intramuralist ™

When we sat down to dinner last night, my youngest son Josh, asked if he could be the one who prays…

“God, thank you. Be with us. Be with all of your children. Be with all of us who are a child of God. Be with Charlie Kirk’s family. We love you. Amen.”

I’ll be honest. Sometimes my kid has more wisdom and grace than I. He knows who each of us is.

Allow us this day to be radically candid…

How does a blogger blog in response to something so atrocious?

How does one respectfully write about an intentional, horrific killing?

How does one speak of someone who killed another most likely because of what they believe? … whose goal was at least in part, no doubt, to silence another because his beliefs and voice were so contagious and effective?

What do we do with the hundreds I’ve personally seen on social media who have celebrated the killing? … who have justified awful, cruel, thoughts-of-deserving responses?

And how, acknowledging all the other acts, do we honestly, painstakingly wrestle with the obvious manifestation of evil?

The assassination of Charlie Kirk this past week was heinous, horrific and evil. I’ve got more words… try wicked, contemptible, immoral, too. Want to address the school shootings? Indeed. Those fit right in. Other political assassinations? Absolutely. All of this demonstrates the worst of our society. As for Charlie, an articulate, intelligent voice known across the country, love him or loathe him, no child of God deserves this. Note: we are each children of the Most High God. Charlie Kirk knew that. It’s what spurred him on.

Charlie’s life was marked by healthy debate, active listening and a bold sharing of his faith in Jesus Christ. He invited dialogue, encouraged respect, added a bit of snark, and always promoted a great hope for the future. He loved and valued all people — especially the younger generation — and even and also especially those who vehemently disagreed with him.

No doubt one of society’s massive, gaping holes of wisdom is our inability to love and value those who disagree with us. We look down upon, claim moral superiority, and cut off and out those who disagree. We find something wrong with them; we find a reason why; we get others in our self-crafted choirs to “like” or “amen.” We attack people instead of ideas. As a current events blogger, my experience is far minimal compared to Charlie Kirk. But let me share that most would be amazed at some of the profoundly awful things people have said to me because we disagree.

So let me address us all, me included…

We act as if we know not just better, but best.

We say “see ya’ when you grow up,” by confusing growing up with thinking just like me.

We claim to love all people and then slam their thinking or ideology — like we are so in touch with the validity of their experience. We are no doubt arrogant and blind at times.

Friends, in this situation, let’s continue with our radical candor. It’s not just the guns; it’s the evil. And we contribute to the problem.

Knowing then that each of us has opportunity to make it better or worse, let us be humbler. Let us sit with those we don’t understand. Like Jesus, let us move toward those we don’t think like. Let us refrain from judgment; let us be curious and actively work to understand, even when it’s hard. Let us realize that we are not each other’s enemies, and the God’s honest truth is that two people can have two totally different views and neither be destroying democracy. Stop the name-calling. Get rid of the insults. Quit using the words “Nazis” and “Hitler” unless it’s in reference to “Nazis” or “Hitler.” Stop the pompous posts that demonize the person who doesn’t share our perspective. Work more to ask questions. Ask some more. And let’s be radically candid still more… It’s not the other; it’s not the fault of the other person, other party or someone else. Rather, it’s us. It’s our vicious infighting that’s destroying democracy; it’s our thinking that we know best and our refusal to humbly submit to a moral code higher than our own. Satan is flourishing in our country. He’s been masterfully creative at getting us to think someone is evil other than him. 

Let’s do instead what God calls each of us to do. Let us weep with those who weep, mourn with those who mourn, even rejoice with those who rejoice. Let us live in harmony with one another. Let us not be haughty nor wise in our own eyes. And let us repay no one evil for evil. 

Let’s stop playing keyboard warriors on social media; it’s not bold nor even courageous. Let us honor all others. That means all. And let us learn from both Charlie and Josh.

Father God, let good somehow miraculously come from this no good, terribly awful day. Our hope lies best when it’s in you.

Soberly…

AR

CB knew I rarely turned on my TV in the morn. I like the quiet. Gives me time to pause, pray, prep for the day… even have an added cup of coffee. But this day would be profoundly different. I don’t remember the coffee.

“Hey, you need to turn on the television. A plane just hit the World Trade Center in New York.”

And with that I scrambled to find the remote in between my two young sons’ playthings, turned on the news, and almost immediately saw the second explosion. When Flight 175 crashed into the WTC’s South Tower, I must admit, I couldn’t comprehend what I was actually watching. I mean, maybe like most of us, I knew it was real, but I had only seen such in the cinema, so it didn’t feel real… and yet it was. Shocking and real.

I was 8 months pregnant with son #3 at the time; no doubt all hormones were heightened, but this was too much to grasp. 

As is my practice, if watching the news, I will venture from station to station, searching for truth, noting the bias that too often creeps in. But on this September 11, 2001, they were all covering the same thing in the same, shocking way…

Flight 11 took off from Boston, headed for Los Angeles, with 76 passengers, 11 crew members and 5 hijackers on board.

Flight 175, referenced above, took off also from Boston, en route to LA, with 51 passengers, 9 crew members and 5 hijackers on board.

Flight 77 left from Dulles, outside DC — they, too, off to LA, with 53 passengers, 6 crew members and 5 hijackers on board.

And lastly Flight 93 left from Newark, headed to San Francisco. They had 33 passengers, 7 crew members and 4 hijackers on board.

All would perish. All would perish at the manifestation of evil. Let us be clear: this was not a random act of violence. This was a calculated, evil attack.

The morning continued…

I remember watching precisely at 9:59 am, when the South Tower, hit second, began to collapse. My previous thought of this series of events being “shocking and real” was only magnified in that moment. Like many, it was unbelievable seeing the fortress fall — and only in a handful of seconds. To think that something spent years in the making could crumble so quickly… it was inconceivable. 

Inconceivable, too, again… how evil this act was.

I think of this day often throughout the year — but especially this week. I think, too, of the dear friends of mine who have birthdays on this day — so hard… hard to frolic or host any festivity. And there are so many stories — so many true tales of honor, courage and sacrifice — stories that make the evil actually pale in comparison.

That’s the thing about evil; it doesn’t last. And while days like 9/11 will always be remembered for their prolific tragedy, the truth is that sometimes the evil shocks us into remembering what’s most important…

As said then by Gen. Colin Powell, “You can be sure that the American spirit will prevail over this tragedy.”

And by Sen. Lamar Alexander, “September 11 is one of our worst days but it brought out the best in us. It unified us as a country and showed our charitable instincts and reminded us of what we stood for and stand for.” 

And New Yorker Jeff Parness, “When Americans lend a hand to one another, nothing is impossible. We’re not about what happened on 9/11. We’re about what happened on 9/12.”

May we always be a people who remember the beauty of what happened on 9/12… our resilience, perseverance and honor of one another. Such would be wise to each and always remember now.

Respectfully…

AR

This was not a slow news summer. When I think of the season’s biggest stories, I think of the conflicts between Ukraine and Russia and between Israel and Hamas and how sad it is that they continue. I think about the Epstein files and the “client list” dispute and how this has been an issue for years. I think, too, about violent crime still existing in this country and how the vast majority of us want it solved but oft differ in how to solve it. Sometimes the news can be a little overwhelming.

One of the other big summer stories, no doubt, was the emergence of Zohran Mamdani, winning the June Democratic primary for the mayor of New York City — now viewed as the fall favorite due to the city’s demographic, partisan makeup.

Mamdami is a 33 year old, native of Kampala, Uganda, and in my opinion, an articulate, bright-sounding individual. What’s unique about him as a mayoral candidate, is that while identifying as a Democrat, he is also a member of the more obscure Democratic Socialists of America. 

My sense is that sometimes an identification is more or less attractive to us because of what we don’t know. If we’re frustrated with capitalism, for example, feeling like it hasn’t worked for us, maybe socialism sounds more attractive even though we don’t understand what it really is; we’re attracted because it’s something different. Let’s attempt today to understand what the different actually is.

We must first ask: what’s the difference between socialism and democratic socialism? Such is a fair and necessary question.

Unfortunately, the difference is ambiguous. Some distinguish between the two by acknowledging that socialism is a broad economic system centered on the idea of government or community ownership of the means of production as opposed to private ownership; whereas, democratic socialism works to achieve socialist ideals within primarily existing structures. Democratic socialists believe in strong welfare states rather than a complete abolition of capitalism. What’s also true, therefore, is that while all democratic socialists are socialists in their goals, not all socialists are democratic socialists. Many socialists advocate for authoritarian methods to achieve their economic objectives.

What too is true is that the term “socialist” is viewed negatively by a majority of American people. Granted, studies have shown in recent years that younger generations (particularly Millennials and Gen Z’ers) have a higher regard for socialism than those who’ve gone before them, although such may also fit into the quandary previously presented of not understanding what it really is. Hence, while there is an ambiguous difference between a socialist and a democratic socialist, the chosen terminology may or may not correlate more with popularity than actual political ideology.

Socialist systems are designed to reduce perceived disparities in income and wealth. They tend to provide universal access to a determined set of basic needs, such as healthcare, education and housing — often at no cost to the individual. It also is oft believed to manage public services well, such as in regard to road repairs and emergency services. The philosophy prioritizes the collective over the individual.

Because of that collective focus, socialism also inhibits innovation; social ownership reduces the personal incentive for innovation and hard work that exists in a competitive, for-profit market. Additionally, there is a strong risk of authoritarianism as witnessed historically. True, too, is that socialist economies lack price signals that typically guide production and resource allocation. Costs can become incredibly expensive and difficult to maintain, especially during a recession, when more people require services while government tax revenue simultaneously decreases. To fund the social programs, significantly higher taxes are necessary. 

Recognizing the difference in terminology then, where has socialism worked? Where has it not?

The reality is that there is no consensus on where socialism has “worked.” While some cite the Nordic model and historical Israeli kibbutzim as examples of social democracy with socialist elements, most political scientists and economists agree that these are primarily capitalist with social safety nets; in other words, they are not true socialism. We should thus be keenly observant of the countries described as socialist, like China and Vietnam, which have blended socialist principles with market economies, and then those with explicitly socialist aims, such as Venezuela and the former Soviet Union. Each has faced significant failures. 

With democratic socialism, it’s thus prudent to understand how strictly the fundamentals of socialism are to be applied. Such would help us discern how attractive said philosophy may actually be.

Respectfully…

AR

It’s that time again. Millions around the world will soon all tune in together. It’s one of the most anticipated weekends of the year: the start of the NFL season!

There’s just something about professional football (and college, too) that riles many of us up in a totally good way. It goes beyond the game — beyond the stats and celebrations, too. We are drawn to football fall and the professional pigskin. We pay attention to the players on and off the field. (Congrats, Travis and Taylor.)

Attempting to understand the why, I utilized our resourceful friend, Mr. Google, asking the following question: why do people love this game so much?

Several had something to say.

First, from some Cornell University students in the field of Educational Technology (EdTech) and cognitive psychology…

• NFL is a piece of popular culture
• NFL is part of American tradition 
• NFL fosters relationships
• Tailgating is fun
• People love watching talented athletes
• League parity keeps things interesting
• NFL hits hard
• NFL has the best sporting final
• There is a chance to win big
• Fantasy Football has real stakes

I agree on all of the above (although my tailgating time has been lacking in recent years). The “Office on Trinity” blog, no less, puts it this way:

• Football and Tradition Go Hand in Hand
• Football Unites People
• It Keeps You Guessing
• Love & Loyalty For Players
• The Vibe is AHMAZING
• More Than Just a Game
• Chow Time during Games Matters a Lot
• Clashes Get Pretty Heated
• Fantasy Football Puts You in the Game

All also good. Next from a Quora contributor: “It’s tough, fast, surprising, tactical, full of violence, noise, heroics, music, fireworks and pageantry. Friday night lights, Saturday festivity, Sunday warfare. What’s not to love?”

Indeed, the NFL is a big deal.

I find myself landing on two primary points in the pondering.

One, as said by the creative Trinity personnel, “Well, it ain’t just a game of football. It’s a mix of tradition, thrills, and community.” Such is indeed an attractive combination to many.

And two — and this may show my semi-humble, current events blogger bias — but there’s something auspiciously profound about what’s playing out before our very eyes — something we don’t witness in too many places in the polarized world we live in… 

Note: the current average attendance for an NFL game is just under 70,000 people. So tens of thousand of people are sitting in close-knit quarters with one another. Of those tens of thousands, there’s widespread diversity — age, ethnicity, gender — pretty much every demographic; all are welcome. Better still, no less, in those tens of thousands, they are remarkably passionate, yelling and screaming loudly for their team… but not all yelling for the same team. Right before us we see tens of thousands who profoundly and publicly disagree.

And save the response of a disrespectful few, they don’t insult one another. They don’t tell the other why they’re right and the other is wrong. There is no presumed moral high ground. At the end of the game, players and fans walk away peacefully and respectfully and prepare to play and cheer again.

That, my friends, is a wonderful game in far more ways than one.

Respectfully…

AR

And so it goes one more time. Absolutely awful. And the reality is, whether we see it or not, we’re united. We hate it. We hate the hate. We don’t want it to happen even one more time.

As students were worshipping and celebrating in their first mass of the year at Annunciation Catholic School in Minneapolis last Wednesday, a young man opened fire on the stained glass adorning the building, murdering an 8-year-old and 10-year-old, and seriously injuring 17 more.

The 23-year-old shooter (who will go nameless here — no need to add to any desired notoriety) had the following words inscribed on his guns: 

• “6 million wasn’t enough.”
• “Humanity is overrated.”
• “Israel must fall.”
• “Burn Israel.”
• “Kill Donald Trump.”
• “Sponsored by Blackrock.”
• “I’m the Woker, Baby, Why So Queerious?”
• “Fart Nigga.”
• “McVeigh.”
• “I am a terrorist.”
• “Bitch.” (This and the one immediately above were written in Russian.)

There’s so much grief. Anger, too. And so many questions. As written by Free Press contributor Peter Savodnik, “In the wake of the tragedy, as with all of these tragedies, we want to know how it happened. And who did it… But most of all, we want to know why. We want to know why, not just so we can assign blame, but so we can make sense of a country where murdering children can happen on any given Wednesday.” We all agree; our kids shouldn’t be scared to go to school. 

As details emerge, we’ve learned the following:

• The shooter was a transgender woman, born a biological male. In a brief manifesto, he confessed he “was tired of being trans.”
• The shooter’s mother used to work at the school.
• The shooter was armed with 3 guns — a rifle, shotgun and pistol — each which were legally purchased.
• The shooter had no known violent criminal history.
• Investigators say the shooter was “obsessed with the idea of killing children.”

We still don’t have all the details. The sad reality is that we may never have all the details.

And yet we react. The grief, the anger, all the questions — they prompt us to cry out and fill the gaps with what makes the most sense to us… gun control, school fortification, prayer… True, though, is what makes the most sense to us may be incomplete. For example, reasonable people call for increased gun control; most gun control targets semi-automatic or assault weapons. Based on what we currently know, it’s unlikely such would have made a difference here. Also for example, reasonable people respond with prayer. Believing God is absolutely aware of all that happens on this planet — and recognizing that no, heaven is not a place on Earth — often it seems he is simply waiting for his people to truly depend on him. But true, too, is that even though we respond in prayer, we don’t have to ignore other potential control measures — from legislation to building more effective school safety systems — that would guard against such a tragedy.

One more for example is transparently wrestling with the mental health of the person who pulls that trigger. What wrongful thinking inside of the shooter makes them feel like such is ok to do? Clearly, this most recent shooter was not thinking wisely, logically, morally, you name it. Something was wrong in his head. It’s profoundly incomprehensible. That’s why reasonable people will also say it’s not the gun but the person with the gun that’s the problem.

And so noting all the reasonable people, let’s ask the better question. In Minneapolis last Wednesday, what would have made a difference? What would have prevented the attack? What would have halted the clear manifestation of evil?

That is the most excellent question. Wisdom suggests we answer in a way that spares vilifying the varied approaches. Here, for instance, there’s no need to vilify those who pray. There’s no need to vilify the trans community. There’s no need to vilify those who approach this from some other, also incomplete angle. 

One of the reasons I think we make seemingly so little progress on this issue is because we spend too much time vilifying someone who emphasizes another angle, i.e. the guns, mental health, prayer. Maybe we should instead start by recognizing and respectfully acknowledging that hard as this may be to see, we’re unified. We want the same thing. We want this to stop. Let’s do it together.

Respectfully…

AR

Remember: it’s wise to listen and learn from persons outside our ecosystem. Last week I stumbled upon a social media post from a previously untapped source. It was sobering indeed. It was written 3 years ago by Spanish psychologist, Dr. Luis Rojas Marcos, in an article he entitled “A Silent Tragedy.” The tragedy is this:

There is a silent tragedy that is unfolding today in our homes and concerns our most precious jewels: our children. Our children are in a devastating emotional state! In the last 15 years, researchers have given us increasingly alarming statistics on a sharp and steady increase in childhood mental illness that is now reaching epidemic proportions. Statistics do not lie:

• 1 in 5 children have mental health problems
• A 43% increase in diagnosed ADHD
• A 37% increase in adolescent depression has been noted
• There has been a 200% increase in the suicide rate in children aged 10 to 14

What is happening and what are we doing wrong? Today’s children are being over-stimulated and over-gifted with material objects, but they are deprived of the fundamentals of a healthy childhood, such as:

• Emotionally available parents
• Clearly defined limits
• Responsibilities
• Balanced nutrition and adequate sleep
• Movement in general but especially outdoors
• Creative play, social interaction, unstructured game opportunities and boredom spaces

Instead, in recent years, children have been filled with:

• Digitally distracted parents
• Indulgent and permissive parents who let children “rule the world” and whoever sets the rules
• A sense of right, of deserving everything without earning it or being responsible for obtaining it
• Inadequate sleep and unbalanced nutrition
• A sedentary lifestyle
• Endless stimulation, technological nannies, instant gratification and absence of boring moments

What to do? If we want our children to be happy and healthy individuals, we have to wake up and get back to basics. It is still possible! Many families see immediate improvements after weeks of implementing the following recommendations:

• Set limits and remember that you are the captain of the ship. Your children will feel more confident knowing that you have control of the helm.
• Offer children a balanced lifestyle full of what children NEED, not just what they WANT. Don’t be afraid to say “no” to your children if what they want is not what they need.
• Provide nutritious food and limit junk food.
• Spend at least one hour a day outdoors doing activities such as cycling, walking, fishing, bird/insect watching.
• Enjoy a daily family dinner without smartphones or distracting technology, let everyone feel valued.
• Play board games as a family or if children are very small for board games, just let the pretend to play it.
• Involve your children in some homework or household chores according to their age (folding clothes, hanging clothes, unpacking food, setting the table, feeding the dog, etc.)
• Implement a consistent sleep routine to ensure your child gets enough sleep. The schedules will be even more important for school-age children.
• Teach responsibility and independence. Do not overprotect them against all frustration or mistakes. Misunderstanding will help them build resilience and learn to overcome life’s challenges.
• Do not carry your children’s backpack, do not carry the homework they forgot, do not peel bananas or peel oranges if they can do it on their own (4-5 years). Instead of giving them the fish, teach them to fish.
• Teach them to wait and delay gratification.
• Provide opportunities for “boredom”, since boredom is the moment when creativity awakens. Do not feel responsible for always keeping children entertained.
• Do not use technology as a cure for boredom, nor offer it at the first second of inactivity.
• Avoid using technology during meals, in cars, restaurants, shopping centres. Use these moments as opportunities to socialize by training the brains to know how to work when they are in mode: “boredom”.
• Help them create a “bottle of boredom” with activity ideas for when they are bored.

Be emotionally available to connect with children and teach them self-regulation and social skills:

• Turn off the phones at night when children have to go to bed to avoid digital distractions.
• Become a regulator or emotional trainer for your children. Teach them to recognize and manage their own frustrations and anger.
• Teach them to greet, to take turns, to share without running out of anything, to say thank you and please, to acknowledge the error and apologize (do not force them), be a model of all those values you instill.
• Connect emotionally – smile, hug, kiss, tickle, read, dance, jump, play or crawl with them.

How wise it indeed is to learn from other people.

Respectfully…

AR

“War itself is, of course, a form of madness. It’s hardly a civilized pursuit. It’s amazing how we spend so much time inventing devices to kill each other and so little time working on how to achieve peace.” — Walter Cronkite

While I do believe there is a time for everything — a season, time for every activity under heaven — clearly not every war is a just war; most indeed seem not. Most seem more that crazy, despicable form of madness.

Such no doubt is the case with Russia invading Ukraine in 2022, starting the largest and deadliest war in Europe since World War II. There was no just cause; it wasn’t a last resort; and there was zero right intention.

There have been tens of thousands of civilian casualties, with several thousand being children. I must admit, I appreciated Melania Trump’s letter to Vladimir Putin last week, imploring the Russian President in “protecting the innocence of these children.”

Hence, the watching world seems felicitously unified in our number one desire here being we want this war to stop. We want it over. No more killing. We want to work more on achieving peace in Eastern Europe than extending the brutal bloodshed.

But as we’ve witnessed these past three and a half years, it’s not all that easy to stop and solve. Hear from USC professors Robert English and Steve Swerdlow, each international relations experts with personal experience in the region. 

Question: what are the biggest barriers to peace:

English: “Neither side is willing to end the war on terms that are acceptable to the other side. Ukraine will not agree to renounce NATO membership and still insists on reclaiming all its lost territories, including Crimea. Russia rejects both of those positions and insists on sweeping political changes in Kyiv. So, until the costs of continuing the fighting grow high enough that one or both changes these positions, the war will continue.”

Swerdlow: “Putin has turned this war into an existential fight for his own imperialist legacy, making it increasingly difficult for him to concede without appearing defeated. He has made clear that his intentions in this war are to subjugate Ukraine, deprive it of sovereignty, prevent it from having the right to join NATO. Even a temporary ceasefire is unlikely to satisfy the Kremlin’s revanchist desire to expand its imperial reach. The best outcome for both Russia and Ukraine is one that reaffirms the principles at the heart of our international system: territorial integrity, sovereignty, and democracy. That would require Russia’s withdrawal of forces from Ukraine’s internationally recognized territory and a commitment to avoid threatening future invasion.”

Clearly, achieving peace is not easy. And nothing the US or European leaders have done thus far has been lastingly effective.

I thus find it fascinating all those who feel so emboldened in their Monday morning or Saturday night quarterbacking, so-to-speak, believing that this should be done or that should be done or this should have gone this way and that, that way. He should have done this. He shouldn’t have done that. And we spend most of our time criticizing the playbooks of the peacemakers. 

Perhaps an unpopular perch, but this semi-humble, current events blogger firmly believes that if the Biden administration knew how to solve the conflict and bring about peace, they would have done so. If the Trump administration knows how to solve the conflict and bring about peace, they will do so. No doubt significant time and multiple steps are necessary. It is clearly complicated.

And so with that onerous reality, I attempt to do and encourage three things in response…

Recognize that each administration knows more than me. My position and perspective is way too far away.

Refrain from criticizing each step in the playbook, like I somehow am empowered to know what’s best, most effective and appropriate.

And most importantly, in this reality, keep praying for those thousands of kids.

Respectfully…

AR

People indeed have wild imaginations. Hence, the creation of the conspiracy theory.

A conspiracy theory is an idea, often challenging the mainstream or official explanation of a situation, that typically involves an alleged secret plot by powerful individuals or groups, believed to be manipulating events behind the scenes. My sense is we’re currently seeing a lot of them.

“With social media and the 24 hour news cycle,” writes Dr. Shauna Bowes for the American Psychological Association, “You can be exposed to misinformation and conspiracy theories much more than in the past,”

In recent weeks alone, for example, it’s infiltrated my news that Pres. Donald Trump wasn’t really shot at in Butler, PA last summer; he had fake blood in his mouth. And that the wife of French Pres. Emmanuel Macron was actually born as a biological man.

The things that make you go hmmmm…

While the above two may qualify as a bit of an ad absurdum approach, our list of longstanding, potentially plausible conspiracies is long. Conspiracy theories have been rampant for years. For example…

The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: Despite investigations, some people still believe that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone and that the CIA or other groups were involved. With all sorts of conspiratorial angles evolving, it didn’t help that Oswald was himself murdered two days after killing the President.

The Moon Landing Hoax: Some individuals contend that the 1969 Apollo 11 moon landing was faked by the US government, with the footage actually shot on a Hollywood set. All sorts of creative analysis includes the supposedly flapping flag and lack of stars in the sky.

9/11 Conspiracy Theories: These theories propose that the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon were orchestrated by the U.S. government or that the buildings were in reality, brought down by controlled demolition.

Princess Diana’s Death: The unexpected death of the beloved Princess Diana in 1997 in a car crash fueled speculation about a conspiracy involving the British monarchy or intelligence agencies. Theorists suggest the royal family wanted to prevent her from marrying the Muslim man she was dating at the time and potentially carrying his child.

Flat Earth Theory: This active belief asserts that the Earth is a flat disc rather than a sphere. For the record, the “Flat Earth Society” has over 145,000 members on Facebook today. (Can someone please let me know if anyone falls off??)

But it makes me wonder, with absolute respect to all people, including those 145K above, what makes us prone to belief in conspiracy? What makes us likely to adopt something other than the accepted status quo? Note that according to research presented by the National Institute of Health (NIH), over half of Americans believe that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone. Thus we ask, what is it that makes us believe what we’ve been told is untrue?

The NIH provides more analysis, suggesting that conspiracy theories come from many motives.  Sometimes we find the conspiracy more appealing. Some, too, possess personality traits that are more aligned with acceptance of the conspiracy. Bowes identifies these as “tendencies to perceive threat and danger, having sort of ‘odd’ beliefs and experiences, relying on intuition, and being antagonistic and superior.”

The reality is that conspiracy theories have always existed, will continue to exist, and aren’t all created equal. We hear them today wresting with Epstein, Covid, Soros and more. How do we know what’s true? Better yet, how do we guard against getting sucked in to that which isn’t true?

Seek evidence — not claims. Watch tone and style; is the presentation balanced and fair or sensationalist and one-dimensional? Scrutinize the source. Does the proclaimer suggest he has the only valid truth? Watch how emotional we become. Be educated. Utilize diverse resources. Look for motive. Beware of drastic leaps in logic. Say prayers for wisdom and discernment, and let our hearts not be rattled.

Lots to think about. Still waiting for that person who falls off the Earth.

Respectfully…

AR

This week got me thinking. Is there anyone we wouldn’t sit down with?

Let’s try it another way…

Is there anyone we’d be unwilling to sit down with, have a cup of coffee, wine, you name it? Is there anyone we’d be unwilling to have a conversation with?

Note I speak not of being reluctant, hesitant or even unenthusiastic. There are perhaps several for each of us for whom we’d have to think twice, maybe three times, being especially intentional about any conversation beforehand.

But therein lies the difference. 

I wouldn’t have happy-go-lucky, act-like-all-is-well-and-wonderful conversations with all people. Because it’s not. 

I wouldn’t refrain from drawing necessary boundaries, as not all conversations are appropriate with all people. Boundaries are healthy and wise.

But I speak of being absolutely unwilling — meaning “I will not… I refuse… I would never do that” — in regard to sitting with and taking the time, doing the work to understand another person. That’s the key.

For years we’ve seen the convenient cry from the keyboard warrior in how disagreement serves as warrantable reason for the expressed unwillingness…

No, we will not agree to disagree. You are wrong. You are wrong in ways that are harming other people. This is not disagreement. This is you being immoral. You are inhumane, heartless and cruel.

Yikes, I admit that some people would be really hard for me to talk to. For some people I’d really have to work at sitting down, being patient and intentional, deciding ahead of time what boundaries need to be drawn and what I’m comfortable and uncomfortable discussing with that person. Some conversations are indeed more laborious, sensitive and difficult than others. 

But the minute I say I’m unwilling to sit down with them, the minute I’ve chosen to forgo any actual conversation, is also the moment I’ve chosen to know no more. I cannot sit behind my keyboard (or elsewhere) and pose that I understand another person fully when I make no effort to really get to know them. I cannot suggest that I know why they think or act the way they do.

Allow me a few, brief, blood pressure elevating examples, if you will. If someone thought either of our two most recent presidents were the most wonderful, compassionate and competent president ever, I would want to sit with them and understand the reason they think that way.

Take the immoral argument. If someone, for example, thought abortion should always be allowed at any time under any circumstance or should never be allowed at any time under any circumstance, I would also be curious and want to sit with them. “Help me understand why you think that way,” I would respectfully ponder.

My goal is to understand what I don’t — not to cast judgment on those with whom I disagree.

This idea that we won’t sit with another because we disagree is sad to me. Absolutely, once more, it is indeed completely healthy and wise to limit the extent of our interactions and instill those boundaries with certain people, as many have ways of articulation and expression that are difficult to be around; that’s not what we’re speaking of today.

We’re speaking instead of the humanity argument. If I judge you to be immoral because of the opinion you hold and utilize such to justify an unwillingness to speak or interact no more, I have just cut off my most effective means of knowing more than I already do.

And if I choose to know no more than I already to, then that makes me sad for me.

Respectfully…

AR

It was easy to be excited. The weekend was one off to celebrate with a small group of people, all especially dear. You know the kind of circle… a safe one, fun one, one where you may laugh, cry, be silly or serious and maybe all of the above at the exact same time. You could talk about anything. Be safe there. It promised to be a great weekend, and nothing would deter me.

With the seven hour solo drive loosely mapped out with extended phone calls, podcasts, and a few coffee shop stops in between, I was set and ready to go. 

I left my house, turned on the turnpike and was well prepped for the first few hours. It was mid-morning, and traffic was decently light. There were four lanes of traffic heading north out of Orlando. Again, with light traffic there were still cars in all lanes, but navigating the pass of slower cars was seemingly simplistic indeed. 

Still in a great mood, I was in the third from the right lane, with the lane to my left being the one intended for the fastest among us. The speed limit is 70 mph there. 

As I approached a slower car from behind in my lane (which for the record, had me going at 77 mph — sorry, Mom), I looked in the rear to my left and right, discerning which lane provided the path of greatest ease. Passing is always preferable to the left of the car one is passing, and with a vehicle near my blind spot on the right, moving into the fast lane to pass made the most sense.

There was a car in that lane several car lengths back. It was actually going faster than my chosen 77; it wasn’t hard to discern. However, it was indeed a ways back and I had the right of way. So I turned on my blinker and moved into the fast lane, passing the slower car. 

A few seconds went by. Then a few more. I was soon to pass the vehicle once in front of me.

Then all of a sudden the one time car a ways back was on my tail. And not only were they on my tail, they were on their horn. Loudly.

I took a glance and continued on, passing the first car as planned. I then safely pulled in front of that car, back in lane number three. The honking car didn’t want to wait for my passing, so while I maneuvered as planned, they had now jetted over to the second lane from right, passing both me and the other car from the right side of the road. Ah, yes, they were now not only back on their horn, this time also including an emphatic hand gesture, mouthing some artful expletive and flipping me off. 

Thank God for tinted windows. Just saying. 

But I’ve thought about that driver many times.

Friends, I did nothing unsafe, unfair, un-nothing. I simply got in a lane to pass a car, safely and methodically. I didn’t cut anyone off nor do anything improper. 

But…

I made another slow down.

I made another unable to go in the path and at the pace they wanted.

I got in another’s desired way. I inconvenienced them.

Because of that inconvenience — and let’s be honest — that’s what it was — it wasn’t a safety hazard or an impasse nor any sort of major complication — but because of that inconvenience, the driver of the other car justified focusing all her angst at me.

Of course that got me thinking…

How often to we magnify an inconvenience?

And then, after we magnify it, unable to perceive it fully accurately because we’ve taken no time nor intent to do so, how often do we focus our angst entirely on another?

And then, after we focus our angst entirely on another, how often do we justify treating them awfully?

Just thinking how misperception makes a difference… and how maybe we should pause a little bit more…

Respectfully…

AR