An Open letter of Apology to anybody negatively impacted by my Yes vote on Utah Constitutional Amendment 3

Good Morning, Day, Afternoon, Evening, or Night, whichever be more appropriate greetings to you as you are reading this.

If you, as an individual, have been negatively impacted by my Yes vote on Utah Constitutional Amendment 3, 2 November 2004, I sincerely apologize.

At the time I did not really feel good about the vote, but I knew it was the expectation of the LDS Church Establishment, whose opinion at that time mattered greatly to me, that I vote Yes on the measure. I have since realized that values, honor, courage, and above all, love, are more important than dogma, fear, intolerance, and hate. I wish I had come to this realization years earlier, as the acceptance of this basic truth has brought me great happiness.

I do not feel it is the role of government to define love. I do not understand how any organization which views marriage as a sacrament allows any secular government to define what is and is not marriage, or requires government to validate said institution. I believe it would be an infringement if the government tried to force a religious organization opposed to gay marriage to perform such rites, but I do not believe this is likely to ever happen, in the United States at least.

Acting in deference to religious and cultural pressures is not an excuse. I realize this, and therefore issues this apology.

Joe

The dream is over...

So... I find myself wishing there was some way to gracefully become a Utah fan. The problem is, I have always hated fair-weather fans, and band-wagonners. I suppose I should take comfort in something somebody told me at work the other day. I am an Eagles fan so there is no concern of me being accused of being a fair weather fan. I guess the implication would be the Eagles suck.

The truth of the matter is, I have been struggling with feelings of ambivalence towards the Y for quite some time. The truth be told, I have much greater respect for the U as an academic institution. The pseudo-academic nature of some of its pursuits frustrates me. The football team is all that really kept me grounded. Now, likely due to the same frustrations I have with the place, it is being left behind, by a far more modernly relevant rival.

We must honor and remember the past. We must live in the now. We must look to the future. I fear this development, in the arguably marginally important realm of collegiate sports, only forbodes the struggle BYU will face remaining relevant in a world that is rapidly leaving it behind.

So perhaps, a Utah man I shall be. If I could only find a graceful exit...

Musings

So,

For those of you who do not know me (I realize that was a heck of an assumption to make as nobody reads this blog anyway, and if anyone does, it is highly likely he/she/they does/do know me), I am somewhat a fan of U2. Those who know me maybe a little better, will know that a lot of what interests me about U2 are the political nature of their music and the idealism and activism of their front man.

I have been following a lot of various policy and foreign affairs sites lately (I like knowing what is going on in the world and I also like knowing what people out there are doing to make it a better/worse place) and just went to www.one.org for the first time in a long time. Going there I saw some of the stuff about one causes and I can't help but think of something that has come up several times in conversation with other people abot Bono. I have heard several people remark that they like U2, but they wish Bono would shut up about his causes. I have had people indicate to me they have issues with his causes.

I have occasionally asked which causes they take issue with. The campaign to end extreme poverty? The campaign against hunger? The campaign to irradicate malaria? The campaign to provide treatment for people infected with aids and fight that terrible disease in Africa? I cannot help what wonder which of these causes people find repugnant. I have a hard time to find a good justification for opposing those causes. Especially for people who claim to love and follow Christ. You know, that crazy fellow who wandered about telling people to love their enemies and feed the poor and clothe the naked.

I don't get it. I really don't get it. People are happy to remember the parts of the Gospels that can and probably should be interpreted as being punitive or judgemental. They latch onto Mosaic divine justice and retribution. They want blood sacrifice, forgetting that, at least according to their sectarian beliefs the final blood sacrifice has been made. They remember mercy only when they have cheated on their wives or gotten caught stealing or making some incredibly insensitive comment or the like that is sure to result in checking into rehab.

I wonder what it is that people find offensive about somebody working alost tirelessly to get people involved in resolving some of the greatest causes of human suffering.

Peace.

Joe

Ammended

I need to stop blogging late at night and in bed and stuff. Actually, I need to start blogging more, but less in a diminished mental state, i.e. sleep deprived and such.

Anyway, the whole purpose of my second point from the "Frustrated" post was meant to be that the only way we have even the slimmest shot at what could be considered even menial success in Afghanistan is with the support of the locals. That will never, ever, ever be won by using harsher tactics. Even now when we, at least ostensibly, care about limiting collateral casualties, we still generally fail colosally, and even when we do not, we do not really have the whole public relations campaign working for us over there, and suspicion and misinformation regarding U.S. intentions and the results of various operations abound.

We need the people on our side. Let me rephrase. We need more of the people on our side. We need much more support from the ethnic Pashtuns. Harsher tactics will not garner that support.

Another sort of sub-point I would like to add to this is Afghanistan will never be Germany. Without public support (Afghan and American), it will not even be Bosnia or Kosovo. Without significant participation from the locals, and without some pretty significant changes in attitude, as well as the general socio-economic structure of the country, it will be impossible to see the U.S. maintain a longterm presence (ala Korea and Germany), in Afghanistan, because it will be way too costly.

At any rate. More ramblings of a fool.

Whatever happens, it will take a lot of work for us to accomplish anything significant over there. It will take a lot of patience, and all the boys and girls who are over there serving the cause must be on their absolutely best behavior.

Peace.

Joe

Frustrated

I am frustrated.

I realize that I have been doing rather horribly as far as posting goes. I have gotten in a bit of a funk and not really been in that much of a writing mood. Also, I would prefer my posts be at least somewhat credible and more than just emotionally charged junk. I think there are a lot of folks who make a lot of money out there selling semi-truths and dealing in rhetoric. I wouldn't want it even if I was a desired commodity (which obviously I am not). My lack of bona fides makes me feel inadequate when it comes to having an opinion on anything.

I am frustrated. I am frustrated at the inability of people to get outside of their own heads. I am frustrated that people are unwilling to learn from history. I am frustrated that the only history a lot of people out there are interested in is some idealized and mythological dream past where everybody held hands and pranced about flying old glory and singing "Yankee Doodle" and having a time of it.

I am not an intentional cynic. I am some ways feel myself forced to cynicism. I would rather be considered a realist and honest seeker of truth. The problem is, for some people, there is no reality beyond a reality that is based on in many cases nothing tangible at all, and there is no truth beyond their often narrowly acquired truth.

I am not talking philosophy or religion here (although I do believe that some peoples' concept of "religious truth" does limit their receptiveness to the possibility of a worldview or perception that falls outside their understanding of said concept). I mean garbage like only conservatives are patriots and the only real America is somewhere in the "middle" (whatever that means) or the frozen tundras of Mooslaska (yes, I realize this could be viewed as a generalization of the type I am deriding, but I feel the need to make it clear I am not actually questioning the validity or patriotism or Americanism in general terms of anybody falling in these geographical parameters).

I am frustrated today cause I hear people talking about the issues of collateral damage in Afghanistan and pushing for a more bloody policy against the terrorists or insurgents or whatever you want to call them, and I have two questions.

The first question I want to ask is how many children these individuals have shot in the face. That is kind of harsh and graphic, but that is my point. Or perhaps how many children being shot in the face is acceptable. I can tell you that the proportion of the Afghan population that would be categorized as children is extremely high, so children are likely to comprise a fairly significant percentage of all collateral. Women, who in many cases are below children in social status and are equally defenseless also comprise high levels of collateral. People for some reason think it is okay to kill random people with bombs. For some reason the fact that it is impersonal and the collateral so unavoidable make it okay. But the end result is really no different from shooting people in the face. I suppose one could make the argument that by killing people over there we are saving lives over here. I have all kinds of issues with that idea that I may get into some other time, but... This is an ideological argument so, you know, whatever.

The second question I have is why people do not study history. The Soviets used much more heavy-handed methods in their fight against the Mujahideen, and look how successful they were. I am not saying we are the Soviets. I am not saying that the current insurgents are anti-Soviet Mujahideen, except, there is the nasty and unfortunate facts that many of the important people behind what is going on in Afghanistan are the same "freedom fighters" who fought the Soviets, and while we are definitely not the Soviets, and I think our motives and hopes for Afghanistan are generally much more benevolent, the people we are fighting see us much the same. Actually, I think they respect the Soviets a little more, because they were much more ruthless. Regardless, the lesson from history, is conducting military operations without concern for civilian casualties is not an effective strategy for Afghanistan. It did not work for the Soviets. If we were foolish enough to pursue such a policy, it would not work for us. Now, it is true that we backed the Mujihadeen, and that was a key component of their ability to defeat the Soviets. Some would argue that is a significant factor I suppose. My response would be that there are all sorts of people out there who will back the Taliban and everybody else against us.

Anyway. These are just my thoughts on the matter. I believe them sound, but hey, like I said, no bona fides.

Whatever.

I love my country. I love its people. I believe it is the greatest nation on Earth. I do not, however, believe that makes me better than anybody who was not blessed or privileged or whatever to be born here or somehow have managed to immigrate legally. I also do not believe that other nations should not be great. I believe that America's greatness should benefit her people. I also believe that America's greatness should benefit all of humanity.

I suppose the most critical argument among the Left and Right and everybody in between could be expressed in the question: What makes America great? The answer to that question I believe would fairly accurately reflect the sometimes violent differences of ideologies.

Anyway,

Peace, be you blue or red or left or right or completely apathetic.

The Hurt

I just watched an incredible film. It is called The Hurt Locker. It ie about an EOD team in Iraq. I am not sure that anyone who has not experienced war can fully appreciate the film, but I appreciate it.

I pity those who have not known what it is to be under fire, to put life on the line. I have in my own small way walked the line and I am not sure I know how to equate all that to normal civil life.

There is no way to put in words how it feels to be wakened in the middle of a clear dark night, smoke and powder in the air. To see the tracers overhead. To hear the whistle of bullets passing by.

There is truly a clarity in battle. And though I hate the war, and the futility of it all, there is a part of me that misses the clarity of serving a just cause, and fighting the good fight. I do not believe there is a true soldier living who does not envy the flag-draped coffin.

I am not sure how to reconcile being here, while my brothers and sisters are there, in the crosshairs, or in the cold dark tomb.

Truly there be none who can long for peace as a soldier longeth for peace, yet there is also a longing for the moment of proof, where life hangs in the balance, and the cause is just.

I fear my soul will never know peace as long as there be war, and I am left on the bench, in the wings. Truly I cannot know happiness when I know my sisters and brothers are far from home, and in harm's way.

Nobody can understand war, and peace, honor and freedom, like a soldier. And oh how I feel I have failed to live up to the challenge posed by the suffering and sacrifice of my kin. Whatever god there be, grant me strength to bear my cross, and lose myself.

Greater love hath no man than this, that he layeth down his life for his brother.

How can I know peace when my brothers and sisters are in the dark. In the cold. On the deserts or mountains of distant lands. How can I find joy in my woman's arms, and my childrens' embrace, when my sisters and brothers are fighting and dying.

I long for the day when the sword shall be beaten into the plowshare, and the childrn of men or God or whatever shall know peace.

Truly there is no peace for the soldier away from the fight. How can I know joy when my brothers and sister's are gone.

As they say in Pashto, bas, enough. I have had my time and my time issure to come again. Now is the time to lay up for the harvest. TO strengthen and prepare. The waters are at the banks and the flood shall surely come.

Carpe Diem. Dulce et decorem est, pro patria more. Pur father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name.

I shall bide my time and prepare myself.

I am an American Soldier.
I am a Warrior and a member of a team.
I serve the people of the United States, and live the Army Values.
I will always place the mission first.
I will never accept defeat.
I will never quit.
I will never leave a fallen comrade.
I am disciplined, physically and mentally tough, trained and proficient in my warrior tasks and drills.
I always maintain my arms, my equipment and myself.
I am an expert and I am a professional.
I stand ready to deploy, engage, and destroy, the enemies of the United States of America in close combat.
I am a guardian of freedom and the American way of life.
I am an American Soldier.

Time to recommit. To prepare. To know, be, and do.

Civilized?

I have been fascinated lately with the idea of civilization. It seems that societies have a tendency to determine for themselves what behaviors are or are not civilized and then make an assumption that that is necessarily a standard that can be applied to and imposed upon all civilizations, cultures, and institutions that do not conform to the standards of acceptable civility. Interestingly enough the only real thing that determines the primacy of one set of social and cultural values is inherently superior might, both militarily and economically. Lately I have spent a great deal of time ruminating over whether the modern Western ideal of civilization is actually all that great a thing, or at least the American version of it. I really don’t think I have any good answers yet.

One of the things I find most fascinating is the debate lately about the ability of “Christian” states to adapt to the modern (and inherently better????) and the failure of Muslim states to do so. I personally feel this is a tremendous case of cultural and spiritual blindness and completely disingenuous. Most of the successes of the West I would term to be scientific and economic. The scientific advances occurred, in many instances, in spite of Christianity, rather than because of it. The sectarians, both the leaders and the masses, have been at best antagonistic to scientific progress. True Galileo and Copernicus have been vindicated but the battle with Darwin is still raging. In Evangelical and fundamentalist Christian areas of the United States there is a great distrust of science, and I believe much of this is due to the fight over creationism vs. evolution. So the west has generally been able to accept technology and science, but in many cases it has been in a disregard to the bastions of Christianity. I do not believe that Christian culture inherently led to the great reforms and discoveries of the western world. The brave men and world who made real impact generally either did so in the dark, were forced to recant, were burned at the stake, or were somehow lucky to have been born and worked after the inquisitions and the intellectual purges.

To tie Western economic dominance to Christianity is a travesty. The West has been very successful at subverting some of Christ’s most basic teachings to fit its materialist/economic ends. I am sure if Jesus were to come around today he would definitely say that it is okay to do whatever is necessary to live a comfortable life of more than modest means. Forget the poor and the hungry. They are lazy and stupid anyway so it is their fault they are poor. It seems to me that many Westerners, Capitalists, and honest Churchgoers would put more stock in the words of Ebenezer Scrooge (“Are there no prisons, no workhouses”) than the words of Christ when it comes to our dealings with the poor. Ultimately something will trickle down anyway so everything will be alright. I fear that Western material success has come through extensive and selective forgetting of Jesus’ teachings.

Another thing that fascinates me about being civilized is the detached impersonality by which we kill. I think the motives for war have not really changed since the first hominid clubbed his buddy because he coveted his furs or woman or dog or magic rock or whatever. We tend to try to glorify it and make it look better but basically every war comes down to somebody trying to take something somebody else has or somebody trying to protect what he/she has from being taken. And there may be noble justifications for it. What is incredible though is the extent to which the “civilized” nations have taken war. I think in some ways the world was a much better place when people battled with sticks and knives and swords and shields and whatnot. You had to actually see the man or woman you were killing and get his or her blood on your face. You had to slip and slide and stumble in the limbs and the gore and the blood. But you had to be actively involved in the act of killing. I think it was especially significant that Kings and Lords used to fight along with everybody else. I do not see a superior civility or justness in a system where enemies are killed from afar with big explosions or little bullets or even bigger explosions and men and women completely detached from the reality of war and death make the decisions.

This gets me finally to the Death Penalty, which is what got me going on all this to begin with. I think that if we really have so much confidence on our justice system that it can justly administer death, then it should be done much more judiciously. A sentence of death should be passed by a jury, and carried out as quickly as possible after it is passed. Not only that, it should be such that a member of the jury will be randomly selected to carry out the sentence. If we have the confidence that we have the right and the responsibility to kill criminals, we should feel confident enough in our justice system that each citizen would be willing to pull the trigger him or herself, with no compunctions. It is evident to me that we do not have the confidence in our system to believe that the death penalty is fairly and justly administered, so we should not be doing it.

So these are some of my recent thoughts.