Personal Essay May 14, 2011
“I saw a squirrel get hit by a truck”
While walking the dogs along the street that runs through our subdivision, I saw (and heard) a squirrel get hit by a truck. The driver no did not stop, or even slow down. The old man seemed in a hurry to get to where he was going.
I heard the Thump; and saw the final shake, as the tail twitched back and forth. Cars zoomed by. Though now a carcass, I did not want another to hit it. They missed as they hurried up the lane.
I looked around. Trees were in full bloom. All bedecked in green, as squirrels and birds lived among their branches. Flowers and grasses marked the path ahead. All was alive.
I stopped to take it in as my dogs were panting; waiting patiently for me to move.
Such is life. But a death too early is not a happy thing.
I thought of the Native Americans’ view that everything has a spirit. Father Sky, I’ve heard them say. Something in that way of thinking brought peace.
Everything is Spirit. The Imago Dei, image of God.
As I continued my walk, nature seemed to echo this statement. Wind rustled through the green canopy above. A squirrel on a nearby tree stopped mid-climb to stare at me, the human stranger. My dogs’ tails swayed happily back and forth.
Life continues on.
Rest well little squirrel. Your spirit moves on.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Why the NHRA is better
NHRA
It seems that we rarely hear about the NHRA anymore. They used to be on TV often, but in the world of auto racing NASCAR has become more popular.
Yet I like hot rods better.
1. The track is shorter; I do not have to wait all day to see who will win
2. There are many small races instead of one big race
3. I like the funny cars and the nitro cars so I get variety, whereas NASCAR has the same type
4. Yeah I admit it, I like the smoke, the squealing tires and the sometimes crashes.
I guess some people like NASCAR and the rest like NHRA –maybe my attention span is just too short
It seems that we rarely hear about the NHRA anymore. They used to be on TV often, but in the world of auto racing NASCAR has become more popular.
Yet I like hot rods better.
1. The track is shorter; I do not have to wait all day to see who will win
2. There are many small races instead of one big race
3. I like the funny cars and the nitro cars so I get variety, whereas NASCAR has the same type
4. Yeah I admit it, I like the smoke, the squealing tires and the sometimes crashes.
I guess some people like NASCAR and the rest like NHRA –maybe my attention span is just too short
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
On Anti-theism
A listing on the Democratic Underground website attempts to draw a distiction between atheism and anti-theism. The writer postulates that the anti-theist believes that all religion are not just wrong ( in a theoretical sense), but also bad. The effects of following religion is that the individual becomes brainwashed and is able to justify bad or evil acts.Further they contend that even those things that are considered good can be achieved independent of religion, such as feeding the poor, and healing the sick. In fact the write argues that these acts are weakened through a religious lens.
Two problems I see with this approach, and with those who espouse a strong atheism. First, they are blinded by the very biases that see in religious people. For them to be truthful, they need to account for the fact that just as not everything done in religion is good, the opposite is also true: that everything done from an a-religious, or secular ideology is also not always good. Unless an atheist can argue that the atheist belief system (and not just individual followers) can produce evil then they are biased.
Secondly, the anti-religious (which I contend is the correct term since ant-theism rejects a belief in a Deity but not in a religion per se), argue that what is primarily wrong with religion is that it is illogical, and irrational. They then believe that logic and rationality are key to a enlightened and "better" life. But, what is rational and logical? Unless one is willing to counter that certain things occur in an illogical, irrational or counter-intuitive fashion--perhaps only initially until better understanding or time passes--then these people are biased. But being defined as biased in not something that a logical, rational, and enlightened person is apt to admit.
Two problems I see with this approach, and with those who espouse a strong atheism. First, they are blinded by the very biases that see in religious people. For them to be truthful, they need to account for the fact that just as not everything done in religion is good, the opposite is also true: that everything done from an a-religious, or secular ideology is also not always good. Unless an atheist can argue that the atheist belief system (and not just individual followers) can produce evil then they are biased.
Secondly, the anti-religious (which I contend is the correct term since ant-theism rejects a belief in a Deity but not in a religion per se), argue that what is primarily wrong with religion is that it is illogical, and irrational. They then believe that logic and rationality are key to a enlightened and "better" life. But, what is rational and logical? Unless one is willing to counter that certain things occur in an illogical, irrational or counter-intuitive fashion--perhaps only initially until better understanding or time passes--then these people are biased. But being defined as biased in not something that a logical, rational, and enlightened person is apt to admit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)