Acknowledging the Foundation

Like many churches, my congregation does work in the community. As we started a new sermon series, the pastor acknowledged the past work done by churches who existed before ours. 'We build on their foundation', he said.

Not all churches understand this concept. I have been in places where, when a community venture was announced, it was as if we would be the first and last game in town. I once asked why we didn't partner with an existing organization, so as not to re-create the wheel. The man looked at me like I was crazy.

Church Leader, if you'd rather re-create the wheel so you can say "This is Our Such & Such", I question your commitment to the community.

Why are you so concerned with having your church's name on it? Why do you rejoice in the inefficient use of resources?

Your prize should be the people getting help, not adulation for the appearance of being helpful. Any fool can take a photo op.

Church Leader, if you are really committed to the community, look at who's already working there. Perhaps God is calling you to add to an existing foundation.

More Martin and Zimmerman

This morning I read that the gun that killed Trayvon Martin only had George Zimmerman's DNA on it. Zimmerman has asserted he shot Martin because Martin was reaching for Zimmerman's gun.

Before you get too excited, remember that reaching for is not the same as touched. That is, if Zimmerman had asserted Martin touched his gun, then the evidence would dispute that. However, Zimmerman said reached for. If Martin tried, but was unsuccessful in making contact with the gun, then it is logical for only Zimmerman's DNA to be on it.

Also, remember that this is a piece of the evidence puzzle. I am curious about the trajectory of the bullet(s), and other physics stuff. How does the physics of the shooting support or dispute Zimmerman's assertions? Does the distance at which Martin was shot tell us whether he could have been considered a physical threat?

In other words, breathe. The trial was a long time coming – despite Florida's Stand Your Ground law, it seems there was enough evidence for at least an involuntary manslaughter charge*. But now that the trial has begun, we should hope and pray for justice and not just us.

*said the woman who has absolutely no legal training whatsoever.

A Tragedy Squared for the Week of September 16th

A disabled woman, sent to that hospital after being beaten by her son, has died. Her death was not due to the physical wounds she received from her son, who was her primary caregiver.

Her son is 11 years old.

As tragic as the woman's death is, I wonder why it was acceptable for an 11-year old to be the primary caregiver to a disabled adult. To be responsible for meals and laundry seems a heavy burden for one so young. It was wrong of him to beat her (apparently repeatedly). But if her disability was such that she could not help with cooking or cleaning, it wrong for responsible adults to put him in such a predicament.

Which begs the question: who paid the bills?

Community Policing

While gardening, a woman finds a suspicious bag buried in her yard. She takes the bag to the police, who tell her "The gang isn't going to like this". When she was threatened – with extortion, with rape, with death – the most they could do was stand guard while she packed her belongings and moved out of her house.

Two reactions:

1. What IS community policing? What good is it if the police can't protect people from intimidation?

2. Oooohhh. The No Snitch code is not about supporting the bad guys; it's about survival. One can live in silent fear or be killed for angering the wrong people. Most people, when given the option, choose life.

On What Akin Said

Perhaps he was thinking of vaginismus,a condition where penetration can become virtually impossible.

If he was, his understanding is still poor. The condition could be psychosomatic – the physical manifestation of a mental trauma – or not. There are degrees of severity. It is unpredictable.

So yes, Akin's understanding of the female body is less than most. A larger issue is the idea that a woman who becomes pregnant during non-consensual sexual intercourse must not have been raped.

But what if the motive for the rape was pregnancy? We are depraved enough as a species to use sex as a weapon. Do you think it beyond our capacity to use pregnancy to inflict pain? To attempt to use life as a means of destruction?

Another issue, brought up during all the hoopla, is the concept of "forcible" rape. It suggests that if force was not involved, rape did not occur. Someone slip you a date rape drug and had sex with you while you were unconscious? Perhaps you got so drunk you passed out and became a sex doll for a cadre of men and boys.

You were not conscious to say no, to fight back. Some would say you were not forced. Some would argue you were not raped.

I wonder. If the victims in such circumstances were boys or men, would the matter of force even be questioned?