Economics confuses me

As does politics. And insurance. And although I'm not really sure what the answer to our healthcare crisis is, I don't feel good about this.

And while we're talking about insurance, let's not forget Wal-Mart.

It's a little late, but

I totally could've used this during Mission Year.

Communal Salvation

One of my favorite debating opponents and I emailed recently about the idea of communal salvation. (We do agree about some things, btw.) Here's what I had to say:

Since our culture is so individualistic, I think we forget that we’re all in
this together, and that what’s mine is yours. Madeleine L’Engle used to
talk about how what we do to the earth affects it so profoundly that it comes
right back to affect us.

I’ve also heard (very recently) salvation
preached as more of a community project and less of an individual
decision. If that’s true, it makes how we treat each other much more
important and makes us VERY responsible for each other. And (as much as
possible) responsible for each other’s faith. I like that idea, I think,
that we are saved as Israel was, by our corporate relationship to God.

He posts about the concept here, and I think it's worth a read. I keep hoping people will comment. What do you think about that idea?

Sounds interesting.

I'm in. Hopefully it comes this way soon.

The best thing I have done

since I finished MY is to sponsor a child through Compassion International . My sister-in-law sponsors a child, and she sent out an email about a different child who needed a sponsor, but by the time I made the decision to do something, he had already found sponsor (my sister-in-law's parents, who were apparently VERY excited about it!) So I am sponsoring a four-year-old Guatemalan girl instead.

Let me tell you that this is not only the best thing I have done, but probably the thing that has made me the happiest. (And my sister-in-law's parents seem pretty happy about it, too, so perhaps you should look into it.) I'm not telling you this to praise myself, but because I want you to know how much good it has done for me (I obviously don’t have purely altruistic motives here).

When I lived in Oakland, my “job” was to serve others. The generosity of my sponsors allowed me to spend the majority of my time washing homeless feet and helping first graders with math. And I didn’t always love it, but it usually made me feel useful and appreciated, even if I didn’t always feel like I was doing any good (but that’s another post).

And now, for the first time in my life, I have a job that pays me real money (read: above minimum wage). I don’t yet have a church family or friends in the area who I hang out with on a regular basis, so all I’ve really got is Food TV and my job. And let me say that my job does not make me feel all that useful. (And neither does Food TV, because cooking any of those recipes means that I have to eat the same stuff for a week just to finish off leftovers.)

I want to find a place to volunteer (and think I’m getting a lot closer), but where I volunteer depends largely on where I end up attending church. For instance, if I decide to attend the suburban church reaching out to its urban neighborhood, then I want to volunteer somewhere in the inner city. But if I decide to attend an inner-city church, I might want to volunteer somewhere else, like a children’s home. (I want some variety while staying in touch with my roots.) And as some of you know, the search for a church has been a long and largely painful one so far.

I suppose there are other ways of feeling useful than to volunteer somewhere, but volunteering is my first choice. Grandma Ruth used to say something at camp every year about how everyone needs something to do, someone to love. . .and something else that I don’t remember (obviously I was spending that time contemplating Bonfire dates). That said, I think it is possible to feel useful if you have children to take care of or other people who need you to function, and those are worthwhile endeavors as well. However, I don’t plan on taking on that sort of responsibility any time soon, so I’m pretty much left with volunteering, which, as I mentioned before, is fine with me.

I think the MY staff lied to us when they led us to believe that the work we were doing couldn’t be fun (or at least wasn’t worth as much if it was). It wasn’t always fun, I admit, sometimes because it was hard, sometimes because we were dealing with other unrelated issues (roommates, family drama, roommate drama, etc.), sometimes because it was such a 24-7 endeavor. (MY was when I decided that I wanted an 8-5 job that I could come home from at the end of each day.) Instead, they tried to sell us on “joy,” which is apparently much more holy. Apparently joy is what you get when you are doing a job you dislike not for the fun of it, but because it’s the right thing to do. I disagree. Besides, I think there’s enough of that in my personal life to meet my joy-quota anyway. (And now that I think about it, I must’ve exceeded the joy-quota for my lifetime just in my year of MY.) I think serving others can be fun. It doesn’t HAVE to be fun, but it can be. Which is good, because I am now a great proponent of fun, especially since I lived through a year of fun-less MY.

So I am looking for some kind of service that fulfills me and meets the needs of others. (Did anyone else notice that I put my needs first? Hah. Figures.) Currently I am looking into serving at a clinic for low-income service workers who are employed in the rich part of town. If this all works out, I’ll get to talk with them as they come in and pray with them before they see a doctor. Isn’t that cool? Keep this one in your prayers for me.

The article's not all that riveting,

but it's important to know. Skim here.

Oh no, I need to go out and find me a man!

Recently, around my grandmother's table, we had a short yet lively discussion about Focus on the Family. I said James Dobson is stupid for wasting his time on whether or not SpongeBob Squarepants is gay.

My mother, I think, said that James Dobson had some great things to say about raising children when she was raising children. That might be true, but it seems that Focus on the Family is shifting to a conservative religious group that has little meaningful to offer my generation.

If you need some proof, how 'bout this? It's in a publication of Focus on the Family.

I suggest you read it all, but here are my highglights:

Paul never held marriage and singleness to be on equal planes, and neither did
past Christians. Does that mean that marrieds and singles are not on equal planes? That my single-ness relegates me to an inferior plane?

Apparently my single state is “the result of a string of systematic impediments to marriage,” because REAL Christians are married.

Today's singleness is not celibacy-induced kingdom work unaccommodating to family life. No, it's the result of choices and mistakes by both the individual and society. Today's singleness is either a lifestyle option or purely circumstantial; therefore, it is largely unbiblical. So things that are lifestyle options or circumstantial are unbiblical? So my choice of not sticking myself in an unhappy marriage is unbiblical?

We are a generation that blinds itself to the notion that the failure to marry timely (i.e., in the Spring of our adult lives) can be as costly as a divorce. It costs someone a spouse, it robs someone of legitimate sexual relations, it deprives grandparents of their grandchildren, it fails to replenish the nursery of the church. Wow. Never have come in contact with the phrase, "replenish the nursery of the church." Yuck.

I know this proposition stings modern ears. I can think of many women, myself included at one time, who might argue, "But it's not my fault I'm single." True, most women are not to blame here as they are not the ones to bend down on one knee and propose. But being blameless cannot serve to validate an unintended outcome.

Who cares about SpongeBob? Whoever wrote this article is gay.

No title. Just read.

So here’s what I’ve been thinking about lately:

First, I’m either coming down with a cold or my sinuses are rebelling against the changes in weather we’ve had here recently (read: it actually RAINED on Sunday). Either way, I can only breathe out of one nostril. But get this, it’s the SAME nostril. All the time. It never changes. Usually it goes from one to the other, but this is the same one all the time, which means that I effectively look like I’ve been crying with only HALF my face. Mmmm, attractive.

Second, I never thought people other than those I know personally would want to read my blog. I mean, who else would care about my life (see above). But apparently I was wrong. That’s sort of weird when you think about it.

Third, I’ve gotten hooked on Related, my new WB show of choice. Last night, Rose (the youngest sister) had to pick between the hot bad-boy and the adorable best friend. Of COURSE she chose the bad boy (not only is it more dramatic, but that’s just what women do. . .stupid women). But that’s not the point here. The point is that the adorable best friend had been in love with her since they met, but had not made a move until recently. Which begs the question: can men and women be “just friends?” Is it possible to have a purely platonic relationship with a member of the opposite sex if both of you are single (or even if you aren’t)? I really would like to know your opinion; I myself go back and forth on this one.

And fourth, how cute is Kim? I mean, really. She updates her blog often enough that it keeps me looking busy when there’s nothing to do, and for that I am eternally grateful.

Take this quiz

I didn't do as well as I should have. Take the quiz here.

Church as Experience

It is a growing market trend to sell an experience, not just products. Barnes & Noble is a great example. You can buy a book anywhere, even off the internet. So why go to all the trouble and waste all the gas involved in a trip to the store?

Because Barnes & Noble sells an experience, not just books. They have big, fluffy chairs where you can sit down and read. They sell overpriced coffee and desserts from The Man, which you can leisurely consume as you lounge around and flip through anything that catches your eye. You’re not paying for books, you’re paying for the opportunity to participate in the phenomenon known as Barnes & Noble.

Unfortunately, church has become one more “product” marketed as an experience.

Yesterday I attended the 11 o’clock service of one such church. It wasn’t as overtly entertainment-based as some I have had the pleasure of participating in, but it was still pretty obviously “priced-to-sell.”

This church markets their experience as an emotional one, with dimmed lights and lit candles and hymns mixed with contemporary rock music. They lacked the smoke machines and light effects I have witnessed, but still hit their target pretty well.

I figure the 20-somethings were in above-average attendance since we were at their latest service, but I think the oldest person there was in his 40’s, and I saw only three non-whites come in.

The preacher is a great speaker (although I didn’t completely agree with everything he had to say) and he’s probably a few years older than me. He has a very laid-back style and even wore jeans.

A lot of those in attendance wore jeans, but they didn’t look casual at all. It was obvious that whatever their style of dress, they were dressed to impress. (And churches thought they could avoid this by allowing casual wear! Hah!)

That’s what bothered me most about the experience: the fact that no one seemed “real.” No one looked sad or confused, and we didn’t sing any “sad” songs (although we did manage to squeeze in a few of those “we’re-so-bad-but-God’s-so-good” moments that I abhor). Everyone had on their game face and it made me very uncomfortable.

My aunt, who attends a church for the homeless in Lubbock, said she was glad to attend church with people who didn’t feel like they had to put on a mask when they came in the building.

This was not that kind of experience.

But I digress. My point is that many churches have now turned to an entertainment model, and seem to be very successful with it. The church I attended yesterday is very large and I assume it will keep growing. Part of me thinks that as long as these people are hearing the word, it’s a good thing. But after you HEAR it, then what? Attendance in the “Welcome to our church” orientation class? A spot in the pew every Sunday? A small group? So what? Are these churches doing a good job of discipling, or are they continuing to churn out Christians whose only activity is church-going? I don’t know, but I do know that they have cornered the market on young people, an age group that typically avoids the Church.

But what about the elderly? Are they all stuck in conservative churches that are dying? Why can’t we get along?

Surely it’s possible for ALL of us to attend church together. And surely that is more of a testament to the love of Christ that allows us to be a community for each other than to only spend time with those who are exactly like us.

I have to believe that there is a way for people of all ages, colors and backgrounds to work and worship together, to do their best to create a model of the Kingdom here on earth, to keep their eyes on the things that MATTER. They’ll disagree and they’ll fail, but I think it’s the TRYING will set them apart. Does that exist? I don’t know that I’ve seen it in action, but I've heard about it, and you probably have, too. Isn't that what Acts is about?

Hall of Fame, Part I

Here at work (in the Communications Dept.) we each have a folder of what we call the "Hall of Fame." (My boss calls hers "World Class Communications.") In this folder we keep the horrible excuses for writing that periodically come across our desks. As a bonus, these things end up being pretty funny, too. I saw something on Steve Holt's blog today that reminded me of my Hall of Fame folder, so I thought I would share. In his post about how stupid Christians are being about The Book of Daniel, NBC's new controversial show, someone left this comment:

The great thing about the show is that the only sane one is Jesus. Sure, he’s a
little hippy but he has the best lines in the show.

Does this mean that Jesus' dress makes his hips look big? I HATE it when that happens!

Also stolen from Texas Monthly

From their list of the best Bum Steers ever.

2000
The Houston Chronicle mistakenly translated into Spanish "Together We Can," the theme of George W. Bush's inauguration for his second term as governor, not as "Juntos Podemos," which is correct, but as "Juntos Pedemos," which means "Together we fart."

Stolen from Texas Monthly

An article by Paul Burka:
The M Word
Now that Proposition 2 has passed, the point is moot—but there’s a conservative case to be made for gay marriage.

IT’S HARD TO IMAGINE A MORE overwhelming vote on a controversial issue than the one that occurred on November 8, when Texans spoke loud and clear in their opposition to same-sex marriages. The mandate from the voters to place Proposition 2 in the state constitution (even though such a prohibition already exists in statutory law) was more than three to one. One hundred and four counties supported the measure by more than 90 percent. A friend from East Texas told me that his home county, Anderson, had voted 91 percent for Prop 2. “Does that mean that nine percent of Anderson County is gay?” I asked him. “It means that nine percent can’t read,” he answered. Of the state’s 254 counties, 253 supported it. All I can say is, How can so many be so wrong?

Of course, I live in Travis County, the only county to vote down Prop 2. It wasn’t even close. While the rest of the state was for it by more than 78 percent, Travis voted just a tick short of 60 percent against it. Well, what can you expect from the only county north of Interstate 10 to vote for John Kerry (no, I didn’t do that) and from the city of Austin, the last bastion of Texas liberalism?

I voted with the majority—in Travis County, that is—and I’m proud of my vote. But liberalism had nothing to do with it. I believe that a vote for same-sex marriage is a conservative vote—not the evangelical conservatism of today, to be sure, but a more classical conservatism that upholds the freedom of the individual and the importance of order and stability in society. I believe in the values of marriage, commitment, and family. My wife, Sarah, and I have been married for 28 years and two weeks at this writing, and we have raised three children to what some would call adulthood. Never once in that time has it occurred to either of us that allowing same-sex marriages would threaten the institution of marriage, as opponents have averred. There are threats aplenty to the institution of marriage—divorce, infidelity, abuse, ennui, thoughtlessness, and, my particular demon, the irresistible urge to make the right rejoinder at the wrong time—and my challenge, as I have seen it, is to keep me from being a threat to the institution of marriage.

Allowing gay marriages would have positive benefits for society. Is it better to perpetuate a lifestyle that must be very difficult—struggling with coming out of the closet, trying to find a partner, cruising bars and other meeting places, and forming and dissolving relationships—or is it better to give couples the chance to form more-lasting bonds? From society’s viewpoint, the answer is clear. Same-sex marriage reduces promiscuity, stems the spread of AIDS, and provides homes for children who have no families. It solves legal problems, such as whether a partner can make medical decisions, inherit property, or qualify for insurance benefits. It allows for orderly dissolutions of marital ties and divisions of property. For heterosexual people who don’t want their children exposed to the gay lifestyle—that is, same-sex public displays of affection—marriage provides a path to privacy. Finally, I think marriage to the right person is a true blessing, and I don’t believe that anybody should be deprived of happiness by law. Didn’t the Declaration of Independence have something to say about that?

Opponents of gay marriage might suggest that gay couples should just live together without getting married, especially since more and more employers allow their workers to include domestic partners in their health insurance programs. Oh, swell. Talk about a threat to the institution of marriage: You can get the benefits without the commitment. I think that’s bad public policy. If it were up to me, my Prop 2 would prohibit such benefits for unmarried couples, gay and heterosexual alike. If you want the goodies, you should have to get married. Is that discrimination against singles? You bet it is. Society has every right to institutionalize a preference for marriage.

But does it have every right to institutionalize a preference for heterosexuality? Well, it is institutionalized, in our instinct to propagate the species. No parent wants his or her offspring to grow up to be gay. Children are all we know of immortality. We want our children to have children, so we can live on through our genes.

I saw the preference for heterosexuality emerge as my children grew up—not so much through their own attractions, for these secrets they kept to themselves, but through their vocabulary. They knew better than to use racial epithets, but around the time Joel, my older son, hit the third or fourth grade, he brought home new taunts for his younger brother. “That’s so gay,” he would say, or “You’re such a fag.” In the collision between political correctness and the endless young-male search for put-downs, “gay” and “fag” apparently had become the only acceptable discriminatory remarks. I asked him what “gay” meant, and he said, “You know. Stupid.” Too bad Arnold Schwarzenegger hadn’t yet come up with “girlie man.”

I didn’t even know that such a thing as homosexuality existed when I was growing up. All I cared about at age fourteen was sports. I was in middle school, and somehow I landed the job of phoning in the results of the Lovenberg Seagulls football and basketball games to the Galveston Daily News. A reporter was my contact, and one night, after I had finished dictating my story, he asked me if I would like to come over to his house some evening and talk about sportswriting. I was very excited at the prospect. My mother was not. My father was no longer living, so she called in the marines—a stern cousin who told me about men who liked to touch young boys—and may have made another call as well. All I know is that I continued to phone in sports results, but a different voice was on the other end of the line, and the reporter’s byline no longer appeared in the paper.

It is not possible to grow up so clueless today. Gay issues arise in the course of our daily lives, and we are forced to decide how we feel about them. Should gays be protected by hate crimes laws? If we’re going to single out some classes of crime victims as having been more terribly dealt with than others (a proposition I have some doubt about), then I suppose gays should be protected along with other groups. Should gays be allowed to serve in the military? “Don’t ask, don’t tell” is a hedge—and that’s why I like it. It gives gays the ability to serve their country without making it a right that ties the Army’s hands in egregious cases. Should gays be protected by civil rights laws—for example, from being fired from a job because of their sexual preference? Sure. People who feel differently argue that such laws validate the gay lifestyle, which goes against their religious beliefs. But I am trying to look at such issues from the viewpoint of policy, not theology. I believe people ought to be judged on how they perform, not on what they do with whom in their bedroom.

Then there are the issues that can’t be legislated. Is sexual preference genetic or a choice? This question matters because most proponents of gay marriage argue that sexual preference is genetically determined, while opponents disagree. The scientific evidence for the existence of a gay (male) gene is inconclusive. Here I hedge again; I believe it’s both genetic and a choice, that inclination and influence are two ends of a continuum. Should public affection between homosexual couples be allowed in public schools? This is a real concern for parents who believe that sexual preference is a matter of choice and that their kids’ choice can be influenced by such displays. What should the school’s responsibility be? In Garden Grove, California, a high school principal removed an openly lesbian girl from school because she was hugging and kissing her partner in full view of their classmates. The principal subsequently informed the girl’s parents that their daughter was gay. The daughter, who ranked in the top 5 percent of her class, sued the principal for invasion of privacy, and a judge recently ruled that the lawsuit can go forward. Why couldn’t the girl just obey the principal’s request to be discreet? I guess any parent who has raised a teenager knows the answer to that question. Is the alternative for school administrators to serve as the kissing police? Good luck.

In Texas, the next battleground for the anti-gay element is adoption. For the past several legislative sessions, a few lawmakers, notably state representative Robert Talton, of Pasadena, have tried to block adoptions by homosexuals, without success. I have to admit that if Sarah and I were trying to adopt a child, and we lost out to a gay or lesbian couple, I would go berserk. All other things being equal, preference should be given to heterosexual couples because to be raised in the prevailing lifestyle is in the best interests of the child. But to bar gay couples from adopting is cruel, both to the parents and to the children. This is particularly true in the case of foster children, who have been taken away from their parents and are wards of the state. Although no statistics are kept, it is widely thought that a significant percentage of foster children in Texas are taken in by gay and lesbian couples. Where will these children, most of whom have suffered abuse and neglect, end up if gays are legally barred from adopting them? What hope will they have? Critics of gay adoption, confusing homosexuality with pedophilia, have suggested that gays will continue the cycle of abuse. It is a specious argument, but specious arguments are not unknown to the Texas Legislature.

The ban on gay adoption has failed in the past because prominent lawmakers in both parties who care about the fate of foster children have been able to speak against it. But the fight against gay adoption has previously been the lonely crusade of Talton and a few other legislators. The question now is whether the success of Prop 2 will embolden the hard-core conservative base of the Republican party to make gay adoption a litmus-test issue, as they were able to do for gay marriage. I hope not. It would be terrible public policy. But if there should be another statewide vote, I will be proud, once again, to mark my ballot “no.”

A Story

I found this as I was wading through some old company newsletters:

During the Christmas season, I am reminded of Ronald J. Seder [it's actually by Ronald J. Sider, which illustrates why my strengths as a proofreader make me valuable to the company], who begins his book, Doing Evangelism Jesus’ Way with this story:

Someone has imagined an astonishing conversation between Jesus and the archangel Gabriel when Jesus returned to heaven. “Well, how did it go?” Gabriel asked Jesus. “Did you complete your plan? Did you save the world?”

Jesus said, “Well, yes…and no. I modeled a Godly life for 30 years. I preached to a few thousand Jews in a little corner of the Roman Empire. I died for the sins of the world. I promised that those who believe in me will live forever. Then I burst from the tomb to convince 120 frightened followers that my life and my story were God’s way to save the world. And then I gave those 120 the Holy Spirit, and I left them to finish the task.”

“You mean your whole plan to save the world depends on that raging bunch of 120 ex-fishermen, prostitutes and tax collectors?” asked Gabriel in astonishment. “That’s right,” Jesus replied. “But what if they fail?” Gabriel insisted. “What is your backup plan?”

Slowly, Jesus said, “There is no backup plan.”

Read this

I'm still mad at Larry James for not emailing me back (long story). But I agree with what he says here.

A Sermon for Myself

I’m still trying to find a church where I fit. Heck, I’d love to just find a LIFE where I fit!

Someone asked me last night to help their suburban white church function in and relate to the increasingly inner-city neighborhood in which they find themselves. (They have committed to staying in the neighborhood, which I think is the right thing to do.) And I’ll be excited if this opportunity pans out. I think I’m qualified to help.

It occurred to me, though, that if I join their church and do nothing else then I will feel like an imposter. I live in a white suburban neighborhood. I work in a white suburban neighborhood, and going to a white suburban church—regardless of its location—will just mean that I slip farther and farther away from my connection to the inner city. And how can I help then?

It occurs to me that I have fled to my white suburban neighborhood because: (1) it’s close to work (I don’t do traffic), (2) safety is an issue, (3) it represents some sort of comfort zone when all of my others have been screwed up (seriously—my parents just moved out of my childhood home) and (4) because I had such a bad experience last year with the program (Mission Year) that took me to the inner city that I want to avoid anything remotely resembling that. I learned a lot and still believe in a lot of things that MY tried to work for (community, social justice, etc.) but I was really hurt by many things that took place there and am still trying to heal. Christians hurt me more in the past year than I thought possible. But I’m doing much better than I was in August, believe me. Man, I was a WRECK when I got home from MY!

I’m considering volunteering at some local inner-city ministry in order to keep my “ties to my roots”; I want to find somewhere to volunteer, but it’ll probably come down to what fits best into my schedule.

I don’t think I’m very “good” at inner-city ministry, and I don’t always enjoy it, but I do believe it’s important. I think my skill set and personality would be much more easily accepted by people like me. But who else will do this work if I won’t? It’s hard, but it’s necessary. (And sometimes I think I have the spiritual gift of doing things that no one else—including me—want to do. Is that possible? If so, God can take it back.) But the truth remains that if the people of God are going to love the “least of these,” the inner city is where it’s at.

I don’t think we get any extra points for loving the people who are exactly like us. I think that’s almost like cheating (and the sad thing is that it’s still hard to love those who are like us). So I can’t cocoon myself in my nice, pretty, white suburban life. It might be more comfortable, but it’s not right.

Advocacy Advisory

So I got something in my work email box today titled the "Advocacy Advisory." I don't know why I received it, but I understand why it is relevant to the health system I work for. A lot of what we do politically is aimed at curbing the government's pressing need to cut benefits for the poor. This benefits us, too, of course, because as a nonprofit health system we are required to provide a certain amount of indigent care to the communities we serve at a loss to us. (And because our mission is to "extend the healing ministry of Jesus Christ.")

But I digress. I thought this news item, ripped straight from The Los Angeles Times (1/3/06) was sad and meaningful. I had no idea that Katrina would affect people this way. Guess I just never thought about it:

The continuing toll of Hurricane Katrina now includes those who will likely face being among the ranks of the uninsured. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Louisiana estimates that 200,000 state residents who had health insurance through an employer will lose those benefits as cash-strapped companies cut staff or go out of business. According to experts, it is one of the largest groups to lose medical coverage because of a single event. Prior to the hurricane, 866,000 of Louisiana’s 4.4 million residents were uninsured, partly due to high poverty rates and lower-than-average rates of employer-sponsored health coverage. The rate is expected to worsen because it is anticipated that few newly unemployed people will decide to buy their own health insurance, while those who still have jobs might see benefit cuts. A rule imposed by state officials that insurance companies keep medical policies active even if premiums had not been paid expired November 2005. Now insurance companies are preparing to cancel policies if premiums are not paid. In addition, New Orleans health care system is not prepared to take on the burden of the uninsured as eight local hospitals are closed and thousands of doctors have left the area. One of the only options state officials have is to wait for federal help. Fred Cerise, head of Louisiana’s DHH said, “What these hurricanes have demonstrated in that having insurance for most adults is only as good as having a job…and that relationship can be tenuous.”

Evacuees Add to State Health Care Costs. Officials in Texas, Georgia and other states face daunting questions about 2006 health care and other costs for the hundreds of thousands of individuals displaced by Hurricane Katrina. Georgia officials have said that state health care and education costs could increase by $100 million in 2006 in the event that 44,000 hurricane evacuees decide to stay. In addition, Texas officials have said that state costs could increase by $550 million in 2006 if 400,000 hurricane evacuees decide to remain in that state. FEMA will likely reimburse states for many costs, but state officials remain unaware of the amount of funds they will receive and when they will receive them.

I'm doing some online research today

and am finding very interesting things, including this article, which raises questions such as:

*How ironic is it that the man accusing NBC of " 'anti-Christian bigotry' " the proceeds to make a bigoted comment? Well, I guess it's more normal than ironic these days.

*Can you actually use the phrase "namby-pamby" and be effective as a teen minister? I have my doubts. . .

What sort of questions did it raise for you (besides "Don't Christians have better things to do? Like feeding Jesus's sheep?)?

Not so funny

Sometimes I worry about posting this stuff because I don't want to fuel racism. But I want people to know what's going on and recognize the effects of poverty. So read up.

Elmo gets tough on potty training

I mean, I know potty training can be a difficult experience (especially for people like my brother, who had to be coerced with songs) but this is a little ridiculous. And let me say that I was very easy to potty train. Just for the record.

I gotta go with Dave Barry on this one

Wilma, Rita, Katrina: No matter how you stack it up, 2005 blew

You need to read this! It includes such highlights as:

February:
In other hopeful news, President Bush, seeking to patch up the troubled relationship between the United States and its European allies, embarks on a four-nation tour. When critics note that two of the nations are not actually located in Europe, the White House responds that the president was ''acting on the best intelligence available at the time.''

March:
But the economy gets a boost when the jobless rate plummets, as hundreds of thousands of unemployed cable-TV legal experts are hired to comment on the trial of Michael Jackson. Jackson is charged with 10 counts of being a space-alien freakadelic weirdo. Everybody agrees this will be very difficult to prove in California.

June:
In disturbing medical news, a new study of 1,000 Americans finds that obesity in the United States has gotten so bad that there actually were, upon closer scrutiny, only 600 Americans involved in the study.

July:
In book news, millions of youngsters snap up the latest in the Harry Potter series, Harry Potter Must Be Like 32 Years Old By Now.

Be careful, though. It's kind of long and can cause pain if you're reading it at work and drinking bottled water and you try to stifle a laugh (becuase the newsletter article you just finished writing is really not funny) and you have to try very hard to keep water from shooting out your nose or mouth or both.

Deep Thoughts wtih A.Lo

Why yes, I am at work. And yes, I don’t have a lot of work to do and am not finding enough motivation to go searching for some (especially since my boss is not here today and doesn’t really seem to understand the concept of not having much work to do, which I suppose, for her, is understandable).

So here are some random thoughts that I’ve been meaning to elaborate upon, but have not done. And may never do, if I don’t just vomit them up on you right now. (Won’t that be fun?)

Yesterday, at Kroger, I was trying to find the shortest check-out line when I reached one that looked promising. As I did, though, I could tell that a guy who had been waiting in the next line over was abandoning his incredibly slow-moving line for this better, faster one. He was there first, so I stopped and told him to go ahead. He said, “No, that’s okay,” and returned to his slow-as-molasses line. Seriously. The guy was just leaving the store as I pulled out of the parking lot. And I thought, “How nice!!” (I don’t see a whole lot of nice in this big ol’ city.) And then I thought, “I want to marry someone nice like that.”

Speaking of big commitments, I’m planning to buy a washer & dryer today after work. I’m a little worried about making such a big purchase, but it’ll just have to be okay.

I’m thinking my life will be harder when I’m older and don’t feel it necessary to work as hard on my appearance as I do now. A lot of guys who work in my building are very helpful and nice, as are waiters and guys who work in the grocery store. I guess I shouldn’t grow accustomed to the level of service I am now receiving. Or I should have good-looking daughters and just go out to eat with them a lot. ;-)

I was reading C.S. Lewis’s Letters to Malcom today at lunch (because I either have to work through lunch, go home to eat and watch the Food Network or eat by myself) and was impressed by his concentration on the supernatural element of the worship service. I tend to forget this, wondering only when we get to stop and go to lunch and when I will no longer have to make awkward conversation with people I don’t really know. It seems to me, though, that in this life, either everything is sacred or nothing is. And things get a little tight-assed and not fun when everything is sacred, but when nothing is sacred we lose the magic inherent in the things of this world. And it’s really hard to find a good balance between those two things (just like with everything else).

Back to the subject of church, though, I have been to two churches since I moved here (and they both happened to be big, rich, white churches, which I suppose was my mistake) and found them both to be wholly unfriendly. This, first of all, is depressing, and second of all messes up my plans. I had planned to find friends here in my new city through a church or, more specifically, a singles group. Both the singles groups at the churches I visited were either Kojie-fied or just plain unwelcoming, as was the rest of the congregation. So am I just going to be lonely and friend-less forever? I hope not, ‘cause that’s no fun (but is made better by the fact that I have cable). This experience has, however, helped me narrow down my very long list of “Qualities my Perfect Church Must Possess.” Now, the list really just includes (1) multicultural members and (2) a welcoming atmosphere.

I’ve been thinking about generosity, too. When I found out that my employer was going to pay me much more than I expected, I was excited about the fact that I would be able to give more money away and use it to bless the people I love. I am, however, finding that I am not as generous as I want to be. All of a sudden, I have a bunch of bills to pay: apartment, car payment, school loans, water, gasoline, electricity, credit card (which I have never before had until about a month ago), etc. My first month of employment left me wondering about my finances (moving is expensive!) and with little money in my account, but I think I’ll be okay now. I also figured out that I’ll be making about $9,000/year less than I expected because of the stupid federal government. The thing is, though, that I keep thinking that I’ll be more generous when I feel more financially stable. But that’s not generosity (especially because I probably won’t EVER feel financially stable.) Generosity is the widow with the two coins who gives all she has. Generosity says, “Here’s what I have. It’s not much, but it should be enough.” It’s a lot like love that way, I guess. It just does its best.

And for those of you who don’t know, my Grandfather is in the hospital. (That’s my Dad’s dad.) He went into the emergency room about 2 a.m. on Christmas morning (Merry Christmas) and had a triple bypass the Wednesday after. (My Christmas dinner was hospital cafeteria ham and macaroni and cheese. Gross.) Apparently he had a little heart attack and he’s still in the hospital; they were able to go through his ribs to do the bypass instead of opening up his chest plate or whatever (man, you’d think I’d be a lot smarter since I work for a health care company) and so his healing time should be less, but his incision is apparently not healing like it should, which is, as the doctor said, “a fatality issue.” So we’re trying to decide who can go and visit and sit with my grandmother in the hospital, etc. We need to wait for some more info, and it looks like next week will be the best time for us to assist, but I have to be out of town for work on Monday and Tuesday and in meetings on Thursday and Friday and therefore unable to make the two-hour drive. So keep us in your prayers. I have to say, though, that it is miraculous that he made it to the age of 81 before having a heart attack, especially because he has high blood pressure and high cholesterol and smoked for a good part of his life. So I am thankful that he’s doing as well as he is.

And I’ve been having really odd dreams lately. Last night I dreamed about my third-grade boyfriend. (That is the guy who was my boyfriend when I was in third grade, not my current boyfriend who is a third-grader, just FYI.) I don’t even remember what I dreamed, just that he was there. Weird.

Alright, kids, that’s it. Guess I’ll have to go back to playing on the internet and looking busy now.