Author: Rev. Joe Dirt

Posted on

Take George Washington Off the One Dollar Bill

I believe it is time to remove George Washington from the quarter coin and the one dollar bill. While we are about it, I think we need to tear down the Washington george-washington-one-dollar-billmonument. The monument, besides glorifying this man, is unabashedly phallic.

I suppose it would not be out of bounds for you to ask me why I have come to this conclusion. Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson are considered the founders of the Democratic Party. Jefferson-Jackson Day is a Democratic Party fundraising tradition across our country. The Missouri Democratic Party has decided to change the name of it biggest fund raiser from the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner to the Harry S. Truman Dinner.

Let’s parse this for moment.

The objection expressed during the local NPR news story was that Jefferson and Jackson both were slave owners.   Nearly 30 percent of our presidents have been slave owners, a total of 12 of the 44 individuals. Of the first 18 presidents, 13 owned slaves. This is not an attempt to excuse, but we are all a result of the time and place our lives pass through. Norms also change with time and place. Continue reading “Take George Washington Off the One Dollar Bill”

Posted on

A Golf “Innovation” or A Bridge Too Far — Super Sized Holes

big holeMost of my golf is played on public golf courses. Being who I am most of that golf is played at those courses that tend to be less expensive. The game played at these establishments only vaguely resembles the game that is seen on television. This has very little to do with the disparity in skill levels between the two sets of players. The casual game played at public courses by most players only makes a passing nod to the official rules of golf. It may be different at country clubs, but I suspect it is only by a small degree or perhaps being less open about it.

Occasionally you encounter people that are extremely serious about their game, but most folks are out to have a good time. As such, there are a significant number of players that use golf as an excuse to drink. Perhaps if I were more coordinated I might do this, but I keep my beer drinking to one or two after the round.

I have no problem with folks out for a good time on the golf course. I tell everyone I play golf with three ends in mind. First, I play for the golf. Since I walk and carry my bag 95% of time I play for the exercise. Lastly, I play for the social aspect of it. Which end is most important varies round by round.

The rules of golf are typically bent in several ways. Continue reading “A Golf “Innovation” or A Bridge Too Far — Super Sized Holes”

Posted on

Flags, Deflection, Guns, Rationalization

In order to confederate battle flagget through life we all have certain psychological defense mechanisms that we use more or less depending on the person and the situation. A very common one is rationalization which is defined as:

‘Rationalization is the cognitive distortion of “the facts” to make an event or an impulse less threatening. We do it often enough on a fairly conscious level when we provide ourselves with excuses. But for many people, with sensitive egos, making excuses comes so easy that they never are truly aware of it. In other words, many of us are quite prepared to believe our lies.’ 1

When psychologists talk of defense mechanisms, they are typically speaking of the individual. However, humans practice defense mechanisms as a group. While there are many areas that we practice rationalization, a frequent one in the United States is gun violence. Whether the killing is en masse or an individual, we continually hear comments Continue reading “Flags, Deflection, Guns, Rationalization”

Posted on

Snowflake Globe Meditation

snow-globe-239988_640I was listening to Krista Tippett’s show, On Being, on NPR this Sunday morning. It is also available as a podcast.   Krista was interviewing Simone Campbell of Nuns on the Bus fame. Ms. Campbell is a nun, a lawyer and a lobbyist for social issues.   She also practices Zen.

She had the most wonderful description of mediation. She described life as being like one of those globes with all the snowflakes in them. In our lives, most of the time, the snowflakes are swirling around pell-mell. Meditation allows the snowflakes to settle and be quite for a few minutes.

I found that a wonderful image.

Posted on

Acceptance and Tolerance

A comment to me recently started me thinking about what is the difference between acceptance and tolerance. The comment was this:

“To me homosexuality is not acceptable behavior. Why are Liberals trying to force me to accept this? I feel discriminated against.”

One definition of acceptance is — the action or process of being received as adequate or suitable, typically to be admitted into a group. Another is — favorable reception; approval; favor. Tolerance is defined as — the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.

Even a cursory glance at the human race gives the impression of great diversity among its members.   This is truly amazing when you consider that if you were to pick two random individuals and sequence their DNA there would be a Continue reading “Acceptance and Tolerance”

Posted on

“No Gays Served”

On the Daily Show last night they played a clip from Fox News where they compared the situation in Indiana in regards to the so-called religious freedom act to forcing Jews running a bakery to serve Nazis.

My response to that would be:

First and foremost you are not comparing apples and apples.  Nazism was a political movement that as part of their core philosophy incorporated racism, anti-Semitism and the extermination of all inferior beings (physical deformed, mentally handicap, etc.) as defined by the Nazi party.  Homosexuality is just another common expression of human sexuality.  Any moral repugnance is more an expression of a person’s religion or culture. It is no worse or better than heterosexuality, just not as common.   To say a person is gay, is no different than saying they are black or blonde or Hispanic.  It is simply a characteristic of a person.

While at one level I believe we should be able to do business with only who want to, there are so many areas of life where this is not true now.  We cannot choose on the basis of color, ethnicity, religion or gender who we rent or sale a house to, who we serve in a restaurant, who we hire, who we accept into a school and many more things. What the Indiana law is attempting to do is codify a religious belief to allow discrimination against a specific minority.  One way to marginalize any group is restrict where and what they can do.  I do not find that morally or ethically justifiable.

Really in the long run what is the difference between a sign that reads “Whites Only” or “No Coloreds” and one that reads “No Gays Served”?