White House Faith Office

In my last post, I expressed my disagreement with JD Vance's use of ordo amoris, both as a way to justify mass deportations, but also because I felt he wasn't really following the dictates of that theological notion.

This post will focus on the recent creation of The White House Faith Office.

For those of you who missed it, the new president signed an executive order to establish a White House Faith Office. Among other things, it will consult with faith leaders on topics defending religious liberty, the promotion of adoption and foster care programs, help faith based organizations procure government grants, and to root out anti-Christian bias in America which includes the creation of a task force led by the new Attorney General to investigate the targeting of Christians. 

He chose Paula White-Cain to lead the office.

So, where to begin. First, this was not the creation of something new, but a renaming of an existing office which was formerly called the Office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives. Not sure why the new president felt the need to alter the title, other than perhaps his penchant for changing things to suit him, to put his stamp on it. 

It is not an uncommon practice for a new boss to want to make changes to an organization or department, I experienced, and engaged in it over the course of my working career, but there is a fine line between changing things for the sake of change, and changing things to actually improve the situation. If this was the only department or federal process that Trump had altered so far, I would give him the benefit of the doubt, but since he has taken a bulldozer to the entire federal bureaucracy, I tend to believe he is endeavoring to put his mark on everything, as a dog does by peeing on every tree in the park.

But I digress.

On the face of it then, no big deal. An office to encourage the myriad range of good works and programs that faith based organizations have created, and to assist them when legal. I say when legal because there is that pesky separation of church and state section in the First Amendment. But again, as long as the office does not try to establish one faith over another as our national creed, the concept is fine.

Unfortunately, the real direction and marching orders for this iteration seems extremely biased towards Christianity. Granted, there was some mention of anti-antisemitism during the announcement of the executive order, but there seemed to be a laser focus in that regards towards various college campuses where some disgraceful conduct occurred in response to the ongoing slaughter of Palestinian women and children by the Israeli government. As I said in a previous post, protesting against this atrocity, peacefully, without intimidation against Jewish students, is also in line with our First Amendment rights, and not anti-Semitic in itself. 

Curiously, I didn't read any comments or instruction given to Attorney General Bondi to investigate the comments by Marjorie Taylor Green in regards to Jewish space lasers. 

As I have read, and most likely stated before, claiming an anti-Christian bias in a country where Christians outnumber all other religious affiliations by two to one sounds as ridiculous as Trump's latest claim (whispered in his ear by Elon) that white South Africans are being discriminated against by their non-white counterparts. While, at least the white South African population is the minority in that country, the fact that those 7% own upwards of 70% of the wealth in that country, or that 60% of Black South Africans live in poverty compared to 1% of White South Africans, it again sound ludicrous to claim prejudice against those with the better standards of living.

Sort of how ridiculous it is to hear some of the super rich in America claiming oppression.

What is really striking however, is that as far as I could determine, no mention was made about the obvious anti-Muslim attacks and widespread prejudice that exists in our country. Of course, it would be a complete turn around for the new president to admit that when he himself is Islamophobic, see Muslim travel bans, calling their countries sh**hole nations, constant derogatory comments about the few Islamic representatives in our government. 

Clearly then, while the Office itself is not the problem, like so many ideas Trump touches, the execution and goals of the directive are the problem.

Will Bondi use this new understanding to sue private businesses who continue to hire people with an eye to diversity, equity and inclusion as an attack on "Christian" values? We know she is targeting such companies, its just a matter of how those attacks are justified, and which of Trump's many unconstitutional executive orders are referred to in any indictment.

And then there is Paula White-Cain. I recommend you google her and not rely on my concerns, but here they are.

First, like Trump, she is on her third marriage. Funny how the sacred institution of marriage is lost of so many of Trump's associates, as well as himself. And, like Trump, she had experience with bankruptcy, he with casinos, she with her first mega-church in Florida. And both have been investigated for business fraud, one actually convicted (has he paid the state of New York what he owes them, by the way), while in her case the Senate Finance Committee found evidence of misusing charitable, tax-exempt funds.

But the really strong connection between the two, as it appears that she is the new president's spiritual advisor, is that she promotes the prosperity gospel. Again, do a quick google on that one, but in essence, it teaches that God blesses his believers with wealth, health and happiness in this life which means that believers can increase their wealth through faith, positive declarations, and charitable giving. And, no surprise, that charitable giving starts by giving to televangelists like Oral Roberts and White-Cain. Again, you might want to google Roberts net worth when he passed to... well I guess it doesn't matter since he was rewarded with God's blessings on Earth.

Prosperity gospel. No surprise that Trump would be attracted to such a philosophy, Jesus's warning in Luke 18:25 that "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle that for a rich man to gain eternal life" notwithstanding.

Finally, while perusing some older posts this morning, I came upon the following one about the 2010 proposal to build a mosque within a few blocks of the site of the horrific attacks on the Twin Towers on 9/11. Curiously, that mosque was built, despite the outrage of some Americans, including Trump who offered $6 million to be an investor so he could block the construction of the mosque. I guess some things never change, white house faith office or not.

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2010/08/mosque.html

JD Vance and Ordo Amoris

I was raised a Roman Catholic, attended parochial school for eight years, then went to a private high school which featured instruction by the Christian Brothers, as well as lay teachers. While I am far from an expert on the teachings and dogma of the Catholic Church, I was certainly exposed to a constant indoctrination of those tenets during my formative years.

I can't recall if I have conveyed the story of when doubt in my religion of birth first began, but it occurred in seventh grade. I had two nuns as teachers that year for all subjects, science, math, religion, all subjects.

At one point, after a science class in which Darwin's theory of evolution was covered, I asked a question in religion class about how we should interpret the Book of Genesis in general, and the story of Adam and Eve in particular as it relates to the topic of the science class that we just left, again, a topic taught by a nun.

Sadly, I was told to sit down, (we used to have to stand to ask a question). Now, perhaps the good sister did not want to broach such a difficult topic, or perhaps even thought that my question did not reflect the curiosity level of my fellow classmates, but remember, I was taught to believe everything in the bible as God's word, the Truth, and here was a science lesson that seemed to contradict those words.

In retrospect, I don't blame the nun although I would have expected her to have asked that same question herself at some point in her life in preparation to teach. At worse, I expected that I could have been asked to see her after class, to discuss the topic, if she wasn't prepared to talk openly to all the children.

Regardless, that was the moment when I realized that the Truth of the Bible was rooted in faith, not fact, which is certainly fine, but should be taught as such. As I sit here, 50 plus years later, I have encountered countless people still, who believe in the Bible as a history or science book. 

As a young adult, searching for meaning (as they say), I read a number of religious tomes, including the Bible, although I focused more on the New Testament. Today, I respect the Bible as a source for stories that provide moral guidance. Stories to make the complex seem more simple, easier to understand. And yes, to present rules for the faithful to follow, so they don't have to struggle with their own interpretations.

Which brings me to the concept of ordo amoris, which I must admit, I was never taught, or if taught, never made an impression on me.

For those unfamiliar with this moral theological notion, it basically refers to an ever expanding circle of love and good will which we should follow. To put it simply, you should show more love to your spouse and family first, then to your neighbors and friends, then to those in other states or other countries. 

Ordo amoris, or an order of love.

The reason it entered mainstream conversation was that JD Vance used this theory to justify mass deportations of illegal aliens from America, which, is no surprise considering the president's rallying cry of America First.

Before posting, I read two articles which seem to look with skepticism at Vance's use of ordo amoris as justification for the rather inhumane treatment of people (yes, they are people, children of God as I was taught during my years in Catholic school).

The first is from the America magazine, the second from the National Catholic Register. The one from America is much longer and goes into much more depth as to why Vance's interpretation of ordo amoris is incorrectly being applied to mass deportations. Also, both articles touch on Pope Francis's reaction both to the mass deportation plans, and Vance's justification. If you only have the energy or time to read one, I recommend the first.

https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2025/02/13/ordo-amoris-stephen-pope-vance-249926 

https://www.ncregister.com/cna/pope-francis-vance-clash-over-ordo-amoris 

After reading the article in America, I initially thought there was nothing I could add, as it detailed a bunch of reasons to decry Vance's interpretation. But as I was typing this post, a number of thoughts popped into my head; here they are.

First, I do recall that there is a pope infallibility theory in Roman Catholicism which basically asserts that the pope is free from error when speaking on faith and morals. Now, while it can certainly be debated if the pope's statement that mass deportations by the United States of America runs contrary to the teachings of Jesus, I would tend to give the pope the benefit of the doubt before Vance. I mean, one of them has studied scriptures all his life, devoted his life to Jesus Christ, and was elected by his peers, all the other cardinals of the Church, while the other is a politician who once declared that Trump was America's Hitler but is now his vice president.

What I want to know is what the pastor at Vance's church is telling him about disagreeing with the spiritual leader of his religion, at least on this topic? Did he correct Vance, admonish him for openly dissenting from the pope's opinion and advice concerning deportations, or did he just glad-hand him and take his (one would imagine) large, weekly tithe?

More to the point however, if we assume that Vance is right, that we should spend our love on our family first, etc, to me it seems that he isn't even doing that. Or not very consistently.

First, Vance is the Vice President of all Americans. To me, that means that his circle of loved ones is far bigger than the average person's who can really only directly effect a very small number of people. Vance's input into this administration's policies, and his defense of them, should require him to consider everyone in the country, not just those who voted for him or agree with him. One might say that morally speaking, all elected officers in our government, from local to state to federal, assume a higher moral standard, a larger circle, if we are to agree with ordo amoris.

So, while most undocumented people are not citizens, many have married Americans, or gave birth to children on American soil. Are they not part of Vance's circle? This inconsistency seems even more obvious, and odious, considering the attacks of birthright citizenship. That juxtaposition seems to define Vance's version of ordo amoris; just change the definition of those we want to exclude from our circle.

There are a few things I would like to ask Mr Vance, but one critical question would be how he would react to one of his children experiencing gender identity issues. While I am sure he would make sure his child received some kind of health care, perhaps even mental health care, I expect he would hope that his child "grows out of it" or resolves his/her problems in a way which conforms with Vance's assumption that there are only 2 genders.

But if not, would he ostracize that child, as has Elon Musk who apparently, has a transgender child whom he disavows? Would he force that child from his circle of love as thousands of Christian parents have done when faced with a gay or transgender child? 

As is true of so many moral guidelines, there is no asterisk after the ordo amoris theory of morality that allows you to pick and choose who to exclude from your order of love. That seems to be the biggest point of the criticism of Vance's use of ordo amoris, that he believes that showing love to people in the outer circles of one's life somehow reduces how much love one can display for those in a closer circle. As if there is a limit of love one can convey so we need to make sure we don't use it all up on people not in our family, or neighborhood or country.

I guess someone like Mother Theresa didn't get that memo.

Another big problem I have with Vance resurrecting this theological philosophy is one I expressed when criticizing the justification for the Supreme Court to allow abortion to return to state control. If you remember, one of their reasons was that the United States did not have a strong tradition of allowing abortion throughout its history. The fact that women have had the right to vote for less time than America has existed, didn't seem to enter into their calculations.

In this case, Vance is going back hundreds of years before America even existed to find rationale for treating immigrants mercilessly. Funny how the GOP seems to love dredging up theories from the past when woman were treated as property, or when only white men had the right to vote, or when divine right was a common argument for why most people were considered peasants without the ability to reason or govern or make choices for themselves.

In the end, Vance would have us believe that blaming American children of mixed immigration status for their situation, or blaming immigrants that flee other countries for freedom or economic opportunity is OK in God's eyes as long as we love those in our own family, or own neighborhood, or own country.

As I said at the start of this post, I am no expert on theology, Roman Catholic or otherwise, but I certainly don't believe in a god that encourages us to treat inhumanely those born in a different place, or children born to parents who crossed a border without permission, or people who are in the minority about who they love or how they perceive their identity.

As for JD Vance and those who seek to wrap their cruel policies in a religious jacket, I am not impressed. It rings of mental masturbation, and not in a good way. 

--

I was perusing some old posts today and came upon this one which seems appropriate given the topic.

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2016/04/discrimination-in-christian-nation.html

A Dialogue with The Almighty

Merriam-Webster defines atheist and agnostic as

Atheist -  a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods

Agnostic -  a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable

I have toggled back and forth between identifying as an atheist or agnostic for much of my adult life, although I generally considered my more agnostic leanings a reflection of a belief that while there must be some sort of force that exists that is not able to be understood by humans, our definition of God could not be accurate, that God could not be anything like what we have constructed in our minds and through our religions. And that certainly, there is no religion (or religious definition of God) that is any better than any other. 

So, imagine my surprise when I was recently contacted by The Almighty.  

At first I thought I was having a lucid dream. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the term, a lucid dream is one in which you are aware that you are dreaming thereby allowing you to influence or control the content or narrative of the dream. While I fly in my dreams more infrequently than when I was a younger adult, flying defined as soaring through the air like superman, I invariably knew I was dreaming while in the air. I was lucid dreaming during those flights.

As I said, at first I thought it was a lucid dream as I have often mused and even written about an encounter with The Almighty. But in this instance, that wasn't the case. For whatever reason, The Almighty had chosen to initiate a communication with me.

"Joe, it is The Almighty. I want to spend some time with you, if that is OK. I hope you will allow me to dominate the conversation but I will endeavor to entertain questions, if there is time."

The sound of the words were very clear, neither commanding nor with a deep resonant base kind of sound as one might expect, but very clear, as if reflecting a confidence. Not obviously a man or woman's voice either, so perhaps "voice" is more a function of a limited perception of communication. As I reflect upon it now, it may have been more of an ESP kind of thing. 

But as I did so, I was a bit taken aback when I focused on the phrase "if there is time", as the thought flashed through my mind that perhaps this was the actual last moments of life, and that my "time" was limited because, well, my time was up.

"No Joe, you are not about to die. It is just that I generally find that these kinds of communications stress the human mind to a degree that they can only last a short time."

"First, I want you to know that I have not abandoned Earth, or Man, or whatever you might refer to as everything going on in the world today. I know your thoughts have moved in that direction, especially these last few weeks, this last decade. Of course, for me, the passage of a decade, or even a century, let alone a few weeks is practically instantaneous, but even so, I am aware of the trends taking place on Earth and I can assure you that I am not missing in action, or off creating life somewhere else in the universe, or just sitting back and waiting for the chips to fall as they may."

"But there is such killing going on", I blurted out, hoping this statement reflected my real question; why did The Almighty allow such death and destruction as was occurring in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, let alone the multiple atrocities that are hidden from the media outlets which most of us access.

"Life is both complicated, and simple. Complicated because of how long it has taken for humans to have become what they are today through the stops and starts of life as it has evolved. And even more complicated because of the slow progress by humans as they have adapted to the environment, learned about the immense variety of species that I have also provided, sought comfort in ever increasing sizes of groups, began to wander about and explore the immense space outside their home planet."

"To be honest, it's been very rewarding to see the progress, the development of what you define as justice, fairness, the respect for life, animal as well as human. Of course, there is still a very long way to go, but I am pleased, in general."

"In essence, that is what makes life simple. You might call it the golden rule, treating others as you wish to be treated. For all the talk about the indoctrination of children towards a more secular perception, treating others as you would like to be treated does not require an association with a religion, just a belief that we should treat each other humanely."

"While I have said that I am pleased with the progress, again, you must understand that my timeline is rather large compared to any civilization's, let alone any one person's. There has been ebb and flow, the pendulum has swung, sometimes rather drastically, in the wrong direction. And I am not just referring to the events of thousands of years ago, but also to events that have transpired even during the lifetimes of many people alive today." 

"So, while pleased with the progress, there is a paradigm shift that is ongoing, that has been ongoing, for a while now. A shift that perhaps seems fairly drastic in the way that humans perceive the passage of time, but not so critical when my timeline is referenced."

"You see, that is the rub, as they say. While I am fully aware of even the most infinitesimal of changes in human development, I am also aware that this process has a timeline of hundreds of thousands of years. For that reason, I am a bit more patient before taking any active involvement."

"To be blunt, one might even say that I am reluctant to intervene because I know that I have provided the proper environment, Earth as you call it, the proper spiritual inspiration, Jesus, Buddha, Mohamed, etc, the requisite mental and physical traits, and, a plethora of possible experiences, joys, and sorrows, that there really shouldn't be the need for me to do more. Without giving too much away, the need hasn't been required in the past with any great frequency."

"Joe, I don't allow war, genocide, brutality, humans do. The real question is why do you allow it, and even more importantly, why do you allow it in My name so often."

"Is there a heaven?", I exclaimed.

There was a pause, brief, but tangible, then

"I will answer that, with the understanding that if humans accept that good and evil emanates from them, and that they should know the difference, then there must be a reward and a punishment for behaving one way or the other. So, yes, heaven and hell do exist but not as humans imagine it. The reward for a life lived as the great spiritual masters have described is far more amazing than anything you can imagine, as is the punishment for turning one's back on those lessons."

"To be honest, if I were to provide the knowledge of what comes after death while you live, the actual reality of each choice, no one would choose hell over heaven. Frankly, most people really don't believe in heaven or hell, despite their declarations that they do, or things like genocide and bombing schools and hospitals, wouldn't exist."

"Why are you communicating with me?", I asked. 

"A fair question, but again, one which reveals the inherent misconception that permeates all religions, that only a small percentage of humans can speak for me, or be contacted by me. All my children have the capacity for good, hence they all have the capacity to communicate what is right and what is wrong. Of course, having that capacity doesn't mean everyone chooses the correct path, or that people should listen to just anyone."

"In your case, you wrote a story called The Line. Do you recall it?"

I thought for a few seconds, remembering the title, but not the story. "No, I really can't remember it's details," I responded. 

Suddenly, there is was, in my mind's eye. 

The Line

I would imagine that if you asked the next 50 people that you encounter, 49 of them, if they answered seriously, would say that, all things being equal, they expected to go to heaven when they died. I have always thought that most people are good. My days of hitchhiking confirmed that belief, and my experiences at work, and in my community have done nothing to change that opinion. But what if we are wrong? What if the creator expects more of us?

Less scrambling for wealth and more helping those less fortunate than ourselves. Less trumpeting ways in which we are better than others and more recognition that the birth lottery was good to us, now how can we progress the lives of those not so lucky. Less finding reasons to distrust, isolate and kill, more searching for ways to bridge our differences; more love, less hate.

What if, at the end of the day, it is simply a matter of how many we've helped, not how much we've earned?

--------

The rain pelted the windshield making visibility very limited. There was no place to pull over, so I continued on, slowly. At a blind curve, two headlights lit up the night, temporarily turning the darkness into light. The collision occurred almost simultaneously just as my eyes recovered from the sudden light providing no time to react. The car teetered momentarily at the cliff's edge, then slid down the ravine into the shallow water below. Funny, I thought, no pain.

The line stretched out in front of me to a point where I could still make out the colors of clothes but not the faces of their wearers. There was a bit of chatter around me but it all sounded forced like the interactions one hears in an elevator. I chose to remain silent, only nodding my head at the woman in front of me when she turned around and smiled the smile one sees in line at the grocery store. Or at a funeral.

Gradually, we shuffled forward. We didn't seem to be moving very quickly yet I didn't sense the impatience one usually feels from a group stuck in a slowly moving, long line. I wondered if they all felt as I did, a feeling that the time would come, soon enough, when we would find ourselves at the front of the line. I heard a short, suppressed laugh in the distance behind me. It was a laugh that seemed to have been stopped short, not just by its owner but by the group as a whole, as if to remind everyone in line that this was not the place for laughter.

After a while, more than minutes but less than hours, I was surprised to find that I had a folder tucked under my arm. I glanced around me and noticed that everyone else also carried a similar folder. No one had opened their package and I followed suit.

More time passed and I was beginning to hear the words being spoken at the front of the line. Well, not really actual words, but voices. Soon I realized that every other voice seemed to be of the same pitch and eventually I understood that each conversation featured the voice of someone in line, like me, and the response from the person who was waiting for us. All of the conversations were brief.

For the second time since I had found myself in line, I was surprised. This time, my surprise was the result of realizing that there were two additional lines leading away from the front of the line in which I waited. How could I have missed them before? One moved very slowly and was extremely crowded. It disappeared into the distance and I got the sense that it did not end just out of sight. The second line was sparsely populated and the people moving within it were free to stride or trot or walk casually as they felt. I noticed that all those around me were also aware of the two lines. I imagined that they wished as I did, to be allowed to join those in that second line.

When I turned my attention back towards the front of my line, I could now clearly see the people as they approached the man whose voice I first detected. He was tall and lean, clothed in loose garb. There was nothing special about his clothes but he obviously commanded the attention of each person who approached him. As each individual personal drama played out, the tall man nodded, each person opened their folder, glanced at the words inside then handed the folder to the man. I heard each person say something, heard his voice respond, then watched as the majority of them walked off to the first, much longer line.

I was getting close now. I should have been close enough to hear the words but for some reason I could not. Yet I could tell that most of the conversations were not ending in the manner that was anticipated. While there was no anger being expressed, there was clearly disappointment of the kind that comes when an outcome is exactly opposite of expectation.

Then, despite the fact that I felt that I had been in line for quite a while, I was suddenly at the front of the line. It reminded me of the conversations that I had had with my grandparents when I was a young adult and they in the twilight of their lives. Time can seem interminable, they all said, yet your life can seem so short, and the time of inevitable death can seem so sudden.

I looked up at the man at the front of the line. He was taller than I had calculated while I was standing in line. But it wasn't his height that was his most striking feature. It was his eyes. They were direct, compassionate, and sad. I had seen similar expressions during conversations where tragic news was being relayed. But his sadness went beyond the sadness that comes from just bringing bad news; his sadness seemed to reflect a responsibility in that he had provided the way to avoid this bad news but it had been ignored. He was obviously reading judgements yet these judgements were far from the judicial impartiality that we expect in our courts. He was visibly saddened by the decisions he was rendering.

I opened my folder and found one piece of paper with a sentence in very large print. It said, YOU MAY ASK ONE QUESTION. Below that line were other words in a language that I did not understand but clearly conveyed something to the man.

"How do you earn the right to take the second line?", I asked.

"You made your choice of which line you would walk every day of your life. You earned time on Line Two every time you performed an act of kindness, doubly so when done for someone you didn't know or who was different from yourself. You earned time on Line Two when your life reflected the spirit of your beliefs, when you were nice when it was hard to be nice, and when you defended someone being treated unjustly. You earned time on Line Two when you used the abilities that you were born with to help those less fortunate than yourself."

"You earned time on Line One when you made choices to benefit yourself regardless of its effect on others. You earned time on Line One when you used your religion to define who to love and who to hate. And you earned time on Line One when you did nothing even though you knew what was right but deferred action to someone else. You earned time on Line One when you used the abilities that you were born with to help only yourself."

"I told you how to live, did you not listen? So many men carrying the message of love, did you not heed them? So much suffering to help ease, did you not see it?"

I reflected on my life in an attempt to calculate which line I had earned through my actions and in-actions. I glanced up at the man at the front of the line and moved towards the line he indicated.

 

As the story faded from my vision, The Almighty continued.

 

"You knew something when you wrote that story, or perhaps had fully incorporated the lessons from your parents, or the spirit of the religion you were born into, or perhaps the feedback you received from your life which taught you that when you are kind to others, it is it's own reward, and when you are unkind, it leaves a dark spot somewhere inside you."

"Which brings me to the theory that good works can't get you to heaven. I am not sure why it is so foundational in many religions and religious books, but that is one of the fallacies of a human created version of heaven. Being kind to others, especially those who are different from you in appearance, culture, perspective, even values, is the most difficult way for someone to live, and the trait I value over any other."

"Or, to put more simply, it is easy to treat people well when they are like yourself, when they are your family, or when they share some basic values or perspective, but far more difficult to treat those unlike yourself fairly and with humanity."

"Not for the first time, probably not for the last, there is a selfishness of action that has begun to permeate man's interactions with each other at a level that is making it more difficult for people to listen to the good within themselves, and to judge whether their leaders messages and policies reflect that same goodness. There is confusion and chaos which causes fear, which inspires behavior that rejects kindness while embracing blame and cruelty."

"Will we get past this cycle?"

"The Earth is billions of years old. Life has existed for millions of years, and will always exist is some form with or without humans. If I said it doesn't matter, would you consider ill of me, as if I didn't care if humanity prospers, or merely survives, or is extinguished? If you consider my time line, the veritable eternity that I have been in existence, and the endless time ahead, you might forgive me for such a nonchalant attitude."

"But know this, it is not the big picture of humanity existing for 100 or 1000 or 10,0000 more years that matters compared to how each person is judged."

"Have you reflected the best of what I instilled in each of you? Or have you ignored the lessons handed down through history from those who were able to fully tap into the goodness I imprinted in everyone?"

"Each of you will earn whatever fate comes your way, as will every person you encounter as well as every person unknown to you, and combined, those actions will enable humanity to exist for centuries, or for decades. But regardless, the Earth will circle the sun for far longer, and the sun will radiate light and heat for even longer still, yet that will still be only a fraction of the time of my existence."

"In that way, the cycle you refer to is inconsequential, in the bigger perspective of time without end."

"But if nothing matters, then what is the point?"

"Did I say nothing mattered? Everything you do matters, everything everyone does matters, every action and inaction. I said earlier that I value good works, especially those conferred upon people unlike oneself." 

"But just as powerful are the in-actions we engage in when we turn our heads rather than see injustice, or stay quiet when we know someone is harming others in words or deeds, in fear that if we speak up, we might be next. Or worse, by thinking we won't be next because our looks, or beliefs, or opinions, mirror those of the oppressor."

"To repeat a phrase that you are familiar with, due to your particular upbringing, what you do unto the least of them, you do unto me. That is a very powerful statement, and one which is extremely difficult to live as one's guiding maxim."

"The point is to leave the world a better place through actions you perform and in-actions you reject."

"The point is to strive to be the best version of being human that you can knowing you will fail, often, but acknowledging those failures, and doing even better when the next opportunity arises."

"The point is to live by giving and receiving as much love as you can both to those in your life, your family, your neighbors, your co-workers, your friends, and to those outside your circle. Or maybe a better way to explain it is to make your particular circle of love as immense as you can. As big as the Earth itself, if possible."

With that, the communication ended. I spent the next hour or so trying to remember and record as much as I could before the memory faded as I feared that perhaps part of the process was that I would forget the encounter. That doubt as to source of such a dialogue was designed to provide those who received such a opportunity a reason to pretend it didn't happen, or couldn't happen to an ordinary person. 

And if doubt in the existence of The Almighty was both the problem and solution to living a moral life, or to attain heaven, I wondered if my own agnostic or atheistic leanings were a boon or an obstacle. 

Or perhaps both.

Belief that by leaving the world a better place, we will be rewarded, and doubt that there a such a reward, but that we should leave the world a better place anyway. 

Do right by those you encounter, not out of fear of eternal hell but because that is why The Almighty began the cycle of life millions of years ago which ultimately led to humanity. 

------

For another short story with a religious theme, here is a link to

An Atheist For Christ

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2024/04/an-atheist-for-christ.html

Eagles Super Bowl Win

The Philadelphia Eagles won the second Super Bowl of their franchise history, second in seven years, this past Sunday. It was a remarkable season for The Birds, who, after starting 2 -2  in their first four games, won twelve of their next thirteen regular season games, that one loss occurring when their starting QB left the game in the 2nd quarter with a concussion. 

From there they won three straight home playoff games, to the delight of Eagles fans, the last one, the NFC Championship game, a 55 - 23 drubbing of the upstart team from Washington.

Then, in a game that they played with near perfection, they dismantled the two time defending champion Kansas City Chiefs, 40 - 22, at one point leading 40 - 6. 

Today, on one of the Philly sports channels, the question was put to the listeners as to which Super Bowl victory was the most rewarding, or meant the most. I decided to read my post from the week after that first Super Bowl win before I considered my answer, a link to which you can find below. 

https://wurdsfromtheburbs.blogspot.com/2018/02/super-bowl-champion-eagles.html 

After reading it, I am torn as I initially thought that this past week's win was better for me, especially considering how dominant the team was in the last two Championship games.

But after reading it, I am less confident in my opinion.

While this year's team overcame some setbacks, there wasn't nearly the number of injuries that beset the first Super Bowl winning team. 

This year's team was hindered more by some poor play, at times, for some of the key players, yet that occasional poor play was always overshadowed by the remarkable year that their star running back had, a year in which he broke the all-time rushing record, regular season and playoffs combined, with over 2500 yards.

Still, I will remember the details of both teams' accomplishments, especially the fact that that 2017-18 team brought home our first Lombardi trophy by beating an opposing QB who is currently considered the best of all time. 

This year's game itself, like that first Super Bowl victory, featured individual play that provided a number of Eagles team members the chance to prove their worth to the team, many whom had their talents doubted at times during the year.

The QB is at the top of that list, a man who just wins games, without flash, without gaudy stats. Jalen Hurt's ability was questioned practically after every game this year, even when they won. And now he is the MVP of the Super Bowl breaking his own record for most rushing yards by a QB in a Super Bowl game.

Then there is the field goal kicker who was one for eight in kicks more than 50 yards after he missed one against Washington in that NFC game, and who had missed a number of extra points in the playoffs. Yet in the biggest game of the year, Jake Elliot made every PAT and hit four field goals, one from 50 and two from 48 yards out, which made him the first kicker to make three from 48 or more yards in Super Bowl history.

One of the Eagles, a player who was well off the radar when the season began, was one of their linebackers, a man who played his first four years in the league with another team, without distinction. For the Eagles this year Zack Baun made more tackles than all those years combined, and after having only one interception in those four years, had one in each of the two biggest games of the season.

Another player who, I admit, I did not have much faith in, accepted his diminished role on this year's team. But when they needed him most Avonte Maddox made a great pass breakup on a fourth down play, and also recovered an onside kick. He did not let his disappointment in not starting effect his play.

One might even include the star wide receivers who saw the limelight shine ever so brightly on the newly signed star running back and perhaps slightly less so on them. But that didn't stop A J Brown or DeVonta Smith who were often seen blocking down field to provide that extra space which resulted in a half dozen 60 plus yard running plays for touchdowns, a record for running backs.

And speaking of that star running back, Saquon Barkley did not just run. There were many plays where he stepped up into the pocket to take on an incoming defender, often someone much larger than himself, to provide that extra split second so the QB could let fly a pass or scramble for extra yards.

And finally, there is the rookie corner back, who did nothing other than holding opponent wide receivers to few completions and even fewer TD's. To top that however, Cooper DeJean, made his first career interception the the Super Bowl and returned it for a TD on his 22nd birthday!

Can I say it is a tie, that I enjoyed both games equally!

Regardless of which game, or team, you prefer for their great victories, hail to this year's Philadelphia Eagles, Super Bowl 59 Champions!

------

For those who wish to leave this post on a positive note, I recommend you stop reading. 

You see, the facts are that both Eagles teams would not have achieved their success without placing the team's needs above their own. It was truly a team effort! While there may have been moments that a me first statement or sentiment was uttered, all in all the players and coaches focused on the team.

Yet America seems neck deep in this America First bull**** which is nothing more than selfishness and me first. We see it in the inane renaming of the Gulf of Mexico, the ridiculous statements from the White House about making Canada the 51st state, or taking back the Panama Canal. As if what is perceived as being good for America, is good for the world!

Still, those supporting such populist nonsense will most likely agree with me that the Eagles run this season was based on non-selfish play. Had A J Brown operated with the mantra of A J first, he wouldn't have been making those down field blocks to allow Barkley to score. Had Jalen Hurst decided that he needed to pad his passing yard numbers, he wouldn't have accepted the focus on letting Barkley run so often. And had Barkley thought that he couldn't afford to risk getting hurt when 250lb defenders came barreling towards our QB, he wouldn't have put his own body on the line to protect his teammate.

Folks, it is that simple. We either work together to make America work, to make the world work, or we all go down together. And so when the new president unilaterally decides to sever our relationships with the World Health Organization or remove America from the Paris Accord on Climate Change, the end result of such temper tantrums is that we all lose, Americans and our allies.

Cooperation and collaboration, playing for your teammates, is a mantra that we hear all the time from players who have just won a championship, yet is sadly lacking from the absurdities that emanate almost daily from the new president and his acolytes. 

It can be difficult to widen one's perspective, while succumbing to tribalism can be safe, far less challenging. But can you imagine if we started treating everyone in our community as teammates, even those who live and love and worship differently from ourselves.

Can you then imagine if we did the same for everyone in our country, whether they live in blue states or red, whether they struggle with their gender identity or were born to people who came from outside our borders.

And finally, can you imagine if we extended that sentiment to all people who inhabit this tiny, insignificant planet orbiting one of millions of suns in a galaxy which itself is one of millions of such expanses in a universe that reaches back into time further than we have discovered, and will continue to exist far after humanity has worn out its welcome within its confines.

Imagine. 

 

 

Another Unconstitutional Executive Order

It's hard to keep up with the number of executive orders that explicitly violate the Constitution and/or just skirt its meaning. Which, of course, is the point of this administration. Chaos, suffering, massive upheaval. Whether it is because Trump just wants to push the limits as far as possible until there are no institutions left to counter his power grab, or because he doesn't really care which unconstitutional executive orders are struck down by the courts as long as he can continue to make money from being president (do we really know if all the classified documents he stole were returned), it doesn't matter. America may never be the same again.

So my big issue this week is Trump's duel executive orders which seek to make Americans who identify as transgender non-existent.  

First, just think about that. People, created by God with a different perspective of their gender identity, have been told by the president of the land of the free, that there is no such thing as their life situation. And, any parents of such a person, are, by association, either violating his executive order by encouraging their child's beliefs, or outright child abusers who may be subject to incarceration and loss of custody of their children if they live in states like Texas where the attorney general has made it a priority to seek medical records of his own constituents.

Of course, there have always been people who struggled with their sexual identity. One might even say that a sizable percentage of all people have experienced difficulty of some kind as they traversed the murky years of puberty. But let's not address reality, let's not address any of the reasons why Americans, children as well as adults, struggle with their self worth, turn to drugs and alcohol, or commit the ultimate act of self destruction, suicide, let's just blame those who manufacture the drugs we demand, or the countries which provide that demand, or just pretend that a certain demographic of Americans just don't exist.

Studies indicate that about 1/2 of 1% of people in America identify as transgender. Not even 2 million individuals, yet one would think that they are responsible for all of the problems of our times, and that with a stroke of the pen, those problems will disappear just as they do.

Which is the point of someone like this current president. Demonize a population that is not understood and exists in small numbers as a distraction away from the real problems of today. Not unlike sacrificing a virgin to appease the gods, except in this case the virgin is one of the most bullied and discriminated against populations in our country, and the gods are the super rich who drive the narratives that transgender people want to creep into women's locker rooms and excel at women's sports.

The fourth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

To me, requesting medical records .of transgender patients could be interpreted an unlawful search and seizure. Unless one believes that transgender people don't exist and therefore have no rights under the Constitution. Keep an eye out for that interpretation in the courts who bend the knee to Trump.

And then there is Section One of the 14th Amendment

All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

Perhaps this a stretch, since this amendment seems to indicate that no state shall deprive a person born in the United States life, liberty, or property, but then again this amendment has been interpreted to protect all naturalized Americans from violations by the federal government as well, hence the current arguments about children born of non citizens, so it is certainly conceivable that transgender people have a case that an executive order, or any federal or state law, that declares them not real, could be considered evidence that their due process has been violated and that their are not being granted equal protection of the laws.

When the gay community was ravaged by AIDS, there were millions of Americans who shrugged their shoulders and blamed the victims for the disease. It was easy to do since they were "different", even easier when the "religious" right declared them to be at odds with God's will. Funny how those who die from illegal use of fentanyl aren't graded with a similar yardstick. And how children experiencing confusion with their gender identity aren't given even a modicum of empathy by those same religious people.

Whether you believe that the current president has violated the Constitution by signing executive orders that declare that transgender people don't exist, or whether you believe it is just another distraction foisted upon America by someone who is the master of telling us where to look, so he can loot our government of money, our national self respect, and the ideals of "all men are created equal", in the end such executive orders are simply mean spirited, and not worthy of a self proclaimed Christian nation.   

And, since the Constitution seems no longer viable, we might as well take down the Statue of Liberty as we clearly no longer believe the  sentiment engraved on the pedestal:

"Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free".

And so, the decline of America continues.

The Anti-Constitution President

My last two posts discussed the first two unconstitutional executive orders signed by the new president. This post will continue on that theme, but without pulling any punches. We are witnessing, in real time, the actions of our country's first blatantly anti-constitution president. 

On July 1, 2020, the three cosignatory countries of the United States Mexico Canada Agreement (USMCA) officially recognized the tenets of this trade pact, which then replaced those of NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) which had been in effect since the early 1990's.

During Trump's first term, it was no secret that he did not like the terms of NAFTA, so it was no surprise that he negotiated the new agreement, USMCA. At the time, it was hailed as a landmark achievement by the US Trade representative, one that would spur manufacturing and investment in North America's economy. 

All but eliminating tariffs between the three countries was one of the main features which is generally the basis of a free trade treaty. Just as a reminder, free trade pacts were historically a foundational aspect of the GOP and conservatives. 

Since the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 gives Congress the power to regulate trade, the Congress in power in 2020 had to ratify the trade treaty before America could enter into it.

This does not mean that any president can't enact tariffs against another nation, as was done by Trump and Biden against China in the past two administrations, but it does mean that once Congress ratifies a treaty such as USMCA, they are the only ones who can void it.

Now technically, Trump's 25% tariff threat against Mexico and Canada is not necessarily against the Constitution, as he invoked the emergency powers of his office to justify his executive order to institute these tariffs, to be specific, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

However, there does not seem to be an economic emergency at hand. The US economy is strong, unemployment still hovers around 4%, the stock market is near its record high on all three indexes, and inflation, while still stubbornly stuck in the upper 2% range, is far lower than its peak of over 9% just two years ago.

In fact, even Trump himself has defended these tariffs as a border security issue by referencing both illegal immigrants and fentanyl as not being controlled aggressively enough by our northern and southern neighbors. 

To me then, this is another power grab by the dictator wannabe who doesn't honor the literal meaning or spirit of our Constitution when he uses his executive powers. And apparently either unknown or not important to his supporters, he is violating the terms of a treaty he advocated for and signed himself.

Of course, Congress is currently inhabited by men and women who are either too afraid to stand up to the president, or actually believe that when the president is from their party, anything goes, the Constitution be damned.

While the judicial branch will attempt to reign in some of these egregious acts, as a few district judges have so far, it is obvious that Trump believes that the Supreme Court will see it his way, since he clearly thinks that three of them owe him for appointing them, and two of the others have indicated their allegiance to him and his movement in their personal lives, let alone their rulings.

 

Since beginning this post, Trump has delayed the 25% tariffs for 30 days. And, to a degree, the threat has worked as both Mexico and Canada have agreed to more border patrols to stem the flow of illegal entry and fentanyl. Of course, it doesn't matter that Mexico was already working with the Biden administration to reduce the flow of immigrants south to north towards our border, nor does it matter that Canada had announced enhancements to its efforts to crack down on illegal drugs moving into America last year.

And of course, it doesn't matter that illegal immigrants coming from Canada account for perhaps one percent of those crossing from Mexico, and that illegal fentanyl that has been discovered being smuggled into America from Canada is far less than one percent of that emanating from Mexico. Seems strange that the tariff penalty would be the same when the level of problem is so drastically different. Perhaps Trump's problem with Canada has less to do with immigration and fentanyl and more to do with...well, I guess it doesn't matter since Trump has rarely been held accountable for his questionable or outright illegal actions.

And, since it is well known that much of the illegal fentanyl is being synthesized in China, why only 10% tariff on that country?

Finally, on another front, if again, only Congress has the power of the purse, how exactly are these DOGE employees being paid for their time, or even that DOGE itself even exists since Congress has not approved its creation. 

The simple fact that America's payment disbursement system is being accessed by people who are not federal employees, and even worse, that when initially declined access to such confidential information, it was the federal employees who were dismissed from their jobs, for protecting the information of their fellow citizens, and the DOGEmen who were defended by the current DOJ head. Yikes!

In the end, I am sure that there will be some money saved from the federal budget, especially money headed to such woke programs as Head Start and school lunch programs. So much for pro-life, but as I have said before, pro-fetus should be their mantra as they have no care for that fetus once it actually becomes a child.

And I am sure that thousands of federal employees will take the "offer" of eight month pay with benefits, especially those in the boomer generation who were thinking of retiring anyway. But for those who aren't ready to retire, and anyone who is considering a public service job in the federal government, I would imagine they will have to reconsider being employed in a hostile work environment where they are considered either too stupid or lazy or both to work in the public sector. 

After all, reduced environmental regulations and less accountability for the fossil fuel industry, plus less food inspectors, highway engineers, government agency auditors, people who man the phones at the various government agencies who help Americans gain the benefits they have earned, scientists at NIH and the CDC, even IRS agents who root out the rich who avoid paying their fair share of taxes, all of it, will allow the real welfare queens like Musk and his ilk to continue to steal huge sums of our tax dollars to enrich themselves while everyday Americans are left to die from poor air and water, poisoned food, and public health emergencies. Double Yikes!!

And so, the decline of America continues.