A woman wrote me this morning saying, “Self esteem I had is gone”.  She went on to say that her partner with whom she is living (former husband but not legally remarried) consistently puts her down by calling her names, saying he hates her and telling her she is fat.  She “knows” that it is not her beloved partner but the addictive thinking speaking, but there does not make it any easier.  Obviously, it is the same physical body,  including his voice, which is present, but the spiritual man whose mind was clear, kind and consistently loving is not present.  When the addiction takes over someone it is as if an unfriendly alien has taken over the body and mind of the person. One is living with an abusive partner.    It is all well and good to remind the person that it is the addiction and not the person who is still there underneath the addiction. While, true, it is not very comforting.
 
The woman who called me has, of course, a history, which she has stored in the form of images and messages in her brain. Many of these messages are lies she previously learned to believe about herself.  The new abusive messages trigger the old lies. The old lies are, “See, I told you before. You are worthless. You are a bad partner/wife/spouse.  You are stupid.  You are fat. You are not allowed to go out with friends because you cannot be trusted. You are not lovable.”
 
The more one listens to these messages, the more one may try to please the abusive person.  One may quit seeing friends or family members because it makes the abusive person mad when one does.  One gets more and more isolated and, thus, dependent on the abusive person for support.   Increasingly much of one’s effort goes into trying to please the abusive person- to elicit their praise or at the very least to do something which is going to make them stop the abuse for a minute or an hour.  One will basically do anything to try to please them. If one cleans the house daily one will get up early and clean the house twice daily.  If certain sexual behavior might please the partner one will engage in sexual behavior one dislikes or even finds distasteful.  One will do things one swore one would never do.   Even one’s parenting is affected.  One begins to enlist the aid of the children in making dad/partner happier or to refrain from “making him angry”.
 
Of course, nothing works long term.   If one is not causing the problem one cannot fix it.  Nothing one does is strong enough to override the addiction or “dis ease” which has taken over the body of one’s beloved. Addiction may be to drugs, alcohol, power, sex, prestige, role or anything else to which one turns to avoid the pain of being oneself (he lies one believes about oneself) and/or to prove one’s worth.
 
All this is exhausting for both the abuser and the abused.  The more exhausted one gets the more it seems as if the old lies are true. One’s looks in the mirror and sees this desperate, haggard, exhausted person with dry, brittle hair, off color skin, tired sad eyes, disheveled clothes, and fat where there is no fat (the appearance of fat is because one tends to see what one expects to see, because the stress affects metabolism, and because of the physical stance/dance (Even though I am a toned man who does not have any fat, I can sink into my body and feel and even look fat.)
 
The most powerful lie is that one caused the change in one’s partner and, thus, one can “fix” one’s partner or the relationship with one’s partner.  Yet, no matter what one does it does not get better.   One feels unable to leave because one “needs” the approval or validation of the abusive partner”.   The abusive person has now convinced one that one is unattractive, undesirable, incompetent to take care of oneself, so self centered that one will satisfy one’s needs no matter how it affect the children; that one is an ugly person who no healthy person would ever want; that one is destined to live alone and even the children are going to learn what a worthless, unattractive, evil person she/he is!
 
At this point one is exhausted or as the saying goes, “bone tired”.  One cannot think clearly, is isolated, and can barely muster the energy to get through the day.
 
It is time to quit feeding the dragon. The dragon is the lies triggered by the addictive behavior if the partner(family member) (recall that the drug of choice could be alcohol, another substance such as pain medication, heroin, etc., power, sex, role prestige, manipulation, religion/goodness, things or?).  Easier said that done.  One may not be ready to leave the person (even temporarily) but the truth is that the person has already departed/been taken over by the addiction.  This means that one has to find a way to begin to reclaim oneself.    It may be possible that one can continue to live in the same house with the addict/abusive person and heal, but it will be very difficult and often impossible.    
 
In most cities there is a shelter for abused women (some also house abused men) and the children.  Most of these shelters also have counseling and advocacy services. Some have legal aid or access to free or affordable legal aid.  Although one does not want to disrupt the life of the children (if any), the life of everyone living in the house/apartment/tent has already been disrupted. One is now looking for long-term solutions. Short term, leaving may seem more stressful.
 
If the abusive person discovers that their control is slipping they may:
 
·      Go to therapy and give the appearance of changing. Although changes may be sincere (people do change) often they will do just enough to reel one back in and then resume the abusive behavior.  In other words it is manipulation and not change.
·      Talk to the children without their partner or other family members present and enlist their aid in blaming you for upsetting their lives.
·      Become more needy.
·      Claim that they need a lot of time to find a place to live.
·      Claim that it is best for the children to continue to co-parent in same house even if the abusive person has another living space.
·      Discount the motive/intentions of one’s friends and supportive colleagues hoping to drive a wedge and/or discourage the friend from being involved in such a dysfunctional system.
·      Even if there is not a history of physical violence begin to make veiled threats.  If these do not work, threats may become more overt.  One must remember that the abusive person has no solid base of self worth. Self worth is now dependent on power, job, status, prestige, false courage or something else outside of oneself. Never assume that an abused person will not become violent no matter what their background.   They may believe that if their partner leaves they have nothing to fear.
·      Remind their partner/family members of all that they will have to do deal with or take care of when they are not there.
·      Buy gifts with intention of proving that they have more to offer than anyone else ever could. The goal is make one feel indebted.
 
This makes it sound very dangerous to leave the abusive relationship. It is.  It is even more dangerous to stay.  There are no non-dangerous options or no non-risky options.  
 
The first step is to begin to reclaim one’s truths. As long as one is feeding the dragon by agreeing (even internally) with the lies, one will not be able to reclaim oneself. When the old lies get triggered or the new lies appear the goal is to just notice without agreeing. Agreeing –even internally – is feeling the lies and making them stronger. One wants to be able to say to oneself, “oh, that is interesting. That is an old LIE!   Oh, this is the “dis ease talking”. How interesting.”

It may help to affirm the truth. The truth is.   The truth is:
 
·      One is a beautiful person beneath the exhaustion/depression).
·      One is a strong person who is worn out.
·      One can heal.
·      One is a competent person who has survived a lot.
·      Other people will love and respect one if one allows them into one’s life.
·      One is not alone. One can get support – shelters, therapist, support groups, books, lectures,
·      One can begin to reclaim one’s health by eating, exercise (not to make one more desirable because one deserves to feel better)
·      Living in a safe home even if smaller and less luxurious will feel like more of a home than a mansion filled with negative energy.
·      One can quit hiding the truth from one’s relatives and friends.  The goal is not to bad mouth the person but to quit pretending, which is another way of feeding the dragon.
·      One has to grieve the death of the healthy relationship or the relationship one thought one had or was going to have.
 
The basic message is that the abuse relationship is not healthy for anyone. Feeding the dragon helps to keep the system going.  One cannot make the abusive person heal. One can pray for them.  One can remember that any of us could stumble on or fall into dysfunctional ways of taking care of ourselves.  The abusive person is not a monster. The addiction is a monster. The dragon which is awaken by the addictive behavior is a monster.  The truth will indeed set one’ free. The truth is that did not cause the addictive behavior and one cannot fix it.
 
Written September 29, 2015

God Weeps
 
Sexual abuse by Catholic Clergy – Imagining a conversation with Pope Francis
 
On Monday, September 28, 2015, the day following the visit of Pope Francis to the United States and Cuba, I read many words of support and many words of criticism of what Pope Francis had to say about the history of sexual abuse by priests and the historic, long term subsequent cover-up by many leaders of the Roman Catholic church.  Pope Francis in addressing an international collection of bishops and clergy said:
 
“God weeps,” he said before an international collection of bishops and clergy gathered at St. Charles Borremeo Seminary outside the city. “It continues to overwhelm me with shame that the people who were charged with taking care of these tender ones violated their trust and caused them tremendous pain,” he said, according to the Washington Post translation of his remarks, delivered in Spanish.
 
In the same Washington Post article it was reported:
 
On his last day, the pope addressed church leadership again – this time revealing he had just met privately with five survivors of abuse, assuring them he believed their stories and vowing that clergy and bishops would be held accountable for “the sins and crimes” of abuse.
 
In the “theguardian.com”:
 
“Campaigners reacted angrily to the response on sexual abuse, with Keith Porteous Wood of the UK's National Secular Society branding it "a brazen failure".
"Many will be disappointed and surprised by this slap in the face to the tens if not hundreds of thousands of suffering victims and to a United Nations body," he said in a statement.”
 
Pope Francis had refused to give the UN committee specific details of sexual abuse cases.
 
The handling of reports of sexual abuse by priests and Bishops has rocked the Catholic Church for a number of years.   The church leadership has paid out millions of dollars and, in many cases, agreed to hand over those accused of sexual abuse of children to legal authorities.    No one doubts that for years priests who abused children sexually were all to often simply transferred.  Tis resulted in the abuse of other children.   Although allegedly this practice no longer happens in the United States some reports contend that some accused priests formerly serving in the United States are able to function in priestly roles in some South American Churches. (See article in USA Today issue of 09 17 1915).
 
Very few people would disagree that the historic failure of the Catholic Church to honestly and effectively address the reality of sexual abuse has resulted in and continues to result in enormous pain to individuals and families.  The dysfunction and dishonesty related to sexual activity of priests mandates that we address the following issues:
 
·      Individual being pressured to engage in sexual acts with a person who one needed to remain in the father, mentor, and trusted adult role.
·      Confusion of the “victims” about their sexual feelings as a result of the abuse.  Did this mean that they were gay?  Had they caused or somehow invited the abuse?  Did the fact that they sometimes enjoyed the touching and resultant sexual release make them equally “guilty”
·      The difficulty in finding someone who both believed the abused and who could respond with empathy without encouraging them to live a life of victimhood.
·      Knowing that the abuse continued with others.
·      For many years, victims not being able to get support from Bishops or other church leaders.
·      The pain of the priests who committed the abuse who did not know how to get help for their “dis ease”.
·      The inability of the church leaders to deal with both those being abused and those committing the abuse in a way which was/is consistent with the healing, forgiving messages of Christ.
·      The lack of realistic and practical guidance to priests about sexual feelings.
·      The ongoing failure of the church leaders to admit to the fact that many priests are sexually active.  Consider the following:
 
“Roman Catholic clerical culture favors doctrinal rigidity, conformity, obedience, submission and psychosexual immaturity, mistaken for innocence, in its candidates. These are the personality elements that lead to advancement and power in the clerical system. Single men are more easily controlled if their sexuality is secret. Double lives on all levels of clerical life are tolerated if they do not cause scandal or raise legal problems. Sexual activity between bishops and priests and adult partners is well known within clerical circles. The secret system forms a comfortable refuge for unresolved gay conflicts. There is a new emerging awareness of the systemic nature of sexual/celibate behavior within the Roman Catholic ministry that is increasingly destabilizing to the church.”  Ncronline.org, A.W.Richard Sipe, 4/28/10  Secret sex in the celibate system
 
In my role as a licensed counselor, former pastor and friend to many Catholic priests I have been educated  about the difference between chastity, celibacy, and abstinence.     Many have told me that while they are fully committed to their vow of celibacy (refraining from any willful sexual release) they can practice chastity and be sexually active.   As near as I can determine abstinence may or may not allow for masturbation (a willful sexual act) but not sexual contact with others.
 
On reapteam.org (A Catholic youth publication) I found the following:  “Chastity is a virtue—not a habit. Chastity is freedom from sexual impurities, not necessarily freedom from sexual activity. We know that God created sex, and everything God created is very good. Within the boundaries of chastity, one can be sexually active. Chastity is the virtue of understanding and respecting sex to such a great degree that one keeps it in the appropriate time and place (marriage). Every man, woman, and child in the world can be living chastity—priests, religious brothers and sisters, single people, married couples, and teenagers. It’s a lifestyle choice. It means that you understand the power of sex enough to keep it in marriage.”
 
On the web site of A.W. Richard Sipe he reports:
 
“The number of clergy who practice celibacy is another question. In 1994 Cardinal Jose Sanchez, then head of the Vatican Congregation for the clergy said “I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of those figures” when he was asked his opinion on studies that claimed that at any one time between 45% and 50% of priests were not practicing celibacy. “

·      The undisputed fact reported by researches and many lay people that many Catholic lay people practice birth control methods other than abstinence and the rhythm method.  This is despite the public outcry by American Bishops about the requirement that the Affordable Care Act mandated insurance carriers paid for birth control medications. (Exceptions for some religious institutions have been made.)

·      The undisputed fact Catholic lay people engage in sexual activity prior to marriage and for purposes other than the possibility of conception.

·      The fact  that there are many gay priests and gay Catholic lay people living a secret life which is very painful and stressful for all involved.

·      The need to distinguish between sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children, teenage children and young looking adults.

·      The significant issues of priest who enter into sexual activity with a female and in some cases there is  physical and emotional abuse.

·      The fact that some sexual abuse is directly related to addiction, which has often, but not often enough, been quickly and effectively treated. (In have personally reported sexual abused by a priest with an addiction “dis ease” which resulted in priests being in route to treatment within hours of my report.)

·      The inability for priests and others who find themselves being attracted to pre-pubescent children to get help without legal action being taken by the counselor, psychiatrist or other helping professional.

Obviously this is not an exhaustive list.  It can be quite a daunting and overwhelming list.  My goal is to highlight some of the issues which we, as a society,need to address if we are going to lovingly and successfully support a healing ministry for both those who are sexually abused and those who sexually abuse.  We must admit that there are systemic issues both within the Catholic Church (as well as other religious institutions) and within the culture at large.   If we are sincerely concerned about the pain of all those involved, we must stop pointing fingers, get very honest, begin to more accurately diagnose the problem(s), design programs of healing for those who are already in pain and repair the system which necessarily results in dysfunction. 

As much as I appreciate and respect the compassionate leadership of Pope Francis thus far, we must all be willing to assume some responsibility and to agree, in love, to create a safe place in which we can honestly look at all the factors which continue to cause the dysfunction and resulting pain.

It is very easy to point fingers at the leaders of the Catholic Church, at the judicial system, or the secular leaders. The truth is that we, as a society, must commit ourselves to a process of honestly, open mindedness, and willingness to face who we are emotionally and sexually; to quit focusing on blaming and punishment; to stop the artificial duality of victim and abuser (overt and covert); and to let Pope Francis and others know that we will no longer punish the truth teller.

We have put our church leaders as well as other leaders in the impossible position of  attempting to support our desire for action while obeying our directive that they not tell “the truth, the whole truth and nothing both the truth”. 

Is it not possible that the God of our understanding alternates between weeping for the pain we cause ourselves and others and laughing at the fact that “the emperor wears no clothes”? Do we really want to continue to posit a God who is STUPID; who does not know that we constantly speak with forked tongue while both pointing and giving the finger?

Written September 28, 2015

 

 
 

 

 
 
 e to edit.

 
Recently, I listened to an interview with Dr. Ellen Langer with Krista Tippett  on “On Being” , Dr. Langer, is awell-known psychologist who was also the first female psychologist to be granted tenure at Harvard.  Dr. Langer does not embrace a particular spiritual or philosophical tradition although she echoes, in scientific terms, the importance of noticing people, places and things, the interactions of people, places and things, and the intra actions of individual pieces of a system such as we humans.  If one was comparing her to Eckhart Tolle one might use the language of  “the Art of Presence.”  If one was comparing her to Pema Tolle one might talk about letting go of attachments to dualities and other labels. 
 
As a scientist, Dr. Langer is trained to look for what she has not previously noticed - of seeing from a new perspective, of hearing with a new ear.  She often makes suggestion such as, “Notice five things about the person with whom you live that you have not previously noticed.”  That, of course, requires that one suspend one’s previous “picture” and allow for the possibility that we do not “know” that person with whom we might have been living for a long time.
 
I am sitting in the café of the Dali Museum in Saint Petersburg, Florida.  My son and a mutual friend are here to see both the Dali exhibit and the current exhibit of M. S. Escher, both of whom are noted for “seeing” from a different perspective and, at times, creating an illusion instead of what we initially think we see.  I suppose all great artists – painters, graphic designers, dancers, and musicians – do this.  Scientists do this while problem solving and/or exploring.   Scientists always work with the null hypotheses – postulating that the research will prove the opposite of what seems to be true. For example the researchdf might poxig that exercise leads to weight loss.  The null hypothesis would be: “Exercise does not lead to weight loss.”   The experiment then has to be set up to try to prove the null hypothesis.  This is to insure that the researcher remain as objective as possible. 
 
Dr. Langer often suggests that we use this principle in relating to the people we think we know.  We might postulate that x behavior will lead to y results.   The null hypothesis is that X behavior will not lead to Y results.   For example, “If I am nice to John, he is going to respond with sarcasism. The null hypothesis would be that, “If I am nice to John, he is not going to be sarcastic.” I would then approach John expecting him to be other than sarcastic. Perhaps he will be warm and inviting. Perhaps he will tell me how happy he is that I am going to be living in his neighborhood.
 
I am well aware that this human  - me – despite my often-stated intentions to the contrary -  tends to put people, places, and things into little boxes. I then relate to them or avoid them based on who I have decided they are and  not who they might be or could be. Dr. Langer would suggest that I begin to use the null hypothesis in viewing and approaching the people I know or meet.
 
The current Pope of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Francis, in speaking to the joint house of the Congress of the United States on September 24, 2015 suggested that:
 
“We, the people of this continent, are not fearful of foreigners, because most of us were once foreigners,” Francis said. “I say this to you as the son of immigrants, knowing that so many of you are also descended from immigrants.”
 
His hypothesis is that we often relate to “foreigners” as if we are fearful. He is suggesting that we use the “null hypothesis,” “We are not fearful of foreigners.”
 
This pope has continued to challenge many of the ways we think about each other and with mother earth. Although audiences, including the members of congress and others of us listening to his speech, might have “heard “ him as either being supportive of or disagreeing with our belief systems, we might do well to practice hearing the null hypotheses.   He is, after all, inviting us to think outside the box on many issues.   Some will maintain that he is also inviting us to stay well within the box on other issues. I am not entirely convinced that is the case. He tends to often say things, which can be “heard” from many different perspectives. 
 
Of course, as one who thinks that we are all equally worthy of love and respect and worthy of sharing the resources of mother earth, I tend to “hear” him from that perspective.  Yet, I very much need to be aware that it is not his mission to co-sign my beliefs. If he did only that, I would not grow or learn anything.   It may be that some of my perceptions  of him are an accurate reflection of some of his qualities or opinions. For example he may be as humble as I and many others perceive him to be.  He certainly does not seem to have a need to show how powerful or important he is by where he lives in the Vatican or what he expects of others. On the other hand, he agreed to take the position of the pope and has not been shy about his leadership, about challenging the behavior of the Vatican bureaucrats or the behavior of world leaders.   He consults with, embraces and spends time with the previous pope, Benedict, while not seeming to have a need to agree or disagree with him.  
 
I think what Dr. Langer, Pope Francis, Pema Chodron, the late Wayne Dyer, Eckhart Tolle and others have in common is the willingness to focus on what they have in common with others and not on what is different.  They seem to discover that we humans have much more in common that we have differences.  In other words it may be that he challenges us by often using the null hypotheses.
 
If I am correct in my understanding of  the null hypotheses and example of Jesus and individuals such as Pope Francis :
 
·      I am the prisoner.

·      The prisoner is I.

·      I am the homeless.

·      The homeless people are me.

·      I am the hungry person

·      The hungry person is I.

·      I am the least of these.

·      The least of these is me.

·      I am the hypothesis.

·      I am the null hypothesis

·      I am all people.

·      All people are me.

 

Written September 26, 2015

 

 

Many males will relate to one of the contests, which, I suspect, boys have been participating in since they began to walk on all fours.  The contest is to see who can urinate the longest distance.  This is otherwise known as a pissing contest.  This may or may not accompany the comparison of the size of the male members being used to spread one’s urine as far as possible. As we boys become chronologically older the games continues only now it is a contest to see who can make the most money, drive the baddest car, command the highest CEO salary, prosecute the most people as the district attorney, be the president who heads the country with the biggest weapons, or in some other juvenile way outdistances other males.   Often the culture rewards those who engage in such pissing contests.  Occasionally, there is a line crossed and then we prosecute and jail the loser in this contest. Sometimes who gets caught or the often seemingly arbitrary line which is crossed, determines the loser.  It is not always easy to determine the line because seemingly there is no shared logic, which determines the lines. Actually, that is not true.   There is a fairly widely published set of guidelines.  It is quite okay to move a company to a foreign country and pay workers very little and even ignore decent working conditions. It is, however a no no to get caught as did Apple in China some time ago.   It is quite okay to pay a CEO millions of dollars and refuse to pay for maternity or paternity leave.  It is laudatory to become a philanthropist with money made at the expense of decent working conditions even in plants in the United States. It is not okay to be to be stupid enough to get caught blatantly endangering the lives of people by selling a product which you know may contain salmonella as was the case with Peanut Corporation of American. This behavior resulted in at least 9 people dying and many others getting sick from tainted peanut butter in 2008 and 2009.  Last year Michael Parnell and Mary Wilkerson were respectively sentenced to 20 and 5 years in prison for their role in this “food poisoning case”.

On September 22, 2015 The St. Petersburg Tribune carried the story of the sentencing of the former President of the Peanut Corporation of America Steward Parnell to 28 years in prison.  Ignoring for the moment the fact that he may get time off for “good behavior” or there may be some complicated formulas which determine exactly how much time he serves, at the 2012 figures of $19, 326.00 per annum to house someone on a minimum security federal prison we, the taxpayers could pay a total of $541, 128.00 to “punish” this man. If he is let out earlier, we the taxpayer will pay the parole officer and others to keep track of this man. Considering the fact that Mr. Parnell is now age 61 and in 28 years he will be 89 we can assume the medical care of this aging man will also be considerable.

One might ask what we the taxpayer will gain for this expenditure of money.   We will get the satisfaction of knowing that “justice has been done” or we will know that we, the tax payer, have shown “the criminal”  who has the power.  In other words we, the taxpayer will have won the pissing contest.  Despite the fact that all of us or most of us, as a culture, have done our part to promulgate the terms for the winning criteria in this game of self worth and importance, he was responsible for knowing where the line was. In this case the line he violated was not even subtle.  In other words he was not as subtle as the manufactures of Volkswagen who were recently exposed as creatively fooling the inspectors and those who purchased their cars into thinking that they could get great gas mileage and keep pollution levels low.  It would seem that some creative soul found a way to change how the car functioned post inspection. Oh dear! 

The reader might be wandering where I am going with this blog. Surely, the reader might be saying, he is not going to suggest that we say, “Bless our heart Stewart.  You fell for our collective ruse of the pissing contest.”   Surely I am not suggesting that we, like Jesus with Judas, hold our arms and say, “Oh come here Steward. We knew you were human and, thus, vulnerable to this trap.  Let me give you a hug and a kiss.”    Perhaps we could just have him say 1000 “Hail Marys. “Hail Mary, full of grace.  The Lord is with thee.  Blessed are thou amongst women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.  Holy Mary, mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen”

What if the goal in dealing with our fellow “sinner’ was more spiritual and not just to show him we can win the contest.  “Oh no, not that!”

What might it mean to have a more spiritual goal?  Again we are forced to think in terms of the spirit or some call the soul.  Some might define essence of the soul as the core of our humanness – what survives forever whether one thinks of that from the standpoint of physics, religion or a spiritual philosophy.   The goal would then have to be concerned with the diagnosed issues or offense. What is the offense of Stewart? Perhaps we can call him Stewie- little Stewie!  What do we want little Stewie to learn so that he is not a 61-year-old going to prison for 28 years?  The goal is not to say that he needs to have a different career.  Even if he had chosen to be a priest, minister, a Buddha apprentice, or whatever he could easily have fallen prey to the same lies about how one becomes a winner.  Many ministers and priests have also been revealed to have fallen prey to the same contest.     No, the spiritual goal for little Stewie would be for him to learn to trust that he is already a sacred, worthwhile, valuable, person worthy of love and respect. It is out of the acceptance of this “truth” that little Stewie could become the President of Peanut Corporation of American with the goal of creating a workplace where all employees were expected to take care of each other, get paid well, take time off for parenting, and create a product which was healthy and good for its customers.  In other words, what if little Stewie had created a Peanut Corporation of American which functioned as companies such as Trader Joes seems to function?  From everything I can find out the goal of Trader Joes is indeed that spiritual.

If the goal for Stewie was spiritual we could also have him live and work with those who rebuilding a city following an earthquake,  those who are taking care of the homeless, those who are feeding the hungry or those, such as Habitat for Humanity, who are building houses for families who do not make a CEO salary – for those who have not won the pissing contest.  Who would lose if we did this? What if, in love, we helped to guide Stewie to embracing his sacred self as is reflected in the lives of others who have not won the context?  It is possible that this could be a win-win for Stewie, the folks he learns from and co-helps, and the Peanut Corporation of America and even the tax payer? 
Perhaps there are many options which would cost less and serve everyone affected more effectively. 

Written September 22, 2015

On September 22, 2015, the St. Petersburg Tribune  on page 3 carried an Associated Press article by Julie Carr Smyth entitled “Survey: 1 in 4 college women report unwanted sexual contact”

Ms. Smyth was reporting Association of American University Campus Climate Survey.  About 150000 participated in the on-line questionnaire.  “Overall, 23 percent of undergraduate women at the participating universities said that they had been physically forced – or threatened with force – into non-consensual sexual contact or incapacitated when it happened.  That included activities ranging from sexual touching or kissing to penetration.  For undergraduate men, the percentage was 5 percent.”

These results represent staggering numbers of people.  They mirror the results of other studies, some of which have been carefully designed to distinguish between inept or even inappropriate flirting behavior  which may be about sexual or romantic interest and sexual assault which is about force or domination - not about sex.

Increasingly,  those conducting studies are including men who may be the victims of sexual harassment or assault.   Particularly here in the United States in recent years the expanded definition of who is a sexual offender has resulted in over 747,000 people on the sexual offenders register (2013 statistics – various sources varies about exact numbers).  

Recently there has been more reports of the continuing practice in countries such as Afghanistan of bacha bazi (adult males taking males as young as 10 to dance and with whom to have a sexual relationship).

In Egypt, even when wearing a traditional female head covering and very traditional female garments covering the body, a male reporter was harassed and followed to the point of being frightened even though he was being followed by a camera crew (see You Tube video).

When the survey by the Association of American University Campus group mentions that some of the individuals who had non-consensual sex when incapacitated I am assuming that this meant that they willingly became impaired with alcohol or other drug use and/or unknowingly took some drug which left them incapacitated.    Recently a female author in recovery has talked about the danger of being in a blackout which can result in appearing to give consent without being present enough to give consent.

None of these issues are new.  For example, if one goggles men taking young male lovers one can find a list of famous men who  had  young male lovers for which they would today in the United States by prosecuted.   This list would include:

Pindar (513-438 B.C.) – Greek Poet

Alexander the Great (356-323 B.C.) – Macedonian ruler

Catullus (85-54 B.C.) – Roman poet

Hadrian (76-138 A.D) – Roman Emperor

Strato (2nd Century) – Greek poet

Leonardo Da Vinci (1452-1519) Italian painter, inventor, scientist

Michelangelo (1475-1564) – Italian sculptor and painter

Christopher Marlowe (1564-1539) – English dramatist

Horatio Alger (1834-1899) – U. S. novelist

John Addington Symonds (1840-1893) – English author & historian

Oscar Wilde (1854-1900) – Irish dramatist and wit

Friedrich Alfred rupp (1854-1902) – German Industrialist

Constantine Cavafy (1863-1933) – Greek poet

Andre Gide (1869-1951) – French author

One can also research the subject of men who have sex with  other adult men

who do not consider themselves gay or bisexual.

Even though here in the United States gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender

men and women have legal protection there is still a lot of disagreement

and moral censure by some of such activities. In many countries any homosexual

behavior is illegal and, in some countries can be punished. Punishment can

include death.

It is interesting that even in those communities and in those countries where the

dress of women is very conservative and may include the wearing of

headgear which covers most of the face as well as clothes which cover the rest of the body and

where men and women are still separated in such setting as the mosque, women (and some

men) do not always feel safe.  Many women do report feeling safer  inthese cultures. Others

decry the lack of freedom and resent males deciding for them what freedoms they will have.

I have yet to mention the ease with which married men and women can now

find internet sites which cater to the married person who want to hook up sexually

with someone other than their spouse.  Despite the recent hacking into the

Ashleymadison.com site  there are many other such hookup sites for married and

singles many of which cater to a variety of sexual appetites.  Many of my

clients have  previously educated me about magazines, adult book stores

and other venues for serving the needs of those married and unmarried

people who want to sexually hook up with other couples or individuals.

Again here in the United States and in many other countries it is perfectly acceptable for both men and women to dress is very provocative clothes or lack of clothes.  It is also acceptable to use sexually explicit ads to sell every thing from cars to undergarments. 

The other day I was sitting in a Panera and a young woman was telling another young woman about what a great time she had getting drunk at a bar with friends last evening.  I could detect no sense of danger or shame being communicated.   Yet, I find that behavior very worrisome both in terms of driving and the ability to give informed consent.  

Some time ago the female sports reports Ashley Fox gained some notoriety because of how she was treated when, dressed in a very sexually provocative manner, she entered the locker room of a male sport team.

Often I have been in the position of going to support the dance competition of  the very young daughter of a relative or friend and have been embarrassed by the fact that it seemed to me that the young girls (more so than the boys) were dressed like young streetwalkers in makeup, shoes with heels, fishnet stocking and a low cut bodice revealing, of course, nothing.  Recently a friend was telling me of the difficulty of finding a one piece bathing suit for a 10 year old.

There are an increasing number of lawsuits by both males and females accusing employers and others of sexual harassment. The sexual offenders list includes true pedophiles whose, through no fault of their own, have a strong, obsessive sexual attraction to very young children as well as a host of people who have unwittingly ended up with child porn on their computer, had sex with an under age teenage prostitute who lied about their age or had sex with someone who was a year or two out of the legal age range for a particular state.

Clearly we are living in a age when we are attempting to legally protect the rights of everyone while giving every adult the freedom to make their own sexual decisions. At the same time we are determined to sexualize young children as well as teenagers while criminalizing a wider ranger of sexual behavior. At the same time we are giving our blessing to some sexual behavior which was previously considered immoral and was illegal.

We are at a crossroads where we have the luxury of more clearly and openly identifying  the contradictory messages we send each other about sexual availability, desire and boundaries.  As social scientists we know that we must first be as objective as possible in diagnosing the issues before we can begin to explore creative and just solutions.    It seems to me that most of us know the following is not working or likely to work:

·      Prosecuting and often incarcerating everyone with whom we disagree about sexual activity.

·      Treating violent behavior which includes sexual contact as sex rather than control.

·      Denying that children are sexual being and that we that something is happening resulting in increasing younger age of physical sexual maturity.

·      Allowing, as the state of Florida is considering, concealed weapons on college campuses.

·      Not addressing the issues of sexually provocative dress for young people and adults.

·      Blaming the victim of violence for the violence.

·      Pretending as if we can preach everyone into abstinence.   Obviously this does not work for clerics or the layperson.

·      Pretending as if married heterosexual people only have sex when they want to conceive or can successful use the rhythm method.

·      Ignoring the relationship between poverty and such activity as Bacha Bazi

·      Different social and legal rules for the haves and have nots.

·      A judicial system which, at the very least, is significantly affected by how much money one has to spend on legal defense.

·      Putting people in jail instead of treating for substance abuse/addiction.

·      Treating the mentally ill as criminals.

·      Expecting single working parents  without a good support system  to have the time and energy to parent. For that matter, expecting two parent families who are both working outside the home at minimum wage jobs and have a minimal support system  to have the time and energy to parent.

I am sure that the above list is not exhaustive.  Hopefully, many will volunteer to help refine this list.

The main point is that the issues about which we are concerned are systemic issues. As long as we continue to act as if behavior happens is a vacuum be will continue to be ineffective in creating a less violent, more just and loving community.    We have to quit hurting and punishing each other and find a way to connect as a community.  Our historic pride in individualism in this country may also be our undoing.  How we think and behave affects not just us as individuals but everyone with whom we come into contact.

Written September 22, 2015

I suppose because I am so looking forward to the visit of my son this week the subject of unconditional love has been much on my mind.   As a parent or at least this parent and, I think, most parents, I always wanted my son to know that my love was unconditional.  I could  never understood how some parents could disown their child.  I am also fully aware that parenting is a very frustrating job.  It is frustrating because we parents cannot and should not control our children. That does not, of course, keep most of us from attempting to insure that our children are morally, physically, and academically prepared to have a successful life.   Sadly, this also does not mean that we have figured out what it might mean to have a successful life.  With 70 some percent of the people in the United States unhappy in their jobs, it is difficult to hold on to the illusion that one knows what it means to be a successful work/professional life.  At my age I am acutely aware that it is not about accumulating things, which, as we age, we, hopefully, begin to realize that we need to get rid of.  This parent does not want to leave a lot of “stuff” for my son to have to distribute to others or just get rid of.   Despite this resolve I, however, have a lot of “stuff.”  Stuff seems a terrible burden to place on anyone. Friends who are dealing with the “estate” of their deceased parent(s) frequently remind me of this.   Living Florida, I am surrounded by consignment and thrift shops on every corner, which are full of stuff which parents left for their kids to dispose of.   As we all know, a lot of we old people come to Florida to live out the last days of our journey.

So, if success is not about accumulating money to buy stuff, perhaps it is about being a moral or ethical person.    Perhaps we think in terms of our children being a good person whatever that might mean.   We ask ourselves, what is a moral or ethical person?   A trip to even the local community library can give us access to an endless number of books on the various philosophers, religions, and spiritual leaders who are convinced that they have the answers.   Hobbes tells us we humans are inherently in need of a social contract with an absolute sovereign power.  Rousseau posited that we humans are naturally good.  Others posit that we are naturally sinful and need “saved” from us.    Still others tell us that it is only by following the precepts of a particular religion that we can be acceptable human beings.  There are many more “opinions” about what constitutes various forms of success – financial, emotional, spiritual, professional, and moral. If we have a healthy child how are we to convince him or her that our way of thinking is either the correct or most accurate way of thinking?   After all, we are tempted to think,  our ability to control or guide our child to having the possibility of having a successful life is dependent on convincing them that we know what is best. Yet, barring issues, which adversely affect the ability of the mind of our child to function, they will quickly figure out that we are not nearly as smart or as all-knowing as we would like them to believe.

Our job as parents is basically pretty simple.  We need to do our best to provide the basics such as food, housing and clothing and to assure our child that we love him or her no matter what they do or do not do.  If we have a child with a mental illness or a disease such as addiction, the job gets more difficult.  When the mental illness or the addiction shows up instead of our child it is not easy to love unconditionally.  We might tell our child and even ourselves that “we love the person but not the behavior” but that does not feel or sound like unconditional love to the brain of that child.   We may find that we have to set some boundaries or practice what is euphemistically called “tough love”.   To not do so may get us labeled as co-dependent. To do so may result in further disrespect by our child who, even in the midst of their illness, knows what we are doing.

What does unconditional love look like, smell like, sound like, or feel like?   There are, of course, moments when we “know” that we are both liked and loved by someone. Those moments will not be 100% of the time in any relationship or at least in any relationship which I have known. In fact, I cannot think of any human being, including myself, who I like 100% of the time. I have often “seen” myself behaving in a way which is not attractive or pleasing.  Sometimes, even as a parent of an adult child, I have “heard” saying myself things such as “ You might want to.” which my son or a spouse might hear as “You need to or should …”. I was not fooling anyone.  My son might respond with, “Quit attempting to control me.”   I might respond, “I am not trying to control you.  I just …” Of course, I was trying to guide or control. The motives might have been very laudable, but that does not mean I was being helpful or was even “heard’ as kind. 

Obviously there is a difference between loving unconditionally and the other person feeling loved unconditionally.  There is also a difference between what I intend, between what I want to intend, and what is heard.  I am not always sure that I am as honest with myself as I would like to think that I am.  Sometimes it is only with the passage of time or with seeing my behavior mirrored in the behavior of others than I can “see.”

It is again obvious that I can complicate the simplest of issues.  No wonder I got such good grades in philosophy in college. I can write pages and pages about whether or not I am awake or dreaming even as I type!    Silly, silly me.

I wish I could say to myself with some degree of confidence that I am going to get better today at just showing up and loving myself and others with no expectations; that I am not going to judge, make suggestions, or try to guide those I love to what I think is a healthy place when they are clearly not ready to go there and may or may not need to go there.  The truth is that when someone I love is struggling, I am going to question whether there is something I could say or do which would be more helpful.  I am also, as I am today, going to strive to more quickly notice what I am doing, laugh at myself, and lovingly remind myself that it is their journey which they have to do in their way. If they ask for advice, I will be happy to offer it.  Or not!

I am typing this as I am sitting at the coffee shop where I often go to write before the library opens.  There are a couple of people at the table next to me whose conversations I hear intermittently. One of the men comes across as being so sure that he knows what is right and wrong.  A little earlier there was another person talking to some other people. He also frequently sounded as if he was so sure about what is right and wrong.  I hear him as one of those who does not have to endlessly analyze the simplest issues.   Many times I have envied the person who is so very clear about what is right and wrong; who has a religion or some other very cut and dry system to guide them; whose religion has a clear set of rules which tells them “the truth.”    Yet, I know that I am never going to be one of those persons.  I am not someone who can “just accept” a set of rules, beliefs, guidelines, or limits.  I am always going to be that kid who has to color outside the lines; that kid who takes apart the clock or whatever object just to try to figure out how it works.      I am also going to think about, analyze, and pray about what is the most loving way to act.  I have to accept that I cannot just follow a set of rules no matter who posits them. It is my goal to  respect the same needs/qualities in others – to respect their need to map their own journey in their own way in their own time.

Atonement and Repentance

I am writing on Sunday and have just listened a couple of times to Krista Tippett’s On Being interview with Louis Newman, the Jewish scholar, ethicist, and professor.   

Yom Kippur, the day of Atonement, beginning on September 23, 2015 and, thus, this was a very timely interview. For me personally, it was timely in the sense that I heard it following and not prior my finishing writing my blogs on the 12 steps of spiritual growth for all of us.  Dr. Newman is also in a 12-step recovery program and talks about the intersection of the 12-step recovery program and his understanding of the concepts of atonement and repentance.   In fact he has written an entire book on the subject entitled, The Meaning and Practice of Teshuvah.  “Teshuvah” is the Jewish word for atonement – turning back to God.  In the Jewishvirtuallibrary.org one is reminded that there are many expressions used in the Bible – “"incline the heart to the Lord" (Josh. 24:23), "make oneself a new heart" (Ezek. 18:31), "circumcise the heart" (Jer. 4:4), "wash the heart" (Jer. 4:14), and "break one's fallow ground" (Hos. 10:12).  Teshuvah incorporates all of these images and actions. For like the 12 steps of recovery as conceived and written by Bill Wilson and Dr. Bob, the reconnection or the turning back to God is an action requirement in which on first get honest with self about going against one’s basic “goodness” which allows me to connect with the God of my understanding and then to go on to atone or make amends.   

Dr. Newman goes on to remind all of us that the  benefit of turning back is freedom.  When we act in a way which is inconsistent with our basic goodness, we are disconnected from our true self and, thus, in a lot of discomfort/pain.   We humans tend to think that running from the pain will give us freedom from it. The irony is, of course, that, as all spiritual teachers remind us, it is only by going toward or facing the pain head on that we can make the first step toward freedom from the pain.  The pain then is not just the remorse from the deed.  The pain is the separation from self, the God of our understanding, and all the rest of creation.   It is a place of abject loneliness.  It is the place of feeling forsaken that Job so vividly describes.

Again, listening to Dr. Newman I find no mention of punishment. There is nothing of the angry, vengeful God which some claim as the justification for violent behavior towards self and others.   In the Jewish tradition, as Dr. Newman and other scholars remind us, the Talmud says that God created repentance before He created the physical universe.   I must admit that in all my theological studies I had never “heard” this. Perhaps I had read without the significance of it registering in my mind.   In my mind this makes a huge difference.   Already God knows that He is going to create humans who will want to do things “their way;” who often react rather than acting with thoughtfulness and mindfulness; who will convince themselves that they are indestructible or that they can keep secrets from themselves and from the God of their understanding; who will turn away from their basic goodness by finding shortcuts to self-worth by attaching themselves to things, persons, substances, concepts, and behaviors.   Somehow, even those of us who have a strong desire to be the best we can be wander off or turn away from that which is best for and in us.   Since we will be turning away, we will have to have a practice of turning back.  We will have to repent and then atone.  (Oxforddictionary.com, as well as other sources, list reparation as the first definition of atonement.)    As I mentioned the 12-step program for recovery from addiction will label this as “making amends.”  Regardless of what we call it -- if we are ready/have the courage or the faith to admit that “our way” is not working we will need a GPS for finding our way home.  For folks such as Dr. Newman, Yon Kippur and the 12-step program both offer opportunities for turning toward freedom.   For some, the Buddhist philosophy is the best or most effective GPS.   There are many such models of GPS devices. I personally am not convinced that the God of my understanding cares which system one uses but, as I have suggested in  “The 12 steps of spiritual recovery for all of us” we all need a system which includes all the steps for diagnosing the problems/issues which keep us from connecting with our basic goodness which then allows us to connect with the God of our understanding and with the rest of creation.  

Although I have not read Dr. Newman’s books, I will do so.  So far, however, not surprisingly, I have found no mention of the concept of punishment.  One does find a mention of the concept of remorse. Remorse is not about shame.  When I think of remorse I think of the pain of separation from ourselves and others.  We often punish ourselves.  We do not realize that we do not need to be shameful or to punish ourselves. No matter how hard we are running, every time we stop, even for a second, we experience the disconnect – the emptiness, the loneliness, and the grief of the futility of thinking we can run fast enough to avoid ourselves. There is no reason for other humans or the God of our understanding to punish us. We do this to ourselves by keeping ourselves separate.  It is true that  our judicial system continues to believe that if we treat people badly enough they will feel bad/shameful  will be forced to connect with their basic goodness. This never works.   Despite all the evidence which states that punishment/shame does not work, rather than designing a system which patiently invites those who harm others to reconnect with their basic goodness, we label and treat them as criminals, bad people, worthless, etc.  All the evidence points to the fact that punishment does not work. Whether it is all the different nations, religious and cultural groups, or the judicial systems, we continue to act as if treating each other as badly as possible will help us connect to  our  basic goodness.   In my 75 years of life, I have come to believe that we are basically good. When we let go of shame, accept the love that is offered with healthy others we are free and can delight in our own goodness and the basic goodness of all others. I am not suggesting I know how to make it safe enough for everyone to practice repentance and atonement.  I know what does not work for any of us.


I do know that it is my experience and the experience of many that I admire that when we let go of the same and the remorse we are able to go on to atone/make amends.  We are then able to experience a profound sense of Shalom – peace.

Written September 20, 2015

Bigotry is bigotry – conversation with Sam

It was a quiet Saturday morning in the Pickett household.  I was enjoying my post gym workout cup of coffee and mentally organizing my day.  Since it was Saturday, I was not surprised to see my delightful six-year-old friend approaching my house. She and her family live next door.  I was also prepared for whatever questions this very precocious six-year-old came up with this morning. I know that, especially on Saturday, she has the habit of reading the newspaper with her dad and/or attempting to process something one of her classmates has said at school. This morning was to be no exception.

Sam:  Hi uncle Jim.

Me:  Good morning.  Are you ready for school?

Sam: Uncle Jim, it is Saturday.  My dad says old people forget what day it is? Are you old people, Uncle Jim? Did you forget?

Me: Perhaps I did.  We old people do tend to get confused sometimes.

Sam:  Sighs!   I thought so!  I need to ask a question.

Me?  What is your question? You know that you can ask anything.

Sam: Some kids at school said the President is a Muslim and that is a bad thing.  Do you think that President is a Muslim Uncle Jim?

Me:  Well, Sam, that is an important question. I know that some people think President Obama is a Muslim and they think that all Muslim are bad. In fact, just the other day some person in the audience where the Presidential candidate Donald Trump was speaking said, “We have a problem in this country and it is called Muslims…We know our current president is one.”  (Associated Press article by Jill Colvin entitled “he’s criticized for not reining in the man calling Obama a Muslim” reported in Tampa Tribune on September 19,2015 on page 8).  

Sam:  What?

Me:  I guess that was a lot to expect you to hear all at once.  The people saying President Obama is a Muslim are usually trying to say that being a Muslim is bad. Do you think it is bad?

Sam:   You mean like my friend Aman?  He is really nice.

Me:  I agree

Sam:   Aman is not bad.

Me:  No I do not think so either.  You know Uncle Jim has other Muslim friends, some of whom you have met.

Sam:  Yes. Then why would kids at school say that all Muslims, including Aman,  are bad?   I tell them they are stupid!

Me:  I think that it is brave of you to support Aman.  I am sure he appreciates that.

Sam:  Yes, but he tells me not to call the other kids stupid.  He says that his father says we must be nice to them and not act hateful when someone else is hateful.

Me:  That is very interesting.  What do you think about that?

Sam:  Well, you are always telling me that I have to treat others like I want to be treated.   How can I do that when they are so stupid?

Me: Well, I think the word you want is ignorant. Ignorant means we do not know something.

Sam:  I know! (Sigh). I have to get the dictionary.

Sam goes to get the Oxford dictionary.

Sam: What word am I looking up?

Me: How about we up the word stupid first.   S T U P I D

Sam:  Why can’t we just look it up on the computer?

Me: We could but let’s also learn how to use the big dictionary.

Sam:  What was that spelling?

Me: S T U P I D

Sam: Here it is.   Help me read it.

We read it together:

         Definition of stupid:

                  Lacking intelligence or common sense

                  Dazed and unable to think clearly

Sam; what does dazed mean uncle Jim? 

Me:  You know that sometimes you get very tired and cannot concentrate. Remember we talked about that.

(Sam closes her eyes and dramatically walks around the room feeling with her outstretched arms.)

                 

                  Informal – used to express exasperation or boredom.

Sam: Exasperation?

Me:  That is another big word.  You know how you get frustrated when I take so long to do something or we have to spend time looking up a word. You could say, “Uncle Jim exasperates me.” Or “Uncle Jim is exasperating.”

Sam: You can say that again!

Me: The second word was  I G N O R A N T

Sam:  I G N O R

Me:  A N T

Sam: Oh here it is.

Me:  Great.  Let’s read it together.

         Oxforddictionary.com definition of ignorant

         Lacking knowledge or information about something: not

         educated.

         Informal – with bad manner

Me:  So, Aman is suggesting that the kids who say all Muslims are bad are ignorant.  They believe what they have heard from some adults. They do not know, like you do, that they have to question what we adults say.  They are ignorant. That is not a bad thing, but we do not want to agree with something we know is not the truth.  On the other hand, Aman is suggesting that it is ignorant to call them stupid.  It is bad manners to talk to or to talk about them as some of them talk about all Muslims.

Sam:  I am glad that I know that  Aman and other Muslims are good people.

Me: Yes. There are some Muslims who think just like some of the kids in school - that everyone has to think like they do. They may kill those who think differently.  We have also talked about the fact that some Christians think that killing others who do not think like them is good.

Sam: So the President is not Muslim but it would be okay if he were.

Me:  Absolutely Sam. You are so wise. I am always so proud of you.

Sam: My head is tired.  I think some ice cream would make it feel better.

Me: You are probably right Sam.

Written September 19, 2015

There was a very brief letter to the editor in the St. Petersburg Tribune on September 18, lauding a recent column by Patrick Buchanan in which he praises the action of Kim Davis, the Kentucky Roman County Clerk for refusing to issues marriage licenses so that she did not have to issue them to same sex couples. I had not read the column but through the magic of the internet was quickly able to read it on the September 11, 20115 edition of “townhall.com”.   In that column well known columnist compares the civil disobedience action of Kim Davis to that of  that of our ancestors against the English and to that of civil rights leaders such as Martin Luther King. In fact, Mr. Buchanan states that: 

Throughout American history, industrial workers, civil rights and anti-war activists, and political dissenters have defied laws, ignored court orders, and gone to jail for contempt.

Rosa Parks broke the law in Montgomery, Alabama, by refusing to move to the back of the bus. Martin Luther King, a disciple of Gandhi, preached and practiced civil disobedience his entire life.

Now there is a statue on the mall and a holiday for King and talk of putting Tubman or Parks on America's currency.

They are honored because their defiance of court orders and law-breaking were done in the cause of social progress.”

Not surprising for those who know me, the actions of Kim Davis and individuals such a martin Luther King did not seem comparable to me.  Yet, as those who know me, will also appreciate I knew that I needed to determine if it is only my personal biases which prevented me from agreeing with Mr. Buchanan.    On the surface  the actions of civil rights leaders, our ancestors against the English and Kim Davis seem to be same.  We have individuals protesting a law or laws which they believe conflict with their deeply help beliefs.   There is no doubt in my mind that Kim Davis believe that the God of her understanding would be highly displeased if she, in any way, supported the “sin” of cosigning the union of same sex couples.   Mr. King often invoke his religious beliefs as justification for his civil disobedience. 

The only question seems to be whether or not the action of Mrs. Davis  serves the “cause of social progress”.   Clearly, Mrs. Davis, Mr. Buchanan and a number of other people, believe that true social progress prohibits the union of people of the same gender because they cannot  procreate. Wait a minute. That cannot be entirely true.  Many heterosexual couples get married with no intention of procreating.   In fact, some are physically un able to conceive a child.   Some might even get married with the knowledge that they are unwilling or unable to have a sexual relationship.  In fact a brief review of research indicates that it is possible that as many of 20% of couples are intentional celibate or have  a sexual relationship ten times a year or less. (Some of the research seems to consider a marriage in which a sexual relationship occurs .81 times a month as celibate.)  As a professional counselor I have met many married individuals who have not had a sexual relationship for a very long time. I  have also met many individuals in a heterosexual relationship which is very sexual with no intention of having children.

I have previously researched the question of whether any social thinker/scientist thinks that there is a shortage  of people on the planet earth. We do not seem to need more people. Some may argue that there is a shortage of people in certain races or social classes.  It that was truly the situation then man people whose sexual orientation is  other than heterosexual could certainly donate their sperm or loan them womb to those heterosexual couples who want but cannot conceive children.

If social progress is not served by the possibility of more children, perhaps it is served by the possibility that celibate people or heterosexual people have more energy or more financial resources to advice the cause of social progress.  I am not aware of any studies which have specifically compared the number of volunteer hours of same sex and opposite sex couples.  I also was not able to find the results of any research which compared dollar the amount of dollars to the cause of social justice  of same sex and opposite sex couples.   There is some research which indicates that, in general, same sex couple often have more disposal income which could be donated or used to stimulate the economy.  If one goggles the subject one will be directed to some articles  the authors of which maintain that same sex couples give more to charitable organizations.

The question still  is how the prevention of social progress is promoted by the prevention of the legal unions (marriage) of same sex couples.

Surely, Mr. Buchanan, Mrs. Davis and others are not proposing that same sex couples will be publicly engaging in  addictive sexual behavior to such an extent that they are unable to keep jobs resulting in the community/the state becoming responsible for their care.   There is no evidence of which I am aware that happens with same or opposite sex couples. It would seem that  whether people who marry are same or opposite sex couples, they do so to create a home together, to support each other in sickness and in health, to share their joys and sorrows and to share all the other activities and responsibilities of this life journey.    Relatively little time is time is spent in sexual activity.

It is true that in historically that:

·     Many children died in childbirth.

·     Many women miscarried.

·     Large families were needed to do gathering and maintenance tasks.

·     There was a  belief that there was a shortage of sperm and thus one did not want to waste sperm.

·     That there was no microscope to measure the number of sperm.

·     That religious laws were created based upon these and similar beliefs.

It is also true that:

·     Those relatively few humans who are 100% heterosexual may find the thought of same sex activity repulsive although the results of research in same sex institutions such as prisons does not bear out this assumption.

·     Those relatively few humans who are 100% homosexual may find the thought of heterosexual activity repulsive.

·     Most of us do not want to observe our family members, friends and neighbors having sex activity no matter with whom we are having sex.

·     The actual sexual activity of many of we humans is more fluid than our traditions and laws indicate.

It is interesting that Mr. Buchanan, Mrs. Davis and a significant number of people  which inhavit various parts of this planet  continue to personally find the idea of same sex marriages  personally distasteful and contrary to their religious beliefs.  I applaud those who are willing to lovingly speak out  about their beliefs.  Insisting that others have the same beliefs or that we use the religious beliefs of a few to dictate the behavior of the many is now how I understand the constitution of this country to work. 

Perhaps, however, I am missing something here. I will look forward to the comment of those readers who can enlighten me about how  limiting marriages to opposite sex couples promotes social progress.   Of course there may be those who think our laws should reflect what we personally find distasteful, difficult to imagine, or uncomfortable.   Certainly there are many countries, including the United States at times, where laws are based on such criteria.

Written September 18, 2015

Step 12 of the AA program is:  “Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.”

We come to the end of our initial meditation of how all of us can use profitably use the 12 steps of the 12 step program begun by Dr. Bob S and Bill W. in 1934 in Akron, Ohio for those struggling with alcohol addiction. Since that time the program has been adapted for use by those struggling with addictions to other drugs, food, gambling, and sex.  It is also used by loved ones of those struggling with addictions.

As I have earlier stated. my understanding of addiction is it is the attachment to some thing, person, behavior or substance to avoid dealing with ourselves.  Although we may experiment with various ways of relaxing or feeling better,  with addiction the thing, person, substance or behavior becomes our primary focus to the extent that the other parts of our life are adversely affected. With some addictions brain actually changes and, thus, the addiction has be treated as any other disease.  

The addictive journey frequently, or perhaps always,  begins as a way for we humans to avoid dealing the seemingly core belief we adopt very early in life that we are missing something; that we are not enough; that we need to somehow prove our worth.  Often we either embark on a journey to get enough money, education, religion, or possessions  to prove we are better than or we can look for some behavior or substance which essentially numbs us to the point that we are unable to function in a healthy way.  Neither way works long term.  It is never enough.

Regardless of what we have used in an attempt to avoid being with ourselves as we are, if we are lucky we all come to a point where we are forced to face ourselves.  If we are very lucky we have identified a program or system for beginning our spiritual journey of healing/recovery.  The two men who began the 12 step program, along with other alcoholics, stumbled on or were inspired to create a 12 step program which required a step by step course of work which led to a “spiritual awakening” and, thus, a way for them to find serenity and then to go on to help other struggling alcoholics. 

Unlike some of the religious systems with which many of us were raised, the 12-step program offers a system of spiritual growth/recovery/awakening which, without any use of the concept of shame, if followed, leads to what is called a spiritual awakening.    I am very comfortable using the term spiritual awakening.  Others may want to use a different terms.  Oxfordictionary.com defines spiritual as:  “Of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.”    Many of we humans,

even if we cannot define spirit or spiritual can identify with the “dis ease” of the spirit – a general sense of not being at home or at peace in our own body.  Some individuals who think in terms of systems might describe this  as an imbalance in this wonderful system we call the human body which is part of ever increasing circle of systems which encompasses the entire universe or  universes. 

I have been suggesting that the 12 step program as devised by those two struggling men in Akron, Ohio in 1934 can be used by all of us to  step by step become more at peace with ourselves and the systems of which we are a part.

We can, of course, use other systems but I want to suggest that whatever system we use include all the steps/pieces which are included in the 12 steps.  We can certainly use some religious or philosophical  approaches such as the Buddhism, or other mind body approaches. I do not think it matters.

Spiritual growth/recovery is contagious.  One of the traditions of the 12 step program is “attraction not promotion”.  Those who are feeling good about themselves and about claiming a good life of which they can be proud will find that other people notice that they have something they want. This provides them an opportunity to share the program which has guided them to this enviable place in their life journey.

Long before I knew of the 12 step program I had the habit of searching out people who had some of “that something” which I wanted.  I would hear or meet or see someone who had a passion for life and for creating a more just and loving world and “just know” that they had something I wanted. I have been known to go up to a stranger and say to them, “I am Jim Pickett. You have something I want. Can we talk?”   Without fail, people were willing to share.  Since becoming familiar with the 12 step program, working as an addiction counselor and attending meetings with clients many of those people who have something I wanted have or now use the 12 step program.  The willingness of people to share what they have found in the 12 step program is, like Grace, a gift one cannot earn – one for which one can only be grateful.

Of course, being the greedy person that I am I continue to seek out other teachers  such as a Buddhist Nun, the recently deceased author and teacher, Wayne Dyer, the yoga teacher Matthew Sanford, and  many more who I have mentioned in other blogs.

On page 106 on AA.org we read:

“THE joy of living is the theme of A.A.’s Twelfth Step, and action is its key word. Here we turn outward toward our fellow alcoholics who are still in distress. Here we experience the kind of giving that asks no rewards. Here we begin to practice all Twelve Steps of the program in our daily lives so that we and those about us may find emotional sobriety. When the Twelfth Step is seen in its full implication, it is really talking about the kind of love that has no price tag on it.

Our Twelfth Step also says that as a result of practicing all the Steps, we have each found something called a spiritual awakening. “  P 106  aa.org

Let us again remind ourselves what the aa 12th step says:

“Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.”

Actually it is because the recovering alcoholic is practicing those principles in all his/her affairs that they have that “something” which others are going to find so attractive.  Because of their resulting spiritual awakening they are going to want to share their story with others.  As they share with others they are going to be listening to themselves and, thus, reminding themselves that they must continue to use the tools of the program – the 12 steps, sponsor, meetings, conventions, spiritual retreats – if they are to hold on to their spiritual awakening which… It is always a circle.

I, of, course, am suggesting that we can all have that spiritual awakening. As I have previously suggested  it is important to not allow  one’s history with a word to keep one from getting what one needs and deserves.  If the word spiritual has too much  baggage than call  it just “an awakening”, “a blossoming” or “claiming joy” or whatever.

It is not surprising to me that the 12 step program makes liberal use of the shortened version of Reinhold Niebuhr’s prayer

The Serenity Prayer

The full text of the original "Serenity Prayer" written by Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971)

GOD, grant me the serenity

to accept the things

I cannot change,

Courage to change the

things I can, and the

wisdom to know the difference.

Many do not know the full version of this prayer. It is:

The Serenity Prayer

The full text of the original "Serenity Prayer" written by Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971)

GOD, grant me the serenity

to accept the things

I cannot change,

Courage to change the

things I can, and the

wisdom to know the difference.

Living one day at a time;

Enjoying one moment at a time;

Accepting hardship as the

pathway to peace.

Taking, as He did, this

sinful world as it is,

not as I would have it.

Trusting that He will make

all things right if I

surrender to His Will;

That I may be reasonably happy

in this life, and supremely

happy with Him forever in

the next.

Amen

This is the full prayer attributed to Karl Paul Reinhold Niebuhr reportedly written in 1926. Niebuhr was a Lutheran pastor and theologian.

Hopefully, the 13 blogs I have written on the 12 steps have been helpful to some.  Certainly writing them have been  a helpful reminder to me.  I appreciate being able to share my thoughts and feelings with you, the reader, and am very grateful for your ongoing encouragement and loving support.

Written September 17, 2015