Showing posts with label many. Show all posts
Showing posts with label many. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 14

a note to my friends

In October of 2008, an event of truly historic proportions took place. Many of you might be saying "Yeah, sure. I've seen it all before." Most times, yes, but definitely not this time. If you've been busy contemplating in a cave or trekking the Himalayas, what has happened as a result of a Connecticut Supreme Court decision granting full marriage rights as a result of a 4-3 decision for gays, lesbians, and transsexuals.

Right now, there is a conservative group pushing for a last-minute amendment. If you are of the legendary 10%, I don't really need to make the case to you. However, I make the case for the following larger group.
  • It is a waste of money when the budget is already scarce.
  • Even if everyone in your household is heterosexual, chances are very good you have a homosexual in your neighborhood. And chances are very good they are NOT an ogre.
  • It's the decent thing to do in any neighborhood.

Having made my points, I urge you to vote NO.

Tuesday, September 9

Our Conundrum

God's Problem

Bart D. Ehrman

HarperOne

In Bart D. Ehrman's book God's Problem, an ancient difficulty is examined by Ehrman. On one hand, we have the " all loving" God (with many, many exceptions) ,the horrific world in which we find ourselves living. If we find ourselves living in the world Ehrman does, it is not a happy scene at all, despite protestations to the contrary.

Ehrman seems to be in a constant wrestling match between God (traditionally created) and all the agonies we face. However, the books are - for lack of a better term - a more holistic vision. While any Bible or Torah is certainly a wide-ranging text, what can Ahura Mazda say to us? Or Krishna? How can the writers of Talmud affect or color the original texts? In the more modern version, how can Thomas Merton (whom I greatly admire) affect our ways of thinking?

I don't think what is generated is as much a tabula rasa as much as a tabula "holistica". Do I believe that any thinking will see suffering wiped out, or, more realistically, understand it? Of course not. But what I can do is alleviate the suffering, and protest the outrages. This is one area in which Ehrman and I can agree.

I myself have accepted Buddhist teachings. However, Thich Nhat Hanh has, ironically, felt a deep appreciation for Christian teachings. Not in the very traditional sense, but it is there. Perhaps if we see more holistically, we will see more.