You know, it's truly amazing to what extent anything that has any remote connection to Christianity or Religion is under attack, even within Science. It is not only in the area of the Government, due to the Separation of Church and State, but also in relation to Science.
I remember mentioning one time in the comment section of another Post, the whole scientific fiasco relating to Abortion and Breast Cancer. Perhaps I should get the Brochure on that sometime and do a complete Post on it, but for now, I just think that what I've already said in the comment section of a previous Post is worth repeating. The non-italics is what I've added to it today.
"No matter what the issue, if it is political, than there is research supporting both sides. BB-Idaho actually left a Link in the comment section on one of the below Posts supporting the 'Safe Sex' program."
I hadn't done the necessary research when he left this link, yet the next Post down, below this one, is at least in part, a response to that and illustrates very well how Abstinence, since it is also taught within Christianity, is Under Attack.
"It's just like the issue of Abortion and Breast Cancer. There is research that says there's a link and research that says that there isn't.
"A group of people who study research collected a bunch of the available research and analyzed it, applying high standards as to what was good quality research and what was not and they found problems with the research that supported no connection, yet most of the research that supported the connection passed the test.
"Unfortunately, all it takes in order for those who want to deny the connection and keep this issue in the 'Controversial Mode' is for them to keep repeating their faulty research results and this is listened too, whether there are problems in the research or not."
Aside from Abstinence Education and the Connection between Abortion and Breast Cancer, I've seen this same scenario going on in the Evolution verses Intelligent Design Debate. If one takes the time to listen to what is actually being said, the arguments in favor of Evolution are full of false accusations against those on the other side, such as the discussion that took place on one of the Posts at the "Bring It On!" blog, which came across to me as more accusations between the participants, than actual arguments offered.
Bring It On! - Academic Freedom Legislation: The Creationists Back Door?
Now that I've visited the site again, I've realized that there are duplicate copies of a lot of my initial comments. That's because I kept trying to submit these comments, but was given no message about them being held for moderation. They appeared to just disappear, but apparently, they all went through. Oh well.
If you want to review the Evolution verses Intelligent Design discussion that took place on my blog, just click on the Label for it to the right. Griper did a post on the subject as well and the Link to it is below.
The "Good News" Declared
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Friday, September 26, 2008
Attack on Abtsinence Education: Fact or Fallacy?
I was going to post the link that's at the bottom of this post quite some time ago, yet wanted to make sure and read it first and it is quite lengthy; 17 pages to be exact. The other thing that I sort of wish I had the time to do was to give a more complete summary of every part of the document, yet since it has been awhile since I've posted anything political and also since I seem to have limited time these days, I will just do the best with the time I have and will have to just summarize the parts of it that stick out for me in my mind.
First, I'll start with the "Executive Summary" that starts the linked article. The link below is to a Technical Paper, written by a group of professionals for the "Medical Institute for Sexual Health", in response to a couple of Articles that were published in the January 2006 Issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health. The first is entitled "Abstinence and Abstinency-Only Education; A Review of US Policies and Programs" and the second one is entitled "Absinence-Only Policies and Programs; A Position Paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine". Both of these were written by a team of authors headed by John Santelli and the Position Paper simply restates the arguments presented in the Review Article.
The authors of these articles claim all sorts of crazy stuff about Abstinence Education Programs, but offer very poor arguments to support their claims. They claim that Abstinence programs threaten Fundamental Human Rights to Health, Information and Life and that such programs are Unscientifically, Ethically and Morally Problematic. These authors are critical of any Educational Policies that are in any way influenced by Morality and accuse Abstinence Proponents of being primarily concerned with Religious and Moral Beliefs, whether than Public Health. They also accuse such of using Morally and Culturally Specific Definitions of Abstinence. They claim that Educational Policies that have Moral Components are Unscientific and that Abstinence Policies are in conflict with Public Health Principles, yet they have no evidence to support this point of view or opinion.
In the paper that I have provided a link to below, the authors respond to all of these accusations and show how the articles that they are responding to contain Serious Omissions of key areas of research that don't support their point of view; Misrepresentations to the point of acutually stating that a source says something that it does not; Deviations from Accepted Practices or Nonstandard Research Methods, Opinions Presented as Facts and Faulty Logic, such as concluding that the failure to prove an affirmative is proof of a negative. They say that the Scholarship is lacking in rigor, that their Key Points are based on Non-Peer-Reviewed Sources, that they site a lot of Secondary and Tertiary Sources, whether than Original Ones and Opinion Pieces and Editorials and On-line News Magazines, whether than Scientific Articles. They fail to inform the readers when their key point are supported by Non-Peer-Reviewed References and some of their Declarative Statements are not Referenced at all.
One interesting contradiction that was pointed out was how in the First Half of the Review Article, the idea of "Moral Beliefs" is rejected, yet in the Second Half of this same article, they talk about Human Rights in relation to "Ethics". This contradiction is an Unsound and Misleading, yet Clever, Plausible and Subtle Argument or Reasoning (Definition of Sophistry), or as the authors of the linked article put it, "The authors initial rejection of 'Moral Beliefs' and their later adoption of 'Ethics' as a guiding principle for sex education is the height of Sophistry."
In the Linked Article, one of the first things that the authors do is define a few terms including "Moral" and "Ethical", to show how similar these two words are, in that, part of the definition of "Ethical" is "Conforming to Moral Standards".
I don't want to leave this page in the Linked Article (Page 4) without mentioning that they mentioned the limited scope of this one particular study involving only one of the 50 states, which happened to be Texas. This caught my eye since one of my commenters to a previous Post also gave me a link to a Texas Study that showed Ineffective Abstinence Programs, yet it is not logical to conclude that the presence of one group of Abstinence Programs that doesn't work proves that none of the Abstinence Programs work.
The "Definitions of Absinence" section of the Linked Article (Page 4) is very good.
Later in the Linked Article, they state that "Despite having previously rejected Moral considerations to inform public health prevention messages, throughout the last 3 sections of this article, the authors tout internationally recognized Ethical obligations as the ne plus ultra of public health decision making. They appear oblivious to the fact that Ethics has to do with Conforming to Moral Standards or to professional standards of conduct."
The other word that the authors needed to define was the word "Virgin", for in the articles they were responding to, the word "Virgin" was claimed to be a moral term, yet a recent PupMed search of the term yielded 197 articles, so it is obviously a "Medical Term" and is defined in very simple, morally neutral, terms in Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary.
Gee! How in the world are we supposed to study the Medical affects of having sex or not having sex, if we keep removing words from the Medical Dictionary just because they are occasionally also used in relation to Morality? That's absurd!
One more point that comes to mind is a couple of Research Studies that were Omitted from the Evaluation done in the Articles that were written opposing Abstinence Programs. Starting with the Chart on the page marked page 9 at the bottom and reading on to the first 6 paragraphs of page 10, it is explained why "The Absence of even a remote allusion to these studies by Santelli et al is particularly Inexcusable." This is especially true in light of their statement that "Based on our review of the evaluations of specific AO(sic)E Curricula...in actual practice the efficacy of AO(sic)E Interventions may approach Zero." In response to this, the Authors of the Linked Article have said that "The conspicuous Omission of the Articles, coupled with the authors' Hyperbolic Declaration, demonstrates Systematic Misrepresentation of the Evidence."
There were many more good points made in the linked article. I've only had the time to touch on a few. Here is the Link.
The Attack on Abstinence Education: Fact of Fallacy?
First, I'll start with the "Executive Summary" that starts the linked article. The link below is to a Technical Paper, written by a group of professionals for the "Medical Institute for Sexual Health", in response to a couple of Articles that were published in the January 2006 Issue of the Journal of Adolescent Health. The first is entitled "Abstinence and Abstinency-Only Education; A Review of US Policies and Programs" and the second one is entitled "Absinence-Only Policies and Programs; A Position Paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine". Both of these were written by a team of authors headed by John Santelli and the Position Paper simply restates the arguments presented in the Review Article.
The authors of these articles claim all sorts of crazy stuff about Abstinence Education Programs, but offer very poor arguments to support their claims. They claim that Abstinence programs threaten Fundamental Human Rights to Health, Information and Life and that such programs are Unscientifically, Ethically and Morally Problematic. These authors are critical of any Educational Policies that are in any way influenced by Morality and accuse Abstinence Proponents of being primarily concerned with Religious and Moral Beliefs, whether than Public Health. They also accuse such of using Morally and Culturally Specific Definitions of Abstinence. They claim that Educational Policies that have Moral Components are Unscientific and that Abstinence Policies are in conflict with Public Health Principles, yet they have no evidence to support this point of view or opinion.
In the paper that I have provided a link to below, the authors respond to all of these accusations and show how the articles that they are responding to contain Serious Omissions of key areas of research that don't support their point of view; Misrepresentations to the point of acutually stating that a source says something that it does not; Deviations from Accepted Practices or Nonstandard Research Methods, Opinions Presented as Facts and Faulty Logic, such as concluding that the failure to prove an affirmative is proof of a negative. They say that the Scholarship is lacking in rigor, that their Key Points are based on Non-Peer-Reviewed Sources, that they site a lot of Secondary and Tertiary Sources, whether than Original Ones and Opinion Pieces and Editorials and On-line News Magazines, whether than Scientific Articles. They fail to inform the readers when their key point are supported by Non-Peer-Reviewed References and some of their Declarative Statements are not Referenced at all.
One interesting contradiction that was pointed out was how in the First Half of the Review Article, the idea of "Moral Beliefs" is rejected, yet in the Second Half of this same article, they talk about Human Rights in relation to "Ethics". This contradiction is an Unsound and Misleading, yet Clever, Plausible and Subtle Argument or Reasoning (Definition of Sophistry), or as the authors of the linked article put it, "The authors initial rejection of 'Moral Beliefs' and their later adoption of 'Ethics' as a guiding principle for sex education is the height of Sophistry."
In the Linked Article, one of the first things that the authors do is define a few terms including "Moral" and "Ethical", to show how similar these two words are, in that, part of the definition of "Ethical" is "Conforming to Moral Standards".
I don't want to leave this page in the Linked Article (Page 4) without mentioning that they mentioned the limited scope of this one particular study involving only one of the 50 states, which happened to be Texas. This caught my eye since one of my commenters to a previous Post also gave me a link to a Texas Study that showed Ineffective Abstinence Programs, yet it is not logical to conclude that the presence of one group of Abstinence Programs that doesn't work proves that none of the Abstinence Programs work.
The "Definitions of Absinence" section of the Linked Article (Page 4) is very good.
Later in the Linked Article, they state that "Despite having previously rejected Moral considerations to inform public health prevention messages, throughout the last 3 sections of this article, the authors tout internationally recognized Ethical obligations as the ne plus ultra of public health decision making. They appear oblivious to the fact that Ethics has to do with Conforming to Moral Standards or to professional standards of conduct."
The other word that the authors needed to define was the word "Virgin", for in the articles they were responding to, the word "Virgin" was claimed to be a moral term, yet a recent PupMed search of the term yielded 197 articles, so it is obviously a "Medical Term" and is defined in very simple, morally neutral, terms in Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary.
Gee! How in the world are we supposed to study the Medical affects of having sex or not having sex, if we keep removing words from the Medical Dictionary just because they are occasionally also used in relation to Morality? That's absurd!
One more point that comes to mind is a couple of Research Studies that were Omitted from the Evaluation done in the Articles that were written opposing Abstinence Programs. Starting with the Chart on the page marked page 9 at the bottom and reading on to the first 6 paragraphs of page 10, it is explained why "The Absence of even a remote allusion to these studies by Santelli et al is particularly Inexcusable." This is especially true in light of their statement that "Based on our review of the evaluations of specific AO(sic)E Curricula...in actual practice the efficacy of AO(sic)E Interventions may approach Zero." In response to this, the Authors of the Linked Article have said that "The conspicuous Omission of the Articles, coupled with the authors' Hyperbolic Declaration, demonstrates Systematic Misrepresentation of the Evidence."
There were many more good points made in the linked article. I've only had the time to touch on a few. Here is the Link.
The Attack on Abstinence Education: Fact of Fallacy?
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Gaining Control over One's Life & One's Puppy
I know that Samoyeds, just like any other Alaskan or Siberian breed, are stubborn and difficult to train, but I had forgotten the full extent of the battle. It's just like battling with a 2 year old child. I tell our puppy, Shasta, "No!" and he rebels and complains and barks at me. I keep telling him, "Now look! You are not the boss. I am.", or in doggy terms, "You are not the head dog. I am and you WILL obey me!"
The potty training seems to be taking awhile, we've had Shasta now since a week prior to Yesterday and he still occasionally peas in the house, but I've noticed that he sort of does it when he's excited, so I guess it's not such a good idea to get him too wound up while in the house. The problem is that he has lots of energy to burn off. During the day, we can take him for walks and let him run in the yard, yet we keep him in at night because of the animals (Raccoon, Bear and Mountain Lion). He's way too small yet and thus, could be a target for such animals, so at night, we have a real problem. He can't run outside cause of the animals and he can't run too much inside cause it might make him pea in the house. If we discipline him and insist that he remain still, he may sleep too much during the day and than be too hyper at night, when it's time for bed. I'm not sure what the solution is. Oh well. I know it'll get better in time.
If you want to read more about our adventures with our dog, Shasta, there is more in the comment section of the next post down, as I'm sure there will also be in the comment section of this one. One of the things I was writing in one of my comments below the next post down, though, was about how the beauty of Alaskan and Siberian breeds (sled dog types) does not come without a cost. The long hair requires brushing. The floors require vacuuming. The high energy requires exercise and the stubbornness requires a lot of patience and persistence. I personally think that it is worth it, but there are some people I know that do not agree.
When I wrote out the title of this post, I was thinking about how the dog training books claim that puppies feel best when they are on some sort of a schedule. This probably is true. If the puppy has a normal "scheduled" play time, maybe we would be able to plan our lives better around his more quiet nap times, for he does sleep a lot. I just need to learn how to make use of the times in which he does.
The potty training seems to be taking awhile, we've had Shasta now since a week prior to Yesterday and he still occasionally peas in the house, but I've noticed that he sort of does it when he's excited, so I guess it's not such a good idea to get him too wound up while in the house. The problem is that he has lots of energy to burn off. During the day, we can take him for walks and let him run in the yard, yet we keep him in at night because of the animals (Raccoon, Bear and Mountain Lion). He's way too small yet and thus, could be a target for such animals, so at night, we have a real problem. He can't run outside cause of the animals and he can't run too much inside cause it might make him pea in the house. If we discipline him and insist that he remain still, he may sleep too much during the day and than be too hyper at night, when it's time for bed. I'm not sure what the solution is. Oh well. I know it'll get better in time.
If you want to read more about our adventures with our dog, Shasta, there is more in the comment section of the next post down, as I'm sure there will also be in the comment section of this one. One of the things I was writing in one of my comments below the next post down, though, was about how the beauty of Alaskan and Siberian breeds (sled dog types) does not come without a cost. The long hair requires brushing. The floors require vacuuming. The high energy requires exercise and the stubbornness requires a lot of patience and persistence. I personally think that it is worth it, but there are some people I know that do not agree.
When I wrote out the title of this post, I was thinking about how the dog training books claim that puppies feel best when they are on some sort of a schedule. This probably is true. If the puppy has a normal "scheduled" play time, maybe we would be able to plan our lives better around his more quiet nap times, for he does sleep a lot. I just need to learn how to make use of the times in which he does.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Now, Isn't that the Cutest? (Our New Samoyed Puppy)
Now, isn't that the cutest and the prettiest thing that you have ever seen?
His name is Shasta. He is nine weeks old today. He has been so much fun.
We picked him up from the airport around 11:00 AM on Friday. He was a little scared and reluctant to come out of the travel cage at first, but once he did, he took to us really fast. In fact, he followed us everywhere.
At least one of our first impressions of him was "Imagine that! A Samoyed that actually comes when called!", for that was quite a contrast from our earlier Samoyed, Casper, that was so scared when we first got him that he ran away from us and we had to earn his trust. Casper turned out to be a very good dog, yet he was such an independent sort and wouldn't always come when called.
Shasta, the new one pictured above, was just the opposite at first and came across as a little clingy, yet as time has passed, and he has gotten more used to us, he is already becoming more and more independent, has began to take off on his own and explore and as he does that, I am beginning to see that typical Samoyed stubbornness emerge. Samoyeds are a little independent, stubborn and difficult to train, but that's part of their charm. They are very gentle and friendly and would never hurt a fly, as I can see, this one will be as well.
The other first impression that we had was that he didn't seem to have quite the energy level that we expected. Our other dog, Casper, just loved to run and was so incredibly fast it was unbelievable. Samoyeds are sled dogs and love to run. I guess Shasta was tired and a little shy around such a new environment, but that is changing as well.
When we first got him, we had to teach him how to go up and down these two small steps over a retaining wall in our yard and also up into the house. He liked it outside and didn't really want to come inside, though he is going to have to be a house dog because of the warmer climate in California. We are up in the mountains, making the weather cooler than in the valley's, yet it is still quite often in the 90s and it even breaks 100 degrees 2 or 3 days out of the year. Samoyeds are winter sled dogs and have very thick fur.
Friday and Saturday, Shasta mainly just trotted and only occasionally broke into a run when he was chasing us, yet yesterday, he was picking up speed and ran without needing to have anything to chase. Yep, he's a Samoyed alright. He was just taking his time getting started. He slipped on the dirt a few times, he's still just a puppy. He runs much better on the grass. I'm sure he will pick up both his energy and speed as he grows. It's so fun watching him learn.
This is so much fun and we are so in love with our new little friend.
His name is Shasta. He is nine weeks old today. He has been so much fun.
We picked him up from the airport around 11:00 AM on Friday. He was a little scared and reluctant to come out of the travel cage at first, but once he did, he took to us really fast. In fact, he followed us everywhere.
At least one of our first impressions of him was "Imagine that! A Samoyed that actually comes when called!", for that was quite a contrast from our earlier Samoyed, Casper, that was so scared when we first got him that he ran away from us and we had to earn his trust. Casper turned out to be a very good dog, yet he was such an independent sort and wouldn't always come when called.
Shasta, the new one pictured above, was just the opposite at first and came across as a little clingy, yet as time has passed, and he has gotten more used to us, he is already becoming more and more independent, has began to take off on his own and explore and as he does that, I am beginning to see that typical Samoyed stubbornness emerge. Samoyeds are a little independent, stubborn and difficult to train, but that's part of their charm. They are very gentle and friendly and would never hurt a fly, as I can see, this one will be as well.
The other first impression that we had was that he didn't seem to have quite the energy level that we expected. Our other dog, Casper, just loved to run and was so incredibly fast it was unbelievable. Samoyeds are sled dogs and love to run. I guess Shasta was tired and a little shy around such a new environment, but that is changing as well.
When we first got him, we had to teach him how to go up and down these two small steps over a retaining wall in our yard and also up into the house. He liked it outside and didn't really want to come inside, though he is going to have to be a house dog because of the warmer climate in California. We are up in the mountains, making the weather cooler than in the valley's, yet it is still quite often in the 90s and it even breaks 100 degrees 2 or 3 days out of the year. Samoyeds are winter sled dogs and have very thick fur.
Friday and Saturday, Shasta mainly just trotted and only occasionally broke into a run when he was chasing us, yet yesterday, he was picking up speed and ran without needing to have anything to chase. Yep, he's a Samoyed alright. He was just taking his time getting started. He slipped on the dirt a few times, he's still just a puppy. He runs much better on the grass. I'm sure he will pick up both his energy and speed as he grows. It's so fun watching him learn.
This is so much fun and we are so in love with our new little friend.
Sunday, September 7, 2008
McCain and Obama Camparisons
The information on the below chart is really scary, especially in relation to Obama's plan in relation to taxes. He is going to totally ruin our economy.
2008 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE COMPARISON TALKING POINTS
ISSUE | JOHN McCAIN | BARAK OBAMA | |
| Favors new drilling offshore US | Yes | No | |
| Will appoint judges who interpret the law not make it | Yes | No | |
|
| Yes | No | |
| Amount of time served in the US Senate | 22 YEARS | 173 DAYS | |
| Will institute a socialized national health care plan | No | Yes | |
| Supports abortion throughout the pregnancy | No | Yes | |
| Would pull troops out of Iraq immediately | No | Yes | |
| Supports gun ownership rights | Yes | No | |
| Supports homosexual marriage | No | Yes | |
| Proposed programs will mean a huge tax increase | No | Yes | |
| Voted against making English the official language | No | Yes | |
| Voted to give Social Security benefits to illegals | No | Yes | |
| CAPITAL GAINS TAX | |||
| MCCAIN | 0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax. | ||
| OBAMA | 28% on profit from ALL home sales. (How does this affect you? If you sell your home and make a profit, you will pay 28% of your gain on taxes. If you are heading toward retirement and would like to down-size your home or move into a retirement community, 28% of the money you make from your home will go to taxes. This proposal will adversely affect the elderly who are counting on the income from their homes as part of their retirement income.) | ||
| DIVIDEND TAX | |||
| MCCAIN | 15% (no change) | ||
| OBAMA | 39.6% - (How will this affect you? If you have any money invested in stock market, IRA, mutual funds, college funds, life insurance, retirement accounts, or anything that pays or reinvests dividends, you will now be paying nearly 40% of the money earned on taxes if Obama becomes president. The experts predict that 'Higher tax rates on dividends and capital gains would crash the stock market, yet do absolutely nothing to cut the deficit.') | ||
| INCOME TAX | |||
| MCCAIN (no changes) | Single making 30K - tax $4,500 | ||
| OBAMA (reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts) | Single making 30K - tax $8,400 | ||
| INHERITANCE TAX | |||
| MCCAIN | - 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax) | ||
| OBAMA | Restore the inheritance tax Many families have lost businesses, farms, ranches, and homes that have been in their families for generations because they could not afford the inheritance tax. Those willing their assets to loved ones will only lose them to these taxes. | ||
| NEW TAXES PROPOSED BY OBAMA | |||
| New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet. New gasoline taxes (as if gas weren't high enough already) New taxes on natural resources consumption (heating gas, water, electricity) New taxes on retirement accounts, and last but not least....New taxes to pay for socialized medicine so we can receive the same level of medical care as other third-world countries!!! | |||
| | | | |
You can verify the above at the following web sites:
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Ramblings about Blogging
Sometimes I just feel the need to make another comment about blogging. Maybe I shouldn't. Maybe I should just keep the heat on in relation to some of the political stuff, such as my most recent; Abstinence, Safe Sex and STDs.
It's just that sometimes I feel frustrated and I don't know where to put my comments in relation to what I feel because so much of what's out there is political and let's face it, politics can be quite frustrating.
I do think that I've grown as a blogger. I used to get overwhelmed every time that my Email box fills up with comments relating to all the posts on all the blogs that I've made comments on. I click the "Sent Follow up Comments to my E-mail" boxes because that is the only way I know of keeping track of where I've been. I could keep notes, I suppose, but haven't gotten that organized. I know there are probably people who are going to tell me that I shouldn't check those boxes because it appears to be driving me nuts, yet I'm actually sort of proud of myself because I've been managing it much better that I used to.
Just as I was getting ready to say; I used to get overwhelmed every time that my Email fills up with comments relating to all the posts of all the blogs I've made comments on, yet more recently, I just shake my head and laugh at myself saying "Oh look, Lista! You did it to yourself again." lolol.
I comment on most of what I read because it makes me feel like I'm more likely to remember what I've read, for why read it, if I'm moving so quickly in my reading from one post to another without really thinking much or trying to analyze anything or if I'm not going to remember most of it anyway? I'd rather analyze it to death. Than I not only remember it, but know what my opinion on it is as well. This slows me down, yet I'd rather read less and remember it, than read more and not feel quite sure what all I just read. That's just me.
Anyway, here's my short break from all the political stuff, but I'm Ok now. I'll be back to responding to all the many comments on various different blogs soon.
It's just that sometimes I feel frustrated and I don't know where to put my comments in relation to what I feel because so much of what's out there is political and let's face it, politics can be quite frustrating.
I do think that I've grown as a blogger. I used to get overwhelmed every time that my Email box fills up with comments relating to all the posts on all the blogs that I've made comments on. I click the "Sent Follow up Comments to my E-mail" boxes because that is the only way I know of keeping track of where I've been. I could keep notes, I suppose, but haven't gotten that organized. I know there are probably people who are going to tell me that I shouldn't check those boxes because it appears to be driving me nuts, yet I'm actually sort of proud of myself because I've been managing it much better that I used to.
Just as I was getting ready to say; I used to get overwhelmed every time that my Email fills up with comments relating to all the posts of all the blogs I've made comments on, yet more recently, I just shake my head and laugh at myself saying "Oh look, Lista! You did it to yourself again." lolol.
I comment on most of what I read because it makes me feel like I'm more likely to remember what I've read, for why read it, if I'm moving so quickly in my reading from one post to another without really thinking much or trying to analyze anything or if I'm not going to remember most of it anyway? I'd rather analyze it to death. Than I not only remember it, but know what my opinion on it is as well. This slows me down, yet I'd rather read less and remember it, than read more and not feel quite sure what all I just read. That's just me.
Anyway, here's my short break from all the political stuff, but I'm Ok now. I'll be back to responding to all the many comments on various different blogs soon.
Friday, September 5, 2008
Abstinence Verses "Safe Sex"
I'll be adding a link soon relating to the research relating to Abstinence verses "Safe Sex" programs, yet for now, I'll just give you this one.
In my opinion, the main problem is not in the presence of teaching about methods of Birth Control, but in what is emphasized. Remember that Teens are greatly influenced by the messages that they receive about sex in school. Too often Abstinence is downplayed, whether than stressed, while sexual activity and condom use are encouraged. The idea that Children are going to have sex is assumed, whether than challenged. Surveys consistently show that parents want schools to include strong abstinence messages, not just a brief mention of it as an option.
Abstinence education does more than just tell teens to say no to unwed sex. It teaches young people the practical skills they need to maintain their purity. They are taught about Self-esteem, self-control, decision-making, goal-setting, character education and communication skills. Please do read the link and I'll be back with more soon.
In my opinion, the main problem is not in the presence of teaching about methods of Birth Control, but in what is emphasized. Remember that Teens are greatly influenced by the messages that they receive about sex in school. Too often Abstinence is downplayed, whether than stressed, while sexual activity and condom use are encouraged. The idea that Children are going to have sex is assumed, whether than challenged. Surveys consistently show that parents want schools to include strong abstinence messages, not just a brief mention of it as an option.
Abstinence education does more than just tell teens to say no to unwed sex. It teaches young people the practical skills they need to maintain their purity. They are taught about Self-esteem, self-control, decision-making, goal-setting, character education and communication skills. Please do read the link and I'll be back with more soon.
More Abstinence and STD Statistics
This post may seem sort of similar to the previous one, but I have posted some additional statistics.
The last post I did on this, that is the next post down, was mainly about how the attitudes about Abstinence and Virginity before marriage have changed over the years and then I gave some statistics relating to STDs and explained how teenagers are even more susceptible to them because of an immature immune system.
Here are still some more statistics on STDs. These are taken from a brochure entitled "Is Sex Safe? A look at:Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs)", put out by Heritage House 2006. The bold emphasis is mine. Consider these facts.
- STDs are the most common diseases in America next to the common cold and flu.
- More than 1 in 5 Americans are presently infected with an STD.
- 19 million people become newly infected with STDs yearly - 52,000/day.
- 1/4th of STD infections occur in teens and 2/3rds of them occur in people under the age of 25.
- 65 million Americans are infected with an incurable STD.
- 35 - 50 different kinds of STDs exist. 25 of which occur commonly.
- 20 different STds are rampant among the young. At least 25 STDs are spread primarily through sexual contact.
- STDs infect 4.75 million teenagers each year, over 13,000 new cases per. day.
- 80% infected with an STD do not develop the initial symptoms.
- STDs are contagious even though no sypmtoms exist.
- New strains of STDs are resistant to treatment.
- STDs often cause chronic pain and permanent damage.
- STD infection can increase the possibility of contracting AIDS.
- Some STDs are incurable, life-long infections. Some can lead to life-threatening diseases and even death.
Another thing that is mentioned in this brochure is five risks that the sexually active need to be aware of.
- Your partner may not know he/she has an STD. 80% infected do not know their condition.
- Your partner may not tell you the truth if he/she has been sexually active in the past.
- You can have an STD and have no symptoms for weeks, months, possibly years. STDs are contagious even though no symptoms exist.
- Teens are much more suseptible to STD damage because they have lower level of antibodies than adults.
- According to the Centers for Disease Control, condoms do not provide complete protection from any STD or pregnancy. Infection can occur in both males and females whether or not a condom is used.
The conclusion given is that the only way to avoid the risks is to Save Sex for Marriage.
That was a quick preview of what some of the brochures at our center are like.
The concluding statement in the previous post is worth repeating here...
Dr Teresa Crenshaw, past President of the American Association of Sex Educators, said "Saying that the use of condoms is 'safe sex' is in fact playing Russian roulette. A lot of people will die in this dangerous game."
Do we really want to play this game with our young loved ones by leading them to believe that sex is Ok as long as they use "protection"?
P.S. - If you find this page by doing an Internet Search, Please also check out my other page on the subject. That One Also has more Comments below it; 29 to be Exact.
Abstinence and STD Statistics
The last post I did on this, that is the next post down, was mainly about how the attitudes about Abstinence and Virginity before marriage have changed over the years and then I gave some statistics relating to STDs and explained how teenagers are even more susceptible to them because of an immature immune system.
Here are still some more statistics on STDs. These are taken from a brochure entitled "Is Sex Safe? A look at:Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs)", put out by Heritage House 2006. The bold emphasis is mine. Consider these facts.
- STDs are the most common diseases in America next to the common cold and flu.
- More than 1 in 5 Americans are presently infected with an STD.
- 19 million people become newly infected with STDs yearly - 52,000/day.
- 1/4th of STD infections occur in teens and 2/3rds of them occur in people under the age of 25.
- 65 million Americans are infected with an incurable STD.
- 35 - 50 different kinds of STDs exist. 25 of which occur commonly.
- 20 different STds are rampant among the young. At least 25 STDs are spread primarily through sexual contact.
- STDs infect 4.75 million teenagers each year, over 13,000 new cases per. day.
- 80% infected with an STD do not develop the initial symptoms.
- STDs are contagious even though no sypmtoms exist.
- New strains of STDs are resistant to treatment.
- STDs often cause chronic pain and permanent damage.
- STD infection can increase the possibility of contracting AIDS.
- Some STDs are incurable, life-long infections. Some can lead to life-threatening diseases and even death.
Another thing that is mentioned in this brochure is five risks that the sexually active need to be aware of.
- Your partner may not know he/she has an STD. 80% infected do not know their condition.
- Your partner may not tell you the truth if he/she has been sexually active in the past.
- You can have an STD and have no symptoms for weeks, months, possibly years. STDs are contagious even though no symptoms exist.
- Teens are much more suseptible to STD damage because they have lower level of antibodies than adults.
- According to the Centers for Disease Control, condoms do not provide complete protection from any STD or pregnancy. Infection can occur in both males and females whether or not a condom is used.
The conclusion given is that the only way to avoid the risks is to Save Sex for Marriage.
That was a quick preview of what some of the brochures at our center are like.
The concluding statement in the previous post is worth repeating here...
Dr Teresa Crenshaw, past President of the American Association of Sex Educators, said "Saying that the use of condoms is 'safe sex' is in fact playing Russian roulette. A lot of people will die in this dangerous game."
Do we really want to play this game with our young loved ones by leading them to believe that sex is Ok as long as they use "protection"?
P.S. - If you find this page by doing an Internet Search, Please also check out my other page on the subject. That One Also has more Comments below it; 29 to be Exact.
Abstinence and STD Statistics
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Abstinence and STD Statistics
In the comment section of the previous post, BB-Idaho and I began discussing the pregnancy center that I work at, which lead up to a discussion of Pregnant Teens, Abstinence, Sex and STDs and I'm not even sure if I have the answer yet to all of the things he brought up, yet I do know that there is information at the center about Abstinence and "Safe-Sex" statistics. Since it's a long weekend, I won't be back there until Tuesday, yet I assure you that there will be more coming besides what I put in this post.
If you would like to read the previous discussion that was made on this subject, go to the next Post down entitled "Avoiding the Extremes in Both Parties", click on the title and then use the "Find on this Page" feature within your browser to find the words "Pregnant Teens". You might have to hit the "Next" button once to get to the mention of this in the comment section. This is where my discussion with BB on this subject begins.
Meanwhile, I though that I might post some of the statistics that I already have handy relating to Abstinence attitudes and STDs.
BB presented some information about birth rates. Here are some statistics about the rate of Abstinence over the years, as well as the current rates of STDs...
A poll conducted in 2001 revealed that 60% of Americans believe that there is nothing wrong with a man and woman having sex before marriage and of course, the media reinforces this idea. The problem is that as our attitudes about sex have changed over the years, so has the decline in those who practice Abstinence before Marriage.
A study in 1992, (same year as a study presented by BB), 55.1% of all women born between 1933 and 1942 reported that they had abstained from premarital sex and only 27.4% of women born between 1953 and 1962 reported the same (Edward O. Laumann et. al., The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the US (University of Chicago Press: 1994)). Later studies revealed that between 1971 and 1995, the rate of girls between the ages of 15 and 19 who reported having premarital sex increased from 30% to 49% (Joyce C. Abma and Freya L. Sonenstein, "Sexual Activity and Contraceptive Practices Among Teenagers in the US", 1988 and 1995; "Data from the National Survey of Family Growth", National Center for Health Statistics, Wasshington, D.C., April 2001, Table1). As far as I'm concerned, these percentages are far too high.
This whole picture wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the rate of STDs going up as well.
Over 65 million Americans currently have an incurable STD and each year there are 15 million new STD cases in the US, of which 50% are incurable (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "Tracking the Hidden Epidemics: Trends in STDs in the US", 2000). Also, at least 1 in 3 sexually active people are estimated to have contracted an STD by age 24 (The Kaiser Family Foundation, "Sexually Transmitted Diseases in the US", Feb. 2000).
Each year, over 3 million teens are infected with an STD (The Alan Guttmacher Institute, "Teen Sex and Pregnancy", Facts in Brief, 1999).
Gonorrhea rates are highest among females 15-19 years old (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "Tracking the Hidden Epidemics: Trends in STDs in the US", 2000).
Also, at least 10% (that's 1 in 10) of all sexually active teens are infected with Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, a condition most often caused by untreated Gonorrhea and Chlamydia that can lead to infertility and ectopic Pregnancy, or Pregnancy in the Fallopian Tubes (The Medical Institute for Sexual Health, "Medical Updates: Frepuently Asked Questions").
Young people are often led to believe that they will be safe from STDs and pregnancy if they use condoms, however conveying such a message can be dangerously misleading. Condoms protect against HIV/AIDs, but only at the rate of 85%, or put another way, they reduce the risk by only 85%. Personally, I think that 15% is a huge window and what's more, there's no evidence to support any protection at all against the many other STDs, now more than 50 strands, many of which are incurable and Birth Control Pills offer no protection at all.
Many sexually active young people do not view themselves as being at risk for STDs and tend to form perceptions of their own risks and their partners risks based on impressions, rather than factual information.
The unfortunate truth, though, is that an immature immune system places adolescents at increased risk for STDs and teenage girls face a greater risk because of an anatomical variance. The outer covering of a teenage cervix is more susceptible to infection by the bacteria and viruses of STDs.
Dr Teresa Crenshaw, past President of the American Association of Sex Educators, said "Saying that the use of condoms is 'safe sex' is in fact playing Russian roulette. A lot of people will die in this dangerous game."
Do we really want to play this game with our young loved ones by leading them to believe that sex is Ok as long as they use "protection"?
For more Statistics, see my other page; "More Abstinence and STD Statistics"
If you would like to read the previous discussion that was made on this subject, go to the next Post down entitled "Avoiding the Extremes in Both Parties", click on the title and then use the "Find on this Page" feature within your browser to find the words "Pregnant Teens". You might have to hit the "Next" button once to get to the mention of this in the comment section. This is where my discussion with BB on this subject begins.
Meanwhile, I though that I might post some of the statistics that I already have handy relating to Abstinence attitudes and STDs.
BB presented some information about birth rates. Here are some statistics about the rate of Abstinence over the years, as well as the current rates of STDs...
A poll conducted in 2001 revealed that 60% of Americans believe that there is nothing wrong with a man and woman having sex before marriage and of course, the media reinforces this idea. The problem is that as our attitudes about sex have changed over the years, so has the decline in those who practice Abstinence before Marriage.
A study in 1992, (same year as a study presented by BB), 55.1% of all women born between 1933 and 1942 reported that they had abstained from premarital sex and only 27.4% of women born between 1953 and 1962 reported the same (Edward O. Laumann et. al., The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the US (University of Chicago Press: 1994)). Later studies revealed that between 1971 and 1995, the rate of girls between the ages of 15 and 19 who reported having premarital sex increased from 30% to 49% (Joyce C. Abma and Freya L. Sonenstein, "Sexual Activity and Contraceptive Practices Among Teenagers in the US", 1988 and 1995; "Data from the National Survey of Family Growth", National Center for Health Statistics, Wasshington, D.C., April 2001, Table1). As far as I'm concerned, these percentages are far too high.
This whole picture wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the rate of STDs going up as well.
Over 65 million Americans currently have an incurable STD and each year there are 15 million new STD cases in the US, of which 50% are incurable (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "Tracking the Hidden Epidemics: Trends in STDs in the US", 2000). Also, at least 1 in 3 sexually active people are estimated to have contracted an STD by age 24 (The Kaiser Family Foundation, "Sexually Transmitted Diseases in the US", Feb. 2000).
Each year, over 3 million teens are infected with an STD (The Alan Guttmacher Institute, "Teen Sex and Pregnancy", Facts in Brief, 1999).
Gonorrhea rates are highest among females 15-19 years old (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "Tracking the Hidden Epidemics: Trends in STDs in the US", 2000).
Also, at least 10% (that's 1 in 10) of all sexually active teens are infected with Pelvic Inflammatory Disease, a condition most often caused by untreated Gonorrhea and Chlamydia that can lead to infertility and ectopic Pregnancy, or Pregnancy in the Fallopian Tubes (The Medical Institute for Sexual Health, "Medical Updates: Frepuently Asked Questions").
Young people are often led to believe that they will be safe from STDs and pregnancy if they use condoms, however conveying such a message can be dangerously misleading. Condoms protect against HIV/AIDs, but only at the rate of 85%, or put another way, they reduce the risk by only 85%. Personally, I think that 15% is a huge window and what's more, there's no evidence to support any protection at all against the many other STDs, now more than 50 strands, many of which are incurable and Birth Control Pills offer no protection at all.
Many sexually active young people do not view themselves as being at risk for STDs and tend to form perceptions of their own risks and their partners risks based on impressions, rather than factual information.
The unfortunate truth, though, is that an immature immune system places adolescents at increased risk for STDs and teenage girls face a greater risk because of an anatomical variance. The outer covering of a teenage cervix is more susceptible to infection by the bacteria and viruses of STDs.
Dr Teresa Crenshaw, past President of the American Association of Sex Educators, said "Saying that the use of condoms is 'safe sex' is in fact playing Russian roulette. A lot of people will die in this dangerous game."
Do we really want to play this game with our young loved ones by leading them to believe that sex is Ok as long as they use "protection"?
For more Statistics, see my other page; "More Abstinence and STD Statistics"
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Avoiding the Extremes in Both Parties
In the comment section of one of Griper's posts, BB-Idaho said something very interesting.
"It's just perspective..
"Q: How do you tell the difference between a liberal and a conservative?
"A: Easy. Watch a man drowning fifty feet offshore.
"The conservative will throw out 25 feet of rope and shout 'swim for it!'
"The liberal will toss out 50 feet of rope, drop his own end, and go off to do another good deed."
I guess that this could be taken as a joke, but I found it to be rather profound and it's just the sort of thing that's right down my ally. I've often talked about the subject of what's wrong with both of the extremes within both the Republican and Democratic parities, and BB said it so perfectly.
The problem with the Republican approach, as described above, is that they assume that the drowning man has the ability to swim 25 feet, which may or may not be the case. The problem with the Democratic approach, as described above, is that they are so eager to do a large number of good deeds, that they do not put adequate thought into each one. Quite often they just give out food, such as a fish, but they do not stick around to teach the person how to fish.
Republicans are willing to teach someone how to fish, but do not give them enough fish in the mean time in order to give them the energy that they will need in order to carry out the lesson. Perhaps I should add that the fish can represent not only food, (what is needed for the body),but also counseling and emotional support (what is needed for the spirit and the soul). Too often, those who are drowning emotionally are expected to swim without any emotional support, just expectation and judgment.
Griper and I were discussing on his blog, not too long ago, about the contrast between Government Programs and Private Charities. I guess it's pretty plain that Government Programs are run pretty inefficiently, yet when it comes to free hand outs, sometimes Private Charities don't do as much better at this as one might think, for many of them do primarily give out hand outs as well.
At the place where I work, we help pregnant teens. We just started a new program in which we have decided to no longer just give out the cloths and baby supplies free, but instead to start requiring them to watch videos and tapes about pregnancy, health, child rearing, budgeting, relationships, sexuality, etc. Interestingly, the girls actually appreciate, whether than resent it.
"It's just perspective..
"Q: How do you tell the difference between a liberal and a conservative?
"A: Easy. Watch a man drowning fifty feet offshore.
"The conservative will throw out 25 feet of rope and shout 'swim for it!'
"The liberal will toss out 50 feet of rope, drop his own end, and go off to do another good deed."
I guess that this could be taken as a joke, but I found it to be rather profound and it's just the sort of thing that's right down my ally. I've often talked about the subject of what's wrong with both of the extremes within both the Republican and Democratic parities, and BB said it so perfectly.
The problem with the Republican approach, as described above, is that they assume that the drowning man has the ability to swim 25 feet, which may or may not be the case. The problem with the Democratic approach, as described above, is that they are so eager to do a large number of good deeds, that they do not put adequate thought into each one. Quite often they just give out food, such as a fish, but they do not stick around to teach the person how to fish.
Republicans are willing to teach someone how to fish, but do not give them enough fish in the mean time in order to give them the energy that they will need in order to carry out the lesson. Perhaps I should add that the fish can represent not only food, (what is needed for the body),but also counseling and emotional support (what is needed for the spirit and the soul). Too often, those who are drowning emotionally are expected to swim without any emotional support, just expectation and judgment.
Griper and I were discussing on his blog, not too long ago, about the contrast between Government Programs and Private Charities. I guess it's pretty plain that Government Programs are run pretty inefficiently, yet when it comes to free hand outs, sometimes Private Charities don't do as much better at this as one might think, for many of them do primarily give out hand outs as well.
At the place where I work, we help pregnant teens. We just started a new program in which we have decided to no longer just give out the cloths and baby supplies free, but instead to start requiring them to watch videos and tapes about pregnancy, health, child rearing, budgeting, relationships, sexuality, etc. Interestingly, the girls actually appreciate, whether than resent it.
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Don't Throw Your Pearls Before Swine
There are times in which I've felt like questioning God about the way He designed certain things on this earth and within the hearts of His people. For example, why has He created us in such a way in order to allow for the pain that we feel? It seems to me that our emotions are far too strong and our hearts far too easily damaged.
There is something else that happens too besides just the injuries that happen to human hearts. Another thing that occurs is how the truth about human hurts remains way too hidden. The very fact that we hurt so deeply hinders the communication that could aid in our healing.
One really good example of this is how a rape victim will so often fail to report the crime that has been committed against her. Sometimes the delay is so long that some will question whether or not she is telling the truth. Time and time again, it is necessary for a professional to take the stand and explain how it is not uncommon for the trauma of such an event to prevent and delay the reporting of the event and how such emotions can even remain buried in the victim's heart for years before the truth comes out.
In a similar way, sometimes people who are highly sensitive emotionally can be injured deeply by something that their loved ones do not think should be significant enough to cause pain, yet the pain is so deep, that the person can not even talk about it.
Finally, after a considerable amount of time has passed, the person finally talks, yet only to be met with the complaint, "That was so long ago. Why are you bringing up the past?" I never could figure out who wrote the rule that if too much time passes before a confrontation is made, than the complaint becomes mute, yet when the hurt is very deep, we are reluctant to talk about it. Sometimes we are even reluctant to talk about it too anyone at all, never mind the one who has caused us pain.
The problem is this...
The truth about the very deepest of hurts is not often enough expressed. Because of this, those who cause such pain continue to get away with it. The faults of the villains are not brought to light and some do not even realize that an injury has occurred at their hand. This reality troubles me.
As I've added to this a few principles that I've found in the scriptures, I've become puzzled even more. Consider for example what Jesus tells His disciples in relation to parables.
"10) The disciples came to Him and asked, 'Why do you speak to the people in parables?' 11) He replied, 'The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12) Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13) This is why I speak to them in parables: 'Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand. 14) In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. 15) For this, people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' 16) But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.'" Matthew 13:10-16, NIV.
"10) When He was alone, the Twelve and the others around Him asked Him about the parables. 11) He told them, 'The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables, 12) so that, 'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'" Mark 4:10-12, NIV.
"He said, 'The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, 'though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.'" Luke 8:10, NIV.
How odd this is. It is as if the truth is only for those who put a little effort into seeking it, for the Bible also says...
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." Matthew 7:7, KJV.
And "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." John 8:32, KJV.
The idea of concealing some of the truth is reinforced by the very fact that things that hurt are difficult to talk about. And than this is reinforced again by the verse that says, "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." Matthew 7:6, KJV.
Yet there is a part of me that cries out and says, "But God, if only they really understood, maybe they would repent!" and this has continued to puzzle me.
I guess God wants us to be so concerned about others, that we actually pay attention to how others are responding to us. He wants us to desire to know and to care about whether or not we hurt those around us. Some people are just too absorbed in themselves and their own concerns to notice what is right there before their eyes.
Lord, please help us to want to know the truth. Please, reveal to us what we need to know about ourselves and our effect on those around us. Please seek out the motives in our hearts. Please, reveal to us the truth and set us free, so that we may more effectively love. Amen!
There is something else that happens too besides just the injuries that happen to human hearts. Another thing that occurs is how the truth about human hurts remains way too hidden. The very fact that we hurt so deeply hinders the communication that could aid in our healing.
One really good example of this is how a rape victim will so often fail to report the crime that has been committed against her. Sometimes the delay is so long that some will question whether or not she is telling the truth. Time and time again, it is necessary for a professional to take the stand and explain how it is not uncommon for the trauma of such an event to prevent and delay the reporting of the event and how such emotions can even remain buried in the victim's heart for years before the truth comes out.
In a similar way, sometimes people who are highly sensitive emotionally can be injured deeply by something that their loved ones do not think should be significant enough to cause pain, yet the pain is so deep, that the person can not even talk about it.
Finally, after a considerable amount of time has passed, the person finally talks, yet only to be met with the complaint, "That was so long ago. Why are you bringing up the past?" I never could figure out who wrote the rule that if too much time passes before a confrontation is made, than the complaint becomes mute, yet when the hurt is very deep, we are reluctant to talk about it. Sometimes we are even reluctant to talk about it too anyone at all, never mind the one who has caused us pain.
The problem is this...
The truth about the very deepest of hurts is not often enough expressed. Because of this, those who cause such pain continue to get away with it. The faults of the villains are not brought to light and some do not even realize that an injury has occurred at their hand. This reality troubles me.
As I've added to this a few principles that I've found in the scriptures, I've become puzzled even more. Consider for example what Jesus tells His disciples in relation to parables.
"10) The disciples came to Him and asked, 'Why do you speak to the people in parables?' 11) He replied, 'The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12) Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him. 13) This is why I speak to them in parables: 'Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand. 14) In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: 'You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. 15) For this, people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' 16) But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.'" Matthew 13:10-16, NIV.
"10) When He was alone, the Twelve and the others around Him asked Him about the parables. 11) He told them, 'The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables, 12) so that, 'they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'" Mark 4:10-12, NIV.
"He said, 'The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, 'though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.'" Luke 8:10, NIV.
How odd this is. It is as if the truth is only for those who put a little effort into seeking it, for the Bible also says...
"Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you." Matthew 7:7, KJV.
And "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." John 8:32, KJV.
The idea of concealing some of the truth is reinforced by the very fact that things that hurt are difficult to talk about. And than this is reinforced again by the verse that says, "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." Matthew 7:6, KJV.
Yet there is a part of me that cries out and says, "But God, if only they really understood, maybe they would repent!" and this has continued to puzzle me.
I guess God wants us to be so concerned about others, that we actually pay attention to how others are responding to us. He wants us to desire to know and to care about whether or not we hurt those around us. Some people are just too absorbed in themselves and their own concerns to notice what is right there before their eyes.
Lord, please help us to want to know the truth. Please, reveal to us what we need to know about ourselves and our effect on those around us. Please seek out the motives in our hearts. Please, reveal to us the truth and set us free, so that we may more effectively love. Amen!
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Back from Family Camp, so Please do Say Hello.
I guess I should do another post informing all of you that I'm back from family camp. It is taking me a while to actually post something that's significant. For some reason, it's often easier for me to respond to other people on their blogs than to initiate a post on my own blog. I do try to post once in while, but I'm afraid it's not always often enough to keep my hit count up.
Oh well. I guess I can only do what I can do.
Oh well. I guess I can only do what I can do.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
We're Off Again
Well, I sort of hated to post what I just posted, leave you with that and than leave town, yet that is unfortunately exactly what I'm going to do. We are leaving sometime tomorrow morning and will not be back until Monday or Tuesday, so your comments are probably going to be left in the moderation mode again until then. Please do still feel free to comment, though, and we will talk about it when we get back. Until then, do take care and I'll see you very soon. Love ya' all.
Calm the Anger in My Heart - Poem
The Lord has actually healed me of a lot of the things I used to really feel angry about. Of course, this horrible beast still rears it's ugly head at times. We all struggle with anger at times, yet I'm so much more at peace than I once was.
Forgiveness is talked about a lot in the churches, yet my struggle was significant enough that I kept saying, "You know what? It's just not as simple as that." Forgiveness actually involves a little bit of a healing process and can often take a little time. It just plain doesn't happen over night.
Here is a poem that I wrote once when I was feeling angry.
Forgiveness is talked about a lot in the churches, yet my struggle was significant enough that I kept saying, "You know what? It's just not as simple as that." Forgiveness actually involves a little bit of a healing process and can often take a little time. It just plain doesn't happen over night.
Here is a poem that I wrote once when I was feeling angry.
Calm the Anger in my Heart
Calm the anger in my heart. Help me to release it unto You.
Pry my fingers from their grasp.
Help me to know You know the way.
Calm the anger in my heart. Show me hope that You are there.
You're the one who changes hearts. Help me, let You do it, Lord.
(Chorus)
What can I do, when the trust has gone away?
What do I do, with the hurt that still remains?
I give it to You, Lord. Heal my pain and make me love.
Calm the anger in my heart. Help me to see Your guiding hand.
Let me cry my tears to You. Heal me Lord and show the way.
Calm the anger in my heart. Help me to see the other’s pain.
Help me feel compassion, Lord. Ease my hurt and show me how.
(Chorus)
What can I do, when the trust has gone away?
What do I do, with the hurt that still remains?
I give it to You, Lord. Heal my pain and make me love.
Calm the anger in my heart. Please forgive me, Lord, I pray.
Help me to confront some one in love,
Yet not until You’ve calmed my angry heart.
Calm the anger in my heart. Take the pain, Lord, heal me now.
Take the tears and cleanse me, Lord.
Help me to let go and trust You, Lord.
A lot of what I have to say about anger is reflected in the poem. Anger involves more than just anger and lack of forgiveness. It also involves hurt; sometimes very deep hurt; and quite often there are trust issues, so to simply say, "You need to let go and forgive that person." does not address all of the issues.
Only God can fully heal us of our hurts and help us to love again and letting go of anger involves healing and therefore also tears.
Another thing that helps is the understanding that we all have areas of our life in which we feel pain. Even the ones that we are angry with have things in their life that cause them pain. In our own humanness, it is extremely difficult to see this because we are so caught up in our own pain that it is nearly impossible for us to imagine that that "horrible monster" that we are angry at feels any pain, or for that matter feels anything at all. Trying to see things from the other person's perspective is extremely difficult on a purely human level and most of us have mental blocks that prevent us from seeing the point of view of someone who has hurt us.
Sometimes too, there are issues of trust. Just because we have chosen to not trust someone does not mean that we have not forgiven them. It is foolish to not do what is necessary to protect oneself from further harm and unfortunately, lack of trust will usually change the relationship, yet trust is something that must be earned and once it is broken, it must be earned back. This is not an issue of lack of forgiveness. It is simply the natural result of broken trust.
The last concept in this poem is the possible need for confrontation. If the person who has caused the pain is someone that we care about, it will probably be necessary to tell that person how we feel, yet this should not be done in anger. Sometimes we need to ask God for help in this one, because it is really hard to express deep hurt without including anger. Anger, though, only begets more anger and accomplishes nothing, just as the Bible says, "A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger." (Proverbs 15:1, NIV).
Another very important thing to remember is that it is only God who can truly change hearts. Just as it is God who can help us to let go of the anger, it is also God who can change the hearts of those who have hurt us, yet in order for this to happen, the other person also needs to turn to God for help and this is a healing process, so we need to be patient.
Lastly, and unfortunately, quite often we never do get the apology that we were hoping for. This is what makes forgiveness even more difficult and the trust may also never be restored. Sometimes there can even be a rift in the friendship that will never be healed, so the most unfortunate and sad reality is that sometimes the process of forgiveness can result not in reconciliation, but actually letting go, not only of the anger, but of the relationship as well, or perhaps of what you hoped the relationship could be. This is the part of the puzzle that I struggled with for so long and wasn't willing to accept.
Pry my fingers from their grasp.
Help me to know You know the way.
Calm the anger in my heart. Show me hope that You are there.
You're the one who changes hearts. Help me, let You do it, Lord.
(Chorus)
What can I do, when the trust has gone away?
What do I do, with the hurt that still remains?
I give it to You, Lord. Heal my pain and make me love.
Calm the anger in my heart. Help me to see Your guiding hand.
Let me cry my tears to You. Heal me Lord and show the way.
Calm the anger in my heart. Help me to see the other’s pain.
Help me feel compassion, Lord. Ease my hurt and show me how.
(Chorus)
What can I do, when the trust has gone away?
What do I do, with the hurt that still remains?
I give it to You, Lord. Heal my pain and make me love.
Calm the anger in my heart. Please forgive me, Lord, I pray.
Help me to confront some one in love,
Yet not until You’ve calmed my angry heart.
Calm the anger in my heart. Take the pain, Lord, heal me now.
Take the tears and cleanse me, Lord.
Help me to let go and trust You, Lord.
(Chorus)
What can I do, when the trust has gone away?
What do I do, with the hurt that still remains?
What can I do, when the trust has gone away?
What do I do, with the hurt that still remains?
I give it to You, Lord. Heal my pain and make me love.
A lot of what I have to say about anger is reflected in the poem. Anger involves more than just anger and lack of forgiveness. It also involves hurt; sometimes very deep hurt; and quite often there are trust issues, so to simply say, "You need to let go and forgive that person." does not address all of the issues.
Only God can fully heal us of our hurts and help us to love again and letting go of anger involves healing and therefore also tears.
Another thing that helps is the understanding that we all have areas of our life in which we feel pain. Even the ones that we are angry with have things in their life that cause them pain. In our own humanness, it is extremely difficult to see this because we are so caught up in our own pain that it is nearly impossible for us to imagine that that "horrible monster" that we are angry at feels any pain, or for that matter feels anything at all. Trying to see things from the other person's perspective is extremely difficult on a purely human level and most of us have mental blocks that prevent us from seeing the point of view of someone who has hurt us.
We also have such a strong tendency to hang on to anger. It is not at all easy to let go of. I know. I've most definitely been there, yet God can help to break through the issues in our heart and help us to release that which we cling to so tightly. As long as we keep holding on to the anger, it is impossible to find peace. It's like a strong hold in our heart and letting go involves a healing process that can often take considerable time. The reality of the long healing process has been too often ignored.
Sometimes too, there are issues of trust. Just because we have chosen to not trust someone does not mean that we have not forgiven them. It is foolish to not do what is necessary to protect oneself from further harm and unfortunately, lack of trust will usually change the relationship, yet trust is something that must be earned and once it is broken, it must be earned back. This is not an issue of lack of forgiveness. It is simply the natural result of broken trust.
The last concept in this poem is the possible need for confrontation. If the person who has caused the pain is someone that we care about, it will probably be necessary to tell that person how we feel, yet this should not be done in anger. Sometimes we need to ask God for help in this one, because it is really hard to express deep hurt without including anger. Anger, though, only begets more anger and accomplishes nothing, just as the Bible says, "A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger." (Proverbs 15:1, NIV).
Another very important thing to remember is that it is only God who can truly change hearts. Just as it is God who can help us to let go of the anger, it is also God who can change the hearts of those who have hurt us, yet in order for this to happen, the other person also needs to turn to God for help and this is a healing process, so we need to be patient.
Lastly, and unfortunately, quite often we never do get the apology that we were hoping for. This is what makes forgiveness even more difficult and the trust may also never be restored. Sometimes there can even be a rift in the friendship that will never be healed, so the most unfortunate and sad reality is that sometimes the process of forgiveness can result not in reconciliation, but actually letting go, not only of the anger, but of the relationship as well, or perhaps of what you hoped the relationship could be. This is the part of the puzzle that I struggled with for so long and wasn't willing to accept.
Monday, August 4, 2008
Well, We're Back. It was a Fun Trip.
It was a fun trip. I guess I almost could have made a post out of the comment I just left on the next post down. I'm hoping to one day soon write about the trip in even more detail, yet for now I just wanted to put something on the top of my blog that says something other than we're gone on vacation, though, to tell you the truth, we have family camp coming up this week end, so I will be away from the computer again this weekend, yet I'm here for now in case anyone wants to say hi.
If you are new to my blog, please do read some of my earlier entries and check out the labels on the right. Thanks for dropping by.
If you are new to my blog, please do read some of my earlier entries and check out the labels on the right. Thanks for dropping by.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)