Yesterday was the end of first day school for another year. All the teacher folk got roses, which was really lovely (and cheaper than t-shirts, which I have loved, but am ambivalent about - they waste resources and are often made in sweatshops, and I think I'm one of the few people who wear mine regularly.)
We went around the room and asked the kids to say one thing they liked about the year and one thing that needed improvement. It started to look as if everyone would say they liked going to the coffee shop down the street, but we imposed a ban after the first four. so, coffee shop, lock-ins (sleepovers) and talking were basically the good things. a desire to paint the room and have fewer movies and no video games at lockins (a constant battle) were the main "needs improvement" areas. My favorite comment was on how much one kid appreciated the "randomness" of our class :)
I think I secretly like that too.
I'm trying to remember what we talked about. hmmmmm....
We went rock climbing on saturday, at a climbing gym. I wasn't going to try it, but couldn't stay away. Still, I couldn't make it further than halfway up any climbing wall, and seriously envied a girl who had come with friends from our class, must have weighed 50#, and could scamble up anything in moments. Two days later my arms are really sore! I spent a lot of my time talking to a gym employee about God. Mostly I talked. She goes to a local christian college and seems to hold significantly more "traditional" views than I do, but was very respectful and interested, if occasionally a little shocked ("but the Bible says....", or, "how can you not care what happens when you die?") It was a very good interaction for me, who can hole up and isolate a bit, at least theologically.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Weird Dream
I had a dream last night that I was at Northern Yearly Meeting and we were discussing having hired ministers / representatives - either for NYM or nationally, maybe both? I don't remember.
Anyway, Jesus was there (not glowing or anything, just another guy, though in long robes and sandals) and was "running" for this proposed office.
I was adamantaly opposed to changing the proscription on paid clergy. In the dream I think it didn't even occur to me that it was weird that it was Jesus we were talking about.
Hmmmm...
I NEVER dream about Jesus.
Anyway, Jesus was there (not glowing or anything, just another guy, though in long robes and sandals) and was "running" for this proposed office.
I was adamantaly opposed to changing the proscription on paid clergy. In the dream I think it didn't even occur to me that it was weird that it was Jesus we were talking about.
Hmmmm...
I NEVER dream about Jesus.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Just Checkin' in
I really just can't stand to not have a "March 2007" archive. I don't want to look like a slacker, at least not at first glance :)
Life is slightly crazy. I'm unemployed again, and actually loving it (just not the lack of money, and, well, the lack of purpose a little bit - but having more free time is great!)
Still trying to save dogs from Georgia. I'm working on a transport this weekend, but am hopefully not fostering any of them. It's crazy, as there are a lot of problems much closer to home (even in my own state) but at least locally, it's not nearly as bad. Of course the solution is to set up a mobile vet down there and do guerilla spay and neuter or something, but it's so overwhelming, there are a million ways to approach it, I guess.
I got back in touch with my most dramatic ex. Or, she got in touch with me. I was (am?) crazy about her, literally. It's scary to know people who can make you crazy (or bring out your crazies, or whatever). What's amazing is that she actually finally apologized for huritng me. It's hard to explain how completely floored I was by that, esp. as it had been a point of contention since practially the beginning of our contact ("I never hurt you, if you hurt, it's because you're screwed up").
The sad thing is that it didnt' change things for me as much as I'd like. I guess I forgive her. What does that mean? I don't want her to burn in hell, or suffer in life, but I only wanted that on a few very fleeting occasions anyway. I wouldn't trust her again, and wonder if I ever did. I don't want to be friends, basically because overall she wasnt' nice to me, and I'd say that was an understatement. I still am horrified by both of us back then (we were cheating on her partner, something she, and eventually he, didnt' seem to think was that big a deal)
Anyway, mulling forgiveness, of others, of self, and what does it mean exactly? I don't think anymore that it wipes the slate clean - I'm not sure what it does, and I'm not sure if I've attained it.
Loving her still feels like pretty much the worst thing that ever happpened to me. I acknowledge that much worse things happen to other people all the time, but it seems I've been pretty lucky. My feelings about it helped me understand the concepts of pure evil and satan (especially disguising himself as God). Sounds silly, but it's true. I learned about myself in the process. But as a good friend says (to paraphrase), I think I'd rather know less and be happier.....
I feel like whenever I read about forgiveness, it's mostly people exhorting others (me) to do it, "you really should, you know, for your own sanity" (or for God, or whatever) - but how? It's not something I feel I can choose to "do" - it seems like grace or something, something that descends upon you, when you're ready, or open, enough.
Life is slightly crazy. I'm unemployed again, and actually loving it (just not the lack of money, and, well, the lack of purpose a little bit - but having more free time is great!)
Still trying to save dogs from Georgia. I'm working on a transport this weekend, but am hopefully not fostering any of them. It's crazy, as there are a lot of problems much closer to home (even in my own state) but at least locally, it's not nearly as bad. Of course the solution is to set up a mobile vet down there and do guerilla spay and neuter or something, but it's so overwhelming, there are a million ways to approach it, I guess.
I got back in touch with my most dramatic ex. Or, she got in touch with me. I was (am?) crazy about her, literally. It's scary to know people who can make you crazy (or bring out your crazies, or whatever). What's amazing is that she actually finally apologized for huritng me. It's hard to explain how completely floored I was by that, esp. as it had been a point of contention since practially the beginning of our contact ("I never hurt you, if you hurt, it's because you're screwed up").
The sad thing is that it didnt' change things for me as much as I'd like. I guess I forgive her. What does that mean? I don't want her to burn in hell, or suffer in life, but I only wanted that on a few very fleeting occasions anyway. I wouldn't trust her again, and wonder if I ever did. I don't want to be friends, basically because overall she wasnt' nice to me, and I'd say that was an understatement. I still am horrified by both of us back then (we were cheating on her partner, something she, and eventually he, didnt' seem to think was that big a deal)
Anyway, mulling forgiveness, of others, of self, and what does it mean exactly? I don't think anymore that it wipes the slate clean - I'm not sure what it does, and I'm not sure if I've attained it.
Loving her still feels like pretty much the worst thing that ever happpened to me. I acknowledge that much worse things happen to other people all the time, but it seems I've been pretty lucky. My feelings about it helped me understand the concepts of pure evil and satan (especially disguising himself as God). Sounds silly, but it's true. I learned about myself in the process. But as a good friend says (to paraphrase), I think I'd rather know less and be happier.....
I feel like whenever I read about forgiveness, it's mostly people exhorting others (me) to do it, "you really should, you know, for your own sanity" (or for God, or whatever) - but how? It's not something I feel I can choose to "do" - it seems like grace or something, something that descends upon you, when you're ready, or open, enough.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
The Center
Over on Liz's blog (the title is a link to it) the comments on a post have veered towards a discussion of what "the center" that many of us are trying to move towards might be.
I realized after the fact that I had revealed myself as an inveterate universalist when I made the claim that "the center" changes depending on what people you're including in your calculation (if you have a scattering of points on a graph, you can find a "center" of the scattered plots)
While the idea seems to be that for conservative Friends, and/or christians (?) The center is true, it has to do with God, and that transcends people. So that new people don't shift it at all?
If there is one (well, there are lots of centers, but if there's a "true" one - that can be true for all of us) does it shift a little when each new person is born or dies?
Or is it constant. has it been constant forever? was it the same center for dinosaurs? Or do they lack souls and therefore not have a center? (rhetorical question, I don't beleieve that for a minute, God certainly doesnt' depend on us for existence, if it has it - except as a word a concept, but if you believe in it, you believe in more than that, I'd guess)
I realized a bit later that I don't necessarily believe that it changes (though I probably believe that more than that it doesn't, if THAT makes any sense) - it's possible that it doesn't change, and yet every new person brought under consideration changes our perception of it. More like science, where our best understanding of truth shifts constantly with new information, sometimes subtlely, sometimes radically, but pretty constantly...
And then I wonder if anyone should NOT be taken as part of the equation - which touches on (perhaps) the idea of "that of God in everyone" (at least my understanding of it, which is not a bit of the reflection God, but that we are all a piece of God, and it is (?) diminished by the loss of any one of us)
So, are psychopathic killers part of God? Does their "truth" shift the center, or, rather, give us new information about it (that can be trusted, that is not false) - or are they simply outside the system of God? Is anyone outside the system of God? Not in terms of basic respect owed (like, no one should be tortured!) but in terms of for lack of a better phrase, building the kingdom?
I realized after the fact that I had revealed myself as an inveterate universalist when I made the claim that "the center" changes depending on what people you're including in your calculation (if you have a scattering of points on a graph, you can find a "center" of the scattered plots)
While the idea seems to be that for conservative Friends, and/or christians (?) The center is true, it has to do with God, and that transcends people. So that new people don't shift it at all?
If there is one (well, there are lots of centers, but if there's a "true" one - that can be true for all of us) does it shift a little when each new person is born or dies?
Or is it constant. has it been constant forever? was it the same center for dinosaurs? Or do they lack souls and therefore not have a center? (rhetorical question, I don't beleieve that for a minute, God certainly doesnt' depend on us for existence, if it has it - except as a word a concept, but if you believe in it, you believe in more than that, I'd guess)
I realized a bit later that I don't necessarily believe that it changes (though I probably believe that more than that it doesn't, if THAT makes any sense) - it's possible that it doesn't change, and yet every new person brought under consideration changes our perception of it. More like science, where our best understanding of truth shifts constantly with new information, sometimes subtlely, sometimes radically, but pretty constantly...
And then I wonder if anyone should NOT be taken as part of the equation - which touches on (perhaps) the idea of "that of God in everyone" (at least my understanding of it, which is not a bit of the reflection God, but that we are all a piece of God, and it is (?) diminished by the loss of any one of us)
So, are psychopathic killers part of God? Does their "truth" shift the center, or, rather, give us new information about it (that can be trusted, that is not false) - or are they simply outside the system of God? Is anyone outside the system of God? Not in terms of basic respect owed (like, no one should be tortured!) but in terms of for lack of a better phrase, building the kingdom?
Love is at the root
Ok, so I felt somewhat foolish after reading even the first few comments on my last post, because it's so OBVIOUS that love isn't a testimony, it's like the earth that the testimonies grow in.
But then I'm left with an even bigger question, why do we talk about the testimonies so much and love so little?
It's like the testimonies are rules that you can follow - because you want to be a "good quaker" - or a 'good person" or whatever.
And I used to get a bit squeamish when folks would say it's not all about the testimonies because I thought they were saying:
a) it's all about God (and therefore, as a nontheist, it has nothing to do with you)
and
b) even worse, God might change "his" mind - if he's the God of the Bible he might (in my opinion) change it to something sort of icky - he might chuck equality out the window and tell us to slaughter all our enemies, except keep the little girls for sex slaves (reference, anyone? I'm so bad at Biblical references) or to kill our first born child or something.
me and God still have some talking to do....
But back to the "love" thing - while I'm not about calling it God, I think there is something, and love is a decent word for it, that grounds the testimonies, and nourishes them. It might even seem to undermine them (in moments where it says - yes, lie to that slavecatcher about whether there is a runaway in your basement - sad that I can't think of a more current example) but it can't be truly undermined, though it can be ignored.
We don't use "SPICE" much in my first day school class. I think it's kinda corny anyways... but I think every now and then we manage to touch on the rest of it, even glancingly...
But then I'm left with an even bigger question, why do we talk about the testimonies so much and love so little?
It's like the testimonies are rules that you can follow - because you want to be a "good quaker" - or a 'good person" or whatever.
And I used to get a bit squeamish when folks would say it's not all about the testimonies because I thought they were saying:
a) it's all about God (and therefore, as a nontheist, it has nothing to do with you)
and
b) even worse, God might change "his" mind - if he's the God of the Bible he might (in my opinion) change it to something sort of icky - he might chuck equality out the window and tell us to slaughter all our enemies, except keep the little girls for sex slaves (reference, anyone? I'm so bad at Biblical references) or to kill our first born child or something.
me and God still have some talking to do....
But back to the "love" thing - while I'm not about calling it God, I think there is something, and love is a decent word for it, that grounds the testimonies, and nourishes them. It might even seem to undermine them (in moments where it says - yes, lie to that slavecatcher about whether there is a runaway in your basement - sad that I can't think of a more current example) but it can't be truly undermined, though it can be ignored.
We don't use "SPICE" much in my first day school class. I think it's kinda corny anyways... but I think every now and then we manage to touch on the rest of it, even glancingly...
Friday, February 02, 2007
SPLICE?
I've been wondering lately why "Love" isn't a testimony. I mean, not exactly, for the past year I've found myself in various situations assuming that it is, and then realizing that I'm wrong.
So, what's with that?
Is it too emotional and passionate, maybe too earthy, for our culturally pretty reserved religion?
Is it an emotion? and therefore off limits?
Are we not called to love each other? but only to act from integrity/peace/equality - which aren't exactly the same thing, but I think why I get confused.
Any thoughts? Am I just missing something?
I think it is a testimony for me. Is that rampant individualism? Doesn't feel (exactly) like it.
Again, not feeling articulate, but have something to say anyways. (dang!)
peace (and love)!
Pam
So, what's with that?
Is it too emotional and passionate, maybe too earthy, for our culturally pretty reserved religion?
Is it an emotion? and therefore off limits?
Are we not called to love each other? but only to act from integrity/peace/equality - which aren't exactly the same thing, but I think why I get confused.
Any thoughts? Am I just missing something?
I think it is a testimony for me. Is that rampant individualism? Doesn't feel (exactly) like it.
Again, not feeling articulate, but have something to say anyways. (dang!)
peace (and love)!
Pam
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Sex Ed?
I work with the middle schoolers at my meeting, and I brought up to the other teachers that I'd like us to do a few discussions with the kids on sex and sexuality. Not really the basics at all (I think they all learn at school about where babies come from and the effectiveness of various sorts of birth control)
I'm hoping more to lay some groundwork for developing about sexual ethics. The kids in my meeting know lots of same sex couples, and some trans people (though I don't know how well they understand that) and some know something about polyamory.
So, I'm not talking about a set of "rules" that I think of as common to religious education. I'm not interested in telling them what's "wrong" - but I feel as if there's a lack in first day school of any talking about that stuff, so kids may be a bit at a loss when confronted with ideas and practices that they're not "used to" - let alone the challenge (for some of us anyway) of figuring out one's own sexuality. I think I'm finally getting the hang of it :)
We had talked about trying to borrow from the Unitarian/UCC "Our Whole Lives" or "OWL" program, but it's much more intense than we expected, and they dont' even sell the curriculum to people who haven't been trained.
We've been working a little in class with question cards - a deck of cards with queries (pretty much) written on them to inspire conversation about spiritual or emotional issues. Last week the teachers decided that maybe we can come up with some similar questions around sexuality, but we haven't set a time to meet and do that yet.
I'm not sure why I'm blogging about this, I guess just for input. I'm wondering if quaker parents have things they'd like their kids to discuss (or really don't want them to discuss!), things people wish they'd gotten to talk or learn about as 12-13 year olds, etc.
Or if anyone has suggestions for questions, or other ways of approaching the topic (whcih is a little awkward and giggly, I must say!)
peace
Pam
I'm hoping more to lay some groundwork for developing about sexual ethics. The kids in my meeting know lots of same sex couples, and some trans people (though I don't know how well they understand that) and some know something about polyamory.
So, I'm not talking about a set of "rules" that I think of as common to religious education. I'm not interested in telling them what's "wrong" - but I feel as if there's a lack in first day school of any talking about that stuff, so kids may be a bit at a loss when confronted with ideas and practices that they're not "used to" - let alone the challenge (for some of us anyway) of figuring out one's own sexuality. I think I'm finally getting the hang of it :)
We had talked about trying to borrow from the Unitarian/UCC "Our Whole Lives" or "OWL" program, but it's much more intense than we expected, and they dont' even sell the curriculum to people who haven't been trained.
We've been working a little in class with question cards - a deck of cards with queries (pretty much) written on them to inspire conversation about spiritual or emotional issues. Last week the teachers decided that maybe we can come up with some similar questions around sexuality, but we haven't set a time to meet and do that yet.
I'm not sure why I'm blogging about this, I guess just for input. I'm wondering if quaker parents have things they'd like their kids to discuss (or really don't want them to discuss!), things people wish they'd gotten to talk or learn about as 12-13 year olds, etc.
Or if anyone has suggestions for questions, or other ways of approaching the topic (whcih is a little awkward and giggly, I must say!)
peace
Pam
Sunday, January 07, 2007
She's here!
This is my latest addition, who flew up from Georgia yesterday. She didn't at first look anything like the photo I'd seen (well, I mean, the photo wasn't of a white poodle or anything) but I think it's really her. In any case, I saved one.
She's great, and only a little bigger than Maddy (but MUCH less barky) - they're adorable together.
I still don't have a name, though I've started calling her "Georgia" (origingal) rather than "new puppy" :)
Update:Georgia has moved on, to live with f/Friends of mine. She's an only dog now (with kitty friends) which means more attention, but less playtime. so many tradeoffs in life. And we miss her much at my house, but are enjoying (at least me and the cats are!) the return to a lower level of chaos.
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Dog craziness
hey
well, this isn't all spiritual and introspective, but I guess I just need to blab.
So, I adopted this dog, and she's ready to travel now. I'm trying to figure out how to get her from Atlanta to Minneapolis sometime this week. I have someone who can get her to the airport on Saturday, but between her not being able to get there until afternoon, and the cargo divisions that handle shipping animals and not being able to prepay (so this woman who's already doing me a favor has to pay, and I have to reimburse her, which is a lot to ask!) and the crate she needs and the certificates (the airline that is best on many things - like having crates you can buy at the airport, also is the only one that requires an additional certificate for dogs flying when it's cold out - which I don't know if I can get)
And it's lots of money, and I'm feeling sort of stupid. I'm sort of figuring I'm spending (a little more, but basically) the money I would have donated to a rescue organization at the end of the year anyway. But I dont' get the tax deduction, and they probably could have saved more dogs with the same money.
And dealing with my mom's money is a similar sort of crazy. she's actually running out, and not all her bills are paid, and some are in my name, which is scary (I'm not sure how that happened!) and applying for assistance is the typical bureaucratic nightmare!
and I'm focusing less energy on that than the dog right now, which probably isn't the smartest.
And once she gets here she needs to be checked out by a vet, and I'm worried about what that will turn up. (she hasn't been tested for heartworm, or given distemper vaccines) and if my dogs will be exposed to anything.
And then, I'm hoping to find her a home, but who knows if I'll be able to? and can I give her up? I havne't even met her, but she's been my dog for a while now. Which brings up a whole nother thing. Am I "in love with the idea of her"? I think I can tend to do that.
Just a friendly update :)
peace!
Pam
well, this isn't all spiritual and introspective, but I guess I just need to blab.
So, I adopted this dog, and she's ready to travel now. I'm trying to figure out how to get her from Atlanta to Minneapolis sometime this week. I have someone who can get her to the airport on Saturday, but between her not being able to get there until afternoon, and the cargo divisions that handle shipping animals and not being able to prepay (so this woman who's already doing me a favor has to pay, and I have to reimburse her, which is a lot to ask!) and the crate she needs and the certificates (the airline that is best on many things - like having crates you can buy at the airport, also is the only one that requires an additional certificate for dogs flying when it's cold out - which I don't know if I can get)
And it's lots of money, and I'm feeling sort of stupid. I'm sort of figuring I'm spending (a little more, but basically) the money I would have donated to a rescue organization at the end of the year anyway. But I dont' get the tax deduction, and they probably could have saved more dogs with the same money.
And dealing with my mom's money is a similar sort of crazy. she's actually running out, and not all her bills are paid, and some are in my name, which is scary (I'm not sure how that happened!) and applying for assistance is the typical bureaucratic nightmare!
and I'm focusing less energy on that than the dog right now, which probably isn't the smartest.
And once she gets here she needs to be checked out by a vet, and I'm worried about what that will turn up. (she hasn't been tested for heartworm, or given distemper vaccines) and if my dogs will be exposed to anything.
And then, I'm hoping to find her a home, but who knows if I'll be able to? and can I give her up? I havne't even met her, but she's been my dog for a while now. Which brings up a whole nother thing. Am I "in love with the idea of her"? I think I can tend to do that.
Just a friendly update :)
peace!
Pam
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Dogs - love them, don't traffic in them
I finally got a camera. These are my dogs now. In the first picture Maddy is wet because she got knocked into the river while they were playing.
All of my dogs and cats are "rescues". I wouldn't have it any other way.
I have gotten all caught up in the story of a number of dogs in a shelter in Georgia who are going to be put to sleep on Friday. I am hoping to try to help save some, but I am starting to think there's not much I can really do.
There are so many people who work so hard on saving these animals (there are cats who will be euthanized too - all healthy, and seemingly lovely animals) and so many animals that are scared and facing death (even if they don't know it)
It just occurred to me to ask here, though it seems a bit weird, that anyone reading this seriously consider adopting a shelter animal if they plan on getting a pet. Buying animals (and thereby paying people to breed more) while so many die seems to me to be something horrific beyond my ability to say it. If I used the word "sin" this is one of the places I think it would apply.
This is one of a number of areas where I'm hesitant to speak, because I am sort of single-minded on it, and get labelled a hardass more often than I actually inspire any actual changes, but I feel like I had to say something.
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Soy will make your baby gay!
So, turns out that soy is "feminizing" (it is a phyto-estrogen, whatever that is, and apparently linked to breast cancer, which I see as an actual cause for concern, but that's not really the point of this article)
Which is making people gay.
Doesn't really explain me, maybe it should have made me straight? I've been a tofu eating treehugger for almost 20 years now and it doesn't seem to have hurt/helped me in that regard.
Also, in case you haven't heard, from Focus on the Family, responding to the news of Mary Cheney's pregnancy Carrie Gordon Earll, said in a statement. “Just because it’s possible to conceive a child outside of the relationship of a married mother and father doesn’t mean it’s the best for the child. Love can’t replace a mom or a dad.”
What a choice to make! I'd say, though, that if it's a choice between the two the choice is obvious, maybe for all of us - we just choose different things!
Which is making people gay.
Doesn't really explain me, maybe it should have made me straight? I've been a tofu eating treehugger for almost 20 years now and it doesn't seem to have hurt/helped me in that regard.
Also, in case you haven't heard, from Focus on the Family, responding to the news of Mary Cheney's pregnancy Carrie Gordon Earll, said in a statement. “Just because it’s possible to conceive a child outside of the relationship of a married mother and father doesn’t mean it’s the best for the child. Love can’t replace a mom or a dad.”
What a choice to make! I'd say, though, that if it's a choice between the two the choice is obvious, maybe for all of us - we just choose different things!
Thursday, December 07, 2006
I can't stand having a picture of Patches up at the top of my blog, so here's my other dog.
He's the one who's cut off in the side of the photo. (We were taking them to post of the other dog - who was lost, and Jordan just couldnt' figure out what we were doing so he had to get in there to see.....)
The small dog is actually named Patches too - but we called him "Percy" - We found him running loose about a block from his home, but no one we asked knew him, so he stayed with us for 3 days until his owner found one of our signs.
I've always thought I wanted to have a small dog and a big dog - it's so ironic or something. But poor Percy got stepped on a lot, and hid under the bed.
It's medium/large dogs for me all the way.
(Maddy actually looked somewhat like Percy when I got her - about 10#, fluffy black with a white chest, but we went to the vet yesterday and she's 17# - so she doesn't look like that anymore....)
I have to get a camera.....
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Patches
I had to put my dog, Patches, to sleep yesterday. I am devastated.
I sort of thought that I wouldn't be. She had a good, pretty long life, and I have two younger dogs who demand much more attention that she did over the last few years.
Still, it was really horrible. I've actually put two other dogs to sleep in the last 18 months (ugh! what a terrible thing to have lots of in your life!) - a puppy who I had had less than a week who had parvo, and my mom's dog, who I'd found at college and who had recently been living with friends of mine.
But she was my baby, and you can't imagine how much worse it is. I got her when she was about one and a half, in 1994. We've been through lots together.
*A dog bite on her back (& trip to the emergency vet)
*A swallowd bottle of ibuprofen (prescription!) (& trip to the emergency vet)
*The breakup of my first relationship (actually, all of my relationships)
*Four cats
*Numerous other dogs (I was always trying to get a second one, she said "no" a lot)
*The time she jumped over a wall at the river and ended up in a drainage pipe outlet - she won't swim, so I basically had to get in the river (in december!) and go around and get her.
*The (barbed) fishhook she got in her mouth (at the river - I actually managed to get it out without damaging anything!)
*The time she jumped off a ledge at the river, and couldn't jump back up, it took me forever to get my scarf around her middle and hoist her back up (during which a helpful woman walked by and told me a dog had died falling down that hill recently)
I almost stopped taking her to the river, but I never did, we all went on thanksgiving.
This photo is more than ten years old (twelve?). There was a willow tree in the yard that for a while had one regular trunk and one stump that was about 5' tall. She was really good at running up the side of the stump, and loved to stand in the tree. The other part fell over in a storm within the year, and it took us ages to deal with it, so it was a great doggy playground.
I didn't name her Patches. I tend towards human-type names for dogs myself. But she already had it, and knew it, and it fit her so well. I'm sad that I will never have to explain that to anyone anymore.
I found myself really really wishing for the afterlife that I don't believe in. So that I could believe I would see her again, that she's happy somewhere instead of just gone.
OUCH
Friday, November 24, 2006
"The God Delusion" - musings
I just finished reading Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion. I liked it pretty well. I find Dawkins mostly fun to read, and quite talented (usually) at making things like the science of evolution make a little more sense to me than they did before. I also find him sort of annoying and condescending. Though I tend to agree with him on many things, I find that his presentation comes off as a bit too self-satisfied. In that past I have thought he spent a bit too much time harping on how stupid one would have to be to accept biblical creation as the true story. This book seems much the same to me.
The biggest point that I'm left with this time is that he is arguing that we should do away with God and religion. I don't so much mind this proposition (as I understand it) but see no practical way to implement it. Also, he makes a very clear point that people who are "religious" in a fundamentalist sense are often poorly educated, and that fundamentalism is dangerous. He seems to think that we can get rid of fundamentalism by getting rid of religion (by......?) but doesnt' go into what those poorly educated people will do with whatever longing led them to fundamentalism in the first place.
In any case, my real point was more about the personal effect it had on me. Early on he makes a distinction between 'supernatural religion' and 'Einsteinian religion'
The latter being pretty well summed up by this quote from Einstein,
"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever... I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism. The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naive."
This actually does a really good job of summing up part of my spirituality. Except for the use of the words "religion" and "mysticism" I myself interpret religion to mean unthinking acceptance of doctrinal or scriptural "rules" or "truth" that stand without evidence to support them. This is clearly (well, I think clearly) not what he meant.
Mysticism, on the other hand, for me, has something to do with transcending the "usual" - feelings of exceptional connectedness, and/or awe, which to me seem completely compatible with nature as God (or any non-supernatural interpretation of "God") Perhaps the meanings of the words have subtlely shifted over time, or simply between the minds of Einstein and me.
I am left, however, sort of high and dry, as usual. I tried to discuss this experience with each of my two exes. One seemed not to want to hear about it because atheism is a big turn off, the other because spirituality is completely uninteresting. Where does a spiritual atheist find a spiritual home?
Dawkins himself does little to address this for me. He himself seems quite ready to find a sort of spiritual wonder in the unravelling of quarks and other scientific ideas that are beyond my understanding, and what's more, mostly beyond my interest.
I find spiritual renewal and excitement in nature - swimming in isolated, clear, beautiful lakes, watching and hearing (and sometimes feeling) a thunderstorm, just being aware of the ocean. These can by mystical (but not religious) experiences for me.
Understanding these things can be kinda cool (why thunder happens, the amazing vastness of the ocean and all the life within it that we don't understand) - but that is not a spiritual experience. Science is no substitute for this God, this wonder, but then the God in the Bible most certainly isn't. I am amazed at how few people I have encountered who share this experience.
I said once, when I was discussing this stuff with Liz, that it's like a baby being born is a miracle. It's not supernatural, we know how to get it to happen, and we know a lot about how it happens (zygotes and embryos and genes and all)- and that doesn't affect the miraculousness of it at all.
At the same time, knowing all that stuff, being a genius to embryology, or unlocking some new key to conception, is not anything like birth.
I don't believe "God" (in the sense of a being with intent) makes miracles happen, and I do believe that given infinite time and resources, science could explain them all (meaning that they are theoretically explicable without "God", but probably won't ever all be so) - but neither has any bearing on the miraculousness of the miracles themselves. To me there's an immense amount of power of spirit there, but sometimes I feel almost entirely alone in witnessing it.
The biggest point that I'm left with this time is that he is arguing that we should do away with God and religion. I don't so much mind this proposition (as I understand it) but see no practical way to implement it. Also, he makes a very clear point that people who are "religious" in a fundamentalist sense are often poorly educated, and that fundamentalism is dangerous. He seems to think that we can get rid of fundamentalism by getting rid of religion (by......?) but doesnt' go into what those poorly educated people will do with whatever longing led them to fundamentalism in the first place.
In any case, my real point was more about the personal effect it had on me. Early on he makes a distinction between 'supernatural religion' and 'Einsteinian religion'
The latter being pretty well summed up by this quote from Einstein,
"I am a deeply religious nonbeliever... I have never imputed to Nature a purpose or a goal, or anything that could be understood as anthropomorphic. What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has nothing to do with mysticism. The idea of a personal God is quite alien to me and seems even naive."
This actually does a really good job of summing up part of my spirituality. Except for the use of the words "religion" and "mysticism" I myself interpret religion to mean unthinking acceptance of doctrinal or scriptural "rules" or "truth" that stand without evidence to support them. This is clearly (well, I think clearly) not what he meant.
Mysticism, on the other hand, for me, has something to do with transcending the "usual" - feelings of exceptional connectedness, and/or awe, which to me seem completely compatible with nature as God (or any non-supernatural interpretation of "God") Perhaps the meanings of the words have subtlely shifted over time, or simply between the minds of Einstein and me.
I am left, however, sort of high and dry, as usual. I tried to discuss this experience with each of my two exes. One seemed not to want to hear about it because atheism is a big turn off, the other because spirituality is completely uninteresting. Where does a spiritual atheist find a spiritual home?
Dawkins himself does little to address this for me. He himself seems quite ready to find a sort of spiritual wonder in the unravelling of quarks and other scientific ideas that are beyond my understanding, and what's more, mostly beyond my interest.
I find spiritual renewal and excitement in nature - swimming in isolated, clear, beautiful lakes, watching and hearing (and sometimes feeling) a thunderstorm, just being aware of the ocean. These can by mystical (but not religious) experiences for me.
Understanding these things can be kinda cool (why thunder happens, the amazing vastness of the ocean and all the life within it that we don't understand) - but that is not a spiritual experience. Science is no substitute for this God, this wonder, but then the God in the Bible most certainly isn't. I am amazed at how few people I have encountered who share this experience.
I said once, when I was discussing this stuff with Liz, that it's like a baby being born is a miracle. It's not supernatural, we know how to get it to happen, and we know a lot about how it happens (zygotes and embryos and genes and all)- and that doesn't affect the miraculousness of it at all.
At the same time, knowing all that stuff, being a genius to embryology, or unlocking some new key to conception, is not anything like birth.
I don't believe "God" (in the sense of a being with intent) makes miracles happen, and I do believe that given infinite time and resources, science could explain them all (meaning that they are theoretically explicable without "God", but probably won't ever all be so) - but neither has any bearing on the miraculousness of the miracles themselves. To me there's an immense amount of power of spirit there, but sometimes I feel almost entirely alone in witnessing it.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Blog Meme Thingamabob
So, Robin didnt' tag me, but I wanted to do this thingy from her blog anyway:
1. Grab the nearest book. If you are currently reading something, that'll be fine too.
2. Open the book to page 123.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the text of the next 4 sentences on your Blog along with these instructions.
5. Don't you dare dig for that "cool" or "intellectual" book in your closet I know that is what you were thinking!
6. Tag 5 people
"Newcharlie sighed and looked out over the block. "Whatever."
"I felt real old when he said that, like I'd spent all my life standing in that doorway trying to get him to listen to me. My head felt heavy, and the sun was too bright in my eyes. When I closed then, Mama was there again, holding the leaf out to me."
It's from Miracle's Boys by Jaqueline Woodson. I just finished another book by her as well, but it's less than 123 pages long (they're teen fiction)
This book was chosen by the library to be some sort of Minneapolis reading club book - like what if everyone in the city read the same book? we could all talk about it with random strangers I guess. I really like the idea, though I doubt I'll talk about the book to anyone I don't already know.
I'm about to return this book to the library
(PS - I'm not into the tagging thing, you're all tagged if you want to be, not if you don't!) comment here and let me know if you do it)
peace
Pam
1. Grab the nearest book. If you are currently reading something, that'll be fine too.
2. Open the book to page 123.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the text of the next 4 sentences on your Blog along with these instructions.
5. Don't you dare dig for that "cool" or "intellectual" book in your closet I know that is what you were thinking!
6. Tag 5 people
"Newcharlie sighed and looked out over the block. "Whatever."
"I felt real old when he said that, like I'd spent all my life standing in that doorway trying to get him to listen to me. My head felt heavy, and the sun was too bright in my eyes. When I closed then, Mama was there again, holding the leaf out to me."
It's from Miracle's Boys by Jaqueline Woodson. I just finished another book by her as well, but it's less than 123 pages long (they're teen fiction)
This book was chosen by the library to be some sort of Minneapolis reading club book - like what if everyone in the city read the same book? we could all talk about it with random strangers I guess. I really like the idea, though I doubt I'll talk about the book to anyone I don't already know.
I'm about to return this book to the library
(PS - I'm not into the tagging thing, you're all tagged if you want to be, not if you don't!) comment here and let me know if you do it)
peace
Pam
Monday, November 13, 2006
Miss me?
So, I'm thinking I'm maybe ready to blog again, but not really sure.
As to:
*What is the point of blogging?
*Do I have anything remotely useful to say to the larger community?
*Am I a quaker blogger? (being, I AM a blogger who is a member of a quaker meeting, but I am bored and frustrated by too much quaker history or, for lack of a better word, dogma. As a f/Friend put it so well recently, "I'm not so excited about Quakerism. I'm excited about GOD, but not really about quakerism" (yes!)
*If I'm not a quaker blogger, what sort of blogger am I? Or do I want to be? I have toyed with the idea of being an eco-blogger, a vegan-blogger (damn, not vegan yet though!), an animal rights blogger, a confused about love and romance blogger, a whiney blogger, a meaning of life (or lack of it) blogger, and I could probably go on and on.... oh, a queer blogger (though being queer is so uninteresting really, if certain people would just get over it, there would be little to say)
love
Pam
As to:
*What is the point of blogging?
*Do I have anything remotely useful to say to the larger community?
*Am I a quaker blogger? (being, I AM a blogger who is a member of a quaker meeting, but I am bored and frustrated by too much quaker history or, for lack of a better word, dogma. As a f/Friend put it so well recently, "I'm not so excited about Quakerism. I'm excited about GOD, but not really about quakerism" (yes!)
*If I'm not a quaker blogger, what sort of blogger am I? Or do I want to be? I have toyed with the idea of being an eco-blogger, a vegan-blogger (damn, not vegan yet though!), an animal rights blogger, a confused about love and romance blogger, a whiney blogger, a meaning of life (or lack of it) blogger, and I could probably go on and on.... oh, a queer blogger (though being queer is so uninteresting really, if certain people would just get over it, there would be little to say)
love
Pam
Thursday, October 12, 2006
minor chaos
So, my life has been all over the place lately, I'm not so bloggerific.
* I got a new job, with "OutFront, MN" - a glbt lobbying organization. I'm excited.
* I was supposed to start today but my furnace died (first really cold day) and I had to stay home all day and wait for the repair guy. They love me, I tell ya.
* After my second interview last week, (really, like a few hours after) I jetted off to Philly with my friend Kate to get my mom and bring her back to Minnesota. My mom has dementia and has been in a home for 3 years. One of my waiting lists finally came up here in Minneapolis, but you have a week to take the spot or lose it.
* We drove back, because my mom doesnt' have a current photo ID and to jump through the hoops to get her one (especially as it would involve her, who gets freaked out easily) seemed worse than a 3 day road trip. I'm not sure I'd say that now, but it was fun (now that it's over)
* My tenant told me this morning that he's planning to move out at the end of the month, so I have to find someone to move in in the middle of winter (well, not the middle, thank goodness!)
So I'm feeling a little crazy and not thinking about godstuff much lately (or not coming up with anything useful to say anyway...)
I did just start reading "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan, who wrote "Botany of Desire" - I really like both books, and this one is making me want to start an organic farm with my total and complete lack of clue as to how to do it (I did bring in all of my tomatoes last night, before the hard frost - well, most of them, it was already dark when I started and I couldn't find them all!)
PHEW!
Pam
* I got a new job, with "OutFront, MN" - a glbt lobbying organization. I'm excited.
* I was supposed to start today but my furnace died (first really cold day) and I had to stay home all day and wait for the repair guy. They love me, I tell ya.
* After my second interview last week, (really, like a few hours after) I jetted off to Philly with my friend Kate to get my mom and bring her back to Minnesota. My mom has dementia and has been in a home for 3 years. One of my waiting lists finally came up here in Minneapolis, but you have a week to take the spot or lose it.
* We drove back, because my mom doesnt' have a current photo ID and to jump through the hoops to get her one (especially as it would involve her, who gets freaked out easily) seemed worse than a 3 day road trip. I'm not sure I'd say that now, but it was fun (now that it's over)
* My tenant told me this morning that he's planning to move out at the end of the month, so I have to find someone to move in in the middle of winter (well, not the middle, thank goodness!)
So I'm feeling a little crazy and not thinking about godstuff much lately (or not coming up with anything useful to say anyway...)
I did just start reading "The Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan, who wrote "Botany of Desire" - I really like both books, and this one is making me want to start an organic farm with my total and complete lack of clue as to how to do it (I did bring in all of my tomatoes last night, before the hard frost - well, most of them, it was already dark when I started and I couldn't find them all!)
PHEW!
Pam
Thursday, September 21, 2006
I took the veg pledge!
I also took this very silly online test which tells me that I'm a militant vegan. Amazing, since I don't actually manage to be a vegan. Apparently I'm militant enough to make up for it (hmmmm, bad quaker!)
I volunteered at a food giveaway sponsored by compassionate action for animals this morning, and got all jazzed about everything.
So, I've meant to write about how being vegetarian is tied to quakerism for me, but I've never really found myself motivated (led?) to. It somehow is hard to explain, though it's the most obvious thing to me (well, probably because it's so obvious to me) So I probably won't again, except to say that it's nonviolence, it's equality (which for me is manifest in not causing animals suffereing because they can suffer, and they don't like to any more than I do, rather than basing it on whether they're smart enough, or human-like enough, or whatever), it's also, conveniently enough, simplicity (eating lower on the foodchain - that also ties into eating locally and organically and stuff)
But right now I'm interested in other stuff about the topic.
Firstly, how hard I find it because it sets me apart from my friends. Most are omnivores, but comfortable with eating vegetarian now and then, some are vegetarian. Pretty much none of them are vegan, and very very few of them (okay, I can think of one) are comfortable eating vegan frequently (that would be my recent ex girlfriend) - It's freaky and saddening to me to think that I am so "of the world" that such considerations could keep me from something that feels rightly led and discerned. And it brings to mind what Zach has been writing about getting back the original "fire" of quakers - that fire that put what God wants (or, in my language, what one has discenered to be "right") ahead of, or even more simply on a completely different playing field from, worldly comfort and convenience.
To be fair, I don't particularly want to be vegan, I really like cheese, and ice cream, and eggs. I really liked meat too, but somehow it was easier to give up - I think because it was more difficult to dissociate - eating the actually leg or side of an actual animal, rather than eating a product that is tied to suffering (and yes, death) but one step removed) - so it's not like the world is holding me back from righteousness, it's more a terribly handy excuse.
I don't know, I think I'm drifting.....
You scored as militant vegan. You are a militant vegan! Happy? Surprised? A vegan is someone who avoids consuming/using all animal products, including flesh, dairy, eggs, honey, leather, and so forth. Some avoid products tested on animals. Being a militant vegan means you have more radical views than most vegetarians, namely animal rights. You may be an activist already or on the verge. You are confident and unwavering about your ethics. Not a vegan? Perhaps you're one waiting to happen! Check it out at www.goveg.com
What type of vegetarian are you? created with QuizFarm.com |
I volunteered at a food giveaway sponsored by compassionate action for animals this morning, and got all jazzed about everything.
So, I've meant to write about how being vegetarian is tied to quakerism for me, but I've never really found myself motivated (led?) to. It somehow is hard to explain, though it's the most obvious thing to me (well, probably because it's so obvious to me) So I probably won't again, except to say that it's nonviolence, it's equality (which for me is manifest in not causing animals suffereing because they can suffer, and they don't like to any more than I do, rather than basing it on whether they're smart enough, or human-like enough, or whatever), it's also, conveniently enough, simplicity (eating lower on the foodchain - that also ties into eating locally and organically and stuff)
But right now I'm interested in other stuff about the topic.
Firstly, how hard I find it because it sets me apart from my friends. Most are omnivores, but comfortable with eating vegetarian now and then, some are vegetarian. Pretty much none of them are vegan, and very very few of them (okay, I can think of one) are comfortable eating vegan frequently (that would be my recent ex girlfriend) - It's freaky and saddening to me to think that I am so "of the world" that such considerations could keep me from something that feels rightly led and discerned. And it brings to mind what Zach has been writing about getting back the original "fire" of quakers - that fire that put what God wants (or, in my language, what one has discenered to be "right") ahead of, or even more simply on a completely different playing field from, worldly comfort and convenience.
To be fair, I don't particularly want to be vegan, I really like cheese, and ice cream, and eggs. I really liked meat too, but somehow it was easier to give up - I think because it was more difficult to dissociate - eating the actually leg or side of an actual animal, rather than eating a product that is tied to suffering (and yes, death) but one step removed) - so it's not like the world is holding me back from righteousness, it's more a terribly handy excuse.
I don't know, I think I'm drifting.....
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
I'm still alive - general update
Just not around much, I guess.
I did actually lose my job, so in a way I have a lot more free time. If anyone knows of cool bookkeeping jobs at progressive companies in Minneapolis, let me know :)
Still broken up with my ex, and not dealing with it very well. I probably won't date for a while (I don't know if I ever want to "date" - I want to fall in love with someone who I'm friends with, but most of my friends are already married, or exes!!!)
She's already exploring dating. hasn't really "hooked up" with anyone yet, but I freak out every time she goes out for coffee. It's not so great....
I know this isn't all quaker and spiritual, but as I think I mentioned before, I'm not so sure about cutting out "normal life" from the spiritual. Spirit is an essential part of everything, isn't it? but right now I can't intellectualize it much, but I think that's okay too.
I went to a class last night at the Jack Pine Community Center, a free class about Empire, and, I guess, the US as empire. It was interesting, and annoying in many ways. The guy who initiated it wants it to be sort of collectively run and not hierarchical, but doesnt' seem to have the skills to implement that (or let it happen) very well. It turned out to be a situation where he would present something, an outline, whatever, and then spend a few minutes saying "if that's okay with you all, I don't want to run everything here,...." and just get a bunch of blank stares. Some of this I think is that it was mostly college students, most of whom probably haven't worked collectively, so they weren't sure how to jump in, but also, this guy seemed to have a vision but no, well, clerking skills (I don't have any either, though I'm thinking more and more it's time to work on that..)
I ended up feeling like he managed to dominate most of the time, without providing leadership. Now, he seems like a pretty nice guy, but it really got me thinking about how we're not culturally conditioned to function in an egalitarian setting where we lead without taking over (rather perhaps, we often take over without leading...)
In addition to which, he used a lot of big words, which is perhaps normal for an academic, but then would often make a point of "translating" them, in addition to occasionally oversimplifying (at one point he mentioned writing his dissertation and explained that that was like a big book report - well, actually, it isn't, but whatever...) what bothered me most about this was that it seemed like he looked at the only black man in the room every time he did this. (also one of the few people who didn't mention what college they went to during introductions.)
So now I'm pondering intellectual elitism too, which I find to be a huge problem for Friends. Not that I think we should "play dumb" - but there are ways to lean towards broad communication rather than muddling things as much as possible with big words.
I dunno.
This clearly wasnt' seasoned, oops
peace
Pam
I did actually lose my job, so in a way I have a lot more free time. If anyone knows of cool bookkeeping jobs at progressive companies in Minneapolis, let me know :)
Still broken up with my ex, and not dealing with it very well. I probably won't date for a while (I don't know if I ever want to "date" - I want to fall in love with someone who I'm friends with, but most of my friends are already married, or exes!!!)
She's already exploring dating. hasn't really "hooked up" with anyone yet, but I freak out every time she goes out for coffee. It's not so great....
I know this isn't all quaker and spiritual, but as I think I mentioned before, I'm not so sure about cutting out "normal life" from the spiritual. Spirit is an essential part of everything, isn't it? but right now I can't intellectualize it much, but I think that's okay too.
I went to a class last night at the Jack Pine Community Center, a free class about Empire, and, I guess, the US as empire. It was interesting, and annoying in many ways. The guy who initiated it wants it to be sort of collectively run and not hierarchical, but doesnt' seem to have the skills to implement that (or let it happen) very well. It turned out to be a situation where he would present something, an outline, whatever, and then spend a few minutes saying "if that's okay with you all, I don't want to run everything here,...." and just get a bunch of blank stares. Some of this I think is that it was mostly college students, most of whom probably haven't worked collectively, so they weren't sure how to jump in, but also, this guy seemed to have a vision but no, well, clerking skills (I don't have any either, though I'm thinking more and more it's time to work on that..)
I ended up feeling like he managed to dominate most of the time, without providing leadership. Now, he seems like a pretty nice guy, but it really got me thinking about how we're not culturally conditioned to function in an egalitarian setting where we lead without taking over (rather perhaps, we often take over without leading...)
In addition to which, he used a lot of big words, which is perhaps normal for an academic, but then would often make a point of "translating" them, in addition to occasionally oversimplifying (at one point he mentioned writing his dissertation and explained that that was like a big book report - well, actually, it isn't, but whatever...) what bothered me most about this was that it seemed like he looked at the only black man in the room every time he did this. (also one of the few people who didn't mention what college they went to during introductions.)
So now I'm pondering intellectual elitism too, which I find to be a huge problem for Friends. Not that I think we should "play dumb" - but there are ways to lean towards broad communication rather than muddling things as much as possible with big words.
I dunno.
This clearly wasnt' seasoned, oops
peace
Pam
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Too Sad to Blog
Big week for me.
My sweetie and I broke up. It was perfect in so many ways, but not something that could work, in the long run, I guess. We're still figuring out how much we can stand to see each other, and how much we can stand not to. I love her
My work is insane, not many details to follow, yet, but there are many issues, and I'm not sure if I'll have a job next week (and that's one of the more minor dramas there)
So, I've been feeling like I need to write something, but getting through the day is about my level right now.
Hold me in the Light, if you feel like it.
Pam
My sweetie and I broke up. It was perfect in so many ways, but not something that could work, in the long run, I guess. We're still figuring out how much we can stand to see each other, and how much we can stand not to. I love her
My work is insane, not many details to follow, yet, but there are many issues, and I'm not sure if I'll have a job next week (and that's one of the more minor dramas there)
So, I've been feeling like I need to write something, but getting through the day is about my level right now.
Hold me in the Light, if you feel like it.
Pam
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)