LIFEIN THE REARVIEW MIRROR

My philosophy of life is, “You are born, you die and in between you do something.” While doing that something, you learn something. My posts on this Blog are not attempting to change anybody’s mind. I know I can’t do that, but maybe after my seven decades plus of life experience, I can shed some experiential light on another way to think. Life gives us something to do and I believe a big chunk of my life’s something is giving others something to think about. Think about that.







Sunday, April 19, 2015

LOOKING FORWARD IN THE REARVIEW MIRROR



When I was young (post dinosaur, pre-Disneyland), we had an amusement park in Chicago named Riverview. Riverview was the home of the "Bobs," advertised to be one of the biggest, baddest roller coasters in the world.

Once or twice a year my buddies and I would take the bus to Riverview, spend the day, and come home tired, broke and sick. Ah! the good old days.

I would always ride the monstrous Bobs, not because I enjoyed 11 minutes of sheer terror and having my stomach follow me at a respectful ten feet, but because it was the macho thing to do. (I did say I was there with my buddies, didn't I?)

Climbing into the wildly painted coaster car, I'd make sure I was settled as far back as my anatomy would allow in the well-worn, cracked leather seat stained with sweat and other bodily liquids. I would then jam the safety bar as tightly up to my waist as the other side of my anatomy would allow. Then with the precision of a concert pianist, I would place my clammy digits into the finger indentations chiseled in the bar by thousands of previous macho and femcho thrill seekers. In basically that position, I would ride the fast, foreboding, fearsome Bobs.

Eventually revitalization caught up with the Riverview section of town. No more amusement park, no more Bobs, one more parking lot.

When I reminisce about my Riverview experiences, I realized what a wuss (didn't have that word in those days, but you get the idea) I was. Now, sixty years later sitting in the safety of my home 1300 miles from Chicago, I picture myself riding the Bobs. I picture starting up the first hill, pushing that sissy safety bar away and standing up when we hit the first dip. I'd take my shirt off and wave it wildly in the air screaming, "I'm the king of the world!" during the whole electrifying way down.

That's what I would have done (looking back from my Lazy Boy and knowing I'll never have to ride the Bobs again). But the Bobs are gone and so, thank God, is my opportunity to implement my fantasy.

I think of my love/hate relationship with the Bobs when I hear speakers and writers reveal studies of senior citizen and what they wished they had done in their lives--how they wished they had ridden their "Bobs."

The senior studies ask the question, "If you had your life to live over, what would you do?" The answers are sprinkled with phrases like:
"Be more reflective."
"Take more risks."
"Be relaxed."
"Be silly."
"Make more mistakes."
and of course "Pick more daisies."

I am always intrigued by these revelations. Easy for seniors to say. Seniors are looking back on a life they will never have to live again. Most of them are economically secure, work life is over, kids beyond their influence, finally settled on their last spouse, many friends gone and death is the next big adventure.

Everything older folks say they wish they had done is purely logical and understandable looking BACK on life. Saying, "I should have taken more chances" when you're 85 and the consequence of taking chances no longer exists, is much easier than taking chances at 25 with the consequences of those "chances" looming ahead.

Would I be such a wild and crazy, roller-coaster type guy now if the Bobs still existed, and I was sitting in that wildly-painted car heading up the first hill?

There is a time and a place in our lives for everything. What the younger folks believe makes life worthwhile (accomplishment, challenge and financial security) is as true for them as what older folks believe now would have made their lives more worthwhile when they were younger (taking more risks and making more mistakes).

The secret is to DO what makes you happy WHEN it makes you happy. Don't pick daisies if you would rather work just because some 85-year-old said in 60 years you will be unhappy you didn't pluck daisies or smell roses. As long as the accumulation of wealth makes you happy -- then accumulate wealth. When it stops making you happy -- pick daisies.

What produces unhappy people are people spending their lives not doing what seems right for them at the time, but doing things others believe are right for them.

What older folks who answer those surveys must remember is at 25 life is serious. Young adults are finishing school, finding careers, marriage, kids, etc. Life is much more serious at 25 than 85. Sure, when we turn 85, we will wish we hadn't taken life quite as seriously. But if oldsters hadn't given the life the seriousness it deserved when they were youngsters, would they have the leisure time to sit around and take studies?

While it might seem I'm putting down the results of these studies, I'm not. I believe the messages these studies provide young people are critical reminders that there are options to a life of stress. But, unfortunately, we humans seem hell bent on learning through making our own mistakes. Maybe that's what makes us human. If the human condition does not facilitate our learning effectively from others' experiences, then by default, our learning must come from our own experiences. Our propensity for self-learning may make us human, but it doesn't necessarily make us a smart human. This is a cosmic dirty trick because by learning through our own experiences, the learning comes just after we need it.

-- 

Thursday, April 2, 2015

AN IDEA WHOSE TIME WILL NEVER COME


As I understand the purpose of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, when implemented federally and at the state level, was to protect the freedom of religious people to not be required by law to perform some actions that are against the tenets of his/her religion. Sounds simple enough.

I'm not too sure how it became so complicated and how it could cause such a kerfuffle, but kerfuffle it did.

To my understanding, the law simply means if a Muslim butcher didn't want to be in a position where he is required to sell a customer a pound of pork chops, he doesn't have to. A Jewish delicatessen doesn't have to provide non kosher corned beef if they don't feel right about it. The Amish do not have to provide an LED light on their carriages. Christians do not have to participate in a same sex marriage if they feel that violated their Christians religious beliefs.

The law seems to have worked for Muslims, Jews and Amish, but for the Christians, not so much. (Ask the photographer in New Mexico, the bakery in Colorado and the pizza restaurant in Indiana.) Why- O- Why did the Christians meet a different fate? Because the Christians went up against the most formidable opponent to what would be considered ordinary daily living for 96% of the population of the US. The Christians locked horns with a wee percent of the population with a humongous voice---the LGBT community.

The best intentions, and the inclusiveness of this law for all minorities, for media purposes became distilled into, "Christians discriminating against Gays and Lesbians."

As is becoming abundantly clear in the United States of America today, 73% of the US population describing themselves as Christians seem very willing to turn the other cheek and have who they are allowed or required to do business with dictated by 4% of the population describing themselves as LGB or T? The RFRA may be a perfectly good law, although like many other laws probably unnecessary, but it has been hijacked by the mini minority.

Let's look at it this way. The government is a business (I know that drives a certain element of our society nuts when you call government a business, but that's a topic for another Blog) The leader of the government "business" is the President. He makes a decree that there shall be no discrimination of any kind in his business. He is the head honcho, and that's his decision to make. The photographer running the shop in New Mexico says she doesn’t wish to participate in a SS marriage to the degree she would have to in order to fulfill her contract. She's the head honcho and that's her decision to make--wait, not so fast. The decision in the US today as to who the picture lady must take pictures of is made by the head of the government business. Doesn't really sound logical does it?

We know the SS couple in New Mexico who came to the Christian photographer to provide photos for their wedding could have gone across the street and found a photographer that would have gladly accommodated them. The SS couple didn't want the photos, they wanted an issue.

When discussing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act on Facebook, a comment was,"Bigotry & hatefulness have no place in a civilized society. Anyone ever hear of "Live and Let Live." That is certainly a noble ideal, but the point is, who are we going to "Live and Let Live," the minority or the person with religious beliefs? Somebody is always going to feel, and actually be, discriminated against.

What do we do if we have a sign in our store that says, "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service," and in comes a person with none of the required apparel. I guess we can ask him to leave. What if our half- clothed brethren is gay and demands to be served? A "Gun Free Zone" and a pair of pistol-packing lesbians show up. Unless the store owner wishes to spend the next few months/years fighting a law suit and potentially losing the business, what can he do? Has the US now gotten to the point where we have different "rights" depending on whom we sleep with?

Most of the recent hoopla has been generated by the gay lobby, and maybe if they were the only perceived set upon group of people we could handle it, but we have to understand there are also discrimination laws on the books regarding these other "Protected Classes:" race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, pregnancy, citizenship, familial status, disability, veteran status, and genetic information. Every living being will or is currently, in some protected class!

How about this for an idea, rather than jump through hoops trying to decide who we should :"Live and Let Live," who
businesses can and can not discriminate against, given that everybody is some kind of minority, let's ELIMINATE ALL LAWS AGAINT DISCRIMINATION in a business and let the free market do it's thing. If a private sector business doesn't wish to serve a certain segment of society that will be to their business and personal detriment, but in a truly free society, it has to be the business owners decision.

I guess maybe the answer to why we get so tied up debating issues like the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and why we will never eliminate discrimination laws is We are not a free society. We like to say we are, and our Founding Fathers tried to get us as close as human nature would allow to personal freedom, but with freedom comes work and self responsibility, two of the very elements our leaders, in their quest for power and control, are slowly but surely wresting away from us.

Anti-Discrimination laws, Unions and rabbit ear TV antennas at one time served a purpose and served us well. That was then, this is now.