​“Negativity is a poor use of energy.”   
 
The above is a paraphrase attributed to Yo Yo Ma in response to the question of how he keeps so upbeat and positive.    I wrote back to the friend who shared that  what Yo Yo is saying seems pretty axiomatic and, yet, we humans seem to have a difficult time accepting and practicing this approach to life.    Judging by the rhetoric of the current Presidential primary campaign in the United States, the fact that we continue to put an alarming number of people in jails and prisons in the United States and  treat them as pariahs, and the fact that we seem to think that labeling many people and treating them as less than gives credence to the assertion that no matter what we call ourselves spiritually and religiously, we think that the love message which is attributed to the Buddha or what Paul in Corinthians 13 attributes to Jesus is at the best unrealistic and at the worse, just pure crap.
 
Yet, folks such as Yo Yo Ma without the apparent need to label himself seems to know that “Negativity is a poor use of energy.”
 
When I was reading the email which included this quote/paraphrase, I was thinking of my experience yesterday.
 
Yesterday I attended a memorial service in a church where the pews were filled with people with a history of addiction to alcohol or other substances, things or people  Some  of the people sitting in this Methodist Church  I knew to be evangelical Christians as was the person whose life was being celebrated. Some were Catholics and some were probably atheists, Buddhist,  Hindu or Muslim.    I knew this to be a pretty good guess because I have  been worked for/with  people in recovery for addictive disorders for many years.   I always recommend involvement in the 12-step recovery programs started by Bill W. and Dr. Bob in 1935.  The original program was Alcoholic Anonymous but since has been used with recovery from  narcotics and other drug addiction (NA), food addiction (OA), sexual addiction (SA and SAA) as well as other addictive disorders    The person whose life was being celebrated was a very active member of the AA program in the Tampa area.   In the process of working with/for folks struggling to recover, I have attended hundreds if not thousands of open meetings (open meeting that anyone can attend whether or not in recovery).  In my office and in lead meetings, I have heard many stories of how addiction led to theft, violence, sexual abuse of adults and minors  and even homicides.  I have even had clients who have murdered for a living.   
 
Since I am a close friend of several of the family members of the person being memorialized yesterday, I already knew what many in the recover community  had reached out to the family with all manner of practical help as well as emotional support.  I also knew that this same group of people had prepared a dinner for the hundreds of people attending the memorial.  
 
It was also safe for me to assume that among the hundreds in attendance at the memorial service were people who had been in jail, had stolen money, cars, things and hearts from family members, employers,  and others.   There were those who are convicted felons, who will forever be labeled as sexual offenders and those who were  directly and indirectly responsible for the death of others.
 
I also knew that most of those attending had reclaimed a life for themselves and those they loved. They were people who had been lovingly helped when they were at their lowest point and who continued to help others when they are at their lowest. 
 
One of the basic tenants of the 12-step recovery program is that all that is required to become a member of this amazing group of people is the desire to stop using.  The basic philosophy is one addict helping another.  No one cares  what you have done, who you have hurt,  how much money one has or how many times one has relapsed.     No one cares what criminal labels one carries into the rooms.  Once there, one is just another person needing help.   One goes to meetings to get help and give help.  If one is able to allow the gift of recovery, one  chooses a sponsor who will guide one through the 12 steps of recovery.  These are, I believe,  pretty basic steps for spiritual growth.  I have previously written in these blogs  about each of those steps.  
 
The basic point  which the minister and everyone who attended the meeting focused on was how loving the person who died was and how much he was loved; how many homeless people camped out at his often small home and how often he shared what food he had.   Of course in the beginning he camped out with others and ate their food. That is how it works. 
 
In the 12-step program and what T, the person who died,  clearly understood was that there is no better or worse, no greater or lesser sin, no ranking of people according to education or profession.  Although there may have been grade school dropouts and Harvard graduates there, once they  picked up the phone or showed up at a meeting they were just one person there to get  and give help.
 
If like me and T, one was coming from a Christian tradition when someone read I Corinthians 13: 1-13, one knew that within the context of their humanness (we are never perfect) everyone in that room was doing their best, one day at a time,  to live those words.
 
1If I speak in the tonguesa of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast,b but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
 
In my experience as a counselor and as an ordained minister the recovery community comes closer to living these words than any church I have every attended or of which I have been a member.   We all could learn a lot from this community no matter what our religious  or lack of religious background or belief system.
 
Written March 7, 2016

​
Who did it and why? - The journey to the next note

Since I am writing on Sunday morning the reader can correctly assume that this morning I listened to the NPR show, On Being, hosted by Krista Tippett.  This morning’s guest was the world famous cellist, Yo Yo Ma.  

While listening to the interview I am not surprised to hear that we both began life with a curiosity about the world or, as he phrases it, “Who did it and why?”   Whether he was looking at the difference between the roofs in France and those he discovered in the United States, the difference between the violin, the first instrument he played as a child and the huge base he saw in a museum or how one was going to travel the space between one note to the next, he seemed to be as excited about the journey as he was about the particular roof, instrument or note. 

It is not surprising that when performing at one of the great concert halls or some very simple space he honors his role as a host of his guests, the audience.  It is also not surprising that this man whose awards and accolades are too numerous to mention loved Fred Rogers and being a part of Mr. Rogers Neighborhood as much as he loved and admired the fact that Julia Child would just say after dropping the chicken on the floor, “Oh, the chicken's fallen on the floor! Yes. Oh, well pick it up and put it right back.”   

I am equally enamored of the fact that he knows that his strength is only in his willingness to be vulnerable.   I think this is what differentiates the person who merely learns to play the notes of music written by Bach and the person who is willing to allow the notes which Bach has written to connect with his all the emotions with which Bach wrote the music and the emotions with which he, Yo Yo Ma, experiences the music.  The cello is the instrument which melds together that note and those emotions before they touches Yo Yo and his guests, the audience.  Although in this interview at least he does not talk about how he now experiences that note as expressed through the cello and experienced by the audience I am sure that he is also changed in this process which, in turn changes the next note.  It is in this space between the  notes or what artists call negative space where this melding and interactional transformation takes place.

Some, including Mrs. Tippett, talked about the joy which Yo Yo Ma seems to exude when performing.  It also seems present in this interview.  Perhaps that is because he is constantly on the same treasure hunt he began as a little boy in Paris- that treasure hunt which wants to know “Who did it and why?”.    It is also not surprising as a undergraduate student he studied anthropology.   

I cannot help but wonder what allows people as Yo Yo Ma, Julia Child, or Fred Rogers to hold on to that childlike curiosity and excitement about being present with and exploring the relationship between the notes of life whether it is a roof, music, building a community or encouraging children to value what they have in common with each other and what is unique about each of them. Fred Rogers had that faith that each child was special in his or her own right  - that each child was a delightful miracle  and each moment with each child as they moved to the next note of life was to be experienced as precious. In my mind this does not mean that each moment is joyful but there Is or can be the joy of being with each other and mother earth even as one shares moments of sadness, pain and disappointment.  There is nothing to fear.   Certainly there is music which demands that we either run or allow it to reach deep into the heart of one’s pain.  What is the word which describes the richness of even that moment of existential angst?  Certainly one could describe it as real or alive or having depth.

Perhaps it was party the Buddhist influence of Yo Yo Ma’s father which gave him the courage to be present to all moments – of being with each note and being with that space between the notes.

This, of course, is the goal of recovery from addiction or of healing from trauma – to fully experience the pain rather than running from it. It seems we humans have a tendency to succumb to the fear of being with the discomfort of pain or the discomfort of the illusion of being able to control what is going to happen. After all, the chicken may fall on the floor.  The string on the precious instrument might break. The electricity which will carry the notes or light the hall might suddenly fail. Oh well!  Just pick up the chicken and proceed.  That was the lesson of Julia Child, of Fred Rogers, Yo Yo Ma and all the rest of those whose courage is ready to carry us from one note to the next.

Written  March 6, 2016

​From illusion  of order to chaos to order

Daily it seems that someone asks me about the current presidential primary in the United States. These questions come from friends in Australia, Canada, England, and many other places.   If not asking about the long lasting, crude, bitter campaign the United States they might be questioning the political situations in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Afghanistan,  or in almost any other country including their home country.   They might also comment about the fact that the  British are considering whether to stay as part of the European Union 

Of course, political strife, war and mass death is not a new phenomenon in human history.  It is also not new that a relatively small percentage of we humans enjoy a grossly large share of the necessities and luxuries of the world while the rest of the population starves or barely survives.  We have explained this gross disparity with many different theories. These include:

•    Survival of the fittest –biological determinism.
•    “The poor you shall always have with you.”
•    Natural or pre-determined classes of people.
•    Harder work by some.
•    Superiority of size, production or any number of other factors.
•    Race superiority.
•    Bigger and/or more effective weapons.
•    Blood – blue blood of the royal class.
•    Form of government.
•    Right of a few “good or smart or industrious/creative” people to make money and decide who is deserving of “help”.
•    Being “God’s” chosen people.

Despite all these theories, many individuals, groups and nations  seem to be experiencing the current distress, fighting, fleeing of refugees, acrimonious political campaigns and civil strife as worse or somehow different than preceding periods of history.  The differences which I can identify are:

•    Mass and instant communication – constant bombardment via the printed word, internet, phone, radio and television.   Unless one lives in a places where one has limited or no access to phones, satellite access, or electrical access one cannot totally escape “the news” from around the world whether that news is about the results of a recent suicidal bombing, the latest disease outbreak or the latest attempt to hold some individual or group accountable.  It can also be what many of us would consider trivial.  Most of the world has now known since  the evening of March 3, 2016 that Donald Trump believes he is well endowed.  I wager that I am not the only person who, prior to this announcement had not only not thought about Mt. Trump’s genitals but had not wanted to think about or even imagine he has genitals.
•    There is no denying that certainly in the United States and in other countries the industrial revolution allowed a significant number of people to rise from relative poverty to having  homes with cars, electricity, air conditioning, refrigerators and televisions.  These same individuals and families took vacations and many managed to send their kids to college.  There was many who felt that they had improved life for themselves and their children.
•    In the United States and perhaps many other countries often covert and some overt violent actions were performed under the guise of being the good people who were keeping the world safe for democracy, god or  …
•    Superpowers, particularly the Soviet Union and the United States, manufactured and controlled the bulk of nuclear weapons and the behavior of many other countries.
•    The rise of feminism, socialized medicine, the right to live and thrive regardless of sexual orientation, race, age, differing abilities continued and in some parts of the world continue to grow.
•    An attempt to hold on to a limited religious understanding of the “purpose” of this life journey for humans and other life forms.  Those doing this are often sure that they have the only true and direct communication with the one true God.  These belief systems co-exist with an ever broadening of a spiritual base which allows for the inclusion of  many different concepts of a higher power or the God of one’s understanding.
•    The ability of individuals around the world to compare notes and organize into communities.
•    The increasing difficulty of holding on to the belief that the universe of which we are a part is the only one or that we are the only possible living beings.
•    The increasing ability of many nations to develop and threaten to use nuclear weapons.
•    The increasing acceptance that we have created a way of life which is destroying the planet.
•    An increasing realization that we have overpopulated this earth and/or can no longer deny that the abundance of some means the death of others.

As I re-read  the above, it occurs to me that it is an age of letting go of many illusions. I suspect that when one lets go of illusions and does not immediately replace them with with other illusions one is left with chaos.  From this chaos will emerge a new order on the level of this universe or a new order on the level of multiple universe.  What cannot happen is a return to the former state of illusions. That is one of the major problems with illusions. Once we have realized that they are illusions we can no longer return to our former state.

Letting go and the resultant chaos is uncomfortable.  It is interesting that this brings me back to the advice to the Christian theologian, Soren Aabye  Kierkegaard, to take that leap of faith. This may not be the particular theological faith of Mr. Kierkegaard, but the process is the same. We must leap off into the unknown and trust that what happens will be what is needed to happen in the evolutionary process. Or not!

My personal belief is that we are at a period in history where the positive and negative forces are battling a an intensity never before experience on this planet. I personally think that the positive forces are stronger and will, in the long run, be the victor.  Whether or not I am right, I know I do not want to add to the negative energy and will continue to have faith that  we humans can allow love to win.

Written March 5, 2016

​Six-year old Sam ask about presidential candidates

I knew that my six-year old adopted niece, Sam, had the day off school but I was not sure if she planned to visit.   Her family had been busy with the visit of her maternal grandparents, mamma and pop pop.

As I looked out the window I was pleased to see her coming across the snowy lawn in her new red boots and coat.   

As she gets near, I open the door.

Me: Good morning snowbird!  How are you?

Sam: Hello Uncle Jim. It is cold this morning.

Me: Yes, it is.  Come in and take your coat and boots off. I will get your slippers.  

I get the slippers from the broom closet.

Sam: I had breakfast Uncle Jim, but I would love some hot chocolate.  Could we make some Uncle Jim?

Me: Of course we can.  Let me get your apron.

I get her apron and tie it on her. Then I get out the milk, salt, sugar, vanilla and cocoa. I pour the milk in a pan and put it on to heat.

Sam: Can I measure the cocoa, sugar and salt Uncle Jim

Me: You sure can. 

She carefully measures the ingredients and puts them in a pan.   We then add a little water and she finishes making the paste.  When the milk starts to steam I pour it in for her.  She begins to stir with the whisk and then we add the vanilla.  In the meantime, I get out the marshmallows and the whipped cream.

Sam: Will you pour it into the cups Uncle Jim?

I do and the Sam adds the marshmallows and the whipped cream.

Me: Careful, it is hot. Do not burn your lips off!

Sam:  Uncle Jim! I am not going to burn my lips off.  You are so silly.

Me: Yes, I know. Still I do not want you to burn your lips.

Sam:  Uncle Jim, why are the people running for president so angry all time? They are always saying mean things. At least they look mean. Sometimes the kids at my school say mean things to each other and then the other kids say mean things back to them. Then someone tries to be meaner.  The other day day Tommy said something mean to Sue about her being in a wheelchair.  Ahmes then told Tommy he was retarded. Tommy then said Ahmes should go back to Egypt.  I do not like it when they are mean to each other but I do not know what to do.

Me:  It is really difficult to know what to do Sam.  Sometimes no matter what you do it seems to make it worse.

Sam: I talked to Sue afterwards and she always says it does not matter, but I can tell it really hurts her feelings.

Me: Why do you think that Tommy makes fun of Sue and the other children. 

Sam:  Well, Sue is easy to pick on because she cannot fight back physically and everyone know she will never say anything mean back.

Me:  Interesting. Why do you think that Sue will never say anything mean to someone who makes fun of her?

Sam: Takes a long drink of hot chocolate leaving a white mustache.

Me:  Nice mustaches Sam.

Sam:  Uncle Jim.  You have one too!

Me:  Oh okay!  Shall we wipe them off? 

I take my napkin and wipe them off.

Sam: What was the question Uncle Jim?

Me: Why do your think that Sue will never say anything mean to someone who makes fun of her?

Sam: Well, you told me to always ask if I wanted to know something.  I asked Sue and she said if she is mean back that she would be behaving the same as Tommy.   

Me:  That is very wise of Sue. What do you think of that Sam?

Sam:  Well, it seems like they will not know that it is not okay to be mean.

Me:  Let’s think about what you said earlier about the presidential candidates calling each other names or about school mates calling each other names.   What did you say happens?

Sam: They just keep seeing who can be the meanest Uncle Jim and at school eventually they start fighting with each other.

Me:  Who do you think wins then Sam?

Sam: Well, it does not seem as if anyone wins Uncle Jim.

Me:  Do your think Sue wins Sam?

Sam:   How could she win Uncle Jim? Tommy and some of the other kids still call her mean names.

Me: What do you think is the most important Sam? If Sue does not respond with mean comments is she proud of who she is?

Sam:  Yes, she is, but that is confusing Uncle Jim

Me:  Sue sounds like a person who knows that she wants to be a kind person no matter what anyone else does. What do your parents say when you do something because other kids are doing it?

Sam: They do not like it Uncle Jim.  Both give me that look!

Me: What is that look?

Sam: They sort of frown and look really disappointed.  I hate that.
She shows me her best imitation of her parents’ “look”!

Me:  Oh.  That is not very pleasant.  

Sam: No. It makes me feel really small Uncle Jim. I hate feeling that way.

Me:  Me, too, Sam.    So your parents think that …

Sam: They think that I should do what will make me proud of me and make them proud of me.  When I say mean things I am not proud of me and neither are they.

Me:  That is one of the things I really like about your parents and your brother Paul. All of you try to be nice people no matter how anyone else behaves.   It seems like Sue does really well with that also.

Sam: How come, if they want to be president, the candidates cannot behave that way Uncle Jim.

Me:  Wow!  That is really a good question Sam.  I think that sometimes, if we are not careful, we can want to win so badly that we will say or do things which we would not normally do.

Sam:   So what if one of them becomes President Uncle Jim and some other President says something mean.

Me:   That is a really good question Sam.   I and a lot of other people are concerned about that.

Sam:  I am glad that I am friends with Sue.   I guess I am also glad that I did not say anything mean to Tommy, but I felt like it.

Me:  Yes, I can understand that Sam.   Do you think that Tommy says mean things because he wants to feel important?

Sam: We talked about that before.  It is difficult to think that way when he is acting that way.

Me:  I know, but if we could think about that how do you think we would treat Tommy.

Sam: I know you want me to say that we would treat him with love Uncle Jim but he is yucky!

Me:  Yes, sometimes what we wear outside is not very pretty. Some people think that the wheelchair make Sue not very pretty but we know that is not true.

Sam:  So you are saying that Tommy’s meanness is like Sue’s wheel chair Uncle Jim?  It is not who he is?

Me:  Sam, sometimes you amaze me.  I am so proud of you. That is exactly what I was saying.

Sam:  Then maybe it would be okay to have a president who is mean Uncle Jim?

Me:  No, I think we need to treat Tommy and the presidential candidates with love but until they quit being mean I do not think that they would be good leaders.

Sam:  That makes sense.

Me:  Goodness, look at the time.   I have a dentist appointing in 20 minutes.    Let’s continue this conversation later, okay Sam.

Sam: Thanks Uncle Jim.

She gives me a big hug and I help her take off her apron and put on her boots, coat, hat and gloves.

Sam: Buy Uncle Jim.

Me:  See you later alligator!  

Sam: (laughing) Uncle Jim!

Written March 4, 2016

​Acceptance versus Assertive

This week I have  been acutely aware of the struggle I have always had with deciding when to be assertive and when to just  quietly accept something or someone.   I know that I particularly struggle with this issues when I am not feeling 100%.  This week, for example, I was visited by the flue which, of course, sapped my energy. When my energy is low, I get overwhelmed easily and in situations which might call for acceptance or being  assertive I could easily come across as aggressive, angry or judgmental.   If I allow that to happen then I feel very guilty and sad. Later, it at all possible,  I have to find a way to apologize.     

I was in a situation yesterday in which I was not able to establish a productive relationship with someone in the service department of a store.  I knew that I still did not feel well and became frustrated and “felt” as if I was not being heard and my concern was being discounted.  I did end up walking out of the store without saying anything mean, but I did so in a way which was not kind.  On might stay that  all 5’5” of me stomped out.   Hopefully, in the crowded store no one particularly noticed.  I am glad that I left without being more nasty, but I know that if I had felt better I might have stayed and  either talked to another staff member or tried harder to communicate with the young man.  I did write a letter to the store manager today and after letting it sit another day will decide if I want to mail it. I am currently thinking that the manager needs to know that one of his employees is struggling to communicate in a helpful manner. Perhaps, of course, the employee was also just getting over being sick, had just broken up with a person he was dating, had suffered a disappointment or had some other issues. There, of course, is always the  possibility that my not feeling well left me very vulnerable to feeling frustrated and ready to find fault with others.

I was even more suspicious of my own behavior since I had another instance of feeling as if I was not being listened to just a couple of days ago.  How do I determine if I need to be assertive in these situations or just   resign myself to the fact that I was not in a  good position to evaluate my part in either of these situations.   There are a number of people, had they  been able to spend time with me this week,  who would be happy to give me honest, loving feedback.  I do not live with any of these people and I was not around them this week partly because I isolated so that I would not spread my flue germs

Writing is another options.  If I can be as honest as possible and then sit back for a bit I might be better able to determine what behavior is more consistent with my core values.

As  young man my repertoire of possible response was very limited. There were:

•    Avoid,avoid, avoid,
•    Mow down with anger and then feel intensely guilty.
•    Sit with it for a bit longer than counting to 10.

Obviously, neither of those responses were productive or helpful.   Sometime in my thirties, I think, I added a third possibility:
•    Ask the advice of a trusted friend and follow that advice.
•    
Fortunately, some wonderful people had entered my life at that time.  One of those was a woman who became a good friend, was and is  a mentor and was my clinical supervisor. She could respectfully and lovingly tell me what I needed to hear and although I might  wince when I heard it I trusted it as loving and most likely to be accurate.   Finally my attempts at putting myself in growth situations was working enough to have enough self esteem or self regard to  accept that I could be a good person and still be wrong or way off base in my actions.  That was huge.  Finally , I was emerging as a human being with both positive and negative qualities. Making a mistake did not wipe out all my worth.

As we all know growing emotionally and spiritually is a process.  Some days may feel as if we have made no progress at all. Other days it may feel as if we are finally deserving to be called a work in progress who does pretty well some of the time.  At those times, it is much easier to determine if one should be assertive before letting some issues go or if one’s first action should be to just let it go.   I seem to do better if I ask myself:

•    Is there someone I trust who can  help me decide?
•    What is my motive?  Is it to help change something for the better, to prove that I am good and they are bad, or to punish? How honest am I being with myself?
•    Does it matter? Is it an important issue?  Even though it may feel important at the moment what it the situation were reversed?  If I am the one receiving the feedback, would it be helpful?   If I let it sit for a few days  how might it seem then?
•    Lastly, what positive change is possible by either letting it go or addressing it in a loving manner.

An easy example for me is a person I know well. She is a good person, but her anger, her seeming habit of holding on to resentments for a very long time, and her caustic and biting sarcasm make it very difficult to remain friends with her. She often gets very lonely and feels unloved.   I know, from past experience, that if I suggest to her that she sounds depressed she will hear this as a criticism, get hurt and then punish with her silence or in some other way.   I want to accept her as she is, keep loving her unconditionally and, unless she asks for help  let  any digs or jabs  go.  No good will come out of being assertive with her.   

In another case, I think the person really wants to provide  a safe, loving office but the staff discount what patients say. In this case I think it could be helpful to to give some feedback about what I found difficult in the response of his staff. 

If I have any doubt about whether to be “assertive” and address an issue or just ignore/let it go, my advice to myself is to ignore and let it go.   Whatever I do I want to practice doing it with love.

Written  March 3, 2016

​The Real Sin of Sexual Abuse by Clergy
 
It is not surprising that the recent movie, Spotlight, documenting the sexual abuse cover up in the Diocese of Boston won so many awards.   By all standards the investigative reporting  on which the movie is based and the movie itself is deserving of the awards.    It is also not surprising that recently the grand jury in Altoona, Pa.  heard evidence of “Two Catholic bishops who led a small Pennsylvania diocese helped cover up the sexual abuse of hundreds of children by more than 50 priests and other religious leaders over a 40 year period…”(Tampa Tribune, Wednesday, March, 2, 2016, p. 8).  
 
It is not just the Roman Catholic church which has been exposed as covering up sexual abuse of those under their care, although it has certainly gotten the most attention and may have been the most systematic about the cover up.   
 
The Roman Catholic church has responded to these revelation by:
 
1.      Paying out huge amounts of money to those who suffered emotional, psychological, and spiritual damage as a result of the abuse.
2.      Agreeing to turn over offending priests to law enforcement.
 
The goal seems to have been three fold:
1.      Make amends for what has happened in the past. 
2.      Insure that civil legal system punish those who continue to abuse children.
3.     Make sure that changes are made to prevent or greatly reduce abuse  and cover up in the future.
 
Taking these one by one:
 
1.     Make amends for what has happened in the past.  Certainly the money, except where it covers the cost of psychological care, is largely symbolic.  The payment of money   awarded to victims of abuse and mistreatment for “pain and suffering” is one of the ways our culture “proves” that it is serious about being sorry for the abuse which has occurred or making the individual or organization responsible for the behavior pay for its sin/wrongdoing.   If the money figure is high enough the person or individuals responsible will experience the pain of letting go of resources. The victim will have money not only for treatment of the effects of the abuse, but money to live on if they are unable to work as a result of the abuse.
2.     Insure that the civil legal system punish those who continue to abuse children.  This action has little to do with the spiritual goal of a  Christian church.  Punishment does not  in and of itself curtail or change the behavior of an individual. The assumption of punishment is that the priest committing the abuse makes an informed decision that his needs are more important than that of the child or other person they abuse. Certainly I have met those who attempted to explain and/or make sense of their behavior by blaming the victim, the organization, or somehow attempt to convince themselves and others that the behavior was not abusive.  Most of we humans want to believe that we have some control over our decisions in the future.   Otherwise, it will seem as if we are saying that one cannot count on any of our behavior being rational, just, or consistent.  If one cannot account for one’s behavior one is essentially saying that one can never be trusted and needs to be in a protective environment.   In locations where I have previously worked, I had occasion to report sexual abuse  to an official of a church.    The official took immediate action to lovingly, but firmly, insist that the person go to a treatment program.  In some cases the person was on a plane to a treatment center on the same day that I reported the problem.  In most of those cases in which I was involved, the person responded to treatment.    None of these were persons whose  only or primary object of sexual desire  was a pre-pubescent child.  The psychological literature is very clear that when a person has a strong, compulsive  sexual desire for pre-pubescent children, treatment is seldom affective.  I have one current client, who was  acutely sexually abused beginning when he was a very young child, whom I do think no longer desires sexual relationship with children. This was a man who, even when he did have such desires, had a very satisfying sexual relationship with his wife. He is also an older man who is very careful not to put himself in situations which could trigger  such desires.  It may be that if chemical castration (use of certain medication to significantly reduce or eliminate sexual desire) or other chemical options  do not work to insure that children are safe from further abuse, that some true pedophiles may need to be in a protective environment as is true for any other mentally ill person who is a danger to themselves and others. This is not punishment.   No one decides that they want to have this compulsive desire.  No one wakes up one day and says, “Oh, in this life journey I want to have a strong desire to abuse others and not be able to exercise any control over my decisions to do or not do this  abuse.”   It is true that some people, very early in life, learn that sexual  use of others who are not able to consent is normal.  That is very sad. Their abusers probably learned it from their abusers. My point is that although I can understand that there was a lot of pressure on the Catholic church because of their frequent mishandling of sexual abuse cases, agreeing to punishment, in my opinion,  it was not consistent with the teachings of Jesus or the church.  Obviously pretending a problem does not exists is also not consistent with the teachings of Jesus or the church.
1.     Make sure that changes are made to prevent or greatly reduce abuse  and cover up in the future.   The action taken has probably reduced cover up.  I have a very limited knowledge of what is currently being done to identify and deal with current cases of abuse. In those few cases where I do have personal knowledge, the response of the officials of the church has been, to say the least, not very pastoral.  There are some organizations which have worked to provide places of refuge from those who are defrocked or otherwise deprived of the medical, physical, and spiritual care of their diocese.  I am not, however aware of the extent to which the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church or other religious organization are dealing with the sexual and psychological issues  which have led to abuse.   In addition to that limited number of individual clergy ( very limited in my experience and view) who truly fit the diagnosis of pedophile, there are many others who act out sexually because of:
      Unresolved or ignored issues relating to sexual identity. The culture at large and some religious bodies have come to terms with the fact that gay, bisexual, lesbian, and transgendered clergy can be ordained and serve the church well.  It is true that “one is only as sick as one’s secrets.”
      Sexual addiction – a very treatable disorder.
      Other addictive disorder such as alcoholism and other drug addiction which may result in the inability access one’s core moral values.  Again, very treatable.
      Untreated mental illness.
      Insufficient acknowledgement of the extent to which we are sexual beings and not accepting that it may be the case that a relatively small percentage  of people can successfully remain celibate for many years. The fact that many priests and other clergy have sexual relationships with other consenting adults of both sexes has not  been widely acknowledged and addressed as far as I can tell.
 
I am aware that I have not, in this brief blog, addressed the fact that the Catholic Church has wittingly or unwittingly taught shame for behavior such as same sex behavior and caused more shame by covering up sexual abuse.
 
It seems as if it is always tempting for we humans to  want to believe that important social issues are simple and, thus, have simple solutions.  I do not believe that this is often the case and I certainly do not believe that it is the case with the issues of clergy sexual abuse. The ability of we humans to think that a we can simply ignore the problem and pretend it will go away may be understandable but clearly did not serve the needs of the victim, the perpetrators, or the religious organizations.   Pretending that the solution is now just to pay off the victims and punish the perpetrators will not result in positive results either.
 
Written  March 2, 2016

​People kill, not guns.  Really!
 
I have heard the above repeated many times by those who are fearful that some of us might want to limit the availability of guns to the average person.   Of course gun even advocates might limit the sale of guns to those who are clearly diagnosed with an acute mental illness. 
 
On the surface, one cannot argue with the assertion that people and not guns kill.   It is true that, drones not withstanding, a gun does not suddenly wake up one morning, stretch, asked for its morning oil and grease then decide to go out to kill.    I also do not feel as if I can and want to argue against the use of guns to hunt for animals which one needs for food any more than I would argue against the harvesting of plants for food or the cutting of timber for shelter and furniture.  I would argue against the wanton destruction of the environment or the killing of animas for sport. I totally support the Native American approach - that one takes only what one needs and one do that with a humble sense of gratitude.
 
Because I have lived in areas such as West Virginia and Oklahoma where there are likely to be people who hunt for their food supply. I am very supportive of healthy people owning a gun suitable for the game that they are hunting whether that be deer, rabbit, squirrel or even bear.   
 
Many people, including law enforcement individuals, own or use a gun for protection.   I do not agree that we have to use weapons capable to killing someone to protect ourselves or those we love.  I also do not believe that any “stuff’ is worth killing someone over.  Personally I would like to see the use of non-lethal weapons to stop someone who is attempting or threating to harm another. I am not convinced that cannot invent a better stunt gun or other weapons which would temporarily immobilize someone.
 
I also have seen no evidence that using various weapons of mass destruction ensures long term peace.   I am aware that many have made what seem to be cogent arguments supporting the belief that the use of nuclear weapons against the Japanese in WWII saved many lives in the long term.    I am certainly well area that many continue to put forth cogent arguments in favor of the use of bomb and other weapons to stop wanton killing and destruction of those labeled as the enemy.   I cannot argue with the fact that there are those in the world who would have no problem killing me as a citizen of a country which has supported behavior which may seem immoral to others or which has engaged in arrogant, greedy, violent behavior to protect its way of life or its interest.   Certainly ISIS, the Taliban, North Korea and other groups and countries perceive the United States as enemy and may perceive me as a citizen of the United States as the enemy. 
 
I am also well aware that once a conflict begins the goal is to punish the other for their attacks which may be a response to our attacks which may be a response to their attacks, which …. 
 
Yes, people decide to use guns and other weapons of mass destructions.  No gun, bomb or other weapon ever got up on its own, put self in the hands of someone or loaded itself onto a drone or a plane and decided to hurl itself as person or group it deemed to be the enemy. 
No one can argue with the fact that people use weapons to kill.
 
The logic seems to be that just having a gun(s) or other weapons is going to be a deterrent.   If one  is known to have more and bigger guns or other weapons that will  deter other from attacking one.   The problem, of course, is that both sides can continue to amass more and weapons.  Thus, we have many countries in possession and/or in the process of possessing nuclear weapons.   We in the United States are somehow convinced that it is not okay if other countries such as Iran and North Korea have nuclear weapon capability. Yet, at the very same time we think that we have a right to continue to develop and possess nuclear weapons. Just this morning I was reading an article in the Tampa Tribune (page 14) Admiral: Time to begin updating nukes” by Robert Burns. He quotes Navy Admiral Cecil Haney saying “we’re at the brick wall stage.   Time to begin modernizing the country’s nuclear weapons is running short, he and other Pentagon leaders say. ..  Robert Work, the deputy secretary of defense, said the Pentagon will need an estimated $18 billion a year between 2021 and 2035 to modernize  the three “legs” of the U.S. nuclear triad-weapons capable of being launched from land, sea and air.”
 
If I were not a pacifist  would I  think I needed to be in a position to protect myself by having my own nuclear weapons or would I just agree that it is right that the United States, Russsia and Israel and and few other countries have nuclear weapons while I was not allowed to?  Would I trust the United States or other countries to not use their weapons on my country or trust those weapons would not get in the hands of other people?   The problem with “bigger is might” is that everyone can keep getting bigger and/or more powerful.   The fear is always that someone will get into a position of power and actually use the weapons.  After all, how may wars has the United States instituted or participated in during since WWII?  Why would anyone trust a country which elected a George Bush or may elect a Donald Trump.
 
Guns and not people kill.  Yes, that is true, but what happens if we take the option off the table of people using guns to kill?   Some might then argue that only the bad people will have guns. I would argue that we need to quit manufacturing guns or only manufactured a little number of hunting rifles .    The truth is that we have a lot of guns. We sell guns and other weapons to many countries.  The manufacture of various weapons is big business.  Temporarily stopping the manufacturing of guns or other weapons would be felt economically by many.
 
We spend a lot of money, energy and time convincing ourselves that it it right to kill the bad person.  Who defines the bad person?  Certainly everyone who has committed a murder, fought in a war or otherwise decided to harm someone has convinced themselves that the person they want to harm deserves it.
 
Guns kill, not people.  The only purpose of a gun is to kill.  There may be an isolated incident of someone using a gun, unloaded, to just frighten someone but even then the purpose isnto make the person think we are willing to harm them with the gun. 
 
If we keep promoting  weapons such as guns as a positive, we are going to have more people choosing guns to kill other people.  We cannot keep promoting the ownernship  of guns without expecting that they will be used more often. Of course, so called bad people/criminals are going to get guns and use them.  We daily promote the notion that it is right for the good people to have guns and/or other weapons. This approach presumes that we can decide who the good people and that:
[if !supportLists]      [endif]Good people will only uses them if they “have” to
[if !supportLists]      [endif]Good people will never have violent  thoughts or be mentally impaired.
[if !supportLists]      [endif]Good people will decide who is justified in using a gun to kill.
 
Thetrace.org gives the following statistics:
 
“The data, compiled in the ATF’s annual commerce report, shows that from 1986 to 2008, the U.S. never produced more than 4.4 million firearms in a single year. But in 2013, the last year for which data is available, the number of firearms manufactured in the U.S. more than doubled, to nearly 10.9 million guns. The report tracks firearms of all types produced for civilian and law enforcement purchases (but not for military use).”
 
As we know not all of these stay in the US. Some are legally exported.  Others are, I am sure illegally exported. What happens to all these guns?   My understanding is that guns do not wear out in one year. They are operable for a very long time.    That means that a lot of guns are available for a lot of people to use to kill or injure others.
 
It is time that we let go of the diversionary argument that people and not guns kill.  The truth is the more guns we have around, the more we justify using guns and other weapons, and the more we are going to have people using guns to kill.   The more we convince ourselves that all the good people needs guns to kill bad people the more we are going to have individuals and countries deciding that they are the good people who get to decide to use guns to kill the bad people. One can be sure that everyone one of us is going to be labeled the bad person by someone and that person is going to have easy access to a gun.
 
Can we stop all people from hurting others  Obviously not. Can we keep all weapons out of a home?  No.   I am not going to get rid of all my kitchen knifes, my workshop hammers and other heavy tools.  If someone is determined to find something in my home to hurt me they will find something.  They will not, however, find a handgun. Neither will  they find a hunting rifle, assault weapons, bombs or any other item built for the sole purpose of killing.   I do not hunt. If I did I would do as friends of mine do. I would lock it in a gun safe. 
 
The argument, people and not guns kill is an attempt to divert one from what we need to be discussing.   Let’s quit accepting that as a way to divert our attention form the real issue.  We need to find a way to demonstrate that it is possible to resolve disagreements and to share resource without the use of guns and other weapons which kill.  If we cannot do this as a nation or as law enforcement groups then we can hardly expect others to learn that this is possible. We humans have often proven that if we eliminate certain options we will find other ways of dealing with issues.   Let’s quit pretending that be can have billions of guns as a way of creating a less violent world.   Let quit pretending that the issue is the right to protect ourselves and admit that guns and the promotion of gun ownership is big business. Some people are getting very wealthy over our willingness to buy that it is safe to have billions of guns which are designed for the sole purpose of killing.
 
Written  February  28, 2016

​Marketing genius.
 
As a social scientist, I have long been fascinated by the seeming inconsistencies in our human behavior.  On the one hand, it seems since the time that I was born,  the general public seems to be increasingly comfortable with clothes which allow for maximum exposure of women’s breasts, the outline of male and female posteriors and male genitalia.  In many places in the United States there are nude beaches  as well as clothes optional resort and camping facilities.  Yet, at the same time we in the United States have reacted in a more punitive manner to public exposure. (Yes, I am quite aware that public exposure like sex crimes are about control and not about sex per se.)  As far as I can determine, starting sometime in the 1980s in the United States and a few other countries, urinal partitions began to be installed in male public restrooms.   While it is true that there were some public restrooms which installed marble partitions much earlier, my personal experience has been that even those historic halls such as Heinz Hall which retained the basic original urinals in the large men’s restrooms on the lower floors had no partitions.   Prior to noticing the increasing number of restrooms with partitions I had overheard comments from a few males about their refusal to use a urinal where other men could possibly view their penis.  Still, I had no idea that this was such a pressing, public issue which would justify the expense of billions of dollars in public restrooms. Yet, soon places as diverse as restaurants and state run interstate highway rest areas were installing partitions.  I could not locate an average price for the purchase of partitions (various materials are available), the hardware to install, and the labor to install them.  Many of the less expensive partitions seem to be around $100.00. There are several pieces of hardware which will be required including screws or bolts which will  attach to the various wall materials or the material of the partitions.   Overall we are talking about a huge amount of  public and private (one can be assured that customers end up paying the cost) funds spent for the sole purpose of we males being assured that no one could, with or without magnifying glasses, view our  average 3 to 5 inches of penis.  Really! Certainly I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge that men in public settings compare their penis size with that of other men.   I would also be remiss if I did not acknowledge that some gay, bisexual men who have sex with men, bi-curious men, and other men check out the penis’s of other men.   At the same time, the number of men who have been sexually assaulted in public restrooms seems to be a very low number.  It is true that historically it has been difficult for men to identify potentially male sexual partners and some public restrooms and parks became common “cruising” areas.  Men developed ways of signaling  and acknowledging interest in each other.   This may be changing as it is safer for men to approach other men for potential dates in both gay and some  inclusive bars and other public places.  
 
The real story which piques my interest is a marketing one.  Someone convinced  a significant number of people that it was good public policy to spend a lot of public and private money purchasing and installing urinal partitions.  How is this possible? More importantly, although google has become increasing informative, no matter how limited my search skills, I could find little to nothing about the history of this marketing genius. I did find an  article about the environmental impact of various materials for partitions.  One can also find the results of some research on the history in other countries of the move away from  public, side walk urinals, the development of female urinals, and the  design and use of the modern toilet, but one will find very little on the more recent history  of urinal partitions.  I even googled “stocks of companies making urinal partitions” and did not get specific results.    While I have no idea of the current profit margin and the level of competition it  would, still, I assume, be a safe and somewhat profitable stock investment.
 
This would be a wonderful topic for someone needing  to do a PhD thesis on a successful marketing technique.
 
It would also be a wonderful topic for the psychological and sociological factors affecting the comfort or lack of comfort of we males with our own genitals.    Apparently many of we men are quite comfortable sharing our enormous beer or food bellies shirtless or nearly shirtless at all sorts of public events in the summer.  As women are to be believed apparently in the comfort of one’s own home, many of we males are perfectly comfortable with boxer (underwear) shorts being the costume de jour.
 
On could also research the possible correlation between the number of behaviors which we have determined to be criminal and  requiring that men (and some women) be labeled for life as sexual offenders.  This list includes those who unwittingly hired a sexual prostitute, many who unwittingly downloaded or had downloaded the wide variety of material which is now considered child pornography, those who exposed themselves, or those who did not accurately calculate the age difference between them and their sexual partners, or who were not clear about the ages of consent in particular states.  In my long years of working as a professional counselor, I have often worked with families whose 15-year-old daughter was dating a college student and  decided not to press legal charges as well as those who were eager to press charges.  We  imprison and label as sexual offenders those with compulsive or addictive sexual disorder.  
 
In my long history of working with victims of sexual assaults as well as those convicted as the “perpetrators” of sexual assaults, I have yet to  encounter cases of male bathroom sexual assaults. I have worked with several cases involving the assault of females in bathrooms.
 
On the one hand, I want to applaud the marketing genius of those who conceived and instituted this very successful urinal partition campaign.  On the other hand, I want to question how we taxpayers allowed this to happen.  I also want to question the emotional stability of we males who  have yet to make peace with or friends with that little bit of protruding skin which allows us to procreate,  to enjoy self-pleasuring, and to make it easy to urinate.
 
I have deliberately, for the sake of this brief blog, ignored the subject of the history of the privacy booth  in both male and female bathrooms.  I have also ignored the subject of open toilets  and, thus, the total lack of bathroom privacy in prison/jail settings.
 
Perhaps if we could identify the marketing techniques used to promote urinal partitions we could convince most of the world leaders why violence is not the road to peace. Perhaps!
 
Written February 29, 2016

Super Tuesday
 
As usual, after doing morning emails and texts and a workout at a gym, I settled in at Panera’s with my coffee and an egg sandwich to read the Tampa Tribune on this March 1, 2016 which is also Super Tuesday, primary presidential voting day in 12 states of the United States.   Several items in the newspaper caught my attention:
 
      41-story condo tower will be tallest building in  Pinellas County - 253 luxury condominiums starting at $600.00.
      Prescription Drug Prices (in US) double in 7 years.
      Disney boosts prices for tickets on peak days – up to $124 at the Magi Kingdom- during busiest days of the year and $105 during August and September.
 
I count myself as of those very fortunate people who are better off than most of the world population.   I own a small condo which is paid for, a 2012 car which is paid for, and enough income to cover basic bills and some luxuries. I have health care through the VA and a supplemental policy.  I pay an average of between $80.00 and $200.00 co-pay per month at the Veterans Administration for doctor visits and all the very expensive medication I take for HIV infection.  I am also wealthy in terms of loving, supportive friends and relatives, being healthy enough to exercise and to take care of myself.   I am truly blessed.
 
If careful, I could save enough money to take a child (or just myself) for a day trip to Disney (I live within driving distance).   If paying out-of-pocket for my medication or a higher deductible, I would  quickly go through my limited retirement savings.  My monthly income would not pay for it.   
 
I could not afford the new condo being built in St. Petersburg or the new one being built in the small community in which I am living which start at a mere $400,000.00.   I am quite aware that I and many of my friends have made choices to put people first in our lives.   I and they could have earned more money if we had been willing to only see people who could have paid a much higher price for our services. Friends such as those who just visited could have chosen to both work outside the home and not put so much time and energy into making a home for they and their daughter or  as giving back so much back to the community in volunteer hours. 
 
Apparently, out of all the presidential candidates running this year in the United States, Mr. Sanders is the poorest with an annual income of $174,000.00.  That amount must, of course, cover the cost of two homes – one in Washington, DC and one in his home state of Vermont (a condo  worth $100,000.00 he shares with his wife).  I could not determine if he is one of those U.S. Congressmen who live in his office when working in DC.
 
By all the world standards, Mr. Sanders  and his wife are, like me,  still among the most privileged in the world. Although he is poor in comparison to the rest of the candidates left running in this campaign, one could hardly describe him as poor.  Still, it does not seem to me that if he did not have the excellent medical care afforded members of Congress, he and his wife would be hard pressed to afford many of the expensive medications should they need them, live in one of the new condos being built in the area, or take many trips to Disney with the grandkids.  
 
Monetarily, the rest of the candidates are much better off that Mr. Sanders.  Moneynation.com as well as several other web sites report the approximate net worth of the current candidates.  To wit:
 
 
“In August of 2015, Bernie Sanders reported net worth assets at a minimum of $187,026 and a max of $759,004. Sanders also owns a condominium in Vermont valued at about $100,000. He has debts of at least $25,002 and as much as $65,000.
 
Ted Cruz's net worth is $4.4 million. The Ted Cruz net worth figure comes from his personal disclosure forms and other assets. Cruz lists average assets of $4.2...
 
Marco Rubio
Presidential candidates don’t have to disclose their exact net worth. According to his personal financial disclosures Rubio has average assets of $541,009 and average debt of $725,001. Adding average 2016 income of $709,719 after tax and expenses gives a Marco Rubio net worth figure of $425,727. Adding the value of the candidate’s $550,000 Florida home gives the final Marco Rubio net worth number of $976,727.
 
 
Hillary Clinton’s net worth is $31.3 million. Our Hillary Clinton net worth number comes from analyzing her 2015 U.S. Public Financial Disclosure Reports. Bill Clinton has an estimated net worth of $80 million. That gives a combined Bill and Hillary Clinton net worth of $111 million dollars.
 
Donald Trump’s net worth is about $6.69 billion. Our Donald Trump net worth calculations come from analyzing his public financial disclosure reports.”
 
I am certainly not suggesting that money or lack of money per se should or can be the sole criteria for deciding who could best lead our country.  Certainly, Mrs. Clinton has made a significant effort to educate herself about the financial plight of the average worker and the plight of the refugees.   Although, as I recall, she and the President left the White House nearly broke (am I remembering correctly?) Did they not move into a home costing over one million dollars?   If indeed they are worthy $111 million dollars they have come a long ways financially since that time.
 
Perhaps, none of the candidates or even someone such as myself who has never chosen to focus on making  even $100,000.00 can fully empathize with the anger and frustration which is driving those who are so dissatisfied with the seeming dissolution of the dream sold to many United States Citizens (euphemistically referred to  as the American dream even though it was never the American dream if we remember that the Americas include many countries).  It is one thing to have a certain income largely by choice without having to sacrifice the basics necessities for oneself and one’s child. It is quite another to be incapable of that possibility or to be convinced that one is a failure because one cannot take the family to Disney for a week without going into debt or live like the other young couples who are on a waiting list to buy those expensive downtown condos.
 
The distance between what one reads about and sees on an everyday basis all around one and what one can afford for oneself and one’s family is demoralizing to many.  Many of the dissatisfied voters in the United States may not be in the same situation as the homeless refugee or the family who has sends their young child on a  dangerous journey which may well end in their death because that is their only chance of that child possibly living.
 
I know.  Life is not fair.  Jesus allegedly said “The poor will always be with you.” Yet, to be surrounded by the picture of the successful and, thus, good person and feel unable to attain that requires a spiritual state of evolution and a sophistication that I feel we are not teaching our children.  The constant high definition, brightly lit photo of faux success is daily hammering away at every citizen in nearly every country.  This is the reality which every Presidential candidate must address.   Whether the pitch is democratic socialism, getting rid of the Muslims, repeal the Affordable Care Act, build a wall, or build more nuclear weapons, we must this election make a decision. The other option is to bury our heads in the sand, not vote, and wait for whatever comes next.
 
Written March 1, 2016 – Super Tuesday
 
Full disclosure:  I was, for a very brief time, married to a doctor.  Our combined income during that time was over $100,000.00.

​An evening of passion
 
Last night, February 26, 2016, the musician, singer Gisele Jackson along with other very talented musicians, invited a very diverse audience of young and elder members of the community to reclaim the passion which brought many people dancing and singing their way into a coming-out party.   Some of we “elders” were reminded of a time when we were reborn into an era of standing up.  Some of we elders, when we were not yet elders, had been om the verge of cracking and blasting out of the shells into which we had obediently stuffed ourselves. Certainly, for me,  the leadership of the Harvard group of misfits, including Ram Dass as well as Martin Luther King, and later Rosa Parks, Eldridge Cleaver, Stokely Carmichael, Malcom X, Angela Davis, the Berrigan  Brothers, and   lesser known leaders such as George and Mary Dockerty provided the framework for challenging the lies about racial justice, gender inequality, GLBT discrimination,  and immoral wars such as that waged against Vietnam and Cambodia had guided me for many years.    It was often,  however, the nurturing, passionate, let it all hang out leadership of such folks as Gisele Jackson who provided a safe, fun place to relax, to regroup, and most importantly to claim a passion some of us did not know we possessed.  For this misfit it was one thing to deliver sermons, march  with thousands of others or even lock the trustees of Princeton Theological Seminary into a space until they agreed to change their practice of investing endowment money in operations which oppressed  people, but quite another to openly express the raw passion that would help me shed the last of my fear of not being one of the good old  boys (or girls).  It was while spending hours with jazz and blue singers or dancing with wild, nearly naked  abandon to  what was generically called disco music.   
 
The rich, passionate, take no prisoners talented voice of Gisele reminded this old man of what we are missing in the current political election.   We are missing the positive passion which says we are alive, we care and we ain’t going nowhere.  We will not allow crude rudeness and blatantly racist behavior to continue to take us hostage.  Build a wall. “No f…ing way!”  Support Gitmo, refuse women the right to choose, build more secret US prisons and label a large percentage of the population sex offenders or support a drug policy which keeps more people in a numb, ineffective state!  No!  No! No!  Enough is enough is enough.
 
Gisele reminded us of the key to unlocking the best that is within us.  We need to again take this dance to the streets.  We need to say no more prisons, no more military actions, no more bombs, no more allowing insurance companies and pharmacies to determine the scope and limits of health care.  We need to invite the Trumphites to dance with us.   We will lead, thank you very much.  Let’s dance.
 
 
Written February 27, 2016