Friday, February 04, 2005

Caught on Tape

As a libertarian I get to debate some interesting ideas. I recently debated my pastor during dinner on why price gouging was, with no government involvement, a good thing. One thing to remember is that nothing is free. If you've received something at no price to yourself, it only means that someone somewhere had to spend either time, money, or both to create it.

Take for instance the hurricane that came close to my area this summer. Everyone was buying gas, but the stations couldn't raise their prices even though demand had greatly increased; so much so that they were running out of gas. At that moment gas was worth a great deal more than was reflected in the price. Indeed, people were filling up so much that there was practically none left when I got there. However, if the station manager had been able to raise the price according to demand then people would have bought less which would have enabled other to buy as well. (I only filled up on what I needed so that others could have some too, regardless of the price, something which many others did not do unfortunately.)

After talking to the manager, while he watched his tanks slowly drain to nothing, I asked if there was more gas on the way. He said that there was supposed to have been a truck that day, but it never came. Now if the trucker had been able to raise his price there was a much greater chance and incentive for him to bring that truck, but what was in it for him? He wouldn't make anything extra and the time he spent on the road would be worthless, at least from an economic point of view. In fact, in may have cost him more to bring it through the traffic during the hurricane exodus.

So it shouldn't come as a surprise that I would have agreed to some price gouging during the "West Coast Power crisis". Hospitals would be able to maintain their systems because others would have turned off their TVs and computers. Instead, the government intervened and paid the difference.

Of course, they had allowed the problem to happen anyway. By not allowing others to start producing electricity they put a lot of "power" into the hands of several individuals who could price with competition.

From CBS news:

CBS News Correspondent Vince Gonzales reports on the Enron scheme, as caught on new audio tape. The traders and plant operator laugh and plot in a display that seems to prove the theory those years before the energy crisis, Enron manipulated markets.

"They had to do a rolling blackout through the town and there was a red light there he didn't see," one Enron trader says on tape.

"That's beautiful," a second voice responds.

"I'm like, this is causing animosity throughout the state now," the first says. "Cars are blowing up."

The new tapes — routinely recorded by Enron to protect their own deals and later obtained by this small utility in Washington state — confirm what CBS News has been reporting for four years: That Enron secretly shut power plants down so they could cause, and then cash in on, the crisis.

In a free market, meaning no government, almost anyone could create and sell electricity thus eliminating the crisis.

My pastor and the other present were aghast that I could propose price gouging, but after my explanation they could see the truth. Indeed, to a Christian price gouging seems, on the surface, to be a greedy and manipulative prospect, but only if you ignore everything else.

Now, without government, what could have stopped the station owner from keeping the prices at their levels before the hurricane - absolutely nothing? Instead of the government mandating a perceived evil, he could lose money but help people out of his own heart.

E-mail Sean at 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com

Lost in the Moment

It might be a good time to revisit something Mark Twain probably dictated 100 years ago this year. Found among his unpublished manuscripts after he died it remains, I think, one of his best works.

War Prayer

It was a time of great and exalting excitement. The
country was up in arms, the war was on, in every breast burned
the holy fire of patriotism; the drums were beating, the bands
playing, the toy pistols popping, the bunched firecrackers hissing
and spluttering; on every hand and far down the receding and
fading spread of roofs and balconies a fluttering wilderness of
flags flashed in the sun; daily the young volunteers marched
down the wide avenue gay and fine in their new uniforms, the
proud fathers and mothers and sisters and sweethearts cheering
them with voices choked with happy emotion as they swung by;
nightly the packed mass meetings listened, panting, to patriot
oratory which stirred the deepest deeps of their hearts, and
which they interrupted at briefest intervals with cyclones of
applause, the tears running down their cheeks the while; in the
churches the pastors preached devotion to flag and country, and
invoked the God of Battles beseeching His aid in our good cause
in outpourings of fervid eloquence which moved every listener.
It was indeed a glad and gracious time, and the half dozen rash
spirits that ventured to disapprove of the war and cast a doubt
upon its righteousness straightway got such a stern and angry
warning that for their personal safety's sake they quickly shrank
out of sight and offended no more in that way.

Sunday morning came--next day the battalions would
leave for the front; the church was filled; the volunteers were
there, their young faces alight with martial dreams--visions of the
stern advance, the gathering momentum, the rushing charge, the
flashing sabers, the flight of the foe, the tumult, the enveloping
smoke, the fierce pursuit, the surrender! Then home from the
war, bronzed heroes, welcomed, adored, submerged in golden
seas of glory! With the volunteers sat their dear ones, proud,
happy, and envied by the neighbors and fiends who had no sons
and brothers to send forth to the field of honor, there to win for
the flag, or , failing, die the noblest of noble deaths. The
service proceeded; a war chapter from the Old Testament was
read; the first prayer was said; it was followed by an organ burst
that shook the building, and with one impulse the house rose,
with glowing eyes and beating hearts, and poured out that
tremendous invocation

*God the all-terrible! Thou who ordainest!
Thunder thy clarion and lightning thy sword!*

Then came the "long" prayer. None could remember the like of
it for passionate pleading and moving and beautiful language.
The burden of its supplication was, that an ever-merciful and
benignant Father of us all would watch over our noble young
soldiers, and aid, comfort, and encourage them in their patriotic
work; bless them, shield them in the day of battle and the hour
of peril, bear them in His mighty hand, make them strong and
confident, invincible in the bloody onset; help them to crush the
foe, grant to them and to their flag and country imperishable
honor and glory--

An aged stranger entered and moved with slow and
noiseless step up the main aisle, his eyes fixed upon the minister,
his long body clothed in a robe that reached to his feet, his head
bare, his white hair descending in a frothy cataract to his
shoulders, his seamy face unnaturally pale, pale even to
ghastliness. With all eyes following him and wondering, he
made his silent way; without pausing, he ascended to the
preacher's side and stood there waiting. With shut lids the
preacher, unconscious of his presence, continued with his
moving prayer, and at last finished it with the words, uttered in
fervent appeal, "Bless our arms, grant us the victory, O Lord
our God, Father and Protector of our land and flag!"

The stranger touched his arm, motioned him to step
aside--which the startled minister did--and took his place.
During some moments he surveyed the spellbound audience with
solemn eyes, in which burned an uncanny light; then in a deep
voice he said:

"I come from the Throne--bearing a message from
Almighty God!" The words smote the house with a shock; if the
stranger perceived it he gave no attention. "He has heard the
prayer of His servant your shepherd, and will grant it if such
shall be your desire after I, His messenger, shall have explained
to you its import--that is to say, its full import. For it is like
unto many of the prayers of men, in that it asks for more than
he who utters it is aware of--except he pause and think.

"God's servant and yours has prayed his prayer. Has he
paused and taken thought? Is it one prayer? No, it is two--one
uttered, the other not. Both have reached the ear of Him Who
heareth all supplications, the spoken and the unspoken. Ponder
this--keep it in mind. If you would beseech a blessing upon
yourself, beware! lest without intent you invoke a curse upon a
neighbor at the same time. If you pray for the blessing of rain
upon your crop which needs it, by that act you are possibly
praying for a curse upon some neighbor's crop which may not
need rain and can be injured by it.

"You have heard your servant's prayer--the uttered part
of it. I am commissioned of God to put into words the other
part of it--that part which the pastor--and also you in your hearts-
-fervently prayed silently. And ignorantlyy and unthinkingly?
God grant that it was so! You heard these words: 'Grant us the
victory, O Lord our God!' That is sufficient. the *whole* of
the uttered prayer is compact into those pregnant words.
Elaborations were not necessary. When you have prayed for
victory you have prayed for many unmentioned results which
follow victory--*must* follow it, cannot help but follow it.
Upon the listening spirit of God fell also the unspoken part of
the prayer. He commandeth me to put it into words. Listen!

"O Lord our Father, our young patriots, idols of our
hearts, go forth to battle--be Thou near them! With them--in
spirit--we also go forth from the sweet peace of our beloved
firesides to smite the foe. O Lord our God, help us to tear their
soldiers to bloody shreds with our shells; help us to cover their
smiling fields with the pale forms of their patriot dead; help us
to drown the thunder of the guns with the shrieks of their
wounded, writhing in pain; help us to lay waste their humble
homes with a hurricane of fire; help us to wring the hearts of
their unoffending widows with unavailing grief; help us to turn
them out roofless with little children to wander unfriended the
wastes of their desolated land in rags and hunger and thirst,
sports of the sun flames of summer and the icy winds of winter,
broken in spirit, worn with travail, imploring Thee for the refuge
of the grave and denied it--for our sakes who adore Thee, Lord,
blast their hopes, blight their lives, protract their bitter
pilgrimage, make heavy their steps, water their way with their
tears, stain the white snow with the blood of their wounded feet!
We ask it, in the spirit of love, of Him Who is the Source of
Love, and Who is the ever-faithful refuge and friend of all that
are sore beset and seek His aid with humble and contrite hearts.
Amen.

(*After a pause.*) "Ye have prayed it; if ye still desire
it, speak! The messenger of the Most High waits!"

It was believed afterward that the man was a lunatic,
because there was no sense in what he said.


E-mail Sean at 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com

Thursday, February 03, 2005

The Greatest Generation of Drug Dealers

Former presidential candidate Harry Browne reminds us of the old days:

Few people are aware that before World War I, a 9-year-old girl could walk into a drug store and buy heroin.

That's right – heroin. She didn't need a doctor's prescription or a note from her parents. She could buy it right off the shelf. Bayer and other large drug companies sold heroin as a pain-reliever and sedative in measured doses – just the way aspirin is sold today. Cocaine, opium, and marijuana were readily available as well. No Drug Enforcement Agency, no undercover cops, no "Parents – the Anti-Drug" commercials. Just people going about their own business in whatever way they chose.

Seeing today's never-ending crisis of teenagers using drugs, you can imagine how bad it must have been when there were no laws to stop children – or adults – from using drugs. But, in fact, there was no drug crisis at all. A few people were addicted to heroin or cocaine, just as a few people today are addicted to sleeping pills or Big Macs, but there was no national uproar about it. Such people, if they wanted to break their habits, could freely consult doctors without fear of being sent to prison.

Wait, Sean, people were different back then, they were all good little Christians who fed their families and walked 42 miles to work every morning, through the swamps, fighting off Indians, and wrestling aligators. Of course, the nature of man has never changed. People were just as corrupt yesterday as they are today.

Do we really have to wonder why the drug problem is as pronounced as it is today. Whenever, the church or some group tries to force morals on everyone using the almight hand of government we get more problems. Interestingly enough, neither Jesus, Peter or Paul ever advocated using government to force the rest of us to be good little (free?) moral agents.

Americans got a taste of what a Drug War might be like when they endorsed the 18th Amendment invoking alcohol Prohibition in 1919. The result was gang warfare, people dying from drinking bathtub gin, corruption in police departments, and non-violent citizens sent to prison for indulging in a vice that was strictly personal. Most Americans rejoiced when Prohibition was repealed in 1933. The chances of them supporting another such Constitutional amendment within the next 50 years were slim to none.

Let me get this straight. The drugs were readily available and we had fewer drug crimes and about the same time we outlawed commercial entities from selling them we got gang wars and drive-bys. Surely, this coincided with man's failing morality!

This isn't a chicken before the egg argument. It's clear that after the laws were on the books outlawing legal groups to sell drugs in legal ways, criminal groups started doing the selling. Thus creating a black market and all the evils that go with it.

From a Christian perspective we have no mandate to use government to change our world. If our war is truly a spiritual war, as Pauls letter to the Ephesians suggests, then our fight is against the spiritual and the only thing we are mandated to do is preach and live the gospel.

Read up on the uncontrolled substances that drove people into madness circa the old days here: http://wings.buffalo.edu/aru/preprohibition.htm


E-mail Sean at 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com

Coagulation

Reg writes:
I would have to say I disagree with your post on sunday-evening-basketball

"Places that were formerly ruled with an iron fist take better to Home Fellowship Groups because each meeting is tightly regimented. Let's face it, free enterprise American minds just don't work that way."

I am not sure the model that your church was using for small groups before your new approach, our church here in Canada has implemented Community Home Groups, and are very successful with them. We started with 8 groups, and are now about to see 20 in the church.

Check out Bro Tamel in Milwaukee, www.parkwaychurch.ws. Another UPC church running successful Small Groups. There are many others.

Can Small Groups work in American/US, yes they can....

I don't doubt that they are successful and in some places I've seen them grow exponentionally, but for our community they weren't working. We were using the same system as Parkway, but weren't getting the same results. What we found was that people really didn't like the mapped-out meetings where everything is broken into ten to twenty minutes sections. As in a Communist country, the leaders were choosing the topic and following the script as it was laid out by those above.

In a free enterprise system the people dictate what they enjoy and how they enjoy it. If I offer a product that no one likes, no one will buy it. If I offer a service that no one needs, no one will come to my store. Using that approach, I let the people tell me what they want and I fulfill a much needed service. So I offer something like basketball or scrap-booking and if people come and are interested, they will come back with no prodding or mandating. If not then we try and find something else that people might enjoy.

In our well churched minds it might look like this system wouldn't work. "How is that building people and their relationship with Christ" was among the first questions readily asked about the system. Don't we have teach them how to pray and read the BIble? It basically depends on you. People are spending time with you in your "real" life away from church. They can actually see how you live outside of the normal church meetings.

It is my view that what most people want is to find an honest Christian with faults like their own, but with the love and joy of Christ.

What sounds better?
"Hey friend! How would like to come to a church meeting at my house? There will be food and drinks and we'll be discussing the Lord."
-or-
"Hey friend! We're getting together and doing something you already enjoy doing. Would you like to come?"

E-mail Sean at 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com

Living the Good Life

One of things I like best about David Bercot is that he doesn't let what he wants to believe interfere with truth. He delves into each subject with an open mind and doesn't care if he is proved wrong or right as long as the truth is revealed.

For him, the best way to know which way to move in the future is by looking at the past. In a chapter entitled "Prosperity: A Blessing Or A Snare?" David Bercot reveals what early Christians viewed as true wealth.

Dr. Paul Yonggi Cho, wrote on Christian prosperity entitled "Salvation, Health, and Prosperity". In if he says that "If we are kings, shouldn't we have majesty, honor and material things befitting kings? This is our natural inheritance...These are our treasures which we can claim as easily as we would draw money from a bank..."

It seems that many preachers and their congregations (one can't blame everything on preachers) have created an entire theology on one verse: "Beloved, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your soul prospers". (3 John 2)

Rather than viewing wealth as a promised blessing from God, the early Christians viewed it as an entanglement that could cost a Christian his eternal life. An early church writer, Cyprian, gave all his goods to the poor on becoming a Christian. He wrote of the wealthy:

"...how can they follow Christ when they are held back by the chain of their wealth?...They think that they own, when
actually it is they who are owned. They are not lords of their money, but rather the slaves of money."

Early Christians didn't just talk about poverty, the majority of them were poor. According to Mark Felix, another Christian writer and lawyer, the Romans taunted them about their poverty.

"See many of you-in fact, by your own admission, the majority of you-are in want, are cold, are hungry, and are laboring in hard work. Yet, your God allows it."

To Mark Felix this was nothing to be ashamed of:

"That many of us are called poor, this is not our disgrace, but our glory...who can be poor if he does not long for anything...He rather is poor, who, although he has much, desires more."

Before you begin quoting the standard lines of the Old Testament on God's wealth for Israel remember that though Israel was commanded to gather wealth and land, Christians were given laws directly opposite.

According to the writings of the early church, it was the heretics who preached prosperity. One example is Paul of Samosata who was described as growing up "destitute and poor", but now "possesses abundant wealth through his
wrongdoings and sacrilegious acts..."

Ok, so history doesn't float your boat, try some of this:
1 Tim. 6:10, Heb. 13:5, Matt 6:19-21, 1 Tim. 6-8

E-mail Sean at 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com

Wednesday, February 02, 2005

Keeping Silent

1Cr 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but [they are commanded] to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

1Ti 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
1Ti 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

From Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up by David W. Bercot:

It's frequently said that the apostles and early Christians were simply reinforcing the cultural attitudes of their time concerning the role of women in religion and society. But Roman women were hardly known for their submissive character. As one Roman commented, "We rule the world, but our women rule us."

For Paul, reasoning doesn't include the culture of the day.

1Ti 2:13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
1Ti 2:14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

In Roman religions, women served in the same roles as men. Female high priestesses governed many temples. Mark Felix, a Christian lawyer, described Roman religion this way: "There is a certain place where a man may not go. Others are restricted from women. It is a crime for a slave even to be present at some religious ceremonies. Some temples are governed by a woman with one husband, and others by a woman with many husbands."
...
If the role of women in the church had been simply a matter of culture, and not apostolic teaching, we would expect to find that women served the same roles in both the orthodox church and the herectical groups. But this isn't the case.

Women were allowed to teach and officiate in most herectical sects. Tertullian made this comment abou the role of women in such groups, "They are bold enough to teach, to dispute, to enact exorcisms, to undertake healings, and perhaps even to baptize."

If not Roman culture, was it the culture of the Jews?

...it's true that women were excluded from the Jewish priesthood. But remember that the Jewish priesthood wasn't a product of human culture. It was divinely instituted. Furthermore, by the middle of the second century, the vast majority of Christians were Gentiles, and they most definitely didn't follow Jewish culture. They didn't keep the Sabbath, practice circumcision, follow Jewish dietary laws, observe Jewish festivals, or follow any other Jewish customs that didn't specifically coincide with Christian teaching.

The early church simply obeyed the apostolic teachings on the role of women in the church...And once again, they went against the Roman culture, rather than following it.

Was it simply contempt?

...Felix wrote, "Let everyone know that all humans are born alike, with a capacity and ability to reason and to feel, without preference of age, sex, or dignity."

Does the argument have more to do with our own cultural views? One could argue that the entire politically correct worldview is in direct contrast with the Word of God.

Why is it that the role of women in the church has become such an issue today? Is it because we've found new Bible manuscripts that teach differently than our present Bibles? Or is it because our culture says that men and women should perform different roles? Once again, who is unable to resist the culture of the day-we or the early Christians?


At the risk of offending such as were offended at a recent Harvard's Chief speech on biological differences; allow me throw in my two cents and make the case for quiet and submissive women in the church. Ladies, you have my support.

E-mail Sean at 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com

Tuesday, February 01, 2005

Sunday Evening Basketball

After moving into our new church we were no longer able to have Sunday evening service so we felt like we needed to fill the void with something that wasn't demanding. We had tried home fellowship groups, but with a church our size (less than 100 members) it was nearly impossible. We were grasping for straws when someone came across the book "Dog Training, Fly Fishing, And Sharing Christ In The 21st Century Empowering Your Church To Build Community Through Shared Interests".

Ted Haggard presents a successful and tested model for a small group ministry here that can be implemented by a church of any size. By enabling members to embrace and capitalize on their own unique abilities, the diverse groups create an environment where people meet mentors that can disciple and guide them. This need-and interest based approach redefines the model for powerful church growth.


In the first few chapters he explains why American Home Fellowship Groups tend not to be as successful as their Communist and Socialist counterparts. Places that were formerly ruled with an iron fist take better to Home Fellowship Groups because each meeting is tightly regimented. Let's face it, free enterprise American minds just don't work that way. We like being able to associate freely, talk about what we want, and do as we dang well please.

The book advises people to create groups where people have a shared interest. In my church the ladies came up with "scrap-booking", which I stay clear of, others started computer groups, while my friend and I started a basketball group.

On the court, guys are real. It's here that competition is out in the open, tensions flare, and jokes can be made without offending the ladies. I've taught and witnessed on that court more than any other place. Guys won't open up in a restaurant under the watchful eye of their wives, but on the court they open up. I've spoken at length with new converts, new members, backsliders, those offended by ministers and preachers, and guys who hadn't spoken more than 10 words in 3 years.

It's well worth read.


E-mail Sean at 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com

Reprisal

A previous Quote of the Day from Shakespeare stated that "Thought is free."
I would add that expressing that thought is a little more expensive.

E-mail Sean at 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com

Might as well give up

From the Washington Post

"Here's to the winners," Frank Sinatra used to sing, belting out Joe Raposo's lyrics as only a winner can. "Here's to the winners all of us can be." Right, and if you believe that, have I got a bridge for you. One of the truths of human existence is that, to one degree or another, all of us are born losers -- in the end, of course, everyone loses, even Michael Jordan and Donald Trump -- and that coming to terms with disappointment, accepting the inevitability of it, is one of life's inescapable challenges. Kris Kristofferson, not Raposo, got it right: "Nobody wins."
...
As the 18th century began, Sandage argues, American attitudes toward failure were divided. On the one hand people tended to believe that it was a sign of personal and moral shortcomings (Benjamin Franklin "blamed failure on laziness, drunkenness, greed, ignorance, extravagance and a host of other sins"), but on the other there was the nettlesome dilemma posed when upright, decent people failed: "The vicissitudes of capitalism were such that honest dealings and hard work could earn failure. Moral maxims never seemed to fit when the 'great loser' was a hardworking chap around the corner."
...
The credit bureaus altered the American vocabulary. A risky person was a "bad egg" or "good for nothing," a safe bet was "good as wheat" or "Number one." Sometimes men emerged as "trustworthy yet not to be trusted." Sandage writes about two men who fell into that unhappy category: "Foresighted and uniquely successful in their own ways, these good men were not 'good for' much if any financial credit. In the agency's ledgers, the moral of these failure stories became clear: redeeming characters sometimes had no book value."

Phl 1:21 For to me to live [is] Christ, and to die [is] gain.

This is why Christians will always be inherently different from the world. We are just too different, too separate and our goals never match up with the grand goals of the world. Without Christ, the best that they can hope is the now.

E-mail Sean at 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com

Who should be analyzing whom?

From the irrepressible Rep. Ron Paul:

Every parent in America should be made aware of a presidential initiative called the “New Freedom Commission on Mental Health.” This commission issued a report last year calling for the mandatory mental health screening of American schoolchildren, meaning millions of kids will be forced to undergo psychiatric screening whether their parents consent or not. At issue is the fundamental right of parents to decide what medical treatment is appropriate for their children.

Forced mental health screening simply has no place in a free or decent society. The government does not own you or your kids, and it has no legitimate authority to interfere in your family’s intimate health matters. Psychiatric diagnoses are inherently subjective, and the drugs regularly prescribed produce serious side effects, especially in children’s developing brains. The bottom line is that mental health issues are a matter for parents, children, and their doctors, not government.


Yet another reason for Christians to homeschool their children. It will pass eventually, so the best thing a parent can do is to remove them from the system before it starts.

E-mail Sean at 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com

Monday, January 31, 2005

The End is Here!

The end isn't just near, it's arrived smack dab in the middle of my blog. I was just gettin' the hang of this thing, but apparently it's time to say au revoir. If you have any thoughts, comments, or questions, 90&9 knows how to reach me! Thank you so much for listening to my tale, thank you for your candid e-mails, for your prayers with my job situation, and for allowing me to be a part of your life for this short while. So now, without further adieu, let me introduce the new blogger. Blogger:february is................ ok, so I don't know! That's right, they've kept it a secret even from me. Ahhhh... man, who you gotta be to know who February is? I suppose I'll have to tune in tomorrow to find out--and so will you.

Goodnight and farewell!
Blogger:january

Thoughts? E-mail them to 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com. Who is 99blogger?
I reserve the right to quote you unless otherwise specifically requested!

Tomorrow I go to Work!

Tomorrow I go to work! Work? Did she say work? That's right, tomorrow I go into my new job. Unfortunately not to start receiving paychecks, but I go in to see the classroom, to see the students that will soon be mine, and to get a feel for how the boss runs her classroom. I'm definitely excited about going. I admit, last Thursday I was fairly panic stricken. I wasn't sure about the school, I was ready to give up teaching, hysterics, I tell you, hysterics. However, the comfortable feeling I had during the interview, their enthusiasm for hiring me, and the e-mail I received today from the principal, welcoming me to the staff, were reassurance enough. I gave it up to God's hands and it's as though He's said, "See, I got you!"

I'll be teaching at a very strong, well known high school. More importantly, I'll be staying in the district where I just worked. That's important. I'll be teaching a junior composition class, a senior composition class, and three sections of freshman English (Romeo and Juliet, here I come!). I admit, I'm totally nervous. Walking into a classroom in the middle of a semester is difficult. Especially when teaching second semester seniors. But I know that God placed me here for a reason, and I'm excited to see what that reason is. I just found out that my classroom is directly across the hallway from the classroom of a girl I graduated from college with. She's also a Christian (non-denominational, I think), and it'll be nice knowing she's nearby to run over and ask odd questions (do we dismiss at bells or clocks in this school??).

The only thing that won't be nice? 5 am. I am not a morning person, and teaching means early mornings. I think the Friday paychecks will make up for that! I'm so excited for this next big adventure!

Thoughts? E-mail them to 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com. Who is 99blogger?
I reserve the right to quote you unless otherwise specifically requested!

Witnessing is Rough!

After tuning in to Odd Girl's blog, My Comments on Your Comments, I wanted to steer your attention that way. She writes some comments that really hit home about witnessing and shares the reader responses. Let's face it, witnessing is something we all struggle with, no matter who we are. Last night I watched my YP hand out three C2C cards in a matter of moments. I gave him the cards, but I didn't have the guts to randomly invite. What's so hard about it? I dunno, but something certainly is, because I can count on one hand the number of people I've invited. I always think about it. I keep the cards in my purse. I randomly leave them places where people will find them (aka-the bench at my gym). I can be talking to my very own barister at Starbucks, name guy, and name guy knows my name, sings my song, and in my head I go, "So you working this weekend? No, well if you have a chance we're having this thing..." And yet, I instead go... "so you working this weekend? No? Oh fun. Yeah... ope, ok, well I'll see you tomorrow." And off I go, another opportunity lost. Why ON EARTH is it so difficult???? Thoughts?

Thoughts? E-mail them to 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com. Who is 99blogger?
I reserve the right to quote you unless otherwise specifically requested!

Sunday, January 30, 2005

Iraqi's Vote!

As I looked at the top picture in the New York Times article discussing today's vote in Iraq, I admit to getting misty eyed at seeing the little girl atop her father's shoulders. I remember the first time I went with my mom to vote. We went into the booth (back when they still had booths) and, after explaining the whole thing to me, she let me pull the lever. It was such a huge deal, I can imagine that man explaining today's procedure to his daughter. Only for him, he has to explain that this is the first time they've been able to do this--that voting is a choice, and that it's even dangerous to go do. Yet, despite the danger, the voter turnout may exceed 60%. That made me jump up and down. Can you imagine the father saying, "this is why these Americans have come." In either a thankful voice, or a bitter voice. The article says that in some districts, people were having street parties after voting. One of my very best friends, whom I love very much, has been there for nearly a year. Going in he hated the idea of the war, to talk to him now his view has completely changed. He now believes it was the very best thing. When I read about 60%+ voter turnout... it almost makes it all seem worth it. Almost...

Thoughts? E-mail them to 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com. Who is 99blogger?
I reserve the right to quote you unless otherwise specifically requested!

Quote of the Day!

Thought is free -William Shakespeare

Thoughts? E-mail them to 99blogger@ninetyandnine.com. Who is 99blogger?
I reserve the right to quote you unless otherwise specifically requested!