CHANGE-REAL AND IMAGINARY

CHANGE IS A LAW OF LIFE*

     Some change is more difficult to abide. The change to Cambria's rare Monterey Pine forest is heart breaking and so too is big change in a little church.

   Slopes of the Santa Lucia Mountains, hill sides and canyons display the unmistakable damage, wrought by drought, disease and management practices. It is sad to see though a reminder of the tenuous grasp of life and health.

AN IMAGINARY TALE OF 

NOT SO IMAGINARY CHANGE

     Imagine a small town rich with diversity of intellect, life experience and birthright. Picture a charming little church where people of all sorts gather in friendship. This is a cast of actors who represent a cross section of ideas, politics, influence, economic profiles, levels of education and attitudes. 

      See this extended family stand by each other in good times and bad. They celebrate together and they comfort each other as they mourn. They know they have their differences, in the secular world, even in theology, but it is their unity and family which holds them together, so they may grow as people and believers. And they do.

      Then a Pastor tells them a danger is lurking. It is the danger of homosexuality and forces in the larger church and world who advocate for equality and full human dignity. But  gay and lesbian people are sinners he says and the church should take a stand. 

       A division shakes the happy family. Some protest that all people are God's children, made in God's image. Others act as sheriffs "enforcing" the Bible. Whispering begins. Distortions are spread. Friendships unravel. Couples quarrel. The men who wrote the Bible are on the most quoted list. Others say look to what Jesus said and did. The Bible becomes a tool of verbal warfare. People are sickened, sad, angry. There is no joy in the once happy little church. Some depart. Others warrior on, convinced they must take what is left of the little church to a new order where gays and lesbians absolutely will not be permitted to be a preacher.

        One group says all humans deserve dignity to teach and preach and be regarded as fully human and equal. They say it is good to have a diversity of view and to discuss and debate even our deepest beliefs. Another group says no, those are progressive ideas, we are meant to be bound by the authority of the word.  Which word, the others ask, which interpretation, which translation? The words of Paul and other men or the words of Jesus? And so it goes.

        This imaginary little church learns about change.

       

       Droughts of spirit and love, disease of anger, fear and management practices must also affect imaginary little churches.

       Change is hard. Sometimes imagination can help. 

*John F. Kennedy is credited with the quotation. The complete sentence is "Change is a law of life and those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future."

    

     See you down the trail.

WHAT IS LIFE?

DEFINITIONS OF LIFE

   Do you think it is possible to reach a place in the progression of human life where we cease to be human? That begs a number of questions, not the least of which is what is a human being?

    Nicholas Wade wrote in the New York Times of a call by eminent biologists to stop the use of genome editing that could change how human DNA is inherited. While it might cure genetic diseases it could also be used to change qualities like intelligence, physical development and more.

The scientists are concerned the technique will be used before the human race understands the ethical challenges such technology presents. Remember the old potboiler The Boys From Brazil? Imagine the bruisers the NFL could breed, for example!

     This exciting new science develops as humans continue to demonstrate a propensity to screw up and to exercise lack of judgement.

     A lawyer in Huntington Beach is a poster child of such.

Matt McLaughlin has proposed a California ballot proposition that would authorize the killing of gays and lesbians. It's a case that tests limits of free speech, but has caused a reaction that questions why can't something that would be illegal be stopped.  In the meantime some are trying to get McLaughlin disbarred. 

     So, back to the rise of amazing and fantastic science and the potential of human idiots and miscreants to get their hands on such. 

    We should never halt the progress of advancing knowledge, but we have probably reached a cross roads where ethics and implications need to be studied and weighed more arduously than ever.

     We are flirting with cyborgs as we implant new knees, shoulders, hips, heart valves and etc. A chip, placed in the brain to limit the effect of a neural and muscular disorder is a wonder, and so too is the potential of similar procedures to halt dementia. But is there a point at which we change what it means to be human?  This question is probably more relevant when considering artificial intelligence, though we are beginning to blur the lines and draw more closely to a change in the evolution of human life. Biology and nanotechnology present us with new horizons.

      There are bright minds and deep thinkers among us and they are pondering what used to be the stuff of science fiction and fantasy.  Do you think the balance of humanity is up for such deep thinking? Or are we populated by larger numbers who would rather prioritize their own desire to live longer, or to birth beautiful children, or create NBA superstars who can fly, or breed warriors who fight wars with unending force, etc?  What do you think? How should we enter this future?

POTPOURRI
An oddball assortment of images stuck in the corner file

 Spring fresh

   Palm Springs Patio mellow

  Patience at Lampton Cliff

   Hearst Castle via telephoto

 Barrel Room setting for a Zin Fest Weekend Winemakers Dinner at Le Vigne

  Wow & delicious!  

   See you down the trail.

ANOTHER TAKE ON MIKE WALLACE & BIRDS ON A LINE

  MIKE WALLACE AND THE HOMOSEXUALS

     I heard from readers after my Monday post on Mike Wallace. Some of you took me to task for my praise of his
contribution to American broadcast journalism.  Here's a 
portion of an email-

"You forgot to mention how he set back gay rights with his 1967 special The Homosexuals.  By the time he was done with the special which featured a doctor who stated the homosexuality was a choice and that they could never be happy....a number of parents stopped supporting their gay children, threw many of their own kids out and many gay adults lost their jobs.  At the time Mike Wallace associated socially with gay people including long time partners.  This was a news man who used sensationalism at the time to gain viewers.

He never countered that original show.  Later he said that he had made a bad judgment call.  That was it."

   And another:

"The old toughie is probably laughing

that he's getting a pass on some of his

outrageous sensationalism.  Look at 

how he bashed gays.  Think you could

broadcast that kind of stuff today?"

     I either forgot about the broadcast, or never saw it.  The piece, which aired in 1967, has a legacy and even has

a significant Wikipedia link and other commentary.

     One source has edited portions of the broadcast and

posted a short YouTube video.

        A virtue of this means of communication is the quickness of response, the depth of research accessible with only key strokes and the value of conversation.  So I amend my thought's on Wallace by expanding it to include this post.

I hope this now broadens the view and achieves more balance.

       It will be interesting to see how CBS handles it on their

60 Minutes broadcast on Sunday.

DAY BOOK

RIDING OUT THE STORM
The birds have created an interesting profile.

See you down the trail.