Well all, I know that it has been some time since I have written, but you wouldn't believe how hard internet has been to come by for me. It is accessible enough here, but I'm somewhat limited by my mobility. Kampala is known here in Africa as the City of Seven Hills so you can imagine how that works for me.
Moving on...
Since I've written last so much has happened. I have been to Rwanda, and there I touched the graves of over 60 thousand people. I cannot even begin to tell you the totality of emotion that overwhelmed me there. I rode the bus from Kampala to Kigali for 11 hours, and let me tell you I was most definately ready to get off that bus when the time came.
We went to the Kigali to see the Rwandan Genocide Memorial there and I was speechless to say the least. I always used to ask myself, if genocide had a smell, what would it be? I think it would smell like indifference smells - like red dirt after a long rain. They say here in africa that the dirt is red because so much blood is shed here. As I looked out at the mass graves of the innocent I smelt the red dirt around me and knew that must have at least an ounce of truth to it.
What touched me more than the museum though I think has to be the woman i will call The Mourner. She works at one of the memorial churches in Rwanda, about a 30 minute drive out from Kigali. You drive out to see it because it's preserved just the way it was during tte genocide. It's everything a Church should never be - blood everywhere, shrapnal, and bones underneath foot. The Mourner didn't speak English, only her tribal language, and our guide spoke the tribal language, but only French and not English. So, our tour went something like this: She would talk to us in her lanugague, our guide would repeat it in French, and I would choke back tears as I had to explain in English that this wall we were looking at wasn't really brown - it was white. This wall we were looking at is what one sees after hundreds of babies have been tossed against it and their skulls have shattered.
She would speak, he would speak, and then I would speak
I would try to speak
of the Genociders tossing grenades through the doors of a church
of women being raped on the communion table
of husbands being forced to watch their wives defiled then killed
of children mutilated and tortured
of holy water spilt on the ground and trampled on
of the icon of the Virgin Mary shot because she too was a Tutsi, so say the Genociders.
She would cry, he would be sick, and I would turn and face my companions and say
These are the skulls of the babies - those holes and dents are from batallions
these are the coffins of the 40 thousand dead men women and children
this is the blood stained pew of a place of God and a place of worship
this is a scene that God loving and fearing people world-wide turned their backs on
Surely Jesus would care more about this happening in his house of worship than when he turned the tables of the money changers?
My heart is forever marked with the dirt on those graves, and my shirt stained with the tears of The Mourner - she knew me naught, nor could she understand me when I spoke, but when I cried, she came and cried with me.
Christians, Jews, Muslims, people of faith: where are we while these Church Massacres are happening world-wide?
What does it smell like - do you smell the dirt?
--
"Because of the devastation of the afflicted, because of the groaning of the needy, now I will arise, says the Lord. I will set him in the safety for which he longs." - Psalm 12:5
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Sunday, April 22, 2007
I Will Sing
I Will Sing
I will sing for the meek
For those who pray with their very lives for peace
Though they're in chains for a higher call
Their mourning will change into laughter when the nations fall
In spirit poor
In mercy rich
They hunger for Your righteousness
Their hearts refined in the purity
Lord let me shine for them
Lord let me sing
Lord let me shine for them
Lord let me sing
- Rich Mullins
I will sing for the meek
For those who pray with their very lives for peace
Though they're in chains for a higher call
Their mourning will change into laughter when the nations fall
In spirit poor
In mercy rich
They hunger for Your righteousness
Their hearts refined in the purity
Lord let me shine for them
Lord let me sing
Lord let me shine for them
Lord let me sing
- Rich Mullins
A Culture of Self Defense
April 18, 2007
Wanted: A Culture of Self-Defense
By Michelle Malkin
There's no polite way or time to say it: American colleges and universities have become coddle industries. Big Nanny administrators oversee speech codes, segregated dorms, politically correct academic departments and designated "safe spaces" to protect students selectively from hurtful (conservative) opinions -- while allowing mob rule for approved leftist positions (textbook case: Columbia University's anti-Minuteman Project protesters).
Instead of teaching students to defend their beliefs, American educators shield them from vigorous intellectual debate. Instead of encouraging autonomy, our higher institutions of learning stoke passivity and conflict-avoidance.
And as the erosion of intellectual self-defense goes, so goes the erosion of physical self-defense.
Yesterday morning, as news was breaking about the carnage at Virginia Tech, a reader e-mailed me a news story from last January. State legislators in Virginia had attempted to pass a bill that would have eased handgun restrictions on college campuses. Opposed by outspoken, anti-gun activists and Virginia Tech administrators, that bill failed.
Is it too early to ask: "What if?" What if that bill had passed? What if just one student in one of those classrooms had been in lawful possession of a concealed weapon for the purpose of self-defense?
If it wasn't too early for Keystone Katie Couric to be jumping all over campus security yesterday for what they woulda/coulda/shoulda done in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, and if it isn't too early for The New York Times editorial board to be publishing its knee-jerk call for more gun control, it darned well isn't too early for me to raise questions about how the unrepentant anti-gun lobbying of college officials may have put students at risk.
The back story: Virginia Tech had punished a student for bringing a handgun to class last spring -- despite the fact that the student had a valid concealed handgun permit. The bill would have barred public universities from making "rules or regulations limiting or abridging the ability of a student who possesses a valid concealed handgun permit . . . from lawfully carrying a concealed handgun." After the proposal died in subcommittee, the school's governing board reiterated its ban on students or employees carrying guns and prohibiting visitors from bringing them into campus buildings.
Late last summer, a shooting near campus prompted students to clamor again for loosening campus rules against armed self-defense. Virginia Tech officials turned up their noses. In response to student Bradford Wiles's campus newspaper op-ed piece in support of concealed carry on campus, Virginia Tech Associate Vice President Larry Hincker scoffed:
"[I]t is absolutely mind-boggling to see the opinions of Bradford Wiles. . . . The editors of this page must have printed this commentary if for no other reason than malicious compliance. Surely, they scratched their heads saying, 'I can't believe he really wants to say that.' Wiles tells us that he didn't feel safe with the hundreds of highly trained officers armed with high powered rifles encircling the building and protecting him. He even implies that he needed his sidearm to protect himself . . ."
The nerve!
Hincker continued: "The writer would have us believe that a university campus, with tens of thousands of young people, is safer with everyone packing heat. Imagine the continual fear of students in that scenario. We've seen that fear here, and we don't want to see it again. . . . Guns don't belong in classrooms. They never will. Virginia Tech has a very sound policy preventing same."
Who's scratching his head now, Mr. Hincker?
Some high-handed commentators insist it's premature or unseemly to examine the impact of school rules discouraging students from carrying arms on campus. Pundit Andrew Sullivan complained that it was "creepy" to highlight reader e-mails calling attention to Virginia Tech's restrictions on student self-defense -- even as the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence rushed to capitalize on the massacre to sign up new members and gather e-mail addresses for Million Mom March chapters. "We are outraged by the increase in gun violence in America, especially the recent shooting at Virginia Tech," reads the online petition. "Add your name to the growing list of people who are saying: 'Enough Is Enough!'"
Enough is enough, indeed. Enough of intellectual disarmament. Enough of physical disarmament. You want a safer campus? It begins with renewing a culture of self-defense -- mind, spirit and body. It begins with two words: Fight back.
Copyright 2007 Creators Syndicate Inc.
Wanted: A Culture of Self-Defense
By Michelle Malkin
There's no polite way or time to say it: American colleges and universities have become coddle industries. Big Nanny administrators oversee speech codes, segregated dorms, politically correct academic departments and designated "safe spaces" to protect students selectively from hurtful (conservative) opinions -- while allowing mob rule for approved leftist positions (textbook case: Columbia University's anti-Minuteman Project protesters).
Instead of teaching students to defend their beliefs, American educators shield them from vigorous intellectual debate. Instead of encouraging autonomy, our higher institutions of learning stoke passivity and conflict-avoidance.
And as the erosion of intellectual self-defense goes, so goes the erosion of physical self-defense.
Yesterday morning, as news was breaking about the carnage at Virginia Tech, a reader e-mailed me a news story from last January. State legislators in Virginia had attempted to pass a bill that would have eased handgun restrictions on college campuses. Opposed by outspoken, anti-gun activists and Virginia Tech administrators, that bill failed.
Is it too early to ask: "What if?" What if that bill had passed? What if just one student in one of those classrooms had been in lawful possession of a concealed weapon for the purpose of self-defense?
If it wasn't too early for Keystone Katie Couric to be jumping all over campus security yesterday for what they woulda/coulda/shoulda done in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, and if it isn't too early for The New York Times editorial board to be publishing its knee-jerk call for more gun control, it darned well isn't too early for me to raise questions about how the unrepentant anti-gun lobbying of college officials may have put students at risk.
The back story: Virginia Tech had punished a student for bringing a handgun to class last spring -- despite the fact that the student had a valid concealed handgun permit. The bill would have barred public universities from making "rules or regulations limiting or abridging the ability of a student who possesses a valid concealed handgun permit . . . from lawfully carrying a concealed handgun." After the proposal died in subcommittee, the school's governing board reiterated its ban on students or employees carrying guns and prohibiting visitors from bringing them into campus buildings.
Late last summer, a shooting near campus prompted students to clamor again for loosening campus rules against armed self-defense. Virginia Tech officials turned up their noses. In response to student Bradford Wiles's campus newspaper op-ed piece in support of concealed carry on campus, Virginia Tech Associate Vice President Larry Hincker scoffed:
"[I]t is absolutely mind-boggling to see the opinions of Bradford Wiles. . . . The editors of this page must have printed this commentary if for no other reason than malicious compliance. Surely, they scratched their heads saying, 'I can't believe he really wants to say that.' Wiles tells us that he didn't feel safe with the hundreds of highly trained officers armed with high powered rifles encircling the building and protecting him. He even implies that he needed his sidearm to protect himself . . ."
The nerve!
Hincker continued: "The writer would have us believe that a university campus, with tens of thousands of young people, is safer with everyone packing heat. Imagine the continual fear of students in that scenario. We've seen that fear here, and we don't want to see it again. . . . Guns don't belong in classrooms. They never will. Virginia Tech has a very sound policy preventing same."
Who's scratching his head now, Mr. Hincker?
Some high-handed commentators insist it's premature or unseemly to examine the impact of school rules discouraging students from carrying arms on campus. Pundit Andrew Sullivan complained that it was "creepy" to highlight reader e-mails calling attention to Virginia Tech's restrictions on student self-defense -- even as the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence rushed to capitalize on the massacre to sign up new members and gather e-mail addresses for Million Mom March chapters. "We are outraged by the increase in gun violence in America, especially the recent shooting at Virginia Tech," reads the online petition. "Add your name to the growing list of people who are saying: 'Enough Is Enough!'"
Enough is enough, indeed. Enough of intellectual disarmament. Enough of physical disarmament. You want a safer campus? It begins with renewing a culture of self-defense -- mind, spirit and body. It begins with two words: Fight back.
Copyright 2007 Creators Syndicate Inc.
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Blogs
Hey there! I just wanted to inform all of you of the cool thing I recently discovered:
THE CAST OF HOUSE ALL HAVE BLOGS.
YES THAT'S RIGHT
BLOGS.
Just what I needed during finals, no?
THE CAST OF HOUSE ALL HAVE BLOGS.
YES THAT'S RIGHT
BLOGS.
Just what I needed during finals, no?
Monday, April 09, 2007
Church & State
So I've been thinking, it's easy conclude that the “church” and the “state” have independent spheres to operate in, and one does not control the other. This is true to the extent that there is no state sponsored church, nor is there a papal state. But what of the idea that when there is a disagreement between the “church” and the “state” we ought to keep in mind who holds the advantage in the tie-breaker: the state. Is this a reality - an insightful description of a society we ought not desire, but society as it stands nonetheless?
But should we even seek for the balance of power in government to be different? It would seem on face that Christians should disagree with the premise that the government ought to have last say on such disputes, because it would de facto translate into a weaker church. However, I believe the real issue goes much deeper.
Churches left to their own devices have historically followed society’s discriminatory practices - such as discrimination against the deaf and hearing impaired, migrant workers, and blacks and slaves, and the poor - and have often been among the last social institutions to jump on the bandwagon of tolerance and civil rights. So just because the state does not control the church doesn’t mean society does not influence the church. At the same time, our current political system makes allowances for special interest groups and individual voting across party lines. Within the current balance of power, if the state decides a dispute between it and the church in a manner that does not satisfy a congregation’s or a denomination’s expectations, the state does not close off other avenues within the political system for the group or individual to respond. There still remain the options of lobbying, voting, and protesting. But if we make the church the final arbitrator of these disputes, then we close off due process to individual members.
The “church” need not be viewed as just its own communal entity, but also as an aggregate of individual members. While the Supreme Court has already made clear that the separation of church and state prevents them from deciding doctrinal issues, it does not prevent them from preserving social norms of safety general public welfare. And even then, the state is really not the final decision maker on any novel dispute, because it is only requiring the church to be as safe as secular buildings. What happens when the church refuses to make its parking lot handicap accessible or to follow the Fire Marshal’s mandate for fire extinguishers? Due process is shut off to the victimized if the state cannot be the final decision-maker. While it is true one individual may move to a different church, a whole America full of people cannot be expected to endure sub-human treatment or to burn alive in a church that didn’t want to pay for smoke alarms.
But should we even seek for the balance of power in government to be different? It would seem on face that Christians should disagree with the premise that the government ought to have last say on such disputes, because it would de facto translate into a weaker church. However, I believe the real issue goes much deeper.
Churches left to their own devices have historically followed society’s discriminatory practices - such as discrimination against the deaf and hearing impaired, migrant workers, and blacks and slaves, and the poor - and have often been among the last social institutions to jump on the bandwagon of tolerance and civil rights. So just because the state does not control the church doesn’t mean society does not influence the church. At the same time, our current political system makes allowances for special interest groups and individual voting across party lines. Within the current balance of power, if the state decides a dispute between it and the church in a manner that does not satisfy a congregation’s or a denomination’s expectations, the state does not close off other avenues within the political system for the group or individual to respond. There still remain the options of lobbying, voting, and protesting. But if we make the church the final arbitrator of these disputes, then we close off due process to individual members.
The “church” need not be viewed as just its own communal entity, but also as an aggregate of individual members. While the Supreme Court has already made clear that the separation of church and state prevents them from deciding doctrinal issues, it does not prevent them from preserving social norms of safety general public welfare. And even then, the state is really not the final decision maker on any novel dispute, because it is only requiring the church to be as safe as secular buildings. What happens when the church refuses to make its parking lot handicap accessible or to follow the Fire Marshal’s mandate for fire extinguishers? Due process is shut off to the victimized if the state cannot be the final decision-maker. While it is true one individual may move to a different church, a whole America full of people cannot be expected to endure sub-human treatment or to burn alive in a church that didn’t want to pay for smoke alarms.
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Cell Phone vs. Bible
I wonder what would happen if we treated our Bible like
we treat our cell phones?
What if we carried it around in our purses or pockets?
What if we turned back to go get it if we forgot it?
What if we flipped through it several times a day?
What if we used it to receive messages from the text?
What if we treated it like we couldn't live without it?
What if we gave it to kids as gifts?
What if we used it as we traveled?
What if we used it in case of an emergency?
This is something to make you go ...hmm...where is my Bible?
Oh, and one more thing. Unlike our cell phone, we don't ever have
to worry about our Bible being disconnected because Jesus already
paid the bill!
we treat our cell phones?
What if we carried it around in our purses or pockets?
What if we turned back to go get it if we forgot it?
What if we flipped through it several times a day?
What if we used it to receive messages from the text?
What if we treated it like we couldn't live without it?
What if we gave it to kids as gifts?
What if we used it as we traveled?
What if we used it in case of an emergency?
This is something to make you go ...hmm...where is my Bible?
Oh, and one more thing. Unlike our cell phone, we don't ever have
to worry about our Bible being disconnected because Jesus already
paid the bill!
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
All For You
All For You
Sister Hazel
Finally I figured out,
But it took a long long time
Now there's a turnabout,
Maybe cause I'm tryin'
There's been times, I'm so confused
Down my road, will it lead to you?
Just can't turn and walk away
It's hard to say what it is I see in you
Wonder if I'll always be with you
Words can't say it, I can't do
Enough to prove, it's all for you
And I'd thought I seen it all,
Cause it's been a long long time
Oh bothered that we'll trip and fall,
Wonderin' if I'm alive
There's been times, I'm so confused
Down my road, will it lead to you?
I just can't turn, you walk away
Its hard to say what it is I see in you
Wonder if I'll always be with you
Words can't say, and I can't do
Enough to prove it's all for you
Rain comes pourin' down,
Fallin' from blue skies
Words give out a sound,
comin' from your eyes
Finally I figured out,
But it took a long long time
Oh now there's a turnabout,
Maybe cause I'm tryin'
There's been times, I'm so confused
Down my road, will it lead to you?
Just can't turn, you walk away
Its hard to say what it is I see in you
Wonder if I'll always be with you
Words can't say, I can't do
Enough to prove it's all for you
Well it's hard to say what it is I see in you
Wonder if I'll always be with you
Words can't say, I can't do
Enough to prove, it's all for you
Hard to say
Hard to say, it's all for you
Sister Hazel
Finally I figured out,
But it took a long long time
Now there's a turnabout,
Maybe cause I'm tryin'
There's been times, I'm so confused
Down my road, will it lead to you?
Just can't turn and walk away
It's hard to say what it is I see in you
Wonder if I'll always be with you
Words can't say it, I can't do
Enough to prove, it's all for you
And I'd thought I seen it all,
Cause it's been a long long time
Oh bothered that we'll trip and fall,
Wonderin' if I'm alive
There's been times, I'm so confused
Down my road, will it lead to you?
I just can't turn, you walk away
Its hard to say what it is I see in you
Wonder if I'll always be with you
Words can't say, and I can't do
Enough to prove it's all for you
Rain comes pourin' down,
Fallin' from blue skies
Words give out a sound,
comin' from your eyes
Finally I figured out,
But it took a long long time
Oh now there's a turnabout,
Maybe cause I'm tryin'
There's been times, I'm so confused
Down my road, will it lead to you?
Just can't turn, you walk away
Its hard to say what it is I see in you
Wonder if I'll always be with you
Words can't say, I can't do
Enough to prove it's all for you
Well it's hard to say what it is I see in you
Wonder if I'll always be with you
Words can't say, I can't do
Enough to prove, it's all for you
Hard to say
Hard to say, it's all for you
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)