I feel a little like I’m beating a dead horse, even though I know this post isn’t really. It comes in a similar vain to the posts of the last few days.

Did you know it’s possible to enjoy most things? Let me be more specific. Did you know that it’s okay to enjoy the classically lame tunes of Nsync; Footloose in all of its cheesy glory; hell, even old episodes of Full House!

When I speak to people, especially younger people, I get this consistent sense of the entertainment taboos. I don’t know who’s coming up with this stuff, but it’s really annoying and frankly, pointless. Even within the same genre of music, the Postal Service is okay to listen to, but Owl City is ‘gay’. Barring my own annoyance at people using that word in that way, it’s also just plain irrational.

Sometime around 19 or 20 I made private commitment to myself to enjoy whatever I enjoy. And I know, I’ve probably written about this before. But see, I realized at that time, if I’m totally honest, I can’t deny that I enjoy the sound of most music. I enjoy most movies I watch. There were all kinds of things coming out of the entertainment industry that I “didn’t like”, but not for any reason that involved what I was actually seeing or hearing.

What I realized at that time when I made that commitment to myself was that my dislikes were mostly ideological or social. Meaning something to the effect of not liking Owl City because it was a lame rip-off of the “real stuff” the Postal Service was making. I wouldn’t have liked the Twilight series because it was full of cheap gimmicks. Nevermind the fact that Owl City is catchy and fun, and the Twilight series is plenty entertaining.

For some reason, for a lot of people, being entertaining or being catchy isn’t good enough to give permission to enjoy something. That is very stupid and it’s a self deprivation that’s based on almost nothing.

See, I feel that I’ve discovered an important distinction. There are some kinds of entertainment that are fun and just plain entertaining, then there are some that should also be respected.

What do I mean by that? I mean that I can enjoy and have fun with the catchy tunes from Owl City, but I can respect The Postal Service. This is an important distinction. With this mental divide, my ideological and social qualms with some particular piece of entertainment cannot prevent me from enjoying something which, in a vacuum, I would find quite fun. Now,  it’s very rare that I hear something that I simply do not like. I rarely watch something that I really don’t enjoy. It may still take a lot to impress me, but not to entertain me.

So, let me suggest something to you. Do you often find yourself scoffing at the latest theatrical release? Do you often find yourself rolling your eyes when the latest auto-tuned disfigurement grazes the car speakers? Ask yourself this—If I knew nothing of this artist, of the current state of music or movies or tv, if I had no idea what my peers thought of this, would I still roll my eyes? Would I still scoff? I’m willing to bet, with reasonable confidence, that if most people are honest with themselves, they’d say that yeah, they enjoy it.

There it is. There will be the proof that you are unnecessarily barring yourself from enjoying much more than you already are.

From my own experience, I strongly encourage you to make the distinction I’ve made. Find the artists and the art that you respect, but allow yourself to enjoy whatever you want. It’s freeing. It’s fun. And, it makes it much easier to share interests with more people, more often. I assure you, you won’t regret it.

Cause lets be honest, climbing a tree, playing tag, or a good round of sardines may be childish, but it’s fun. And likewise, Lady Gaga may be cheesy, but the music sure is a hoot to listen to.

A few days ago I posted about Lillian, an elderly woman who was widowed late last week after 62 years of marriage.

Unfortunately, Lillian’s mind is flirting with dementia, although she’s not totally gone. Much of the time she is lucid, or at least appears to be to anyone speaking with her. But, since her husband has died, she will not be fit to live alone. In her moments of distress, she is simply in too much danger. So, with no one to look after her, she will have to be moved into a assisted living facility.

As a self-proclaimed, independent woman, she isn’t happy about this transition. But her safety is at stake and unfortunately, her mind isn’t working well enough to make these decisions. She will be required to live where she can get care when she needs it.

Only a few hours after entering the facility where she will undergo a psychiatric evaluation, and possibly where she will be living, I was given directions to take some of her belongings to her. Immediately upon entering, Lillian insisted that I take her home. She proceeded to follow me around, determined not to let me leave without her.

It was at this time that I nearly lost my cool and jumped down facility staff’s throat. You see, Lillian was causing trouble. She didn’t want to comply. So, in an attempt to coerce cooperation out of Lillian, the staff continually lied to her. Not little white lies—bold-faced lies. Lies that couldn’t in any way even be construed as honesty.

“Lillian, just come over here and talk to me. Then we’ll let you go home.”

“Lillian, I promise, I won’t let him leave. Just come talk to me then you can get in his car and go home.”

“Lillian, he didn’t drive here. He walked. He can’t drive home. He’s just going to leave and get his car, then he’ll come back and pick you up so you can go home.”

Lillian is not so gone that she was fooled by any of this. Each time they used the word “home”, I felt like I could see her heart break a little bit. She knew good and well they were lying. Lillian is alone and while she’s not entirely rational, she knows it. With each lie seeking cooperation, I imagine that Lillian must feel how alone she is.

I understand that to be an attendant at a nursing home must be extremely challenging. But when you lie to someone get their cooperation, you not only strip them of the little freedom they have, but you also rob them of their dignity. For these attendants to lie in order to get these elderly patients to comply, completely disrespects these people whom other cultures would hold with the highest esteem—and with good reason.

Because I think companies should be held responsible for their actions, however trivial some people may find them, I will tell you that the nursing facility is called Hartsfield here in Bowie. The facility is nice, but consider carefully whether or not compliance is really worth more than dignity. And for Lillian, please continue to pray. This is likely the most difficult time she has ever experienced—or likely ever will.

Let’s say you had a child and you told them that eating Oreo cookies would would kill them. Of course, you were being extreme and saying that if you eat too many Oreo cookies you could get morbidly obese and die of heart failure. But what you told them was an exaggeration to help protect them from getting fat off Oreo cookies and dying.

Well, one day at lunch, one of the other kids gives the child an Oreo cookie. The child eats it and doesn’t die! Empowered and no longer afraid of Oreos, he begins to eat them all the time. And not only that, but begins to wonder if Ho-Ho’s and even McDonalds is safe to eat too. He finds all of these things to be not only not dangerous, but actually delicious!

With a diet now consisting mostly of corn syrup and trans-fat, the child develops early onset diabetes. With nothing left to do, and unable to go outside to play, the child now spends all of his time playing video games and eating Oreos.

As the parent of the child, do you suppose that this sequence of events wouldn’t make you feel guilty? After all, telling the child that Oreos would kill him was really just an inverse of the Boy Who Cried Wolf. You lied to the child and then the child didn’t trust you. I know that my conscience would certainly burn.

Even though I think most of us would agree that we wouldn’t want to do something like this to a child, it is what our schools and many anti-drug and tobacco groups do every day.

Tobacco is a harmful substance. There is no question about that. It can cause a myriad of health problems. Growing up in a public school system, I would have expected the lung cancer rate among cigarette smokers to be somewhere in the 75-85% range. But that’s simply not the case. The number is actually more like 15%. That’s high, objectively speaking. But subjectively after consuming a lot of anti-tobacco propaganda, it seems like nothing at all. I’d be lying if I said that didn’t come to mind as I smoked my cigarette this morning.

Marijuana is absolutely no different. Do you remember DARE from back in elementary school? After that program was over, I thought marijuana made you stupid and lazy and worst of all, on your way to harder and harder drugs. But most of that stuff doesn’t hold water anymore. Modern studies have debunked a lot. Marijuana causes no long-term memory loss, no long term amotivational syndrome and most importantly, only about 8% of people who smoke marijuana go on to try harder drugs and even less actually become dependant on them.

Though Hookah is a fairly new development, similar things are being said to children and college age students about it. But, did you know that until 2007, no studies focusing specifically on hookah had been done. Rather, hookah was lumped in with all water-pipes, which are significantly different. The worst part is, the first study dedicated to hookah smoking suggested that hookah smoking doesn’t increase your risk of developing cancer. The study was thrown out because it cast a form of tobacco in a positive light. (you can read the interview with the researcher and find links to the study in this thread.)

Anti-tobacco and anti-drug groups reason that it’s okay to exaggerate if it keeps people from doing it. The problem is, if you lie to a person, it strips them of their freedom. If you walk into a liquor store and put your finger in your coat pocket and point it at the clerk saying, “I have a gun”, provided they believe you, they feel they have no choice.

As long as it doesn’t violate anyone else’s liberties, people need to be free to do what they wish. If you lie to a person about the risks of doing this or that, you take away their freedom to choose for themselves. But what’s even more important, if they discover that you have lied (which most people eventually do), they may find themselves empowered to do the very things you tried to protect them from.

Lying to protect someone—especially from themselves—is still lying. And it’s still wrong.

Last night I read an article posted on Albert Mohler’s blog entitled Black Children Are an Endangered Species? The post, was about abortion and how painfully disproportionate it is in ‘favor’ of black women. Citing some statistics in particular, like 37% of abortions every year are performed on black women, while the black population in America only makes up about 13%. And, that if those black babies since Roe v. Wade hadn’t been aborted, the black population would be around 19% today!

Most of the quotes in Mohler’s post came from Catherine Davis, a pro-life advocate with a focus on the black community, and the website toomanyaborted.com.

The reality of abortion is a shameful stain on our culture. And while it has evolved into something appearing to be ‘benevolent’, it’s roots in the eugenics movement (a pseudo-science aimed at selectively breeding the ‘superior humans’, and sterilizing the ‘unfit’ ones) are grotesque.

Davis thoroughly believes that abortion is a prevailing piece in a huge conspiracy to ‘cleanse’ the human race of black people. I suppose it could be, but that doesn’t seem like the most rational answer to me.

Now hear me out and please, don’t confuse what I’m saying. I hate abortion. I hate the idea that human beings of any kind can be nullified in the name of ‘freedom’ and ‘choice’. Americans have choices and freedom, but only to a point. And this is true across the board. I have the freedom to face an accuser, or not to. But I don’t have the freedom to rob him, or kill him. I have the freedom to quit my job and live on the streets begging for money. But I don’t have the freedom to steal my food and clothing.

Similarly, a woman has the freedom to engage in sex with whoever is willing, but she shouldn’t have the freedom to simply dodge the consequences that may follow when that means violating another person’s freedoms—the child she inadvertently conceived.

The abortion industry has an obvious slant toward black people. Though the statics are skewed. It also has an obvious slant toward low-income people in general. Unfortunately, this often means the Hispanic and black parts of our culture.

The abortion industry is incredibly lucrative. There is tons of money to be made. And this, I believe, is the pressing matter. Money. Not racial cleansing or hate. Liquor stores also have a concentration in minority areas as well. Yet I doubt there is a racially based conspiracy driving liquor sales.

It would seem to me, more likely, that there are cultural and economic situations in these particular people’s lives that make them more likely to pay for these procedures. Or, at the very least, makes public programs which pay for such procedures for these people much easier to achieve while appearing to do social good.

Even slavery throughout history wasn’t driven primarily by hate, but by money. ‘Free’ forced labor is ‘good’ for a business owner’s bank account. Or, at least in the short run it is.

Consider this, as a middle-class, white American, I am much more likely to walk by an Apple store. And, their marketing is almost definitely targeting me. But is that racist, or simply economic? It’s economic. There are all kinds of cultural and economic things that make me more likely to buy, and so their marketing campaigns have their crosshairs set.

I see no problem in speculating what may be the motives of those perpetuating something as terrible as abortion. But that really can’t be verified. And, staking a claim like racism or genocide, I believe, may have some really dangerous social consequences.

It hasn’t been that long since blacks in America were considered sub-citizens and it wasn’t long before that that they were considered by Europeans and new Americans to be sub-human. Those are deep wounds and they will take more time to fully heal. I believe that taking something as widespread and socially ‘acceptable’ as abortion and building an uprising against it on the claim that it is motivated by racist conspiracy will work against the efforts for social healing and reconciliation.

In fact, I think part of the reason her movement is gaining so much steam is because those wounds still exist and are very real. If you can fuel a social cause with something else people are passionate about, they will be more emotionally connected to the whole thing. But, while I think this could lend itself well to brining an end to abortion, looking back it may also go a long way to stunt the healing of a huge group of people.

I commend Davis for speaking out, and particularly for speaking out to the black community. However, I don’t think it is necessarily beneficial, or even responsible, to build that following on the possibility of racially motivated conspiracy. We want our children, who are lucky enough to survive the womb, to grow up secure in and loving their racial heritage, but also loving and respecting everyone else’s.

Kudos Davis. But please, reconsider the talking points.

Christian culture is really stupid.

There, I said it. Of course, by “culture” I don’t mean the Gospel. I mean, this weird little way of life that Americans have designed and, for many, has taken the place of God’s grace in the Gospel. A “good” Christian usually just refers to someone’s skill at fitting into the Christian masses.

It’s about 90% of what’s sold in Christian bookstores and what’s preached in most of our churches. It’s stupid. It’s constricting. It’s legalism. Christian culture is the modern day Judaizer Paul warned us about. “Don’t touch. Don’t taste. Don’t listen”. Well, I for one hate it. And, in lieu of today’s thoughts on the subject, I thought I would share six songs that Christian culture would probably say I shouldn’t like, but I do—some of the meat I’m not “supposed” to eat, but will exercise my freedom over.

Here we go:

Mama by My Chemical Romance
Offending Lyric: “Mama, we all go to hell…”

Of course, the weight of eternal damnation is nothing to joke about. But is it possible that Christian culture has indoctrinated us with a theological insecurity that leaves our skin raw enough for this lyric to offend? I think so. In fact, with thicker skin—songs like this one might actually equip the church to speak to the kids who would never set foot in their walls.

Listen to the song here

Jesusland by Ben Folds
Offending Lyric: ”Broadcast to each house, they drop your name but no one knows your face billboards quoting things you’d never say you hang your head and pray”

There’s a lot of interpretations of this song. Some people say it’s political. Maybe. But anyway you look at it, it’s almost definitely (at least on some level) a critique of the very culture I’m complaining about right now. If someone wrote a song poking fun at me, I probably wouldn’t want people listening to it either. But you should listen to it.

Listen to the song here

Gentleman Caller by Cursive
Offending Lyric: “Your gentleman caller Well, he’s been calling on another He loves his forbidden fruit And as it dribbles down his chin He cries: "Baby I’ve been drinking with some friends now how about a little kiss"

The graphic nature of the lyrics in this song will offend most. But the metaphors are rich. A messenger with an important message should be listened to, even if he’s really ugly.

Get it Faster by Jimmy Eat World
Offending Lyric: “I’m holding out But not getting an answer I wanna do right by you I’m finding out Cheating gets it faster”

A song about infidelity? Not likely to top the list of approved songs. However, Jimmy Eat World speaks honestly in Get it Faster to a matter that people (men, especially in the church) will easily relate to. Pretending problems don’t exist never fixed them.

Listen to the song here

The Decline by NoFX
Offending Lyric: (Just about the whole song, but in specific:) “The story book’s been read And every line believed Curriculum’s been set Logic is a threat Reason searched and seized”

As a general rule, I think that NoFX are pretty much 100% moronic. I mean, you’ve got to have a screw loose to have any real hope in absolute political anarchy. But The Decline is an 18 minute punk-ska-rock, religious, political, epic masterpiece. Some of the social commentary is even quite poignant. But what’s really interesting, if we’re not allowed to listen to songs like this one, we’d be proving NoFX a little bit more right—and we don’t want that!

Listen to the song here

Mama’s Room by Under the Influence of Giants
Offending Lyric: “Makin’ love in mama’s room, Takin’ all I can from you, And when you go, go, go, oh, oh, oh, Go, go, go, oh, oh, oh. “

A song about taking someone’s virginity as a kind of sport? Yeah, that’s pretty busted. But, just try not to dance to it. And keeping the theology of man’s depravity in close view, if I ever engaged in the kind of activity described in Mama’s Room, it wouldn’t be because of the song. The benefit of exercising my freedom with this song, outweighs the “risk”.

Listen to the song here

In Conclusion

I’m not suggesting people violate their conscience—where in fact their conscience really is being offended. I am however suggesting we sometimes give the “Christian culture” the finger and make use of the freedom we have in Christ for the sake of the lost who can’t relate to us (and for the sake of our own sanity)!

In his short book, A Gospel Primer, Milton Vincent reflects on sin, guilt and sanctification. He has this to say:

"As long as I am stricken with the guilt of my sins, I will be captive to them, and will often find myself re-committing the very sins about which I feel most guilty. The Devil is well aware of this fact; he knows that if he can keep me tormented by sin’s guilt, he can dominate me with sin’s power."

Powerful words of reminder. Jesus’ death and resurrection overcame not only the spiritual effects of sin, but also its power over us provided we exercise faith in Jesus’ work.

That means remembering that we’re not guilty any more.

It reminds me of a song I heard today from the Rocket Summer, title "Run to You".

Turn look, look out and see.
Do you see me? Cause I think I see you.
I’ve been some other place.
The wind that I chase, it all just leads back to you.
Oh how I’m still, so still its burdening, it’s still outran.
I knew you when I was young, but where I am right now.
Is where I am.

Run to you, I will run, I will run
I will move, right on through all these things I have done.
And you’ll take me back, I don’t know why.
I wanna say I’ll never do it again, but I can’t
But I will try.

Turn and look, look out and see.
Do you see me? Cause I think I see you.
Ive been some other place.
The wind that I chase it all just leads back to you.
Oh how I miss what you miss, but I will fall time and again.
And I will say, that I’m true to you, but I’m a cheat.
I don’t understand.

So I’ll run to you, I will run, I will run
I will move, right on through all these things I have done.
And you’ll take me back, I don’t know why.
I wanna say I’ll never do it again, but I can’t
But I will try.

No, not history’s deepest, most profound songwriting, but a powerful sentiment nonetheless. Not to mention a great song. You can listen to some of their music on their MySpace page.

A Parable

Imagine that there were ten men in two groups, and they were all enslaved to a third group of men. There were five in one group and five in the other and five in the group that owned them. They were to do everything they were told and if at any time the owners were dissatisfied with the men, they could exercise their rights over their property and dispose of them.

One day, a man from among the slaves rose up with great charisma and a powerful argument. The owners were moved and convicted by this charismatic leader and they freed all five members of that man’s group. The group, now free and satisfied with their own freedom turned a cold cheek to the other five men still in bondage. And, to the charismatic leader’s dismay, in time, they themselves became slave-masters.

A Double Standard

I read in the newspaper today a commentary on Obama’s intentions to sign the Freedom of Choice Act and the strange irony that it presents.

Less than 150 years ago African-Americans were still being held as property. Less than 40 years ago, there was still legislated separation between blacks and white. Now, in just a few short (compared to the whole human timeline) decades, we have a officially elected a black president. This is a profound moment in American history. And, in many ways, and on many, it is a great grace from God, overcoming sin in a fallen world.

But, the president chosen, who has personally and directly benefitted from a fight against unjust laws of slavery, segregation and discrimination, stands passionately by another legislation that ensures millions of people continue to be treated as property.

Therein lies both a philosophical problem, a logical problem and a double standard.

Indeed, no person should have the right to enslave another. No white man should ever have the freedom to own a black man. Nor should a black man have the freedom to own a Hispanic man. Or a Hispanic man, a white man. Much less should they have the freedom to dispose of them as property who no longer desired. While we would affirm these things strongly, and our president probably even more strongly, yet he, and many, affirm the right to dispose of unwanted children.

If children indeed should be treated as property and their owners should have the freedom to dispose of them for convenience sake, then why is it so passionately affirmed that the African slave trade was an evil—or the modern sex trade, for that matter. After all, these things made many lives much easier.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s niece, Alveda King, said it like this:

“The battle for equal rights has reached a major milestone [with the election of Barack Obama], but Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s dream of full equality remains just a dream as long as unborn children continue to be treated no better than property…”

A Conclusion

I’m finding a more tender heart these days for the unborn; the helpless, those who truly cannot defend themselves. We should:

…Pray for President Barack Obama, that God would have mercy on him and his heart would be softened and changed. 
…Pray that God would stay the hand of our government from passing into law the Freedom of Choice Act.
…Pray that God would have mercy on the millions of unborn at stake.

…Pray that God would have mercy on our nation that loves comfort and convenience, literally, more than life itself.