Full Body Scan? No thanks!

OK, when I arrived for my flight to Orlando this morning, I saw that the Full Body Scan (aka "Virtual Strip Search) has now apparently become the standard order of procedure for Richmond International Airport.  They only have ONE backscatter scanner, but everybody is expected to go through it unless they protest.  When I stepped up to the line, there was a lady patiently standing there.  I asked her if she was being made to wait because she had "opted out" of the virtual strip search.  She said, "Yes, I guess I have to wait because I have 'a choice'."  She was a first class frequent traveler and had been waiting 10 minutes for the exercise of her freedoms.  She was a bit frustrated, but was not going to be bullied into relinquishing her freedoms.  She was adamant about that fact.

I had the time to talk to her because I was also opting to exercise my constitutional freedoms from illegal search and siezure.  In fairness to TSA, I'll have to say that the guy who did my patdown was was sensitive to my rights.  When he commented that I'd probably done this many times, I said, "No, I used to be able to be screened without having to opt out of a virtual strip search."   He didn't react negatively to my comment and was quite professional in his conduct.

I told him that I was aware that he was just doing his job.  He said, "Let's just get you through here."  He scanned his gloves in advance to confirm that his gloves didn't create a "false positive" on the explosives test.  I joked that if his gloves failed, I'd have to screen him.  He didn't laugh out loud, but appreciated the humor.  (Wow!  That is a change from most of my previous interactions with TSA!)

I don't know if they've backed off on some of the "enhanced pat-down procedures" but the pat-down was not excessively invasive.  I've seen others go through the enhanced pat-down before and I don't feel that this one was as invasive as some that I've seen.  Maybe TSA is buckling a bit to our demands for our constitutional rights?  :-)  Read: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-tsa-scanners-20110202,0,984304.story

I appreciate that TSA has some professional employees.  I appreciate that they seem to have eased up some on the enhanced pat-down.  However, none of this makes up for policies that play "fast-and-loose" with our constitutional rights to begin with.  I still contend that everyone who walked through the strip-search line this morning were denied their Constitutional right to protection from illegal search and seizure without probable cause.  The more we submit quietly to this erosion of our rights, the more the bureaucrats in charge of our "security" will sharpen their knives to whittle away yet more or our rights.

Prayer...a civil right?

Tomorrow is the National Day of Prayer here in the United States. It has been pretty much in the media of late, because of a few political situations surrounding the event. It is sad that a thing as simple as prayer has become a divisive political issue. Politics in the US has become such a polarized affair that just about anything can become a divisive issue.

One of the politically-charged issues that has netted significant attention is the fact that Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham, was dis-invited to the National Day of Prayer observance at the Pentagon (HQ for the U.S. military) because of the objections of a Muslim activist group. Many are upset, believing that the rescinded invitation is bowing to a tiny minority, while offending the Christian majority in the U.S.

In another case, Senior U.S. District Court Judge Barbara Crabb, of the District Court in Madison, Wisconsin ruled that the National Day of Prayer is unconstitutional. The "Freedom From Religion Foundation" filed the suit, saying that such an establishment of prayer was not legal. (It is interesting to note that their foundation's name is anti-constitutional, since the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of religion...not freedom FROM religion....)

Lately I've been thinking about some of these political issues and contrasting them with what Paul says in 1 Timothy 2. In 1 Timothy, Paul urges us to pray for our political leaders and all leaders. He goes on to say that the reason we should be praying is so that we can live peaceful and Godly lives. Further, he says that the reason we live Godly lives is so that others can come to know Jesus because God is not willing for ANY to live and die without knowing Jesus.

So...do we need a nationally recognized event, one day per year, to fulfill this urgent request from Paul? I say no. Is the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional? I say no. The bigger issue is that we are prone to spend so much energy on preserving our "constitutional rights" that we spend NO energy praying! This cannot be good!

I contend that open prayer - even on government property (gasp!) - is our constitutional right. When the president, a governor or any other public official begins to establish a "National Religion" they are crossing the line set out in the Constitution proscribing as unacceptable any "establishment of religion". The National Day of Prayer is not such an establishment. While I would argue that it is our constitutional right to pray, I would argue more loudly that we don't need the governments permission to pray. More that a Constitutional right, prayer is a God-given privilege paid for and provided by Jesus! I think we need to quite "fighting for our rights" and start praying.

I say don't wait for the National Day of Prayer to exercise your rights! Pray often. Pray every day. Shucks...go ahead....pray without ceasing! And while you're at it, pray for our government leaders. They are facing a lot of adversity and division. They need wisdom beyond their own ability. I know only one source for that wisdom...and prayer is the conduit!

“You can’t trust anybody…”

I just got “nabbed” by America’s finest…the TSA. I forgot a bottle of water in my backpack. This water bottle has made the trip through numerous checkpoints, but always empty. This morning, I forgot to empty it.

Well…my water bottle became the proverbial “tip of the iceberg” for my TSA experience. Because I had a bottle of water, they “randomly” tested my bag for explosives…and it tested positive. Once the alarm was set off, one TSA “expert” patted me down while another did the “alarm positive” paperwork, while another checked through ONE of my bags thoroughly. (I have to ask – why didn’t they check BOTH bags of this suspected terrorist? After all, I WAS guilty of carrying a water bottle…)

I asked what types of things would cause a “false positive”. She said, “Heart medication or sometimes even hand cream.” I joked that I had heard a commentator say, “The LAST person that needs to be told they test positive is a heart patient.” (I though the implication was obvious…that the stress wouldn’t be good for a heart patient.) Her response? “Terrorists take heart medication too.”

Huh?! The BROKEN logic of that response is a good sign to me that she should be relieved of her role in screening passengers -- TODAY. Is it heart medication we are screening for here? I thought it was explosives we were guarding against, not prescription medication. Terrorists can have allergies too. Should we start screening for Claritin as well? (I confess…I had some in my bag. Arrest me now.)

The statement upset me was when she said, “You can’t trust anybody these days!” That statement is blatantly untrue. You can trust me. She stands at the checkpoint every day and sees evidence that the MAJORITY of the people passing through the airport can be trusted. (Except that you can’t trust certain conservative Christian guys to remember that they have a bottle of water in their backpack…)

TSA exists to protect the general traveling public against the VERY unlikely “bad guy” trying to get on the plane. I have traveled a lot, and I have never –to my knowledge – met anyone who turned out to be one of those bad guys. I would venture a guess that my “friend” at TSA this morning has never met one either. We can’t buy into the philosophy that “you can’t trust anybody”. If we do, the terrorist have won!

You’ve GOT to trust people. I am about to step onto a plane and TRUST a pilot I’ve never met, but I don’t plan to interview him or put him through a sobriety test. I left my vehicle in long-term parking in Washington, DC when I began this trip. I am trusting literally hundreds of people to leave it alone. And it works! You can trust MOST people for the basics in life. While I understand that TSA can’t just assume everybody is OK, I refuse buy into the philosophy that “you can’t trust anybody”.

Here is some interesting reading I found while I was writing this post.

"Happy Holidays" means more than it used to...

I remember "back in the good ole' days" when you went to the Post Office to buy stamps and found that you had to choose between several Christmas designs. I went to the Post Office yesterday and found a whole new dilemna. There was a poster with SIX options for "Winter Holiday" stamps!

On closer inspection, I found that the first choice was....well, exactly that...a "Winter Holidays" collection. You know...gingerbread man, snowman, candy cane...just "winter" stuff. That one gets TOP BILLING. The lady in front of me was making her displeasure known to the guy in front of her..."So Christmas is SECOND now, is it?! We've got to get Christ back into Christmas!"

Well, needless to say, she got my attention. I look more closely at the poster... OK....what is on the menu this season? You've got your "Winter Holidays" collection, you've got your "Madonna and Child" stamp, you've got Hannukah stamps...the EVER popular KWANZA stamp and...what's that one? EID?? That writing looks Arabic.... Hmmm....

By now, the TWO people in front of me were quite animated in our discussion of EID as a holiday. Trust me...in downtown Louisa, VA there won't be a particularly large demand for EID stamps. I won't mention the name of the USPS employee behind the counter who let me know they didn't like it either!

I did some research on EID and I learned that it is the holiday that marks the end of Ramadan. ...and now, of course, it is a nationally celebrated "Winter Holiday" since the USPS deems it worthy of a stamp. In the year 2009, EID falls on September 21st. A "Winter Holiday??" In 2013, it will fall on the 8th of August. Hmmm...will it be a "Winter Holiday" stamp then?! How many Muslims will be buying EID stamps in December to celebrate the end of their fast that took place in August or September?! Could the USPS do anything more ludicrous? I guess maybe it makes sense to them....but it is totally lost on me.

I really can't wait until 2015 when EID falls on July 15th. I guess we'll have stamps with EID commemoration on them instead of flags, to celebrate the month of July. That red, white & blue, stripey....starry cloth thingy our ancestors died to honor will be totally out of vogue as a sign of old-school nationalism by then. We're far too inclusive to honor a nationalistic symbol that way any more!

(Edit: It dawned on me this morning that we have made the transition from "tolerance" to "inclusive". The USPS had to stretch to find a way include the Islamic community in this festive season, so they chose EID as their option.)

(I hope you can read my cynicism and still get my meaning. I am really bothered that the USPS is honoring a Muslim holiday on a stamp.)

Book Review: "What difference do it make?"

Book Review: What Difference Do It Make?
By Ron Hall, Denver More, and Lynn Vincent

Contrary to popular opinion, one life does make a difference. The choices you make will make a difference in your world. That is the core message of "What difference do it make?", the new book by Ron Hall and Denver Moore.

Ron is a white elite Art Dealer and Denver is a black man who was homeless until Ron's wife Deborah decided to make a difference. Their first book "Same Kid of Different as Me" is about the choice that Deborah made to make a difference in the sphere of homelessness in her city. Deborah later died of cancer. This, their second book, is about the difference that Deborah's life made and is continuing to make in the lives of people all across the United States.

The chapters of the book each trace a thread of change that came about as a result of Deborah's life, and - perhaps more importantly - the book that chronicled her choices. While the book is about the effect of one life on the homelessness surrounding her, the more important lesson to be learned is that you CAN make a difference in your world. Each chapter follows the story of someone who was touched by "Same Kind of Different as Me" and how they were changed. It further goes on to tell how that individual chose to make a difference in their world as a result of reading the book.

While there are a few elements of the book that cause me to question individual choices of the people being chronicled, I found the book to be very motivational. Most people I know are moved by the plight of the homeless, but are paralyzed by ignorance. They are plagued by questions about what to do and what not to do in order to bless people and help them.

Denver give a new definition to "blessing" and helping". He says that you "bless" someone by giving them a gift that tells them they still matter in the world. He says that you help someone by stepping down into the pit with them and staying long enough to give them a boost so they can climb out. He would approve of either action as a Godly response to homelessness.

One of the things that struck me as among the most remarkable comments in the book was about "blessing". Denver says that you cannot bless someone and judge them at the same time. He says that you must give your gift to God as you hand it to a homeless person. You can't focus on blessing them if you insist on judging how they might use your gift.

I thoroughly enjoyed reading "What difference do it make?" and would recommend it to just about everyone. I wouldn't say that it will answer all your questions about homelessness and how you should respond. However, it will give you some simple pointers on some things to NOT do, and some ideas on how to begin. Get a copy and read it. I don't think you'll regret it! You definitely won't look at homelessness the same way afterward.

Book Review: The Gifts of the Jews

Book Review
"The Gifts of the Jews"
How a Tribe of Desert Nomads Changed the Way Everyone Thinks and Feels
by: Thomas Cahill
ISBN 0-385-48249-3
Paperback, $14.95
Nan A. Talese/Anchor Books


I bought a copy of "The Gifts of the Jews" because a professor highly recommended it as a moving tribute to the Jewish people. Based on who recommended the book, I expected the book to be respectful of the Biblical record, but I soon found that it wasn't what I expected.

Cahill opens the book with a graphic verbal depiction of the nature of worship and the attitude towards gods in the people and culture in the Fertile Crescent prior to Abram's arrival on the scene. He does a good job of comparing various early literature to discern the difference between various forms of belief, and attitudes toward local deities at the time. He spends more time than I thought was warranted giving a graphic description of the sensual worship rituals of the ziggurats with their priestesses - making his book seem more like a paperback romance than a respectable work of historical research.

As you can tell by now, I was not overly ecstatic about Cahill's presentation of the roots of the Hebrew people. However, what I did appreciate was the credence he gave to the idea of Abraham's belief in his personal covenant God. The "evolution" of the belief in a god that Cahill outlines is a decent perspective to read, in order to understand how Abraham's neighbors would have viewed his insistence on belief in a personal Creator God.

At times, you would almost believe that Cahill was a believer. He seems at times, to have great respect for God. However, he shows no great appreciation for the Biblical record, and thereby blows his "cover" in my mind. This man is no believer. He honors his own intellect above any idea of God.

Cahill lost all credibility with me when he said:

It is no longer possible to believe that every word of the Bible was inspired by God. Fundamentalists still do, but they keep usp such self-delusion only by scrupulously avoiding all forms of scientific inquiry. They must also maintain a tight reign on their own senses, for, even without access to modern biblical criticism, any reader might wonder at the patchwork nature of the scriptures, their conflicting norms and judgements, outright contradictions, and bald errors. But even without resorting to modern scientific methodology or noticing what an inconsistent palimpsest the Hebrew Bible can be, we must reject certain parts of the Bible as unworthy of a God we would be willing to believe in.

When you strip away the camoflague, you see that Thomas Cahill, not God, is the final arbiter. God must be judged by the almight Thomas Cahill. The phrase "a God we would be willing to believe in" implies that we are the final judge of all that is right or wrong.

If God is God, then I do not have the right to set standards for Him. I cannot set a certain standard for God and only believe in Him if He performs to a level that meets my satisfaction! If I am the final judge...then I am God. If I am God, then I can cease my search for Him. I have already found him in the mirror!

While Mr. Cahill is a masterful writer, I cannot recommend this book for anyone who truly desires to honor God, or the Biblical record of His work among His people. I can only recommend it to anyone who seeks to have more fuel to fire their belief in "the almighty in the mirror."

All others....move along...there's noting to see here.

Book Review: DEATH by Meeting

I have decided to try to do a review of the books I read, so you can get a preview of some of the things I read. I hope you find this useful. I will start with a book I just finished, and in a couple of days, I will do a review of a book I finished about a week ago. "DEATH by Meeting", I really enjoyed and think it will be a very useful book to anyone who has to run meetings in their work. The next book I review will be one I loved to hate for most of my reading of it. :-)

"DEATH by Meeting" is by Patrick Lencioni, and is written in the form of a "fable" to teach a new concept. For that reason, it is actually a pretty light read. If you are one who skips to the end to decide if they will like the book or not, you will get a complete misconception, since Lencioni recaps some of the key concepts taught by the fable in a couple of chapters at the end.

I won't steal any thunder from the book by telling any more details that to say that Lencioni advocates through the story, the idea of doing your meeting "on purpose". Don't expect one kind of meeting to be a "one-size-fits-all" affair. Conflict, drama and context are your friends in getting vital information onto the table in your meetings.

Lencioni's protagonist in the fable gets the executives to understand that the first 10 minutes of any meeting, like in a movie, will set the stage for the rest of the movie, and will probably determine whether people are engaged or bored by the rest of the piece. Meetings are no different.

The idea of doing meetings in varied ways to match the topic and purpose should NOT be news to any of us, but the fact is that in MOST organizations, a meeting is a meeting is a meeting. They are all the same and most of the participants would give their left arm to have an acceptable excuse to miss the meeting. Lencioni crafts a wonderful story to help executives grapple with some concepts that will help protect their organization from "DEATH by Meeting". I would encourage anyone who needs to run meetings in their role in their organization to read this book and implement as much as possible. It is a good read and makes some excellent points!

As a final point, I would say that my wife commented on the speed with which I finished this book... I usually plod carefully through non-fiction to make sure I get the point. Since Lencioni wrote this like a well-lubed work of fiction, I flew through it and couldn't get enough! :-)

Flag Burning in Virginia!!

This post was pre-written and I waited until I received Erika's permission before posting it, out of respect for her journey.

Americans have traditionally held a high degree of respect for the flag. It is not, as my daughter lamented recently, "just a piece of cloth". In her defense, I have to remind you that she has only lived as anything other than a visitor in the US for about 18 months. You've got to remember that she is culturally more Australian than she is American. We moved to Australia when she was 3 years old and left Oz when she was nearly 12 years old. Perhaps to the same degree that Americans are overly patriotic, Australians struggle to have a national identity at times. I think Erika is working through the struggles of trying to bridge BOTH of those mindsets!

Yesterday, we visited a camp owned by the Woodmen of the World Insurance Company, during a "Family Fun Day". Evan is going to go to a week of camp there with a buddy from church, so we wanted to check it out. Woodmen of the World is a fairly conservative, VERY patriotic company, so part of the event was an official retirement ceremony for a flag that had become old and tattered.

For those that may be unfamiliar with the etiquette surrounding the US flag, it is pretty specific. At no point is the flag supposed to touch the ground. There are specific ways that the flag may and may not be displayed. An upside-down flag is a sign of distress and a request for assistance. One way that etiquette is commonly transgressed of late is that a flag is not supposed to be made into an article of clothing. And perhaps more important, a tattered, faded flag is to be retired and should not continue to be displayed. ...and there is a very intricate, specific way for the flag to be retired.

I never knew what a flag retirement ceremony was like. I found it so intriguing that I thought I'd write about it here for your interest and enlightenment. The retirement ceremony we observed was carried out by U.S. Army personnel. The first thing that was done in the retirement ceremony was that the field of stars was removed by cutting it out, intact with scissors. This field was then folded and placed in the hand of one of the soldiers holding the flag. With this done, they proceeded to cut out each of the red and white stripes, folding them in half and draping them over the soldier's arm. When the process was complete, they burned the stripes, in groups of 2 or 3 and then, after a kiss by the soldier who was holding the pieces to the field of stars, it too was burned.

It is meaningful that the field of stars never gets cut into pieces. I think it represents unity of the 50 states of the Union that is the United States of America. Each of the 13 stripes of the flag represents one of the original colonies of the birth process of our union. They chose INDIVIDUALLY to become a part of the Union. (These are my personal commentary, and not the official "dogma" of the Flag Retirement Ceremony.)

On the way home, Erika asked why there was such reverence given to the flag. She felt that maybe they were giving a level of reverence to a "piece of cloth" that should be reserved only for God. I hope we did a good enough job of being sensitive to the journey she is on, and also challenging her to think beyond the symbol and reflect on the importance of the object of the symbolism. I found it very moving to spend the amount of effort that was spent to honor a symbol of our unity and a symbol of the freedoms that were bought with the price of much blood and many lives. If you have a chance to attend a Flag Retirement Ceremony, I highly encourage you to do so.

RANT: TSA and Level Orange

Note: This blog post was originally written several weeks ago while I was on a plane, but the sentiment hasn’t changed much since I wrote it.

If you have ever talked to me about travel, you know that I don't really like the TSA much. Understand me, though - I am very happy to be secure. I do not want a repeat of the events of September 11, 2001! However, the aspect that frustrates me is the willingness our government has to pay whatever expense to set up this vast bureaucracy whether the policies are effective or not.

I am writing this on an Airtran flight from Richmond, VA to Atlanta, GA. At the "sleepy" little airport in Richmond, I showed my photo ID to prove that I was the person who was ticketed to fly on this flight. They I submitted all my articles I was carrying to be inspected and walked through a metal detector. OK. I think we're safe now.

When I got to my gate lounge, I noticed 3 TSA personnel standing around...waiting. "Oh now," I thought, "why are they here?" Well, everyone who was at that gate lounge had just walked through the same procedures I had undergone and were sufficiently screened 30 minutes earlier or they couldn't be there. Two of the agents checked all the IDs of people again as they got on the plane. One just stood and watched. I turned to a fellow traveller and said, "Your tax dollars at work!" :-)

If one security screening is not sufficient, will another make us any more secure? We have air marshals aboard most airline flights these days. Maybe we should have a TSA person on flights to check IDs enroute as well?

We are on Orange Alert in the United States, and have been since August 10, 2006 without any specific threats indicated to justify the heightened level of “alert”. In reality, I think we are not all that alert anyway. Remaining on such high levels of “alert” for extended periods tends to fatigue the system.

Does it occur to anyone else that maybe we have let fear rule the day, and in a small way the terrorist are winning? Again, I am glad that we haven't experienced any further attacks, and some have been thwarted. I just doubt that we have to surrender ALL of our freedoms to live in security. I for one would like to see us go back to at least Alert LEVEL YELLOW unless there is some actual threat that justifies the current heightened level of alert.

Postlogue: Funny reminder when I had dinner in the airport in Atlanta and was given a metal fork and a plastic knife. I feel more secure now since I can’t stab my steak with a metal knife. :-)

Unfaithful Blogger

I just looked at my archives and realized that I have not been particularly faithful to blogging for the last few months. It can get tricky sometimes keeping track of all the options for communication. Some of the options are so similar, I sometimes blur the lines a bit.

Let's see....there's Twitter, there's Facebook, there's my blog, there's e-mail updates, there's Skype...the list seems endless. Each serves its purpose, but at times I think there might be just too many options. Each comes with its own set of expectations, and something has to give. Hmm...did I mention face-to-face communication, telephones, letters...etc...? I think that is probably what suffers. As we develop the habits of virtual communication, we need to make sure we retain the connections that I like to call "analog" (as opposed to digital).

Do you ever struggle to keep up with your communication? What do you do to keep the tensions in check?

Obama, ideology and life...

President Barack Hussein Obama signed an executive order lifting restrictions on Embryonic Stem Cell Research. It has been interesting to read the media's descriptions of the event. The National Post put it this way:

To wild applause from several scientists, including three Nobel laureates, researchers, people in wheelchairs and members of Congress, Mr. Obama signed an executive order reversing a decision made by president George W. Bush that restricted federal research funding to only stem cell lines that existed before Aug. 9, 2001. Mr. Obama said the policy was driven by ideology and not science.

But there was fierce criticism from social conservatives and right-to-life groups. U. S. Catholic Cardinal Justin Rigali called Mr. Obama's announcement "a sad victory of politics over science and ethics."

Both sides see this as a very black and white issue. Most of the media tend to use words that make it appear that embryonic stem cell research was illegal in the United States prior to this executive order. Mr. Obama took advantage of the opportunity to proclaim that ideology can no longer trump science.

On January 23rd, just 3 days after his inauguration as President, Mr. Obama quietly removed a ban on U.S. Federal funds being used to fund international aid for organizations that fund abortions in developing nations. It must have been a high priority for him to take this step so early in his Presidency.

No, these decisions do not end and era where "ideology trumps science". They herald the beginning of a new era of ideology trumping all things. (It ceases to amaze me that during times of such economic difficulty, Mr. Obama's budget included over 600 billion dollars for a "downpayment" on Universal Healthcare!) The real question for me is this: "When did ideology become bad?" I don't like the idea of someone's will being imposed upon the people, but I feel like that is what is happening NOW, during this period when supposedly ideology is not a trump card!

I have an ideology. It isn't my own. It was written for me and "imposed" on me by the will of Another. Have a read. I take refuge in THIS ideology!

Psalm 2

1) Why do the nations conspireand the peoples plot in vain?
(2) The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers gather together against the LORD and against his Anointed One.
(3) Let us break their chains, they say, and throw off their fetters.

(4) The One enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord scoffs at them.
(5) Then he rebukes them in his anger and terrifies them in his wrath, saying,
(6) I have installed my King on Zion, my holy hill.

(7) I will proclaim the decree of the LORD:
He said to me, You are my Son; today I have become your Father.
(8) Ask of me, and I will make the nations your inheritance, the ends of the earth your possession.
(9) You will rule them with an iron scepter; you will dash them to pieces like pottery.

(10) Therefore, you kings, be wise; be warned, you rulers of the earth.
(11) Serve the LORD with fear and rejoice with trembling.
(12) Kiss the Son, lest he be angry and you be destroyed in your way, for his wrath can flare up in a moment.
Blessed are all who take refuge in him.

It would be easy to be taken up with all kinds of irritation and frustration and I admit I am prone to that! It is a healing balm to stop and remember that God is still on the throne! He may allow us to trounce around on the stage for a time, but He is still in charge and will have His say. Count on it!

How about you? Do you tend to get taken in and begin to "fret" (a good King James word that my grandmother used to use. grin) when you see the things that take place in the world around you? Fret not! God is still on His throne!

Penn Jillette gets a Bible

My friend Max called my attention to this video by Penn Jillette, of "Penn & Teller" fame. It can say a lot to us about our attitude towards people.

Watch that e-mail, watch what you forward

I read an interesting article in Christianity Today and it hit a nerve for me. Our actions in the e-mail world probably don't match our actions in the real world. The things we say in an e-mail, we may never in person. It is just so easy to click "Send". Some people forward every little thing without thinking twice. I used to reply to forwarded e-mails with a tearjerker of a story by replying, "Yes, thanks, I'm doing well, how are you these days?" because they seldom bothered to talk about anything related to me or themselves.

However, this story is about something much more hurtful than having to click delete, or having to reply and say, "No Madeline Murray O'Hare isn't trying to get James Dobson off the air..." This couple had to face a court trial, a conviction and now a fine an jail time! All because somebody decided to take matters into their own hands and "help".

After you've read the story, perhaps you'll agree that the mission workers in the story had a bit of culpability in the "poor choice of words" department. Perhaps you'll agree that the person who forwarded the e-mail had a significant degree of culpability as well. Perhaps you will feel the government is over-reacting. If so, you might be missing the most important point -- "What do I do with e-mail?"

As the article points out, information that is shared with you is shared with YOU -- not with everyone in your Address Book. We have to be discreet in the way we handle information. I have known of several people who worked in locations that required they use a lot of discretion in how they talked about their work. They felt safe in talking to churches in their home country, and the church naively put their prayer letters on their website, with their name and picture as well.

Why is that so bad? Well, a hostile government official cannot do a keyword search from his desk on printed prayer letters, the e-mail in a churches inbox, or telephone conversations. He can do a keyword search from his desk and find the letter when the church has posted his letter on their website!

Many churches also list their missionaries' e-mail addresses in plain text on their website, so members can write to the missionaries. This is not the best idea, but not because of hostile governments. In this scenario, the "bad guy" is the spammer who scoops up the address with a little piece of software that scours the web looking for just such a thing. Soon, the workers' inboxes are full of invitations to buy medications they never thought they needed...

Christian workers are supposed to put their trust in God to look after them. This is right and true. However, it would help them a lot of their brothers and sisters would slow down, take a minute and ask their opinion before sharing sensitive information...even if they do it for all the right reasons with a good heart.

Christian workers should also ask God to "set a watch over my lips" so that they don't leave themselves open and vulnerable by words mis-spoken. This couple are paying a very dear price for a mere joke in an e-mail! It was only a lighthearted moment, but it has come back to haunt them now.

God will look after you. He will meet your needs. He will protect you from harm. He wouldn't mind if we joined in the effort with Him, though!

How much is a TRILLION anyway?

My team leader said today that he had heard a politician say an interesting concepts of how much a trillion dollars is. He said you could give away a million dollars a day from the day Jesus was born and STILL not have used up a trillion dollars. Wow.

Putting aside all implications of bi-partisanship, take a trip over to "Freedom's Lighthouse", a VERY conservative website for a look at CNN's (a very liberal network!) coverage of the concept of a trillion dollars.

Wow....that is two posts in one day by Greg! A record, I reckon!

To: Greg From: donotreply@warner.senate.gov

What does it mean when your Senator writes to you from a "donotreply" e-mail address? Do you think maybe it means "DO NOT REPLY"? Well that is the message that I get. "Thank you for expressing your opinion. Now, please take your puny little ideas and go away."

I wrote to the Senator that was chosen for me recently. (That is my attempt to avoid calling him "my" Senator!) I told him that I was concerned about the Economic Stimulus plan and that I was particularly concerned about a specific clause in the miniscule print that said NONE of the money from the stimulus package could be used on buildings that were used significantly for "sectarian education". Religious ideas are no longer allowed in the public arena.

I would counsel ANY Christian institution to NOT accept the government's money. However, this didn't apply only to religious institutions. It applied to ANY building on ANY campus that receives money from the stimulus package, if that building is used often for "sectarian education". Enough said about that. What bugs me is Mr. Mark Warner's reply.

In the second paragraph of the response, I was informed that:

On February 10, 2009, I joined a majority of the Senate in approving a bipartisan compromise to restart the economy through a responsible mix of tax cuts and investments that will create jobs.

Did you notice that little "bipartisan" word nestled comfortably in that sentence?! What does HE think bi-partisan means? The compromise agreement narrowly passed, with only three Republicans signing on to the plan. There were a good number who were crying foul that they weren't allowed to be involved in hashing out the details of the compromise since they weren't in the right party.

Well, I suppose Mr. Warner did the right thing to use a "donotreply" address when he wrote to me. I doubt he wants to hear what I have to say. I doubt that he even cares.

I wrote to him to express my concern of the Economic Stimulus Plan and he drops a bombshell near the end of his e-mail. It says:

The Recovery and Reinvestment Act is but one component of a three-part plan to restore our economy. We still have important work to do to address the foreclosure crisis and shore-up the real estate market and we also must take steps to repair our banking system so that credit will begin flowing again to consumers and small businesses.

Again, thank you for your input. As we move forward in the 111^th
Congress, please continue to be in touch with your opinions and concerns.

What?! You want to apply your sovereign expertise in those areas too? I am not surprised, but I am a bit shell-shocked. ...and sticker-shocked! What will this end up costing me in the end?

I like the closing: "...continue to be in touch..."

But DO NOT REPLY!

I get the message, Mr. Warner.

The Gallup Poll of Assigned Opinion

Have you ever answered an official opinion poll? We got a call a couple of days ago from the Gallup Association -- famous for their polls of public opinion. I have been able to take part in several opinion polls from various organizations through the years. They usually ask several questions that are "throwaway" questions, for the purpose of preparing you to answer the way that is desired. I always enjoy having the opportunity to "skew" the number a bit with my strange take on things. I am convinced that most surveys come to the very conclusions they set out to prove. This one was no different.

When they called, they said that they needed to interview the person in the household with the most recent birthday. They said the survey was about healthcare and a little about politics. Brenda's birthday is 7 days after mine so I couldn't do the survey. Hmph!

Well, Brenda took the survey. There were lots of topics covered, but when she was done I asked her what the real question was. She wasn't sure, but I had noticed she was frustrated with the multiple choice answers to one of the questions. I asked her what that question was. She said it was, "How important do you rate the economic stimulus package?" She was frustrated because she wanted to say, "I don't think it is the right thing to do!" but the closest option was, "Important, but not urgent." BINGO. I think that was the core question.

The Gallup Association is widely respected. Their polls are quoted as valid measures of the opinion of the public. However, they are carefully worded, multiple choice options at best. At worst, they manipulatively "corral" you into the answers they want to show up on the poll results! If you really want to know my opinion about the Economic Stimulus Package that my hopelessly in debt Federal Government wants to send me the $800 billion+ bill for, then -- for goodness sake -- give me the option to speak my opinion!

Hey, anybody want to do an opinion poll about the quality of opinion polls? Pick me! Pick me!

Young Adults and Word-of-Mouth

On another blog, I have been musing about word of mouth, young adults and how to promo events. This year, I made a decision to NOT do a print brochure for a young adult event that I have been chairing for a couple of years. It wasn't particularly popular with the Baby Boomers who help to facilitate the event, but I was (and still am) convinced that the cost-to-benefit ratio for a full color glossy brochure just didn't justify the brochure.

Then Michael sent me this post from an unrelated-yet-related blog, with this quote, which was quite insightful:

MySpace is over, it's just not cool anymore; Facebook is still cool, but that might not last much longer; and the biggest thing in their life is word of mouth. That's how they hear about music, bands, everything."

If the conclusions drawn by these high-powered, high-paid "gurus" is correct, we have some homework to do, in order to understand how to get the "word" out about events for young adults. What do you think is the way to infect the word-of-mouth machine with info about new and upcoming events and the like?