​Brain stimulation, movement and cursive handwriting
 
I was pleased, but not surprised, to read an article in the April, 5, 2016 Wall Street Journal by Robert Lee Lotz entitled “The Power of Hand Writing (D1-D2).   In this article, Mr. Lotz summarizes the results of research measuring the short- and long-term benefits of students taking hand written notes versus typed notes on a portable computer device such as a laptop.   The researchers thus far have found:
 
·      In 2012 researchers at the University of Washington in St. Louis found that in the short run, laptop note takers performed slightly better and had higher recall.
·      The same University of Washington research study found that those who took notes in longhand remembered material longer and had a  better grasp of concepts.
·      In 2014, experiments by psychologists Pam A. Mueller at Princeton and Daniel Oppenhemer at UCLA found, “… that students who took notes by hand took down fewer words, but appeared to think more intensely about the material as they wrote and ingested what they heard more thoroughly.”
·      Any notes are better than none.
 
This particular article did not report on any of the research which connects movement per se with brain stimulation. 
 
Yet we know a number of facts about the human body and the relationship between movement and the brain..  These include:
1        The various parts human body is interactional (talk to each other)
2        The brain is part of the body.
3        The brain directs movement.
4        Movement affects/directs the brain.
5        Many other factors affect the brain which in turns affects the body which in turn…
6        Developmentally delayed children who received physical therapy – manual manipulation of their body – develop certain skills such as language faster.  (One can google the mind body connection and learn about the work of such individuals as Mark Taylor with whom I studied.) 
Thus, it should come as no surprise that any activity which involves increase movement will have an effect on the brain.  The movement required for cursive writing is much different than that required for typing/keyboarding.
 
There are apparently other advantages to cursive writing.  David Sortino reports in an article entitled (Brain research and cursive writing (davidsortino.blogs.pressdemocrat.com) that students who wrote in cursive for the essay portion of the SAT scored slightly higher than those who printed, “which experts believe is because the speed and efficiency of writing in cursive allowed the students to focus on cohesion of ideas in their essays through the mirror of the connected cursive stroke.”
 
 
Denise Ferrell reports that further research is strongly suggesting that other benefits of cursive handwriting may be:
1.    Functional brain development.
2.    Stimulation of brain synapses.
3.    Memory retention
4.    Development of fine motor skills
 
5.    Improved reading and learning capability.
(Denise Ferrell, September 20, 2015, “Can our brain benefit from cursive handwriting, tbifaithnews.com)
 
Other researchers are focusing on mapping of the brain regions which work together to control movement. This research holds promise for better understanding and possibly developing treatments for such disorders as ALS.   It may also be important to remember that once there is some impairment in the brain which affects movement, the feedback to and the affect on the brain may hasten or cause further impairment. (google brain mapping and ALS)
 
We humans have a tendency to discount or forget the interactional nature of all relationships whether between the brain and the rest of the body, between humans and the rest of the universe(s), or between humans.   Everything we do literally changes the entire universe(s) and every change in any other part of the universe affects what is happening with the individual human and humans as group.
 
I recall when I first went to Alaska to work with the Klingit Indian community, I was educated regarding on how the changes introduced to and often imposed on the indigenous people affected every aspect of their life.   Foods were introduced which so changed the diet that they began to experience illnesses which they had not previously experienced.  Forbidding children from speaking their native language, arranging houses as in a suburb without taking into account the dynamics of the community, destroying their written history which was recorded with the totem poles, and imposing a system of justice which violated their core beliefs and values destroyed everything which had allowed them to live and to thrive for a very long time.   
 
Similarly, when we as a culture decide to replace such seemingly innocuous activity as cursive handwriting with the computer, we need to consider that the changes which are then effected  are going to change more than the convenience of being able to use spell check, editing, and other tools without having to retype entire documents, use carbon paper or type a ditto copy (the young reader may need to google the ancient modernizing “art” of such techniques).
 
Whether it is in the use of  prepared frozen meals, the computer, the automobile or other magical inventions, we humans may want to borrow the skills of those other humans  who are trained and skilled in appreciating and understanding the nature of systems – how all system are interactional.  We do not need to fully understand quantum physics to accept the basics of system theory.
 
Written April 6, 2016

Perhaps we are enough!
 
 
It is my habit to listen to NPR news, read the Tampa/St. Petersburg Tribune, the Huffington Post, various newsletters and sometimes, The Wall Street Journal and other national or international newspapers.   Most of the time if I read other newspapers such as The Wall Street Journal it is when I am taking a break at the library.   This week The Wall Street Journal is being delivered to my home. Since there is no name on the paper when it is left on my doorstep I can only assume that it is a promotional campaign.   I am hopeful that someone in my neighborhood has not subscribed and is looking for it.  I have no way of knowing.
 
Not surprising, the United States Presidential campaign elections news continues to dominate much of the news.  Of course the ongoing search for those responsible for the Brussels terrorist attack also continues to be a front page item.  This week the Panama Papers “pulled back the curtain on the secret financial dealings of the world’s rich, powerful, and, in some case, allegedly corrupt” (Wall Street Journal, April 5, 2016, page A12).  The leak of information about secret shell companies to hide huge amounts of money by many political and economic leaders of the world does not, I am sure, come as much of a surprise to many.  At least the fact this happens is not very surprising news. Wealthy, so called  reputable business and political leaders have been legally doing everything they can to assure that they keep more of their money for a long time.  As more is revealed particular names may or may not be a surprise.
 
A story about health care professionals dealing with so-called difficult patients also caught my interest.  
 
Another story which caught my attention was decrying the commitment by California and New York to move towards a minimum $15.00 an hour income.
 
 
The following excerpt from a story reported on NPR also made a connection in my mind with other stories:
 
“Almost the entire dance floor is covered by table seating," he says. "So in a place where people would have danced and mingled and get to know each other is really privatized space. Just like the rest of Shanghai, where everybody wants to own real estate, now young people really want to own real estate at the clubs."
We bump into Teejay, a local university student from Nigeria and a promotor whom the club pays to bring in customers. Teejay, who doesn't want to give his full name because he's not supposed to be working on a student visa, says rich Chinese spend at least $500 for a table and a lot more on drinks.
"They buy 30 bottles of champagne and they only get to drink two," says Teejay. "They just want to show off."
"The club takes it back," says Teejay. "It's the club's profit."
 
It seemed to me that all of these stories have a common thread running through them.  The common thread is the attempt, often seemingly desperate, for we humans to feel important. It would seem that we humans for all of our seemingly auspicious abilities compared to most animals have a difficult time being satisfied with being a relatively  small part of the whole which makes up  planet and the universe(s) which we can currently envision.   Whether it is the money changers, empire builders, elaborate pyramids creators, collectors of rare spices, precious jewels, chariots/very expensive cars,  or castles which morph into McMansions, expensive gym gear, a table at a Shanghai club,  the patient who has an endless list of physical complaints, an extensive amount of body art, bigger guns/weapons of mass destruction, a salary which collects more simple interest then a neighborhood of ordinary families earns in a year, or one of the other creative ways of  attempting to make ourselves feel worthwhile by proving we are more than, the essential goal is the same.  It may be with some, such as one finds in certain professions, in hard core prisons or in terrorist groups, the way we attempt to prove our importance and, thus, our worth is by proving how much we don’t care about what others think of us   Our importance, and thus our worth, is determined by how much  others fear us.
 
Money, beyond a certain  basic amount is about proving one’s worth.  We can use it as the symbol of our worth or to do good deeds such as those done by such folks as the Zuckebergs and the Gates.
  
Another way that we humans attempt to prove our worth seems to be the number of “I got you’s  we can accumulate.  If we can identify all the bad (greedy, unethical, sleazy) people we will distinguish ourselves as  one of the “good” people  and, thus, earn our own worth.  Rarely do we see ourselves as pursuing the same goal as those we have “caught.”  
 
It is interesting to think what might change if we recognized our common interest, goals and, yes, vulnerability   We might then quite pretending as if “thou” (as Martin Buber might say) were so different than “I.”    If our basic vulnerability and fear is exactly the same then we would not be so focused on responding to fear  from the center point of our own fear.   This then might allow for addressing the core issue of our vulnerability.   Obviously this would require the courage to take that leap of faith that a different approach might lead to different – more effective – solutions.
 
Perhaps!  Perhaps we are enough.
 
 
Written April 5, 2016
 



​

​Illogical and false comfort of profiling
 
Although I cannot find wording of the recent change in Federal policies regarding housing assistance for felons,  I am quite sure that I heard  on the NPR news this weekend a change in policy allowing for some felons to be eligible for HUD housing.   If I heard  or listened correctly this change would extend non-discrimination policies to includes some felons. No one could be automatically excluded from being given HUD housing because of a history of being a convicted felon.  Those processing applications will now be able to consider type of crime on which one was convicted, length of time since conviction, and other alleged indications of whether it is safe to have that person as a tenant in public housing.
 
On the surface, discrimination against convicted felons makes sense.  No one wants to increase their chances of having a neighbor do something which makes the housing complex in which one is living more dangerous.  Yet, all the statistics indicate that (1) merely having a history of being a felon does not insure that one is going to commit another crime and (2) treating people as less than does not make them more likely  to become a  law abiding, safe member of the community.   In fact all the research indicates just the opposite – treating people as less then and excluding them from mainstream society may make it more likely that they return to behavior which they already know.
 
There are also many state and federal laws regarding those on the sexual offender lists restricting where they can live or work. Just recently there was a public outcry when it was discovered that someone on the sexual offender list was working as an Easter Bunny in a shopping complex.  The assumption frequently is that if someone is on the sexual offender’s list he or she would present a stronger potential danger than one is is not on the sexual offender’s list. However, making this assumption is illogical for a number of reasons.  Let us, for example, consider what sorts of offenses might result in one being on the sexual offender’s list. The potential offenses include:
      A teenager posting nude photos of himself or herself.  (According to Human Rights Watch, a 15-year-old girl in Pennsylvania was charged in 2004 with spreading child porn after taking nude pictures of herself and putting them on line.)
      Visiting a prostitute. 
      Peeing in  public. (At least 13 states require sex offender registration for urination in public.)
      Flashing your breasts. You can get arrested for indecent exposure in California if you flash your breasts in front of a lot of people in order to gratify yourself or offend somebody else…
      Having consensual sex with a teenager, even if you're a teenager, too. At least 29 states require teenagers who have had consensual sex with each other to register as sex offenders…
      Sleeping with your sister even if sister is 15 and you are 16.
      Giving a child a hug even if the person hugging is a teenager hugging another teenager.
The above list was contained in an article entitled, “ 7 Surprising Things That Could Make you a Sex Offender” by Erin Fuchs in business insider.com
 
I could add to this list such offenses as:
      Having sex with an underage prostitute even if the prostitute lied about her/his age.
      Exposing oneself.
      Someone else downloading child porn on one’s computer even if it could be proved that one had no knowledge of this.
      Being accused of having sex with one young child by one’s spouse during bitter divorce and one pleads guilty upon advice from an attorney because it would be traumatic for the child to testify in court.
      A judge fearful of having a decision overturned even if  he/she did not believe the person had committed a crime. (Judge was fearful because of prevailing judicial atmosphere which surrounds accusations of sexual offense.)
       A emotionally immature 19-year-old having sex with a willing 15 (almost 16) year-year-old but who the court and other experts determined had been heinously harmed for life.
These are actual cases  in which I have testified as a professional counselor.
 
Currently there has been a suggestion, even from a presidential candidate, that all Muslims be prohibited from immigrating to this country. This is based on the fact that  radical Muslims have been responsible for most of the terrorist acts.  
 
Deciding that all Christians are against human rights because certain radical Christians seem to be responsible for the recent “religious freedom” laws in several states in the United States.
 
In all of these cases, there is a very elemental error of logic.  If one took a basic logic class one would learn that there are two types of logic:  deductive and inductive.  An example of a  deductively valid argument is:
1.    All men are mortal.
2.   Socrates is a man.
3.   Socrates is mortal.
 
An example of an inductive argument would be:
1.    Every day to date the law of gravity has held.
Therefore:
2.    The law of gravity will hold tomorrow.
 
One can say of this inductive argument that it is a strong argument. One would not say that it is logical.
 
(check out any introductory logics book or web sites such as “logicalfallcies.info”
 
Thus, one could say: 
1.    Some of those  on the sexual offenders list are dangerous.
2.   All  dangerous sexual offenders are on the sexual offenders list.
We would have made a very weak inductive argument. The truth is that most dangerous rapes are committed by a family member or someone else that the family knows.
 
On the other hand we could say that:
1.    All sexual offenders on the sexual offender lists are human.
2.   Jake is on the sexual offenders list.
3.   Jake is human.
 
We have made a logical argument but one which does not tell us anymore than the argument about Socrates tells us.  We could just as easily say that:
 
1.    All teenagers are sexual.
2.   All sexual offenders are sexual.
3.   All teenagers are sexual offenders.   
 
Obviously it is not true that being sexual determines who is a sexual offender.   There are many “holes” in this argument.  All who are listed as sexual offenders are not dangerous criminals. Violent and, thus dangerous, sexual offenders act out of a need to control and not primarily a need to be sexual.   Most teenagers are sexual although some are asexual.  All teenagers who are sexual do not have a need to control. 
 
We could also say:
1.   The majority of convicted felons are black.
2.   John is black.
3.   John is a convicted felon.
 
This would be an illogical argument.  If a majority of convicted felons are black, police are more likely to profile, arrest and convict blacks. We have acted in a way to make this a self-fulfilling prophecy.
 
The basic truth of logic is that profiling, while sometimes understandable and temporarily comforting, does not make the community a safe place.  Yet, we continue to violate the basic laws of logic to provide ourselves a temporary illusion of safety. The truth is that, long term, these illusions make the community less and not more safe.   
 
Whether we talking about the international terrorist situation, wars between nations, dangerous sexual behavior, street crime, or dangerous drug use  profiling has not and will not serve us. Particularly as we in the United States listen to and evaluate the words of those running for all political offices in this country it would serve us well to listen carefully and to apply the basic laws of logic to what is being proposed.
 
Written April 4, 2016
 

​Musing about the  Shabbat or Sabbath
 
It is Sunday and instead of worshiping at a Christian church I have worshipped while on the treadmill, rowing machine and other machines while listening to some Ted Talks and programs such as On Being with Krista Tippett.  This is my Sabbath or Shabbat which looks much like every other morning of the week for me. By the time I get to the gym, I have read some morning meditations and checked in with a number of “family” via text and email.
 
I have been giving some thought to the practice which the filmmaker Tiffany Shlain, her husband, and children follow of a technology-free Shabbat.  I also frequently give some thought to again looking for a church community of which I can feel a part.  I am not sure, however, that  I retain enough of the core beliefs of the Presbyterian Church which I attended for many years  and for which I served as an ordained minister/teaching elder.    I also have not found that sense of community in places such as the Unitarian Church although I admire and like much of the work they do. I also admire and like the work of the Metropolitan Community Church and occasionally am able to make a donation to help with some of the service they provide to those in need of assistance with basics such as food or housing.  At times the rituals of the Roman Catholic church provide that much needed sense of being a part of for me.
 
In many respects, the church I most identify with is that of the internet. I appreciate what Tiffany Shalain says  of the internet. She said in an interview with Krista Tippett on On Being:
 
“There’s a point in the development of a child’s brain where all the different parts of the brain are connected that they can have their first insight. And extrapolating that out to the internet, the moment that we can truly get everyone on the internet connected, imagine the insight that will be able to happen when we have that many different perspectives coming together in one network. And I think the challenge is going to be to create enough collaborative tools to make that happen. But that makes me incredibly hopeful.”
 
I had listened to the interview with Mrs. Shlain  a couple of days ago (I can download the Sunday broadcast  on Thursday or Friday). This morning I was thinking about some of what Mrs. Shalain has to say while listening to a Ted Talk by Chelsea Shields entitled “How I’m working for change inside my church.”   Mrs. Shields grew up in a very religious Mormon family and community.  She has internalized many of the beliefs of that church while rejecting many of the practices of treating women in the church as those who need to be led and told how to behave, dress and worship by the males in the church.  In fact, as is true for many religions, teenage boys have traditionally been more revered as leaders than adult women. While females in the Mormon church and many other religions are honored and respected as mother, homemakers, and community nurturers, they have not traditionally been viewed as being able to make leadership decisions in the church or even to make simple decisions such as what costume/dress is appropriate. For example, until recently, it would have been strictly verboten for women to wear pants to enter the place of worship.   
 
Mrs. Shields and other women have been able, despite much opposition and, at times, being ex-communicated from the community, to hold to what they consider their core Mormon beliefs while advocating – even demanding in love – changes to the rules made my males.
 
In many religions women continue to claim ownership in the religious communities of their heritage.  Not only women, but others such as members of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered community have claimed their right to share the table with the rest of the members of that community.   
 
Others, like myself, have not found enough within our religious institutions to keep us connected to a particular community. Yet, we bring with us a strong sense of what we consider the core teachings of that religion.  I, for example, have taken the core teachings of I understand to be the core teachings of Jesus and the New Testament community about love, justice, and taking care of each other with me.   I bring those core teachings to the increasing ability of we humans to connect to the larger “brain” of the human race – which as Mrs.  Shlain suggests “can bring together many different perspectives from around the world” – can bring together the many different thoughts, ideas, and dreams of the human race.
 
Folks such as Mrs. Shalain, Mrs. Shields, and many others from around the world are inviting us to allow our combined neurons and synapses to play together.  
 
The amazing thing about the internet is that there is no reason for any of us to have to dance or struggle alone.   There other devout Mormons who believe in the equality of women. There are other non-religious Jews who recognize the importance of the celebrating and practicing the Sabbath.  There are many devout Roman Catholics who are members of the GLBT community. There are many Muslims who embrace feminism and the GLBT members of the community.
 
Many of we humans continue  to do what many of us did as children – to live as if we were schizophrenics.  We hold on to the knowledge of who we were  - intellectually, sexual, emotionally, and spiritually – while learning and practicing the steps to appear to fit in the community.    We were two different people. This required a lot of effort. This schizophrenic practice continues to be the norm for many in the world.  Yet, as we connect the different parts of our human brain via the internet we can claim and celebrate the wholeness of who we are.  
 
I think of the Sabbath as that time which I take a break from allowing confirmation of what I know and new ideas to steam into my brain.   It is a time which I can be more mindful or as Mrs. Shlain says:
 
MS. SHLAIN: Yeah, and being mindful — actually, the word “mindful” — I have to tell you the new word that I love to ground the word “mindful,” which is so used everywhere now. OK, here it is ...
MS. TIPPETT: It is. It’s one of those overused words.
MS. SHLAIN: I know. It’s so overused it’s lost its meaning. So here’s the word that grounds it is “metacognition,” which is “meta” — thinking about thinking. It’s the same thing, but it’s so much more — it grounds it in science, which is exciting to me, and it has kind of teeth to it. [laughs] It kind of secures itself to the ground.”  (taken from the transcript of the interview  on On Being).
 
I am still allowing this term to roll around in my brain. I like the sound of it, although I am not sure it I want to use that Shabbat time as  time for “thinking about thinking.”  For me it is that time when I focus on my breath and refrain, as much as I am able, from directing my thinking process.  Somehow the term “metacognition”  is not so  much thinking about thinking as it is “beyond thinking.”   
 
Regardless of what terms we play with, I  want to be very intentional about observing a Shabbat or Sabbath – a time to not connect so globally but to be more present to myself and  all those and that within my more immediate sphere – to savor the experience of community.
 
One of the attractive aspects of the Quaker church meetings on the Sabbath for me is the practice of sitting silently with others until or unless the “spirit” moves me to share.   This also reminds me of the practice of be “reading separate books together.”  
 
It is a time of not talking just to talk, of not directing my learning process, of allowing myself to catch up with myself so that I can be more present with a larger community.
 
For today, I am not sitting in a traditional church, temple or synagogue. For today I am going to spend time just sitting with the expansiveness of being present without the need to analyze that which separates us into different religions.
 
Written April 3, 2016

​Waiting for the yeast to do its work
 
I recall my friend Frank telling me of the discomfort he felt the first time he had an employer suggesting that he was expected to just sit, doodle and let his mind wander much of the time at work. While he was certainly expected to produce, his employers knew that creative ideas were not to be forced.  Ideas arise as we allow the chemical to visit various synapses, first playing with one and then another in no apparent logical order.  I think of experimenting on the piano with various notes and chords or exploring the sounds with using a stick or the rubber hammer on pots, cans, counter tops, floors and other small and large surfaces in the kitchen or the workroom.  One cannot know when one will stumble on “the note” which is going to connect those negative spaces in the music score which will become a new Bach-like cantata or a passage in a John Cage creation.  Who knew, for example, that the amplification of a pencil moving across a piece of paper would bring to life exactly the right note to complete the birth of a new musical score.  Although there may be arguments about whether “this is music” there will be those who will recognize and acclaim the genius of the John Cages of the world.  
 
Adam Grant’s most recent book, Originals:  How Non-Conformists Move the World and his Ted talk on “The surprising habits of original thinker,” talks about the process of allowing creative ideas to ferment and rise to the surface.   He seems to delight in using such terms as procrastinate to describe the time it takes to allow this fermentation. Although Merriam Webster might define procrastinate as “to be slow or late about doing something that should be done: to delay doing something until a later time because you do not want to do it, because you are lazy, etc.,” Professor Grant is delighting in using it to refer to that time when it may appear that someone is not working as hard as they might to bring a project to fruition.  He is using the word to describe those who are quick to start a project but then are slow to finish.  
 
I was, not surprisingly,  delighted to hear that the process which Professor Grant is describing is very close to that which I follow.  In undergraduate school and graduate school, I was quick to start research and would soon fill up many 3 x 5 cards with notes which I could organize, reorganize and then organize again. Then they would sit until shortly before the paper or project was due. I knew that I would be typing all night on the manual typewriter (later the electric and then the memory electric) and end up, if lucky, with smudgy corrections on the original and unreadable one on the copies.  If the Gods were smiling, I would notice at 4:00 a.m. on the day it was due, discover that I had left out a paragraph or an important sentence on an early page thus forcing me to retype the entire document.  I can only imagine, what long erudite, amazingly creative works would have emerged from my “pen” had I had access to a computer on which I could have made corrections without retyping the entire document.
 
The process has not changed much over the years.  The idea for this blog began germinating while I was at the gym this morning between 6:00 a.m. and 7:30 a.m.    When I got to Panera, I got coffee and a breakfast sandwich which I enjoyed while reading the papers, responding to emails, talking to my coffee buddy, Penny, looking around and saying good morning to a few other people, and looking up some random information via google until I had “wasted” over 2 ½ hours.  I had not in that time written one word of this blog.   Often I began thinking about a particular blog days or even weeks prior to writing a word.   I may write some note cards (actually typing notes in my note app) which I may or may not look at prior to writing.  Sometimes I say that I am waiting for the muse which, for me, and apparently for many if Professor Grant is correct, is a matter of waiting for the little bits of ideas to visit, try on different costumes and either get discarded or allowed to visit other ideas until the proverbial light bulb goes off and my brain is ready to send my fingers into high gear.    
 
The end result may yet need many editorial corrections but the essence is down on paper. To the casual non-writer observer, the words flow from my “pen” and imprint themselves on the screen.
 
My understanding is that many creative people in all areas of life follow essentially the same process.   Obviously, there are some projects whose completion and submission are dictated by a deadline. For some of us, a self-imposed deadline is important. In the case of the blogs I have a commitment to myself to finish and publish one daily. Other projects sit with notes and ideas or as unedited and, thus, unfinished creations which  have been moved from house to house to house to house!  Perhaps they will be birthed and perhaps they will not. Unless I set a deadline which I then make sacred, many will never be born.  The term procrastinator may actually be accurate to describe my approach in this case.
 
I suspect that, as educators and parents, we need to foster the seemingly natural tendency for children to spend time day dreaming.  At the same time, we probably need to teach them the discipline of both making notes and setting deadlines.    We will want to be careful about attempting to force children to be organized in this process.    I may keep notes on post its on my desk or on a small notepad. I may keep additional ones on my computer or phone.    A good friend of mine relies entirely on post its which she puts on her checkbook or wallet in her purse. Sometimes they fall off.    For both of us, the mere act of writing down the note may be enough even if we never look at it again.
 
As a father, sometimes I would attempt to get my son to organize his room or the area of the house which was for his “stuff.”   From an early age he reminded me that it was his space and he should not have to follow my rules.   Sadly, even when he became an adult I might offer to clean, do dishes or impose my organizational rules or system on his space!  99% of the time he would remind me that it was his space and he would take care of it when he was ready.  I hope I listened most of the time, but if I was now parenting a young child I would, hopefully, be a lot more respectful of respecting his space and their process. While at various developmental stages they might need some “guidance” in setting deadlines or honoring deadlines set by the school, I would want to be more respectful of supporting a creative process which worked for them.   I do realize that in a traditional classroom it may be more difficult to accommodate the styles and systems of each of the children. There are some wonderful models for making this work.   Teachers may need a lot of support for being creative in setting up and managing the classroom but the more we understand that kids may be busiest when they seem to be playing the more we will nurture the creative process in all of them and ourselves!
 
Written April 2, 2016

​Six-year old Sam learns about blessings


Sam called me last night and asked if she could come over after school on Friday to talk about a homework assignment.  I have sliced some fresh fruit and  some cheese for her after school snack.  Of course I also have her favorite drink, milk.

I see her walking over from next door now.

Me:  Hello Sam.  How was school today?

Sam:  It was fine Uncle Jim but I am glad it is Friday.  

Me:  Me too.  I bet you are hungry. I have some fruit and cheese.  Here, let me pour your milk. (I pour her a large glass of milk.)

Sam:  Thanks, Uncle Jim.  Yumm.  This is good. I love pears and grapes.

Me:  I know that you do.    So what is this homework?

Sam:  Here it is Uncle Jim.

I read:

“The Jewish have a tradition of saying 100 blessings.  A woman filmmaker Tiffany Shlain, talks about this in an interview with Krista Tippett on the NPR program she hosts entitled “On Being”. One of the films Ms. Shlain made is called “A Science of Character”.  “In this film she talks about the periodic table of 24 character strengths positive psychology has identified… (from the interview with Ms.Tibbett). Among those is humility.     

Albert Einstein is reputed to have said: “I prefer an attitude of humility…(azquotes.com)

Ms. Shlain also talks about blessings and the Jewish tradition of listing or naming 100 blessings on a particular day.  

What if we assume that a part of humility is the many gifts we are given. We do not understand why we are given certain gifts, but, for this assignment, let us focus on being grateful for all we are given.    We will call these blessings.

I would like each of you, between now and Monday, to write down 100 blessings.   Start by defining blessings.”

Me: Wow! That is a really a good assignment. You and I have often talked about the fact that you, Paul, your parents and I have much for which to be grateful.

Sam:  100 is a lot Uncle Jim.

Me:  it does seem like a lot.  For now let’s focus on the first part of the assignment.  We need to define blessing.

Sam: I guess I have to get the dictionary.

Me: Yes, but I think first we need to watch our hands.  My hands are sort of sticky from all the fruit!

Sam: Good idea Uncle Jim.

Me:  Here is your stool so you can reach the faucet.

Sam: Thanks Uncle Jim.

We both wash and dry our hands.

Me:  Okay.  How about the dictionary Sam?

Sam:  Here we are Uncle Jim.     Let’s see – blessings?

Me: Close.  Try blessing.


Sam:  Okay uncle Jim.  Here it is.

1.    A prayer asking for divine favor and protection.
2.    Grace said before a meal.
3.    A beneficial thing for which one is grateful:
4.    A person’s sanction or support
(Oxforddictionary.com)

Me: Well, it sounds like the teacher is talking about the third definition- A beneficial thing for which one is grateful.
Why do you think the teacher wants everyone  in the class to do this? 

Sam:  In the film it talks about how we become a person … Oh I cannot think of how to say it.

Me:  Perhaps how we become a person we can be proud of?

Sam: Yes.   The teacher said that we sometimes do not think about how our behavior affects others.

Me:  Ahh.  So our character is about behavior. One of the behaviors which your teacher wants us to think about is whether we are complaining about what new toy we don’t have or whether we are grateful for what we do have.

Sam:  Yes.  Mrs. Williams said that when we are more positive we have different chemicals in the brain which makes us feel better. Do you think that is true, Uncle Jim?

Me:  Yes, I think so Sam. In fact, Mrs. Shlain when she was talking to Mrs. Tippett reminded us:

“But yeah, dopamine — but the good news is that the — and dopamine, it’s also things that make you feel good, things that make you want more, like food… or there’s all of these things that you can’t be satiated with.
And then on the flipside, with oxytocin — this is what I love — oxytocin is the love hormone…  Or it makes you feel trusting. And it makes you want to collaborate. And they’ve shown that when you get a text or an email from someone you love, or someone you feel connected to, you get a rush of oxytocin.”    So when we are in a positive mood we feel better and others feels better.  When we feel better we are more trusting and it is easier for us to work together.  You know, Sam, how much easier it is when the whole family works together to clean the house for example.

Sam:  It goes much faster and we laugh a lot.  We have fun but we are getting it done.

Me:  So is the family working together something which you are grateful for Sam?  Could we call that a blessing?

Sam:  Yes Uncle Jim.

Me: Does everyone have a family?

Sam: Not in the same house, Uncle Jim.  Some of Yana’s family is in Syria and some of Ahmes family is in Egypt.  In fact, Yana mother thinks that her mother may have been killed in the war.   That is very sad Uncle Jim.

Me: Yes, it is.   So when we remember to be grateful or to count our blessings we are more aware of how others might feel.  Do you have other blessings Sam?

Sam:  Remember the other day when you took Paul and I to Panera and we saw the man who carried all his things in a plastic bag. You told us he was homeless. He did not have a bed or a kitchen or a bathroom or anything. I got very sad.

Me:  So you are grateful that you have a home, a bed, food, and clean clothes Sam?

Sam:   Yes, Uncle Jim.  I guess I do not always think of those as blessings Uncle Jim.  I better write these down.
Me:  Yes, let me get paper and a pen.  Why don’t you you write these down – family, home, bed, clothes, food and then keep writing things down all day.  We will get together sometime tomorrow to see how the list of blessings is coming.  You can talk to your parents and Paul about what they think are blessings in their lives.  How does that sound Sam?

Sam: Okay Uncle Jim.  It still seem a long way from 100.

Me:  Yes, but I bet that by tomorrow you have a lot more than 5.

Sam: Thanks Uncle Jim.

Me: You are welcome Sam.  This makes me think about blessings also.

Written April 1, 2016

​The fallacy of dualities
 
Fair.  Not fair.   Reality.  Not reality. 
 
 
Someone challenged me yesterday to consider the double slit experiment and the  principles of quantum physics.   Later I was listening to a Ted Talk about quantum biology.    The person who challenged me to think about the double slit experiment also challenged me to think about the nature of the concept of time and the nature of the concept of reality.  We are, I think, blessed to live in an age where quantum physics and biology constantly stretch our brain to think of  a universe which has more possibilities that the tiny boxes in which many of us learned to  think.  Yet, it seems we continue to get frustrated because of our lack of ability to push situations, people and things into those tiny boxes.
 
For example, later in the day I was talking to another friend about the concept of fair and how we can come to terms with the fact that life, from our limited human perspective, does not seem fair.   Often it seems as if we are asked to either passively accept that which is “obviously” not fair  or to keep butting our head against a steel wall fruitlessly attempting to control situations or people over which we have no control.  
 
It would seem that we humans do much better if we can divide people, things and events into either A or B.    Either something is good or bad; right or wrong; fair or unfair; one color or another color.  It does not often seem to occur to us that approaching life as if people, things, and events were either A or B limits us. What if people, things and events are both A and B?  It seems as if we spend a lot of time arguing about or attempting to prove that we live in an “either or” world.    Certainly, if we consider the arguments of Aristotle and others about the law of non-contradiction it would seem obvious that something cannot be both A and not-A at the same time.    Yet, there are those who would argue that the law of non-contradiction is a metaphysical and not a logical principle.    If we assume, for a moment, that this is true, then we can avoid some of the more esoteric  or complicated arguments and just discuss an approach to life which allows us to both take a stand for what seems “right”  or “fair” to us and to trust that it is safe to not get attached to a believe that it is our job to ensure that a situation has a just or fair outcome.
 
From my limited perspective, the sense of peace is shattered when I get attached to the idea that it is my job to control other people, places or things over which I have no control.    If, for example, person X decides to engage in action B, I cannot stop him or her from engaging in that behavior.  The only options are:
       To request that my boss, the city government, my partner, a friend, my neighbor or my colleague behave in a way  which I think is fair.
      To accept responsibility for deciding for allowing that the other persons does or does not do can determine my happiness and peace of mind.
       To obsess about, plot a response to, or otherwise totally commit my time and energy to attempting to right this perceived wrong so as to make this situation fair.
      To do whatever I need to do to try to assume a position of power over the person who has committed this wrong or caused this unfair situation.
       To demand that the God of my understanding listen to me and correct this situation.
       To hire an attorney who will use any means necessary (including all my money) to attempt to right this wrong no matter how this action affects my family and my own health.
      To clearly alert the appropriate officials of the nature of this wrong. I do not have any control over what they do or do not do with this information short term.  If the person responsible is an elected official I might launch a campaign to support someone else the next time an election is held.
      To take pride in the fact  that I have not violated my core values.  My core values says that winning means I have to stand for what seems right or fair while treating myself and others with loving respect.. In other words, I can redefine the concept of winning.  
 
Winning now becomes holding  on to my values  - to being a person of whom I am proud.   This thus allows me to “win” no matter what anyone does or does not do.    Using this concept of winning still allows me to stand tall and speak up for what I perceive to be fair or just.  It does not require that I force an individual or company to right the perceived wrong. It does not require that I be treated fairly.   It frees me from the attachment to winning the argument or the battle. It allows me to know that I am blessed to have the power to treat myself and others with love instead of allowing anger or other negative emotions to set up a barrier between us.
 
As with quantum physics, it is easy to forget that we live in a system.  How we behave affects  others just as how they behave affects us.   Thus, just as putting an observer (even a camera) behind the double slit screen changes the outcome of the experiment (one can go to you tube for some excellent demonstrations of what happens when an observer is added), how I respond to an action I perceive as unfair affects everyone around me including the person I think committed the unfair act.  Their reaction to my reaction then affects me and everyone else.  We can imagine the energy particles bouncing off of each there and then back to each other.  Obviously if  I am angry that is the energy which is bouncing around.  If I am strong and loving that energy is  also bouncing around..
 
Written March 31, 2016

​Responding to shame without shaming!
 
This morning I was listening to a Ted Talk by Dr. Brenè  Brown entitled “Listening to shame.”     As she accurately notes, the person who is most likely to shame us the harshest is ourselves.  The shame first comes from an external source and then we internalize it.   Most often the internalized shame is because of “truths” we  began internalizing as a young child.   Some of these truths are:
      You have to do it all (be an amazing professional/worker, a hands on, always present, always supportive parent, an attentive, healthy, sexy supportive partner, take risks but do not fail, and be an engaged member of local organizations and the community at large). (Women are more likely to get these messages.)
      Be tough; do not show weakness/vulnerability; romantic; a full partner with household tasks and parenting; take risks but do not fail; a good listener; empathic without being vulnerable; sexy; and, a good provider. (Men are more likely to get these messages.)
      Be a good student; be nice, be tough, be sexy without being sexual; get perfect grades, take risks but do not fail, make time for family and friends, and be  amazing in music, art, sports or other activities. (children are more likely to get these message.)
 
Obviously,  it is impossible  to live up to all these truths.  We are going to fail a lot. We will either make ourselves vulnerable by taking risks, not take risks which is also failing, and no matter what we do we will not be that perfect person.  Many of the messages we get are conflicting or contradictory.   For example,  as Dr. Brown points out,  if we men are sensitive and empathic as women say that want us to be, women may experience us as weak and undesirable as partners, colleagues, fathers or friends.
 
There are some new truths which we need to internalize or of which we need to remind ourselves. These are:
      We cannot step into the same river twice (Heraclitus).  We are going to move forward or backwards. We cannot be static. If we move forward we are going to make mistakes.
      All people who contribute something important learn how to fail well.  Even folks such as Georgia O’Keefe at the height of her international fame as an artist often painted the same flower 100 times before she achieved the “found/created/captured” the flower which was hers.
      Scientists in every area of life spend most of their life finding what does not work. Some researchers spent their entire life identifying the non-answers/solutions.
 
The opposite of shame is not denial.  The opposite of shame is:
      Pride that we tried something.
      The humility to admit what we tried did not work (learning from what did not work).
      Not attempting the exact same experiment and making the exact same mistake over and over again. Doing that is insanity.
Once we have responded to that internal voice within us after making a mistake or coming to terms with being the human that we are and focusing on learning from what did not work, we may, at times, need to respond to that person who is intentionally or unintentionally shaming us.  I do not want to engage in a tennis match of shaming messages.    That is, I do not want to respond to shaming messages with throwing shaming messages back at the person.   Sadly, as individuals, communities, and as nations we do that a lot.  What then are the options?  The options may include:
 
      Apologizing if our behavior hurt or offended the other person.   Apologizing does not mean degrading ourselves or falling on our sword.  It also does not need to be done a thousand times.   The person may not hear it the first time or even the second time.  They may not ever hear or accept it.  One has no control over that.
      Making amends when possible and when doing so would not cause more harm.
      Giving the person some distance and time to grieve or otherwise work through the hurt or harm that was caused or that was experienced (the experience of hurt may or may not have more to do with triggering old issues than what one just did).
      Being supportive of the fact that they are hurt. One can be sorry the other person was hurt even if the hurt  does not seem directly related to what one did.   In this case one is not taking responsibility for the hurt but merely offering support for the feeling the other is experiencing.
 
Sometimes, for a variety of reasons, the person is not able to quit shaming or beating one up. Forgiveness may not be an option for them.  Even if they say they forgive one, they may keep hurling shaming messages at one or the ones they have already hurled have permanently lodged in one’s mind and keeps pounding one internally.   In this case one may need to keep reassuring oneself that the only power one has is to:
      Keep reassuring oneself that one has a plan to prevent a similar action in the future.
      Reassuring oneself that it is okay if the other person is not able to forgive and/or trust one in the future.   One may need to grieve the loss of the relationship, but, at some point one has to move on.
      Not shaming the person who has been shaming.  We do not want to say, “How dare you keep shaming as if you were perfect and never did anything hurtful to another?”   Although it may be tempting to get angry and tell them what how terrible they are for being so harsh, that would be falling into the trap of keeping the tennis game of shame going.   After all, I only have control over my behavior. I want to be a loving, accepting person.  I have no control over how the other person responds. I am not going to give the other person the power to compound my original mistake or hurtful behavior by doing or saying something else hurtful.
 
The bottom line is, of course, that shame is never, ever helpful.  Admitting fault, apologizing and making amends when possible is helpful and, I think, the right thing to do.  Shame isolates one and make one more likely to use anger or some other unhealthy behavior to avoid dealing with an letting go of the guilt and shame. One does not want to justify my hurtful behavior, but one also do not want to  allow past behavior to keep one from taking risks and living one’s life to the fullest.
 
Written March 30, 2016

​The magic of respect
 
I have long been aware of four facts:
The reports that state that over 70% of people are unhappy at their jobs.
     Many people report being treated as if they were stupid, lazy and needed to be told what to do every moment of the work day.
     Children and adults are often punished for thinking for themselves
     Kids who act out their boredom in school are often labeled, medicated, and/or sent to the  office and then sent home.
 
Full  disclosure is in order. Since I was a young child and even now as a 75-year-old adult, I am often told to “behave.”  I recall last year starting a new, part-time job.  The second day on the job one of the other professional employees sat down with the clients to tell them how to behave when the owner of the company came the next day.   A couple of the clients quickly offered, “You do not need to worry about us, worry about Jim misbehaving.”   This was my second day at this facility. How had clients who were in the early stages of recovery from serious addiction issues,  and, thus, very self-centered, discern that I was likely to misbehave? They also quickly figured out that I was the go to person if they had a concern which other staff may not have wanted to address or may not have addressed in a passionate, assertive manner.
 
Every place I have worked it has quickly become obvious that Jim is not good about obeying rules which do not make sense or do not serve what he understands to be the primary goal or mission of the organization which hired him.   When I was a Presbyterian minister, often on Monday morning, I would receive a call from an administrator in the regional arm of the church hierarchy saying that they had reports from some of the elders of the church that “Reverend Pickett did such and such” and asking if the report was accurate.  The accusation was almost always accurate.  In this small community of many churches and few residents  I sent  the kids from the Presbyterian church to a Sunday school at one of the other churches.    I also agreed to officiate at the wedding of the daughter of a couple who had  been kicked out of the church for living  in sin. When a woman was about to get divorced, her husband had a serious of strokes which left him unable to take care of himself. She did not divorce him but kept him in the home and took care of him. Later she and another man established a very loving relationship. He moved in and both of them took care of each other and the disabled husband.  The church elders threw them out of the church.  I thought their solution to be very loving.
 
I worked with the owners of the local bars to develop youth programs.
 
Many of the newer companies such as google and the dot-com companies figured out early on that if they wanted employees to be creative they needed to give them a lot of freedom, let them share in the profits, and enjoy other perks.  
 
Yet, today, in much of corporate United States the thinking is that the more rules the better.  We also seem to spend a great deal of money attempting to insure that individuals do not  misuse resources and do not cheat in terms of time spent at work.  Additionally we spend a lot of time, energy and money attempting to insure that no one takes advantage of  or misuses social service resources.  
 
The same approach is common in schools.  There are many rules for how to behave in school.  Yet it seems as if the more rules one has the more likely children and adults are to misbehave.  When children in school misbehave we send them to the principal’s office and all too often make liberal use of suspension and other “punishment.”   We also make liberal use of medication. Seldom does it occur to school officials or even parents that the rules or the approach to learning may be the problem.
 
It seems as if many of we humans are genetically programmed to “rebel” when someone attempts to control us.   Yet, this fact seems to have little influence on how we manage people in educational system, in homes, and in the corporate world. 
 
Once again, to find  a report on an experiment in using fewer rules, treating adults and kids with more respect (assuming that they will more often than not do the next right thing), I turn to Ted Talks.    I find a talk by Ricardo Semler entitled “How to run a company with (almost) no rules.”  
 
Mr. Semier says of the company leadership team,
 
“We said things like, why can't people set their own salaries? What do they need to know? There's only three things you need to know: how much people make inside the company, how much people make somewhere else in a similar business and how much we make in general to see whether we can afford it. So let's give people these three pieces of information. So we started having, in the cafeteria, a computer where you could go in and you could ask what someone spent, how much someone makes, what they make in benefits, what the company makes, what the margins are, and so forth. And this is 25 years ago.
05:46
As this information started coming to people, we said things like, we don't want to see your expense report, we don't want to know how many holidays you're taking, we don't want to know where you work. We had, at one point, 14 different offices around town, and we'd say, go to the one that's closest to your house, to the customer that you're going to visit today. Don't tell us where you are. And more, even when we had thousands of people, 5,000 people, we had two people in the H.R. department, and thankfully one of them has retired. (Laughter)
 
So we'd say things like, let's agree that you're going to sell 57 widgets per week. If you sell them by Wednesday, please go to the beach. Don't create a problem for us, for manufacturing, for application, then we have to buy new companies, we have to buy our competitors, we have to do all kinds of things because you sold too many widgets. So go to the beach and start again on Monday.”
 
As it happens he and some others have also developed schools called Lumiar which are set  up using mentors, experts (retired grandparents) and a child governing group which have been enormously successful in terms of the kids doing well emotionally and academically.
 
He described the school concept:
 
 
“And so we created this school, which is called Lumiar, and Lumiar, one of them is a public school, and Lumiar says the following: Let's divide this role of the teacher into two. One guy, we'll call a tutor. A tutor, in the old sense of the Greek "paideia": Look after the kid. What's happening at home, what's their moment in life, etc.. But please don't teach, because the little you know compared to Google, we don't want to know. Keep that to yourself. (Laughter) Now, we'll bring in people who have two things: passion and expertise, and it could be their profession or not. And we use the senior citizens, who are 25 percent of the population with wisdom that nobody wants anymore. So we bring them to school and we say, teach these kids whatever you really believe in. So we have violinists teaching math. We have all kinds of things where we say, don't worry about the course material anymore. We have approximately 10 great threads that go from 2 to 17. Things like, how do we measure ourselves as humans? So there's a place for math and physics and all that there. How do we express ourselves? So there's a place for music and literature, etc., but also for grammar. 
…
We'd say, why do we have to scold the kids and say, sit down and come here and do that, and so forth. We said, let's get the kids to do something we call a circle, which meets once a week. And we'd say, you put the rules together and then you decide what you want to do with it. So can you all hit yourself on the head? Sure, for a week, try. They came up with the very same rules that we had, except they're theirs. And then, they have the power, which means, they can and do suspend and expel kids so that we're not playing school, they really decide this stuff that we have in the schools, in general. And they have a zero to 100 percent grading, which they do themselves with an app every couple of hours.”
 
I strongly encourage every reader to listen to this talk or to download the transcript of the talk and read it.    The reader will notice that the Mr. Semler applies the same principles to every aspect of his life.    He examine rules in every area and for every stage of his life journey. If the rules does not make sense  in terms of what I am going to call his spiritual goals he takes a different approach.
 
Often if I want another opinion I ask a young person.  Frequently young people, including very young children, are very honest and see issues from a fresh perspective. Certainly a young child might not appreciate some issues such as the need to pay the electric bill, but very often when they tell me something is “stupid” they are right.
One the favorite questions of very young children is “why?”   If I cannot explain why in a way which makes sense to that young child  there is probably not a good reason to keep doing it.
 
Obviously, one could replace the phrase “breaking rules” with “being creative.”   We are  living in a historical time when we can “train/make” robots, 3-D printers, and other tools to do much of the repetitive work. That leaves us free to develop new approaches to how we live and take care of each other.   In many instances we are not doing a good job by anyone’s standards.   Putting old people out to pasture and then in substandard nursing homes, making money just to make money or to prove who is important,  creating more weapons, building more prisons and suicide bombings, and fracking to get more oil and gas so that we do not upset the business balance by developing and using more solar energy and many other life dances  are not  working well.  
 
More rules and more punishment for breaking rules is not creating a more just, happy, or moral community.  Perhaps, just perhaps,  we need to accept the invitation of people such as Mr. Semler to explore a new dance.
 
Written March 29, 2016

​Religious Freedom
 
At times I feel as if I am back in an introductory class in college which requires me to learn the language of the subject matter – language which was not spoken in my high school or in my home.   I recall the very first college introductory  philosophy class where I first heard terms such as metaphysical, epistemology, ontological, dialectic, hermeneutics, and many others.  I immediately questioned my right to be enrolled in an institution of so-called higher learning.  Clearly I had not done due diligence to my lower learning classes and  needed to immediately apply to repeat first through 12th grades.   I often feel the same way when listening to or reading the so called “news.”  Such was the case when I was reading about the “religious freedom” legislative bills in Indiana, North Carolina, and most recently,  Georgia.  Florida also passed and the governor signed the pastor protection act. I read these bills as restricting the rights of certain individuals although they purport to protect religious freedom.   The Florida act is the least restrictive in that it is concerned with protecting pastors from having to officiate at same-sex marriage ceremonies.  Apparently such a bill makes someone or some group of people feel better although I am not aware of any gay or lesbian couple attempting to force a particular pastor to perform a marriage ceremony.  In fact, how would they go about doing that?  Would they hold a gun to the head of the pastor and force that person to officiate at the ceremony intended to cement and celebrate love? Really?   Pastors, of course, refuse to marry heterosexual couples all the time for not having a previous marriage annulled, for not satisfying particular rules of that church, or for any other reason which the pastor thinks violates the intent of the ceremony according to their church, temple, or mosque.   I cannot recall anyone ever suing a minister, rabbi, or priest for refusing to marry them.  If anyone knows of a successful suit against a clergy person for refusing to marry a person I would love to hear from them.
 
No, in fact, although clearly my education is deficient in many areas, it is not my deficient education which prevents me from understanding the use of terms such as religious freedom or pastor protection when used in legislative bills.   These bills are about discrimination. They are a way for legislators  - elected officials – to voice their disapproval of any rights accorded members of the GLBT (gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender) community by federal law, decree, or court order. It is clearly not enough that all religions have the right in the United States to pray that the God of their understanding will reign down his or her wrath on those who dare to love each other and who may even desire the same legal or community support as is afforded those who are publicly affirming their intention to live as a heterosexual couple.   Until fairly recently, in this country it was still possible to insure that someone who engaged in an expression of love with someone of the same gender spent considerable time in jail and/or was bullied and/or harassed by school officials, church officials, and law enforcement officials.    Sadly in some countries one can still be put to death for engaging in such an act of love with a person of the same gender.
 
It is ironic that it seems as if the very same persons who are most vocal about calling down the wrath of the God of their understanding  on radical, religious terrorists– assisted by weapons of mass destruction – are those who would, in the name of the God of their understanding – restrict the right of those who do not believe and live as their beliefs dictate.   It seems God fearing Christians who “love the sinner but hate the sin” will do everything in their power to prevent passive or active public support” of those they determine are sinners. They may no longer lynch and do not engage in suicide bombings.  Yet they may be dropping bombs from a drone or an airplane on those who, unlike them, are evil.  
 
Fortunately the latest “religious freedom bill” was vetoed by Governor Deal of Georgia.  I do not know whether he did it for economic reasons or because he knew it was a hateful act borne of fear.   Bless his heart. Some are now saying, “Governor Deal could not muster up enough courage to sign a watered down religious freedom bill. The people of Georgia deserve better.” (It does not matter who made this and similar comments which are published on web sites of news outlets such as Huffington post.)  It does appear as if Governor Deal wanted to avoid the potential mass exodus of major corporations from the Peach state.
 
The distance between those who act under the guise of religious freedom to attempt to ensure the passage of non-discrimination bills by any governmental entity in their state and those who commit acts of suicide bombing is not nearly as many miles as some would like us to believe.  Unless and until we are able  and willing to admit this we will find ourselves losing our battle with ISIS and other fundamentalist, radical, religious groups who see themselves doing the work of the God of their understanding. Apparently they, as is true for some Christians, conceptualize a God whose ego is so fragile that they have to protect that fragile God from those who do not believe or act the same as they do.
 
It is imperative that we close this illusionary gap between the groups who would impose their religious beliefs on others if, indeed, we want to begin to put an end to the insanity which is leading to such behavior.   We cannot form an alliance nor an understanding with those who one determines are as “non-human” as they envision us to be.
 
Perhaps it is time for a tiny bit of honesty and humility if we want to understand “those people.”
 
Written March 28, 2016