Christians must seek to understand Christianity, which is based off of what Jesus discussed and advocated.  He most assuredly talked about the poor, the homeless, the meek, those living and dying by the sword, etc.  But the biggest problem I have with a concept of a “social gospel” that requires forums to ask political candidates what they will do as government officials to enact these ideas is that this isn’t what government does or is supposed to do.

In Jesus’ day, he went to individuals and groups of individuals and asked them to do things about the sick, the poor, and every social problem that existed.  He could have easily gone to the government and used his awesome powers to change government and government bureaucrats.  Even if you know absolutely nothing about the Bible, if you’ve watched “The Ten Commandments“, you know how well this worked for Moses.  Thus government and politicians being what they are, Jesus and his followers would have had to deal with the Roman government — a government that believed in torturing prisoners and publicly executing them.  Now contrast that with the American government of today.

But Jesus didn’t try to change the rulers of his time.  If better government was the answer, I’m pretty sure Christ could have hooked that up.  But that’s not what Jesus did, he took his message directly to the people who could actually do something about the issues, the people who actually experienced the suffering and the hurt, he took his message to you.  He said, in a sense, “I want you to do something about poverty, sickness, and morals.”  He didn’t ask you to lobby for laws that may only help the suffering in an indirect way (if it truly helped at all) or vote for the lesser of two evils.  Jesus asked you to be more direct in your actions in order to know compassion and closeness to others, as opposed to the distance and robotic nature at which government claims to fix problems.

While I am theologically universalist and do not believe that some people go to heaven (or a desert oasis filled with virgins) and others do not, there are those who believes this is a mechanism for justice in the universe.  For those, who do believe this, believe in the importance of a social gospel, and still crawl to kings and presidents for the resolution of all perceived societal problems, what will Judgement Day be like?  Will you be held accountable for government’s failure to live up to a Christian vision of helping your fellow man?  I kind of think using “the Devil made me do it” excuse (or in this case “the government made me do it”) to describe why the homeless haven’t been given homes won’t fly.

So what we’ll see tonight is anyone’s guess.  Maybe they’ll spin, or triangulate, or have a genuine religio-politico epiphany right on stage.  I’m sure the media will continue with its nit-wit blather about “who won the Evangelicals” as if a group of people, especially Christians, could be owned by a politician or political party.  Anyway, I’m pretty certain that we’ll see the emergence of a huge Pander Bear of enormous proportions, which in this case would seem to be an eighth circle of hell situation.  We definitely won’t see much social change in this world until we all understand that what we do in this life is up to us — for good, for evil, for indifference, for apathy — and not up to the governments and politicians.

Two situations of note (and a lot of little things) have led me to where I am at this time. The first, is a recent ballot access petitioning project that I worked on that took a toll on my health and emotional stability. That will more than likely be a topic of discussion sometime in the next few days when I’ve fully gotten up the nerve to face my demons. The second situation was Barack Obama’s recent vote on domestic spying. It’s becoming obvious as to what he means by being the owner of the “change” meme. Other than changing his positions, ala triangulation, his vote to give immunity to telecommunications companies for breaking the law represents a level of change that we haven’t seen since… err, umm, George W. Bush ordered telecommunications companies to break the law. Obama’s vote prevents us from ever knowing to what extent American citizens’ rights have been violated and what specific role the President and his men had in this conspiracy. In a response to a follow-up question during Libertarian Party’s Presidential nominee Bob Barr’s testimony in front of the House Judiciary Committee, Barr voiced investigation of Bush’s wrong-doings in order to send a message to future administrations that such abuses of power wouldn’t be tolerated. But that requires the House Judiciary Committee to make the right call.

Anyway, I’m sorry that I’ve ever said anything nice about Obama. He’s no different than McCain. Well other than, of course, being a black guy. Otherwise, he’s doing the bidding of the “techno-slavery” establishment that runs this country. This action is the clearest signal possible that the day is coming very soon when the decision to put men in slavery and chains will not be based upon the color of their skin, nor the content of their chracter, but by the vast technological resources possessed by the slave master. For this, I truly hope Jesse Jackson changes his mind about cutting off Obama’s nuts.

Yesterday’s shooting at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church, however, was poignant in a number of ways. First and foremost, I’ve attended more UU services than I can mention while living in Terre Haute, Indiana and Durham, North Carolina, as well as having been to political meetings at my current local congregation, the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Raleigh (NC). While I don’t describe myself as Unitarian-Universalist any more, UUism still holds a place close to my heart. Happening geographically close to home in the Unitarian Universalist Association’s southern “Thomas Jefferson District” and having a number of friends who’ve been personally affected by this action have made the feelings associated with this incident seem nearly crushing.

Anytime something like this happens, there’s a natural tendency to think, “What do I do?” While I mean no disrespect to my UU friends — some of the most colorful, joyful, peaceful, best coffee making people you could ever hope to meet — I’m afraid the collective answer about what to do may be misguided.

When considering next steps, UUs need to follow the suggestion of Thoreau and “strike the root”. Not all of the details have been released as to the suspect’s motives, but we do know the following — he was unemployed, he was alone and had little or no social support, his basic needs of food and shelter were being taken from him, he lacked self-esteem and a feeling of success in his life. While this man could have lashed out in violence at any number of groups or individuals, it’s sadly ironic that he chose to assault an institution with such a long standing committment and fervent dedication to helping the poor and the downtrodden. Unfortunately, making a stand on issues brings both wanted and unwanted attention to those things you advocate.

Being both a theologically and politically liberal denominational body, there might be more of an emphasis on beating swords into plowshares, but that’s not the answer. Violence has never been the fault of the tool. Mankind is creative enough (and depraved enough) that if every gun was destroyed today, by tomorrow morning humans would already have a new-and-improved favorite way to kill.

The solution for UUs and their family, friends, and neighbors is found in three things that are not very far away. First, as a community of similarly-worshipping people, individuals can find solace and provide comfort to one another. Second, as a spiritual body UUs can look to the wisdom of the past to emphasize the spark in each one of us, the same spark that is extinguished when we believe the world, and not spirit, is the ultimate reality and power over us. Third, as an institution for social change, UUs must accelerate those efforts to find those who feel they are without hope and bring them into a welcoming, accepting, and loving community.

While this won’t prevent every possible episode of violence in the near future, it’ll go a long way. Even though, UUs were targeted for their beliefs, I think that in the recovery process, UUs will reflect upon their successful advocacy in the areas of human rights, religious tolerance, and social justice and understand that the good they have unleashed upon the world is far greater than any evils one man can commit.

Once I got to a location with Internet, I started chatting online with a Time Warner representative, having the following exchange:

Michael Smith: Thank you for choosing Time Warner Cable’s Online Chat, My name is Michael. Please hold as I pull up your account information.

Michael Smith: You are in an area that is experiencing an outage. We are aware of the problem and technicians are working to correct the issue as quickly as possible.

Johnny: Thank you. Is there an ETA on restoration of service.

Michael Smith: The technician are working on its earliest resolution.

Johnny: Thank you. Have a nice day.

I was about to ask again if he knew *when* service would be restored. Just as long as it was up before I had to telecommute the next morning, I would have been totally cool with whatever he said. Of course, I probably threw him off, since ETA wasn’t what I was asking for, since ETA is “Estimated Time of Arrival”, which had nothing to do with service restoration, and everything to do with getting somewhere on an airplane.

Anyway, the total outage was four or five hours. Not a big deal, in the end, I guess.

After reading this article, I’m still in the Barr camp. I agree that it would be great for more emphasis on Fed policy and oversight. I think that indicates a deeper knowledge of economic theory and application to include the Fed in any economic considerations. I’m sure most (but definitely not all) Libertarians are fine with his economic views. His slightly more conservative social views are another issue, however.

Nobody ever reads the party platforms anyway, but activists are willing to draw blood to get them their way. It is probably the only aspect of American politics where ideas dominate.

He’s probably right considering that his site generally only recognizes Democratic and Republican candidates. However, when considering alternative political parties, he’s not quite right. As a Libertarian, I know that platforms occassionally are considered sources of ideas for negative attacks. And activists do their darnedest to make the platform represent the philosophy. Usually, alternative political parties and their candidates even express these ideas (often to their electoral deaths). I would say that this is the other place where ideas dominate in politics. But the general reluctance of people to vote for these idea-filled candidates gives us an insight to the American’s regard for the concept of ideas in politics.

This weekend has made me think that if the people were oppressed in the 21st century, most people would pass on revolution and gladly accept slavery. This also leads me to believe that, while nowhere near perfect, the Founders had guts, something that more and more Americans are lacking now-a-days. That’s bad for the future of America, but great for dictators and other evil-doers.

While I had seen this episode a number of times, I was curious to see how it played on air. It turns out that it’s third weekly airing on Saturday at 11:00pm puts it coming on after a black minister guy giving a sermon. If he only knew that the inaugural episode featured a Thomas Jefferson impersonator. Sorry, no mention of Sally Hemings was made in this episode.

During the entire show, I kept thinking that this Thomas Jefferson bore a certain resemblance to Mike Munger, Duke professor and candidate for Governor of North Carolina. You be the judge:

Maybe that’s a good indication that people should vote for Mike this year. Just be sure to keep him away from the slaves when he gets elected.

The end of the show had wrong contact information that I tried to remove at the studio to no luck as one second of it was still left. Oops. This gave the RTN staff ample opportunity to play a message emphasizing that it’s a community station, just anybody can become a producer, and you might see things you don’t agree with (like more freedom and less government, for example). This was a good transition to the show that followed, “David Young: A Musical Journey“. Amazingly, he can play two recorders at the same time. While I dissed this concept at first, his show may oddly enough be my new favorite show on RTN. Other than “The Libertarian Alternative”, that is.

As typical also for this time of the year, I am also railing on about the perception that we have a choice — a choice of two polished, professional politicians to vote for every year. While this angst is typically geared toward getting political parties on the ballot, my focus is now encompassing the plight of the lone write-in candidate whose votes get thrown out if they can’t complete a petition drive before the election (as is the case in North Carolina).

But even getting past the politics, I’m finding more and more that I’m not free. Getting past the existence of the government in my life, I am a slave. I look at where I’m at situationally. Who got me there? For the most part I did. How do I deal with my situation? Not well usually. I’m angry, anxious, exhausted, fearful, nervous, and depressed most of my waking hours now-a-days. I could live in an anarchist paradise, with only myself calling the shots for my life, but I still wouldn’t be free because of what I’m feeling and how I’m dealing with it.

As I reflect upon the true meaning of freedom, independence, and liberty, I’m reminded of the title of a book by 1996 and 2000 Libertarian Party Presidential nominee Harry Browne. It’s called “How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World“. I’ve read excerpts. It sounds like something we all start reading immediately as we not only reflect, but as we begin to realize what being free truly is. Hey, it’s Independence Day — what are you doing just standing there? Watching fireworks?!

Beyond that, though, as a Libertarian, it only backs up what I’ve been saying for years is the basis of the Libertarian Party’s hidden appeal and potential electoral strength. Libertarians don’t need to adopt positions of conservatives or liberals or move to the middle, since libertarianism is a consistent political philosophy that embraces what some would call fiscal conservatism or social liberalism. And what it amounts to — leaving individuals alone so they can live their lives the way they want — is much more easily marketable than the hodgepodge of arbitrarily deciding what part of your life you should want controlled by the political bureaucracy.