make it and wise enough to consider their point. You see, those of us who enjoy being white and well-to-do inhabit a very different world from those of color. We live and move throughout our days enjoying a certain privilege and place. Yes, most of us must work to secure our place and we to suffer the vagaries of human existence; however, the table is undeniably tilted in our direction and to deny such insults those that suffer from it and displays our ignorance to the realities of American life.

              Our nation was born out of similar protests; which when ignored by those in power turned into violent revolution. We need to carefully consider these protests, seeking to understand the forces that generate such frustration. In their own way, the athletes that take a knee during the National Anthem are engaging in an act that is patriotic to its core, just as patriotic as my enlisting in the Army.  Our intransigence regarding these demonstrations will only serve to further alienate those marginalized segments of our population that badly need our help and assistance. Instead of railing at the demonstration let us instead seek to understand the forces that are the genesis of such frustration and seek out common ground and solutions. The demonstrations are not acts of disrespect. They seek change to better our society and as such, are acts of patriotism. Those who willingly shoulder the slings, arrows, and criticism taking a knee during the National Anthem deserve our respect and a fair hearing.

How I choose to remember.

I remember standing in the Hertz rental kiosk watching CNN. I was in Wiesbaden and Christy and kids were half a world away in Youngstown, Ohio. I signed some papers and drove over to the Jag office. By the time I arrived a crowd had gathered around the TV, fixated on a burning tower. Horrified, we gasped as the second aircraft slammed into the other tower. All of us, soldiers, knew that our lives had changed. And they did. We watched as the towers sagged and crumbled, along with our naïveté and hubris. Many things died that day, including several thousand people; innocent going about their daily duties. 

We tend to focus on the physical aspect of that day, the lives lost and property destroyed. And, at some level, we should; especially the lives. Those who lost loved ones rose the next day to a world forever darker, grimmer, barer. For them September 11th will always remain a sad reminder, a day passed in mourning. 

We rarely stop to consider the spiritual and moral loss to our nation. We've discarded the openness that for so long characterized our nation. We turned to baser motivations.  We let fear corrode our sense of decency and welcoming nature. Now we talk of walls and limitations on speech. We turn away when jack-booted thugs stomp on others and the civil liberties that set us apart. In a sad way we dishonor those who died on that bright September day. 

If we wish to truly honor the memory of those that died on that day, and all those that have perished in Afghanistan, Iraq, or other some dreary dusty alley let us reclaim and reinvigorate our commitment to the values laid out in our foundational documents. A renewed sense of basic decency will best preserve our liberties and defeat those that seek our destruction. 

I was a Stranger

                Over the past few months the droves of disappointed voters flocked to various public platforms to voice their discontent with the outcome of the last presidential election. President Trump has discovered that being president is not nearly as much fun as running for president. He’s also discovered the constitutional limits and leadership challenges of the Presidency, enduring the unending stream of criticism directed at all presidents. And, sadly, he generates much of the criticism due to behavioral and policy issues. But now, those of us who claim the name of Christ find ourselves faced with a moment in which we may stand together for an issue of import, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program; commonly referred to as DACA.

                This morning my daily devotional reading took me to Matthew 25. Here in the final days before the crucifixion Jesus talks about end times and the separation of the sheep and goats. Among the failures of the goats He listed, “…⁴³ I was a stranger and you did not welcome me…”.

The goats complain, saying, “Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger…?”

Jesus replies, “Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.”

And the goats then shuffle off in the sad darkness of eternal separation from the Lord. Matthew 25:43-46 English Standard Version (ESV), modified for length and emphasis.

This is not a solitary moment in the sweep of scripture. Throughout the Bible, God proclaims His love for the sojourner. At Sinai, with the dust of Egypt still fresh on their sandals, God reminds the Children of Israel to always take care of the sojourner, remembering that they too were once sojourners. Repeatedly the stringent voice of prophets rings out chastising the Jews for oppressing the sojourner. In Isaiah, chapter 10, the Lord condemns those who write iniquitous decrees that oppress the poor, the widow, and the fatherless. In these passages God reminds us that His heart is inclined toward the weak, the widow, the orphan, and the sojourner. And such were we.  At some point, all our families got off the boat, strangers in a strange land.

This is a moment of opportunity for Christians in America.  Here is an issue that God speaks about in direct, unambiguous language. We should clamor for legislation that extends a hand to the sojourner among us. We can set aside our constant sharing of sarcastic memes and instead clamor for taking care of Jesus. For many, who find President Trump wanting, the tendency has been to focus on constant attacks on questionable character or decisions. While this may provide some transitory pleasure, in the end it is illusory, of no real substance. It takes no intellectual effort to click or tap “share.” For those Christians who supported President Trump the tendency has been to spend time denigrating and ridiculing those who did not. We ought to unite over this issue. We all desire a more “Christian” nation and now we have an opportunity to move, however incrementally, toward God. We can love these people in a tangible way. And, in doing so, we show love for our Lord. This group of people, largely voiceless, needs our advocacy. In a like way we found ourselves in desperate need with no one to intercede for us, then God moved to serve and save us. By serving this unrepresented group we show love and ultimately serve Jesus.

I Must Speak

            President Trump decided to pardon former sheriff Joe Arpaio in accordance with his constitutional authority. Though he acted well within his authority, He acted recklessly and in a fashion deleterious to the well being of our society. As a sheriff Arpaio fostered a command climate in which those of color, particularly Hispanics, suffered immense deprivations of their constitutionally guaranteed rights. In this toxic environment many innocent suffered and, in a distressing number of cases, lost their lives. Eventually justice caught up with the sheriff and he found himself convicted of criminal contempt. President Trump stepped in, before the judges assigned sentence, and pardoned the Sheriff. This pardon adds fuel to an already volatile situation. It clearly communicates to those of color where our President, and those who support him, stand and how far we must travel as a nation before we live up to the words found in our Declaration of Independence which read, “…all men are created equal.” Some may wonder why I feel compelled to add to the volume already penned on this subject. Some friends in quiet communications have wondered why I might take such action.

            Long ago, 1981 to be exact, I took an oath to “protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic and to bear true faith and allegiance to the same.” That oath did not contain an expiration date or time limit. It remains in effect. So I must speak out. I must remain true to those stirring words that frame our government. And though the Declaration and the Constitution are two separate documents, they echo each other. I was trained by SSG Williams and SFC Io; both later attained the rank of CSM. They taught me the fundamentals of soldiering. They remain men I look up to and seek to emulate in my daily life. They happen to be men of color. I served with COL Bill Aquino and COL Pat Crowder. Both of these men helped me through a particularly dark time in Iraq. They stood by me and, as we say in the Army, had my “6.” Again, they are both happen to be men of color. The list could stretch on. Suffice it to say, I cannot now turn my back on all of these men and women who served with me, ensuring my physical safety and professional success. They did so with no thought of my race. Their only concern was that I was a fellow soldier. Upon my breast, over my heart, it read, “U.S. Army.” So today, I stand with them. I stand with my oath. I stand with the founding documents of our nation. And as a Christian, I stand with the Bible where it says, “There is neither Jew, nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus,” Galatians 3:28. So I must speak. I must cry out against injustice. And I must live up to my oath. I can do nothing else.

Why Monuments Must Go

As a Christian, as a soldier that took an oath to “protect and defend the Constitution,” as a man that has stood at Dachau’s charnel ovens, and a vast unmarked grave in Northeast Baghdad watching family members scrabble through mounds of desiccated remains desperately seeking some link to a loved one, I am compelled to speak out concerning those sad monuments to our darker past. It is one thing to soberly view historical items in a museum, learning of our, all to frequent, descents into community madness and an entirely different thing to glorify the perpetrators of the near destruction of our nation and supporters of the shackling of Black people into bondage through large public monuments. Participation in these two intrinsically different events sends two divergent and incompatible messages.

We erect monuments to those men and women that exemplify those noble character traits our culture lifts up; individuals who sacrifice for the betterment of all. Those monuments that glorify leaders of the Confederacy do not point to our better, brighter moments. Instead they remind us of a darker, baser past, one that should cause us to hang our heads in shame. Washington, Jefferson, and others, while not perfect men, point toward a higher place, toward those noble ideals framed in our key and founding documents. While we must not forget those forays into shameful, deviant behavior; we do not want to lift them up as examples to emulate. They should come down from those public spaces they currently occupy. They were erected to remind certain segments of our society to keep their heads down and to remember their place on the bottom rungs of the societal ladder. Relegate such memorials to the past and to those museums dedicated to education and illumination. We must move out of that dark phase of our history into the light.

We remember men and women like Washington, Adams, Roosevelt, Tubman, and others that expended their energies and take risks to forward the cause of human freedom and liberty. They risked all to serve others and deserve public recognition and remembrance. Lee, Hood, and others while men of military prowess, chose to expend their energies, personal fortune, and military skills in a cause determined to savagely curtail liberties for some, to expand the borders of slave territory, and trample the Constitution all while destroying our nation. When faced with a crucial choice they chose poorly. And while they remain a critical portion of our history, they do not deserve adulation and honor. The time has long passed for us to swallow our pride and remove these constant reminders of a dark and failed past.

The Boxing Match

                Last Sunday the twitter world woke up to a new tweet from our President. In this round of his twitter-wars he took on CNN. In an altered video clip he beats up a person whose head has been covered by a CNN type logo. As with most modern world leaders, President Trump utilizes Twitter to communicate directly with the public. While other leaders use Twitter to put out positive messages of congratulations or the occasional note of sympathy for sufferers, President Trump uses his posts to engage in very public conflict; primarily with news organizations and individuals that have the temerity to criticize him or some aspect of his policy. Instead of appearing as a powerful leader President Trump comes across as mean-spirited, vindictive, and petty. He displays a crude, sophomoric type of humor common to bullies of all ages. He uses Twitter to attack his enemies. The problem with all this is; he incorrectly identifies his enemies.

                Based on his public pronouncements, President Trump believes news organizations are his primary enemies. He chafes under their criticism. He has yet to learn that as president public criticism will be his constant companion; no matter what he does or says. Action or inaction it does not matter, someone will compose an article taking him to task. Every president since George Washington endured public attacks, some brutal and unwarranted, some earned. Those presidents who develop a thick skin and ignore most of them, only responding when absolutely necessary, fare well. Those who remain easily offended incur repeated assaults. President Trump has chosen to respond almost daily to perceived insults or slights issued by mainstream media. He speaks of them contemptuously, engaging in frequent vitriolic broadsides. In his opinion the press is the enemy. In this he is very mistaken. The press is not the enemy. Do not misunderstand me, President Trump, indeed all American citizens, faces enemies. There are forces arrayed against us that daily work to secure our destruction. They are legion.

                Ignorance is President Trump’s enemy; indeed our enemy. Ignorance crouches behind every bush and in the shadows seeking to drag us down. Ignorance shackles us to nonexistent fears. It deludes us into believing in a Technicolor celluloid past; one where we lived in our own places enjoying a fictitious unity. Ignorance denies reality, decrying a need for action or urging an overreaction to some ill-defined threat. Ignorance convinces us that a bogeyman lurks just around the corner, causing us to miss the real threat standing next to us. But ignorance is not the only enemy we face.

                Prejudice actively seeks to undermine our republic. Ever since the directors of the Dutch East India Company instructed Peter Stuyvesant to cease discriminating against Jews, Muslims, and immigrants of other nationalities and religions we’ve embraced the concept of freedom and toleration in our country.¹ This does not mean that we do not struggle with this concept. Indeed, we fought a war that almost destroyed our nation over this issue, the Civil War. But prejudice will destroy us since it leads us to judge unfairly, to categorize, and to discriminate. Prejudice is a tenacious enemy that every generation must fight anew. Still there are other enemies out there.

                Greed and its extreme sibling avarice the twins that generate in the human heart a grasping churlishness toward or fellow man will destroy us. Greed leads us to amass fortunes at the expense of our neighbor. Monetary success is not an evil unto itself. Yet, when we allow monetary success to consume us, causing us to look askance at our fellow citizens in need denying them assistance, our

nation stumbles. Left unchecked greed morphs into avarice, which knows no bounds. Greed and avarice move us to view precious natural resources as things to be exploited, not a trust to steward and husband, ensuring the long-term health of our nation. Greed and avarice teach us that our fellow citizens do not matter unless they materially add to our bottom line. Left unchecked, greed will consume us a surely as locusts devour standing grain. Greed and avarice father yet another enemy, poverty.

                Poverty shackles over forty-three million of our fellow citizen, some 13.5%, in grim circumstances. ² Our government defines poverty as two adults and two children living on a combined income of $ 24,339.³ Poverty carves a chasm between those of us who have and those of us who have not. For many this chasm, carved largely by our own intransigence, remains a fixed and impassable barrier. They may gaze across and dream; but, no bridge exists and those of us on the far side, living in relative luxury, do precious little to help them escape their pitiable lot. Ultimately poverty will destroy our republic and Western-Civilization from within. Those living under the grinding heel of poverty face a future filled with pain, suffering, and uncertainty. Often they stagger from one chaotic situation to the next, barely able to keep body and soul together. And while it is true that some live in poverty due to poor personal choices, that fact does not relieve us of the responsibility to reach out and help, through as many means as possible, our fellow man. In its preamble our own Constitution lays this burden on us, “…promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,…”⁴ To deny this responsibility, is to be dishonest with ourselves and our fellow citizens. But, there is yet one more enemy I’d like to point out, dishonesty.

                Dishonesty, in all its forms, eats away at the core of our nation. Falsehood erodes trust. Prevarication destroys our ability to work with each other. Those who dissemble only seek to avoid a painful truth. In some cases truth hurts; usually our pride. I hate to admit to my students when I’ve made a mistake. But, in order to set a good example, to be worthy of claiming the profession of teacher, I must own up to my mistakes, willingly admit them, and then take corrective action.

Ironically, they know when I’ve made a mistake. They are smart and observant. Admission of guilt only clears the air and helps us move on to the next event with alacrity. For us to make progress we must fight this enemy and require our leaders to not only be honest, but also work against all forms of deceit. Until we elevate our national discourse we will not enjoy true success in any venue. Dishonest remains one of the most tenacious of enemies. It is imperative that we address this enemy since the existence of dishonesty feeds all other enemies and allows us to deny their existence.

                If President Trump ever wants to rise above reality TV star, demagogue status, and assume the mantle of world leader, he must battle our true enemies, ignorance, prejudice, greed, poverty, and dishonesty. He must discard his penchant for using bully tactics against his detractors. Those tactics will never succeed. He has no true lever to move them. They will remain after he is out of office.

And, truth be told, when he engages in such puerile behavior he fans the flames of criticism. His only real defense is to engage the enemies of our nation. Battle them Sir. You will still receive criticism, but at least then some of your critics will be silenced by your success. As for the rest of us, we must turn our attention to our real enemies. The enemy is not the person on the other side of the aisle who embraces a different view-point. In fact, if we learn to listen we might find that not only do they share our desires for a successful nation; they may have some good ideas as well. Ultimately, we will all have to fight the real enemy and the longer we tarry, the harder the climb, the more difficult the road will be.

                As always, please leave a comment, like, or share. Any feedback will help me improve as a writer and as a thinker.

1. http://www.ricburns.com/film/new-york-a-documentary-film

2. https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty.html  

3. https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-poverty-thresholds.html 

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

The Nefarious Poor

                Well, the Republican Party has shown the nation where they stand. After long years of

criticizing and carping about the Affordable Care Act, they revealed their plan this last week. Cobbled together very rapidly in closed door meetings, without input from outside sources, this bill reveals a certain darkness in the American psyche. Sadly, this is not limited to members of Congress. Fundamentally we despise the poor and consider them fundamentally flawed. We’ve adopted an attitude common in Elizabethan and Edwardian England, as well as the gilded age in America. We do not care for those less well off, those recent waves of prosperity have left stranded on sandbars of poverty, those unable to crawl up the beech to the higher ground of affluence. More than that, we assume that being poor indicates some level of moral failure on the part of the impoverished. We have ours and we do not want to share any of it with the nefarious poor. In fact, given half a chance we’ll gladly take what little they have. In recent years we’ve adopted the attitude that somehow poverty and need indicate some level of criminal misbehavior.

                I suppose all of us blessed with some measure of financial success have always harbored suspicion regarding the poor. After all, we enjoy our fiscal success due solely to our innate intelligence and wise decision making. We arrived at our exalted status through our own hard work, overcoming every obstacle through tenacity and grit. We never needed, or accepted, a helping hand in any form. Bereft of family and friends, our determination brought us the life we enjoy. Those who endure poverty do so by their own choice. Sometime in the 1980’s we started questioning the efficacy and legitimacy of helping the poor. In the early 1990’s we embraced the document Contract With America as a blue-print for governmental reform. A foundational assumption of the document was that efforts to help the poor had degraded their morality and helping them only encouraged continued illicit behavior. This type of thinking reinforced and strengthened remains prevalent in many circles today.

                We see the homeless or beggars and assume, without questioning, that they arrived at their state due to inherent laziness, poor decision making, or some manner of criminal activity. Influenced by the long reach of Puritan thought, we ascribe material blessing to God’s approval and material want to some fashion of divine censure. After all, in a land of plenty such as ours, any anyone can achieve material success with only minor effort. Bring up this subject in a break-room or foyer and we will gladly trot out stories of people living in relative luxury, driving late-model cars, all on the largess of food-stamps (a program that no longer exists, being replaced by the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP), long-term welfare, and the generous handouts collected in the hot summer sun near a Walmart exit or overpass. Another popular chestnut centers on a minority mother who subsists on welfare collected for children she produced in a revolving door fashion. We incorrectly associate moral failure with poverty. Good and upright people go to work, earn a living, and enjoy the fruits of their labor in peace and quiet. There are several mistaken assumptions that lead us to these erroneous conclusions.

                Incorrect Assumption Number One: those who receive governmental assistance do not work. We assume that those who receive governmental assistance spend their days lounging around, binge watching their favorite shows on sixty-plus inch LED TVs. ¹ Due to a decrease in full-time work opportunities, especially for those with minimal education, an ever growing percentage of wage-earners must cobble together multiple part-time jobs in a desperate attempt to make ends meet. In most places a full-time minimum-wage job will not lift a family of four out of poverty and pay the bills. Additionally, part-time work does not include the benefits of health insurance, a retirement plan, advancement, or vacation. The average American wants to and is willing to work. In recent decades many companies, especially those in the ever increasing service sector, have shifted their work from full-time to part-time in order to reduce the amount of money paid in wages and benefits. This long-term shift in the working environment, aided by the demise of unions, has generated a growing class of working poor. This group of workers, living on the margins, often find themselves thrust unexpectedly into poverty.

After all, since SNAP and welfare are so generous they simply do not want to work. They’d rather sit around and collect checks; years of governmental largess having destroyed their ambition. In truth, in over half of the households receiving SNAP, or other monetary assistance, people participate in the labor market.

                Incorrect Assumption Number Two: those receiving governmental assistance do so for long periods of time and as part of an overall employment strategy.  An unexpected problem, such as sickness or loss of a job, often thrusts a family into poverty and homelessness. While participation rates and times vary by program, the Census Bureau reported that the majority of SNAP participants received benefits for between thirty-seven and forty-eight months.² In fact most programs employ a variety of strategies to move participants off program and into self-sufficiency. Those of us living in the middle and upper class enjoy a variety of ways to deal with the unexpected problems of modern life. We purchase new or newer cars. We set aside funds to maintain them. We enjoy jobs that pay a variety of benefits. A close friend recently struggled through a period of sickness. They enjoyed a good full-time job with benefits. Their benefits not only paid for a majority of the treatment, but also ensured that they had a job once they recovered. While this period challenged them, they were able to focus on treatment, knowing that their job remained secure. In fact, their supervisor allowed them to ease back into working full-time by scheduling them half-time for two weeks and then allowing them to assume a full workload. A part time worker would not enjoy such coverage and flexibility. A sick child or parent requiring constant care may result in the loss of employment for the care-giver. The problem need not be medical in nature. A mechanical failure in transportation may very well drive a family into dire straits. Employers easily replace part-time workers. Most job application and interview processes inquire about reliable transportation. Transportation failure is cause for dismissal. These or any other of a number of seemingly innocuous problems may push a family into a deficiency requiring governmental aid. Most of those receiving such aid do so temporarily. The situation is dealt with or the time allowed for aid runs out. Either way, they move off the well-fare roles.

                Incorrect Assumption Number Three: those receiving aid or assistance are involved in criminal behaviors of one kind or another.  In recent years we’ve embraced means testing, mandatory drug testing, and “work-fare” as acceptable strategies for reducing and policing well-fare roles. In some way I suppose means testing is valid. In a world of constrained resources we do not want to waste or fritter away monies recklessly. But why do we assume that those who need help engage in nefarious behaviors at a greater rate than the rest of the population? From all reputable accounts drug testing costs far more to implement than we ever save.³ It turns out that in most places ⁴ We expend much more in the way of public funds for congressmen and other governmental officials and never ask them to provide a sample of their bodily fluids. As someone who participated in and ran my command’s portion of the Army drug-testing program, I often wondered at the implied message I sent to my soldiers when I handed them a bottle and required a sample in return. I’ve also endured the embarrassment of being watched while I produced a sample and having to watch others do the same. In defense of the Army program, we were trying to eradicate a drug culture that sprang up during the chaotic post-Vietnam years. We effectively beat back that particular problem, creating an environment that is largely drug free. In the case of the military, and certain other professions which involve public trust, drug-testing may be a viable course of action. But why do we make recipients of public assistance prove that they are drug free? What gives us the right to subject them to that particular indignity? When considered against the relative waste implementing such programs entail, these measures seem particularly mean spirited and designed to demean, not save. So what are we to do?

those receiving public assistance use drugs at a far lower rate than the population as a whole.

                This rather short essay cannot hope to even fully define the problem. But, it does point out that in recent years we have adopted a rather negative and churlish view of those in need. Any real effort to help those in need starts with an attempt to understand their story, how they got to the point of need in the first place. And to do that, we must see them as people; men and women who for various reasons need help and assistance. Of course poor life decisions may have generated this need. But more often than not, the circumstances regarding birth and education propel people into needy circumstances. And we would all do well to keep in mind the assistance we’ve required and enjoyed over the years. Very few of us enjoy success entirely on our own. Many people, perhaps into the hundreds, provided us help of one kind or another. For most of us the mere happenstance of our birth, something we cannot influence, guarantees a good start. Born into families which encourage and nourish, we thrive. Our families know and understand the importance of education and ensure that we attend school. We live in zip-codes which have decent schools; schools with adequate funding, good programs, and that attract and retain high quality teachers. Our neighborhoods enjoyed low crime-rates and salubrious surroundings. Our parents pursued careers which enabled them to provide excellent health-care when we needed it. All of these things we did nothing to obtain. And for the vast majority of those who inhabit state supported assistance rolls, these things remain a dream out of reach. So we should cultivate the ability to see those requiring assistance with a more sympathetic heart, one that remembers the truth of the old saw, “There but for the grace of God go I.”

     As always, please leave a comment, and if you like, share. Thanks.

1. https://www.fns.usda.gov/pressrelease/2015/wh-120815     

2. https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2015/cb15-97.html

3. https://thinkprogress.org/what-7-states-discovered-after-spending-more-than-1-million-drug-testing-welfare-recipients-c346e0b4305d

4. http://time.com/3117361/welfare-recipients-drug-testing/

Some Thoughts on Recreational Use of Marijuana

                I spend my days with teenagers. I’m a teacher. During the schoolyear from 7:30 until 3:45 I’m surrounded by young people. I hear them talk to each other. They talk with me. Some consider me part of the furniture, never pausing to consider what I might think about their conversations. Others enjoy having an adult that listen to them, finding teachers unusual since we actually value their opinions, sort of. Sometimes they’d rather not share their opinion, especially when they did not read the assignment. At any rate, I hear interesting things. I hear a lot of fuzzy logic, ill-considered things. Most of the time, I do not worry. Time takes care of many things without my personal intervention. I occasionally hear someone compare the recreational use of marijuana to enjoying a glass of wine or beer with dinner or a cocktail in the evening. On the face of it that statement sounds reasonable; however, despite the increasing number of states that have decriminalized marijuana use, there is a significant difference. I think we need to carefully consider that difference and its implications. These implications shed light on a variety of other behaviors. Sadly, as one who has engaged in using both substances in my past, I feel comfortable speaking on the issues at hand.

                Most people who enjoy an alcoholic beverage, especially with dinner, enjoy the taste pairing. A good red wine goes well with a steak or Italian food. A glass of beer compliments a hamburger, pizza, or Mexican food. A cold gin-n-tonic with lime over ice certainly refreshes on a sultry summer afternoon. We consume these beverages primarily for the taste benefit or they quench thirst. In fact, most consumers of alcohol carefully monitor their consumption levels to better enjoy their beverage of choice. Over consumption degrades or ruins the experience. A relatively small amount of alcohol dulls the taste buds; something wine connoisseurs fully understand, hence the somewhat disgusting, but necessary, practice of spitting into ready receptacles at serious wine competitions. It is the taste that matters. People consume marijuana for entirely different reasons.

                Users imbibe in marijuana seeking an altered perception of reality, the “high.” No one consumes marijuana for the taste. As far as I know there is no recipe for wilted marijuana salad. We want the effect that marijuana provides, that change in reality, the altered state. This does not mean that everyone that uses marijuana seeks an escape from some bitter commonplace existence. They may just enjoy the buzz. After all, it is rather pleasant. But, at the end of the day, they want to view things differently. They crave some level of an altered state. That is the key difference. When consuming alcohol we carefully monitor our intake in order to avoid the altered state that alcohol brings. In fact, some legitimately exclude alcohol consumption in any form based on this concept. So what is wrong with an altered state?

                An altered state seeks a different view, a perspective that does not conform to reality. When making decisions, large or small, we need a clear understanding of reality and the issues at hand. ⁶ So then let us not sleep, as others do, but let us keep awake and be sober. I Thessalonians 5:6. The Bible is replete with similar counsel in other places. We must work to view the world clearly in order to render good judgments on any situation. Of course one might say, “It’s only for recreation, the short term effect.” That may be true. But that statement does not address the bigger issue of using something to alter your perception of reality.

Most of us find understanding the complex world around us difficult at best. Often we find relationships and the attending emotions byzantine and impenetrable. Altered states only cloud the issue, rendering thoughtful interaction near impossible. Indeed, those of us who claim Christ must always remember Paul’s injunction, “

                Living sober is more than simply a lack of any mind altering substances. Living sober includes your decision-making, your lifestyle. When we choose to alter our perception of reality, through any medium, we damage our sobriety. If I choose to binge-watch Star Trek instead of grading papers or grappling with some other thorny problem, I’m altering my perception of reality. If I seek comfort in a quart of my favorite ice-cream after a tough day in the classroom, I’m seeking to alter my reality. When I avoid work by “doinking around on Facebook,” I’m avoiding a responsibility I do not like. Reaching for that extra helping of mashed potatoes and gravy to feel good after a rejection email debases my understanding of the world around me. If I quaff a couple of pints to ease the burden of the day, I’m not dealing with the reality of my situation. We must view the world with a stringent, clear-headed mind in order to live soberly. And this is the problem with recreational marijuana use.

                This missive does not seek to address the issue of legalizing recreational use of marijuana. That is an entirely different subject with a completely separate group of issues. This essay focuses on living sober. That is the fundamental issue. By its nature, recreational use of marijuana damages or degrades sobriety. At its core, marijuana use seeks to alter reality; whether to dull or enhance.  We must guard our grip on reality, not alter it. Making valid decisions requires a complete understanding of what is going on around us. When we distort our sense of normal, we skew our decisions away from acceptable and will endure the consequences of such poor decisions. And as someone who's participated in a variety of horrendous activities while deployed, I understand wanting to avoid certain desperate realities. But, sobriety requires facing reality and not avoiding it. This concept applies to anything we use to avoid reality, legal or illegal. So while I might accept the proposition that the short-term effects of marijuana use are akin to drinking a glass of wine or beer the long-term negative influence on our perception of reality are profound and should be eschewed.