I know before I write even a word of what I'm feeling led to post here that many- especially of the young- will automatically jump to the conclusion that I'm being "right wing" bigoted and fundamentalist hard-nosed.  Nothing I can say will dissuade them that this is not just another "Republican" post, ranting on about "nothing" while corporate greed and corruption, worldwide poverty and trafficking, and environmental "rape" goes unnoticed and unaddressed by the "religious right".  I can only say that I was addressing many of these "newly discovered" worldwide concerns of theirs long before many of today's advocates were born.  I, too, am deeply concerned about each of those things, and have dedicated a lifetime trying to address them, not just with words, but with meaningful action. I have tried to put my money and my sweat where my mouth is on each of these and many other such issues.  I have avoided political posturing like the plague.

However, why is it inappropriate for me to be bothered by the unplugging of the microphone for a young valedictorian, headed for the military academy, because he had dared to mention his faith as part of his life story in his graduation address.  I realize that the school system had an "unplug" policy.  I've also read their policy (Have you?) and it is designed to avoid vulgarity, personal attacks upon school officials or fellow students, anything off-color or distasteful or any rabble rousing tactics.  It is designed to encourage the speakers to highlight their life story, hopes and dreams for the future.  The ONLY possible infraction of this young man was violating the phrase "infringe upon the rights of others".  I guess that's why he was unplugged.  Nothing else in their policy fit anything he said or did.

My question: What about the valedictorian's right to talk about his life, his hopes and dreams as the school encourages?  If he does it sensitively, in kindness, not condescendingly nor gratuitously, does he not have rights to be considered, too?  When one set of rights conflict with another set of rights, are we, as a nation, at a place now where the Christian is always the one who must yield?  I realize that Christians should, at heart, be people who willingly give up their rights for the sake of others.  I've preached and practiced that for years.  BUT, even Jesus stood firm at times in the face of the Pharisaical mindset of his day.  Here's the deal.  No one seems willing to ask these days, Can non-religious people have a Pharisaical mindset that needs at times to be firmly confronted?  I say "Yes!".  The prideful arrogance of the FFRF (Freedom from Religion Foundation) is modern-day Pharisaism at its worst- prideful, arrogant  obsession regarding one's view of God.  If Christians have that kind of attitude, their microphones need to be turned off.  But, if Christians are simply sharing life and hopes and dreams and that's impossible to do without mentioning Jesus- and, if the militant FFRF is threatening to "remove schools from the synagogue" unless they turn off the microphone, I think there comes a time to leave the microphone on.  The school would NOT have been in violation of any mandates, including their own policy, had they simply let the young man be heard.  I'm weary of hearing of schools running scared and "throwing the baby out with the bath water" in the name of "playing it safe."  I don't want my grandkids to be always having to second-guess their words when Jesus comes to mind.

Maybe I want too much.  Maybe I just need to help get my grandkids ready to live in a far, far different country that the one in which I grew up.  And I'm working on that, too.  But I will never encourage them to be ashamed of Jesus.  I will encourage them to be kind, gracious, loving.  But never ashamed.  If that has become the criteria for being a good "Christian" in today's America, then I guess the microphone will be pulled on many generations in the Calvin family in the future.  And that makes me sad.  Just sayin'!  Not mad- just sad.

AVOID EGO ATTACKS

I've alluded a few times in previous posts how urgently important it is to avoid ego attacks at ALL costs when involved in a heated argument.  Let me expand on that idea a bit.  Couples/families can disagree and even argue on virtually any topic/issue and have their relationship remain relatively intact when it is over (all other things being equal); however, when one or more get off issue and onto personal attacks (in order to "score points"), they will inflict irreparable harm upon each other and upon the relationship.  

What are ego attacks?  Anything that verbally diminishes the value of the other person: sarcasm, hurtful comments regarding appearance, intellect, family heritage, weight, habits, etc., as well as continually dredging up the past in unhealthy ways.  Basically, "You" statements, spoken with anger- "You are so... (fill in the blank)."  The writer of Proverbs says that the power of life and death resides in the tongue and we need to be people who are best known for speaking life into everyone, especially those closest to us.

When I coached debate in the seventies and eighties, I noticed a tendency for the better teams to engage in ego attacks upon their opponents when they sensed that they were losing the round (Sorta like politicians do nowadays).  I told my teams that if I ever saw them doing that, I would forfeit the round and we would go home the losers, even if it were in the state finals.  I wanted them to win on issues- not condescension.  If I felt that strongly about ego attacks in debate, you can imagine my feelings regarding it in marriage and family.

A quarter century ago, we had a young lady come for counseling with anorexia nervosa.  Although she weighed a mere 79 pounds, she saw herself as fat.  She recalled a time when she was eleven years old and her dad- a verbally abusive man- screamed a her: "I don't see what the boys see in you anyway, as fat as you are!!"  Sixteen years later, at 79 pounds, she still clung to her daddy's assessment of her.  Sad isn't it.  The power of life or death resides in the tongue.  I urge you, for the sake of your family, CHOOSE LIFE!!

FALLING DOWN

This is one of those things that, hopefully, you will go a lifetime without EVER needing to employ.  It is ONLY for those times when anger is very obviously about to "take over"- yelling, personal attacks, on the verge of throwing things.  I owe this suggestion, too, to Dr. Paul Faulkner.

When you sense that the anger curve is about to spiral out of control, one of you- it doesn't matter which one- fall out on the floor, limp as a dishrag- wherever you are (You'll only do it in public once- from then on, you'll reserve your spats to the house!).  Now, the other person walks over and lies down on the floor, too- head-to-head with the first person.  Get the picture?  You now have two grown adults lying on the floor, head-to-head, looking at the ceiling, arms outstretched.  NOW, pick up the disagreement wherever you left it when the first one fell to the ground and continue hashing it out (No ego attacks- see previous posts!) and talk it through until both of you feel comfortable getting up.  That's it.  "But, what will the kids think?"  Well, I hope you're not guilty of having arguments with that sort of intensity in front of your kids; however, if you are and you fall down, they'll LOVE it.  They'll be asking you about it, lying beside you, crawling on top of you, and, whatever they do, they'll be SO much more comfortable than they were when things were so intense that they wondered if you were both about to kill each other.

This works when needed for two reasons: it provides a "cooling down" moment.  It's hard to remain as intense as you were when your spouse has just fallen to the floor.  And, when you're "doing battle" you're wanting to see the whites of the "enemy's" eyes.  (In such intense arguments, you're treating your mate like an enemy because you're trying to "win".  Two things to remember at such times: the only enemy is Satan- the one who's wanting to devastate your relationship- are you going to let him win?  And, in these kinds of intense arguments, when one of you "wins", both lose.)  You don't need to see the whites of their eyes.  And falling on the floor allows you to hash things out, without trying to see when you "score a victory", so you both concentrate better on a solution rather than a "win".

More than thirty years ago, I had a couple come for counseling who had gotten into such a fight that they had actually thrown things at each other.  I suggested this exercise because, quite frankly, at that time, it was about the only suggestion I had in my "tool kit".  I saw the couple a few years ago- thirty years of marriage, grown kids, grandkids on the way, elder in the church.  They thanked me for the "falling down" recommendation.  They said that they'd only had to employ it a very few times in three decades, but just knowing they had it as a possibility, helped them keep their disagreements on a healthier level than they had sunk to prior to coming to see me.  SO, it works IF you ever need it.  Hopefully, you never will.