This is being written offline…

Jesse, I find it difficult to fathom that you can somehow think that, as Christians, our only responsibility is to introduce people to Jesus. If you follow that thought process to its logical conclusion, I should carry a Bible and a Glock 9mm, and get everyone I meet saved, and then promptly put a bullet in their head, so that they can go be with Jesus. I know that everyone would agree that is ludicrous and asinine, correct? I’m not saying that an inability to meet physical needs should prevent us from meeting spiritual needs, but meeting physical needs is highly important.

Yes, Jesus only fed crowds twice, but he also met physical needs in other ways, and showed that having your physical needs met is important.

Some examples:

Matthew 12:1 At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain and eat them. When the Pharisees saw this, they said to him, "Look! Your disciples are doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath." He answered, "Haven't you read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? He entered the house of God, and he and his companions ate the consecrated bread--which was not lawful for them to do, but only for the priests.

Why would Jesus disciples need to eat? They had Jesus, in the flesh nonetheless, so why were they picking grain? Because they were hungry. Jesus encouraged the behavior, too!

Mathew 8:23 Then he got into the boat and his disciples followed him. Without warning, a furious storm came up on the lake, so that the waves swept over the boat. But Jesus was sleeping. The disciples went and woke him, saying, "Lord, save us! We're going to drown!" He replied, "You of little faith, why are you so afraid?" Then he got up and rebuked the winds and the waves, and it was completely calm.

Why didn’t Jesus let them drown? They had Jesus, so why would they need to be saved from a physical calamity when they had their spiritual needs met?

Mark 5:21 When Jesus had again crossed over by boat to the other side of the lake, a large crowd gathered around him while he was by the lake. Then one of the synagogue rulers, named Jairus, came there. Seeing Jesus, he fell at his feet and pleaded earnestly with him, "My little daughter is dying. Please come and put your hands on her so that she will be healed and live." So Jesus went with him.
A large crowd followed and pressed around him. And a woman was there who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years. She had suffered a great deal under the care of many doctors and had spent all she had, yet instead of getting better she grew worse. When she heard about Jesus, she came up behind him in the crowd and touched his cloak, because she thought, "If I just touch his clothes, I will be healed." Immediately her bleeding stopped and she felt in her body that she was freed from her suffering. At once Jesus realized that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked, "Who touched my clothes?" "You see the people crowding against you," his disciples answered, "and yet you can ask, `Who touched me?'" But Jesus kept looking around to see who had done it. Then the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came and fell at his feet and, trembling with fear, told him the whole truth. He said to her, "Daughter, your faith has healed you. Go in peace and be freed from your suffering."

Why did Jesus heal that woman? He could have simply granted her eternal salvation and let her continue to suffer, right? Her spiritual needs would have been met. But Jesus wasn’t content with that. He wanted the woman to have peace and to be freed from her suffering. He was in the process of giving life and life more abundantly.

AC 4:32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

Did you catch that? They were testifying to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, but… look… “no needy persons [were] among them”! Could it be that they were actually meeting people’s needs, both physical and spiritual?

If you can still tell me, Jesse, that people need Jesus only, with nothing done to improve their immediate condition, I’ll continue to post things like this. There is plenty more in the Bible about this.

Twice. Twice. Jesus feeds the crowd two times in the entire Bible. So because of those two accounts, do you assume that every time Jesus taught people, he fed them as well? I don't see that recounted anywhere else in the Bible except for those two times. Jesus gave the people what they needed anywhere he went, but he didn't feed every single person he spoke to or even every person that followed Him. So we should do differently? If we can't feed the hungry, we can't make tell them what Jesus did, cuz then we're hypocrites? I don't think so. We have one need (We including me, you, all christians, all non-christians). We need the saving grace of Jesus Christ. If I don't ever breathe again, that's okay. I'll be all right in the end. If I never eat another morsel, but am saved by the only one who can do so, then "it's all gravy." You tell me I need food. I say you are quite wrong. I need nothing else, the people of the world need nothing else, you need nothing other than the saving grace of Jesus Christ. To disagree is to say that his grace is not sufficient.

2 Corinthians 12:9 - but He said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness."

Just to clarify: I meant for Jonny Boy to give a prostitute money, but not in exchange for her services. :)

Bye Kairsie....

Hehe. Kairsie being all social activist... boycotting the discussion of social activism. lol.

I am boycotting this blog until it returns to it's origional purpose.

Whoo hoo! Jon's getting a prostitute! (just kidding!)

But seriously, I have thought about how many little gadgets and toys that I have and don't NEED in the sense that they are essential to survival. But, these toys sometimes make me a more efficient person. Cell phone, car, laptop. I wouldn't die if I lost these, but I would be a less effective person. I own a (as Shauna would say) "million dollar bass," but I use it for ministry. I could sell all I have and give to the poor, but I haven't felt God calling me to do that. I hope if I do hear Him say that I will answer.

Carrie: I don't want to get in to the whole "war" thing right now. Read my old blog archives for my opinion. You're right that welfare doesn't work, but we need something that will make a difference in these people's lives.

Jesse: I have to strongly disagree with your post saying that Jesus is all people need. Yes, Jesus is the most important thing people need, but they have very real, very present, very physical needs as well. Even Jesus didn't offer Jesus without meeting people's needs. Look at Mark 8:1. Jesus wouldn't send the crowd home without feeding them. Often Jesus' ministry centered on meeting people's physical needs. And look at James 2:14. What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that--and shudder. You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?

Hmmm. You said "Maybe you think that sharing the gospel with someone without providing earthly "needs" is hypocritical." Yes. I absolutely do think it's hypocritical, and the Bible teaches that it is, too.

Jesse: Short of a miracle, people DO NEED to eat. Otherwise they die. Now, we could say, "Let's just bring them to knowledge and acceptance of Jesus's saving grace, and that's all they need, because when they die of hunger, drug overdose, etc., they'll at least go to heaven," and to an extent, that would be true. In which case, quit your job, stop eating, and for that matter, stop breathing too because you don't really need to breathe, right? I say...er...type this because I think that you misinterpreted my comment about needing to eat. My point was that we can share Jesus with the urban (and even the non-urban) poor in our country, and that is truly their primary need, but if we don't teach them a new way to live, how likely is it that anything will change? As Jon said, "I agree with Carrie that what people need is Jesus. As someone once put it, "A bowl of rice is not a substitute for the Holy Spirit," i.e. the Social Gospel without the Gospel doesn't work. But the bringing the Gospel without working towards societal change doesn't work, either. We can promise people a better life in the hereafter, but Jesus wants to see people living life "more abundantly." Living in a run down crackhouse, selling your body to buy food does not qualify as life to the full."

Re: Jon: "You should sell your new camera and give the money to a prostitute. "

My sister, do you understand what you're insinuating with that comment? heheheh *wink*


And Re: "Those people need Jesus, but they also need to eat."

While I'd like to be like some others and say I agree with everyone with everything they have to say, I completely disagree with this statement. You do not NEED your car. You do not NEED a house. These people do not NEED food. I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to provide these people with such things, but, in an eternal perspective (which every Christian should have), there is only ONE thing that anyone needs, and that's the saving grace of Jesus Christ. If you can't provide a single meal for someone, but can show them that God loves them anyway and thus influence them to accept JC in their hearts, then they have everything they need.

Maybe you think that sharing the gospel with someone without providing earthly "needs" is hypocritical. But I say that being unable to provide earthly "necessities" for a person or group of people should never keep you from going to them and telling them what Jesus did for them. Sometimes you just don't have the resources to feed 35,378 people that need to hear the gospel. So does that mean that you don't go to those people because you can't feed that many?

I had something else to say, but I haven't gotten much sleep this week and I can feel my brain faltering. I'm just donkeying about I guess.

YAY! Half day of work today!!!! Thank you everyone last night for some exciting bunny-age. Keep an eye out for bunny-wear so we can start our underground bunny ring. I'm sorry Shauna and sister for popping my vein at you, and everyone for being so anal. Next time, just tell me this: "It doesn't matter in light of eternity! Get over it!"

Mexican tonight possibly.....

Violet bunnies today...

Cute extra puppy at home...

Pa-king-wow!...

WELCOME HOME, RACHEL! :)

Jon: You should sell your new camera and give the money to a prostitute.

I don't think anyone has ever said that we should turn our ears away from the cries of the poor and oppressed.... Isn't that what we were saying about education (formal or not)?

Wow. We need more missionaries in our country. Big time. People God has called and provided support for to work in seemingly hopeless places with people in seemingly hopeless situations. This has just reminded me how important state-side missions is. Why do so many people think that "go" means "go over the ocean?" Sad. We need help. Man, I wish I could do that...not need a paycheck. But I'm reminded, also, of how much my kids need me where I am. I'm going to miss them next year.... :(

Jon: Re: "I'll tell you where the money is. $3.9 BILLION dollars PER MONTH to maintain a military presence in Iraq." Your comment made me think of something: Ok...not that I necessarily agree with the Iraq issue, but let's just keep in mind....what if our good friend Saddam did have WMDs, and what if we didn't invest the funds necessary to find them and to shut him down....what if we invested all that money into education, and what if he blew us all up anyway? Just a thought.

Yeah, it's all about Jesus. But for right now, there are people--all over the world, not just in our nation--whose lives are, for lack of a better term because it's 1:21am, crappy. Those people need Jesus, but they also need to eat. Hm... I guess we could debate these issues for hours, days, years on end, but--really--that would have been wasted time if we're not actually doing anything. The best thing about all of this is the fact that, despite our differing proposed solutions, we're all looking for the same thing. Jon and Jamie care enough to be passionate because we're talking about lives here. I dunno...I'm kinda rambling...It's so easy to philosophize, and "politicize," but are we walking our talk? Maybe you are. Maybe you aren't. I have no idea, and I'm not the judge, anyway. My problem is that I tend to walk the fence. I wimp out when it comes to making a decision as to where exactly I stand on various issues, perhaps because making a decision would require research (I refuse to make ignorant decisions when it comes to things like these), and doing the research requires time and energy....and there will always be someone better informed than I am anyway, but that's a pathetic excuse. I guess maybe what I'm getting at is that we should let this be a challenge to each one of us to find out what we believe and why, be well-informed so as to intelligently and adequately defend our positions, and then to do more than merely speak them. Be a doer.
Wow, I'm tired.
(The bunnies wore me out!)

How the heck did this go from the random blog to the debate blog? Jaron come save this place!!!!!!!!!

"Yes, the answer is education. But where's the money?" I'll tell you where the money is. $3.9 BILLION dollars PER MONTH to maintain a military presence in Iraq. That would fix up a good number of schools, make the student/teacher ratios more healthy, and in general improve society. I'm not trying to muddy the waters here by bringing up the whole war issue, it's a mite superfluous to this debate. BUT, the point is, the money exists. Yes we're in a recession, blah blah blah, but if we were to appropriate the funding we ALREADY have towards good uses, it would actually make a difference. But Republicans don't want to come off as soft on crime or distributing handouts. They need to learn that sometimes a "hand-up" has to first come in the form of a "hand-out." And sometimes the only way to prevent a young urban delinquent from becoming a career criminal is rehabilitation, not incarceration. Welfare doesn't work, but turning our ears away from the cries of the poor and oppressed works far less.

I agree with Carrie that what people need is Jesus. As someone once put it, "A bowl of rice is not a substitute for the Holy Spirit," i.e. the Social Gospel without the Gospel doesn't work. But the bringing the Gospel without working towards societal change doesn't work, either. We can promise people a better life in the hereafter, but Jesus wants to see people living life "more abundantly." Living in a run down crackhouse, selling your body to buy food does not qualify as life to the full. The underclass in our society needs our attention. We can continue rolling up the windows of our BMWs for only so long.

(welcome home, Rachel)

I just got off the phone with Danricc/Daniel/Degryn. I wish I wasn't working right now so I could help defend him against Ruthy and Stephanie. Sometimes working bites. But I have money in my bank account. Is it worth it? I can't tell.

I think this argum...er....intellectual debate is fun! :) You can debate all you want, just not on my blog. :)

Jesse: I'd just like to point out that the "attacking" definitely went both ways.

Jon (& Jamie): So if everything sucks so much, what's the solution? It's so easy to become fatalistic when this issue surfaces, especially as a teacher. Yes, the answer is education. But where's the money? Whether we like it or not, education requires funding. Lots of it. I'd love to be able to work with five students at a time, but that means schools need tons more teachers. That means teachers' salaries will be cut. That means unless one is independently wealthy and need not actually survive on a meager salary (as if our salaries aren't meager enough as it is!), a great teacher who actually has the passion and vision and intelligence and endurance to truly teach might be forced to seek other employment. That means schools are more likely to become filled with sub-par teachers who teach only because that's the best they can do. It's a vicious cycle. Maybe someday educators will get the respect they deserve.... Ok. I'm done.

[Editors note: I wrote this offline before I saw Jon's response to Jesse. I only saw it when I came in to post this entry]

Oh my...its worse then I thought. :) Where do I start...I guess I will address this one point at a time. By the way...sorry for the length...my juices must be flowing today. :)


"...a discussion stops being an "intellectual debate" when it becomes emotional"
--Hmm. First off, I don't know that you can say it became emotional. But for the sake of discussion, I will temporarily grant you the benefit of the doubt. I believe I disagree with you. Those are the best intellectual debates. Those topics that cause deep emotion are the topics that produce our best debating.


"The "discussion" you and Jon are having over this blog right now has, at least on your part, become emotional..."
--Again, hmmm. I don't concede that it has become especially emotional or even if it has, that it is a bad thing. I have emotions. When I think a incorrect mindset is keeping people in bondage, you bet I'm gonna be a little emotional. That is precisely why I took the time to respond to Jon's email. But it doesn't mean that it isn't an intellectual debate. But I digress...onto the next point.


"Try rereading your post that begins by attacking Jon's reaction by calling it predictable. Pay special attention to the tone of the entry."
--Sure I called it 'predictable'. It was predictable. I could have told you in a heart beat what he was gonna say. How does that make it NOT an intellectual debate? And what's with "attacking"? I was simply responding to Jon's post. You see...its exactly what I am trying to say. People can't have disagreements without using negative words like "Attack". I was simply putting forth the idea that I saw Jon's post as predictable. The point of view that he put forward was the same point that he made to me last time we had this discussion. He could call MY response 'predictable' too I suppose. Neither Jon nor I are gonna change what we believe every other day. We have had this discussion before. I have heard that point of view a hundred times in discussions of this issue. That’s why its predictable. And what was my "tone"? I think he is mistaken. That was the "tone" that was supposed to come through. I hope it came through loud and clear. Jon thinks the same of my opinion. So what...?


"Do you not sense the righteous indignation? The anger? The frustration?"
--I hope you do! That’s exactly what I had! I do have all of those things when I hear points of view being espoused that I think are harmful to people. That is precisely why I responded. Again, your premise is faulty, I believe. I don't believe those things are mutually exclusive with intellectual debate and disagreement.


"This results in attacks, like yours, against individuals and their opinions."
--This is just incorrect. I didn't 'attack' anybody. Telling somebody that you believe they are wrong does not constitute attacking them. If I were to tell Jon that HE was too dumb to understand my arguments, that would be an attack. Telling Jon that his ARGUMENTS are dumb, is not. I certainly did attack his opinions, but I did not attack him. You know....I think therein lies the rub. I think we are living in a society where everybody is afraid to tell someone they are wrong. We live in a hyper sensitive culture where telling someone you think they are wrong is seen as close-minded and bigoted. I am not referring directly to you, Jesse, anymore. :) I am now making a comment on society at large. Being open-minded and having freedom of speech should not mean that I can't tell someone they are wrong.


"I would like to request that you take some time to calm down before your next post..."
--I am quite calm....


"...just maybe, you'll be able to express your opinions objectively without calling Jon ignorant."
--If you would kindly reread the post, you will see that I called the COMMENT ignorant, not Jon. I called it a few other things too while I was at it...namely racist, but I digress. :)


Now...for all of you who are new to intellectual debate, as well as those in Miami-Dade county, the above was an example of intellectual debate and disagreement with my dear friend Jesse. I do not hate Jesse. I did not 'attack' Jesse. I simply informed Jesse (and the rest of the world) why I feel he is incorrect on some things.

Class dismissed.

I *gasp* totally agree with Jamie. It's a miracle.

Intellectual debate is vital, and if intellectual debate isn't passionate, it's not worth having. I'm very glad Jamie believes in what he says (even if he's wrong) enough to become emotional about it. You're right, Jesse, that sometimes emotions can hamper someone's ability to think rationally, but I can think rationally about dealing with the underclass and still be passionate about it. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was intensely emotional in his struggle for the rights of his people. But he was also logical and pragmatic. I think it's unhealthy if things get personal, i.e. "Not only are your arguments stupid but your underwear smells bad," but it's equally unhealthy to not be passionate.

(BTW, I thought Jamie's reply was level headed. Incorrect, but level headed.)

I'm sorry Jamie, but apparently you and I have different views as to what constitutes an "intellectual debate." I support discussion over matters such as these, and believe it to be extremely healthy. The only way to verify our own opinions is to run them against those of someone else. But I believe that such a discussion stops being an "intellectual debate" when it becomes emotional. The "discussion" you and Jon are having over this blog right now has, at least on your part, become emotional. Try rereading your post that begins by attacking Jon's reaction by calling it predictable. Pay special attention to the tone of the entry. Do you not sense the righteous indignation? The anger? The frustration? I would never refer to such a post as "level headed." When emotions get involved in such an issue, you begin to lose objectivity and, in turn, clarity of thought. This results in attacks, like yours, against individuals and their opinions. I would like to request that you take some time to calm down before your next post so that maybe, just maybe, you'll be able to express your opinions objectively without calling Jon ignorant.

I have a question...can someone please help me understand...why do people react so much to honest disagreement and discussion. As soon as Jon or I (or anyone, but it seems to be us most often :) ) disagree with each other and begin to discuss something, everyone runs for the hills saying "why can't we all get along!". Its like people have an allergic reaction when people start to have an intellectual disagreement. If you believe in something and someone posts something that disagrees with it, why wouldn't you tell him why you think he is wrong? I got it Jesse...maybe your spots were an allergic reaction to some intellectual disagreement you overheard!?!

And no Jesse, its not mucho defensivo.... its called intellectual debate.

(You know what I think this deserves a longer discussion..people's aversion to disagreement...check my blog sometime. maybe i'll say more on this topic.)

And also...what is so unrandom about discussing poverty and how to eliminate it. I thought the idea of a random blog was so anyone can post anything they want... Just because I am not going on and on about some stupid bunnies....man! ;)

Now I feel bad putting something lighthearted here... and I feel guilty complaining about that... yuck.

But, just so you know, the bunnies are running rampant tonight at my sister's house :) . 8ish i think?

Perhaps my response was predictable because the problem is so systemic.

There's no need to repeat yourself. I read you clearly the first time. And I quote, "We live in a country where if someone is willing to work hard, just about anyone can pull themselves up by their bootstraps and make something of themselves."

That's a blatant lie. The poor in our country (especially those who are of a minority ethnicity) have been so brutally ignored by society at large that there are virtually no options left for them. They can't go to college because they can't read because the wonderful public education system has screwed them over. They can't get a job because they don't have a college degree. They have no transportation. They have no health insurance. They have no options. What's your solution, Jamie? Would your company hire a homeless man? No, of course not. He's not qualified. Whose fault is it that he's not qualified? His own? I doubt it. He learned it from his father, who learned it from his father, who learned it from his father, all the way back to slavery, where black people learned what white people (who hold the power in this country) really thought of them. Can the cycle be broken? It most certainly can be. But how exactly do you plan on providing a bootstrap? "[G]o find somebody that hasn't been as blessed as you, and start helping them to understand the power of education, how to be responsible in holding down a job, and be there to provide the viewpoint that they way out isn't more government programs, but in learning how to provide for oneself." They understand the power of education, and understand that they don't have access to it. They could be responsible and hold down a job... if they had access to a job. And they do provide for themselves. By stealing your wallet, stealing your car, selling your children drugs. It's their only option right now. Welfare certainly hasn't changed it, but I haven't seen anything else that made a dent.

(Oh, and before you dismiss that article as liberal propaganda, look at who wrote it.)

Wow Jamie... mucho defensivo... At this point I would like to take Kairsie's suggestion and run with it....

Random random random unrandom random!!!

Did you guys know that if you make a rat addicted to morphine and then use a drug to put it into withdrawal, it shows the same effects as a menopausal woman having a hot flash? Pretty cool, huh?

By the way my bunnies are growing tomorrow, but the new bunnies are being put into quarantine until August 6th. *big big big smile*



(^) (^)
. o
\____/

Jon's reaction is to my comments is so predictable. I should have warned you all. As soon as someone mentions that perhaps the "urban poor" (which is a pretty narrow view of who the poor are in our country, by the way) might be better off if they were given BOOTSTRAPS instead of HANDOUTS, liberals assume that you are calling the poor in our country lazy or something. Do I need to repeat myself!? The poor in our country are not all that way becuase the are LAZY! For crying out loud. The knee jerk reaction that you get from some people regarding this issue...!

There are some in this country, however, who believe the poor in our country would be better off being able to provide for themselves then being dependent on somebody else. Am I saying that they have an easy situation? No. Am I saying that we should just totally eliminate all of welfare? No...of course not. But if Christians would come alongside the poor and help them get educated, learn how the economic system works in this country, teach them many of the things that many of us learned growing up, INSTEAD of supporting institutions that only further this crippling dependance on others, many people would be better off.

So, get off your pulpit, go find somebody that hasn't been as blessed as you, and start helping them to understand the power of education, how to be responsible in holding down a job, and be there to provide the viewpoint that they way out isn't more government programs, but in learning how to provide for oneself.

And this racist comment that if you are a white, middle class person you somehow are unable to dialogue about issues that affect the poor is just ignorant.

Last night's round of bunnies was so unbelievably exciting (and irascible)! It was me and 7 girls (woohoo!), all of which cute, and all of which with cute, fluffy bunnies for me to destroy. Mwahahahahaha...

Oh, and get this: I went out with Shauna! It was great! She's like, so awesome. We went out, and then we were all like, "this is nice." Then we hugged and went back in again. It was good while it lasted! I think that we've decided to "just be friends" for a while, and while that's semi-disappointing, I understand that our friendship is something of immense value, and therefore I appreciate it greatly-ful.

Worms, worms, worms. All over the place! Who opened up that can? Oh, that's right. It was me. :) I have to admit that it's kinda fun to watch Jamie and Jon go at it.
Jamie: You're just jealous because you have no bunny experience. You could join us for our post-fusion killer bunny gaming if you'd like. Then you'll see just how great those bunnies are. I love those bunnies....*Sigh*
Shauna: I don't know your phone number! :( Call my cell: 610-914-3925

Jon: Oops. Sorry about the h. I don't know how I did that. I NEVER spell you're name with an h. Please accept my deepest apologies.

Jon (and everyone else for that matter): Let's get one thing straight about the "stupid story"..... I never said I agreed with it. Nor did I say that I disagree. I just thought it'd be interesting to read everyone's responses. Ok? Ok.

Dude, you guys this blog is supposed to be for randomness. Why don't ya'll create a shared blog just for debates *cough*jonandjamie*cough*.

So then the bunny said to the rat "at least they don't kill you just for your feet, they kill you cause you're a nusiance"

Well, Jon, that's an article worth reading. But I want to know what YOU are going to do about such an issue. Are you going to institute tutoring programs in your church to help inner-city kids? Are you going to assist inner-city schools financially outside of taxes? We, as simple human beings, always face the self-proposed question: "I'm just one person. What can I do about it?" My guess is that you are considering a response related to affecting the government through a change in voting style or political alignment, but do you really believe that we can confront such issues only through the government via voting and political support?

I agree with Harold when he states that education is the most important key to overcoming poverty. At this point in my life, though, I have a hard time seeing a part that I can play in such an issue. I hope that some day the Lord will put me in a place where I can truly make a difference directly, but until then I educate myself in preparation for educating others. This, then, is the part that I play now while you debate between two governmental parties that both have severe shortcomings. To claim that a Republican vote or a Democratic vote is always the best choice is foolishness. One should only vote based on the goals and qualities of a candidate him(or her)self.

Okay, so it has become obvious that I have little experience in discussing politics, but I think I may have brought up a good point or two. Forgive my ramblings (I blame it on the seeming "disconnectedness" of the article presented and the issue being discussed.).

Normally I wouldn't post such a lengthy article up here, but since Blogger is paying for both storage space and server bandwidth, I don't really mind.

I dare whoever's on this blog to read this article. And I dare you to read it with a mindset that is outside of your privileged, white, middle-class paradigm. Understand that you don't understand the issues here - you can't even begin to relate. So before you try to perpetuate this caste system we have in America, get your facts straight.

---------------------------------------------------------

(cornerstonemag.com) What If There Are No Bootstraps?
An Interview With Leon Dash About His Book, "Rosa Lee"
By Chris Harold


Rosa Lee is the story of a woman who upon first glance personifies every stereotype regarding inner-city poverty. Washington Post reporter Leon Dash deals straightforwardly with many of the stereotypes without himself falling into an ideological category. Dash, who won a Pulitzer for the book, followed Rosa Lee and her family for four years, hunting for clues in the world of the inner-city underclass.

Dash follows Rosa’s day-to-day struggles and traces her family history; what he finds is fascinating and heartbreaking. Rosa Lee’s grandparents carry their bottom-rung social status and their sense of racially-limited options with them to Washington, D.C., where they seek to escape the harsh life of North Carolina sharecroppers. Uneducated and unskilled, menial labor and domestic work are their only means of survival and the grandparents pass this emphasis on to their children. The cycle continues as Rosetta, Rosa Lee’s mother, “educates” her daughter by preparing her to survive the only way she’s ever known, teaching her to wash, cook and clean. Dash thus follows an unbroken line of poverty up from the South into the vastly different circumstances of Rosa Lee’s life in the inner city.

Rosa Lee refuses the path of domestic work because she is unwilling and afraid to be at the whims of white employers. Then, acting in part out of adolescent rebellion, she becomes pregnant with her first child, Bobby, at fourteen. She has another, Ronnie, at fifteen, and then marries at sixteen. The marriage lasts only four months. In all, she has eight children by six different men. She begins shoplifting as a way to have nice things she can’t afford. Her first contact with drugs is also the result of needing money. Of her eight children, two —Eric and Alvin—somehow escape their mother’s legacy; all the others follow her into drug dependence (Rosa Lee is a heroin addict), criminality, poverty, and in the case of her eldest son and daughter, the contraction of HIV. Her oldest son, Bobby, dies of it. Finally, in 1995, so does Rosa.


In all this horror, Dash’s book shows the mystery of sin and responsibility as it works its way through generations. That Rosa Lee and her family were sinned against is evident in Dash’s tracing of the family’s roots (the discovery, for instance, that Rosa Lee’s older sister was conceived when her sharecropper mother was raped by a white overseer). Yet equally clear is that Rosa Lee also bears responsibility for her choices. As our understanding of Rosa Lee as a human being deepens, the inevitable questions come. We interviewed Leon Dash and asked him some of these questions.


Did your greatest shock come over Rosa involving her own children in crime?


Well, I was familiar with the oldest child in an underclass family becoming part of the parents’ criminal activity, or providing money for the family by some illegal means with no questions asked by the parents. But all of Rosa Lee’s children were brought into her criminal activity. It was for what she always called “survival.” Rosa, for instance, would buy a brick of marijuana and her children, right on down to the youngest, would sit around the kitchen table and cut this brick into what is called “dime bags.”


And you found this to be true of other families, this passing on of criminal behavior?


Yes. It’s part of the Urban Institute’s definition of the underclass, that the criminal behavior is generational.

But you say Rosa Lee would call this her way to survive. Did her government assistance fall short?

I knew from a past project I had done on teen pregnancy that welfare assistance is not enough to cover the necessities of life. I had seen firsthand that these families on welfare would regularly have no food in the house by the end of the month. This was also true for Rosa Lee and her family.


If the government made you poverty czar with full authority to change things from the ground up, what would be the first thing you would change?


Education is the single most important thing. It has not been working and this is not just a blip in history. Rosa Lee went to school in the 1940s. She, her children, grandchildren, and now her great-grandchildren have not gotten an education that would help them. Three of her five grandchildren can’t read. Rosa Lee dropped out of school in the seventh grade because she was pregnant. But pregnancy aside, could she do seventh grade work? No. She couldn’t even read. The problem is that the educational system is approaching children from the inner city in a conventional manner, attempting to teach these kids as if they were kids from middle-class schools. The educators refuse to deal with the real educational difficulties these kids bring with them to school.


How would you deal with it?

First, you can’t put a teacher in a classroom with thirty aggressive, attacking, and profane kids and expect that teacher to teach. You have this middle-class teacher in with these kind of kids and they just drive her nuts. So, instead, have only five kids with a teacher. You must provide a situation where learning can actually happen and not just a teacher being the sergeant administering discipline and keeping order. And I mean this has to happen starting in kindergarten, not just junior high or high school.

But when I talk about these kind of things, people get very upset. They say it is unfair to send a disproportionate amount of their tax dollars to go to support these underclass kids. Why should they? What I try to say to these people is that you’re going to pay for it in other ways—in prisons, in police, welfare, or even by having your car hijacked.


The poverty czar then would need to appeal to self-interest to see his reforms through?


If this poverty czar proposes these kind of educational reforms, he’ll probably have to resign before he’s out of office. He will become a lightning rod for these issues people are angry about. It’s like talking about religion or politics; opinions about this are really charged with emotion. People don’t want to pay more taxes than they have to; they want to have more money for themselves. So a poverty czar would just have to know he’ll never make it to the end of his term. The best he could do is raise these issues and get things moving in the right direction. But, of course, what we really need is the political will to deal with these kind of underclass issues. Right now we don’t have that. We need to have people in politics who are willing to sacrifice their careers to deal with these issues.

Compassion could give us this political will, but how are we going to be inspired to this kind of compassion, especially in this time of politically scapegoating the poor?

I don’t know. Honestly I don’t. We need a charismatic leader, but we don’t have one. I just don’t know. I was giving a talk recently and a man stood up and said regarding Rosa Lee, “Why are you so sympathetic with this person?” He was one of the angry ones. I said that I didn’t really see myself as sympathetic. I mean, I had learned about how Rosa Lee had prostituted her eleven-year-old daughter, Patty. Who wouldn’t be repulsed by such a thing? Of course I’m not sympathetic to that. “But,” I said to him, “I guess I’m just not as eager to condemn her as you. I can’t judge her as harshly or easily as you.”


This man was one of the “haves” who cannot understand the “have nots,” who simply see people like Rosa Lee as morally reprehensible. These “haves” keep telling the “have nots” to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. I’m here to remind them, “Hey, these people don’t even have bootstraps! Give them a break!”


So the problem is that these “haves” don’t understand that if they grew up in the same circumstances from the time they were born, they might not be the person they are today?


Absolutely. I would not be who I am today had I grown up in Rosa Lee’s circumstances. There’s no way! And that’s what I try to remember and tell others, “Hey, there, but for the grace of God, go I.”

What main insight do you hope the average middle-class American would gain from reading your book?


That there is an underclass. That it is growing and it’s a problem for all of us.


What practical steps could the average middle-class American take to help with the problems of the underclass?

Mentor one child. Tutor one child. Alvin and Eric, the two of Rosa Lee’s children who made it out of poverty, both had mentors (Gartrell Franklin and Nancy McAllister) who helped them at crucial points in their lives.


If you could go back in time to when Rosa Lee was young, do you think that kind of intervention, mentoring, might have made her story come out differently?


It’s funny, Rosa Lee used to say to me, “Mr. Dash, I wish I would have known you when I was younger. You could have helped me.” But I would tell her that I didn’t think when she was a young woman she would have listened to me.


Could you give me an example of how Rosa Lee’s limited range of choices counter the simple solutions offered to her?

In Rosa Lee’s case, what jobs are available to her? She can’t read. There are few jobs for you if you can’t read. She can’t work at any kind of hard labor because she’s an older woman in poor health. So in a case like hers, simply moving someone off welfare will not guarantee he/she will get a job. People also don’t want to deal with the history behind this, the whole history of racism that has played its part in lives of those like Rosa Lee. Fifty-seven percent of the underclass are black.


An especially haunting moment comes when Rosa Lee remembers her grandfather who was a poor sharecropper from North Carolina. She recalls how he never laughed, and one day she asked him why. He says, “We had such a hard time down in them sticks I guess I just don’t see nothin’ to laugh about.” And Rosa Lee didn’t understand this answer.

Right. That shows how the effects of racism came down to Rosa Lee without her even understanding what happened to her. Her mother Rosetta raised her according to what she knew from growing up in the South, which meant if you were a black woman you learned to do domestic work to survive.


Does racism continue to play a part in the poverty of the inner cities?


Yes, it does. One explanation is that people see poverty as a minority problem. This I think is due to the fact that the main media are located in urban centers and the reporters are simply too lazy— quite honestly—too lazy to go out and show the other faces of poverty in rural areas. Although the majority of those in poverty are black, there is still a large population of whites who are in places like southern and western West Virginia, Kentucky, and also in the upper peninsula of Michigan. So then it’s difficult to get funding for all who qualify for programs like Headstart, which is a proven program, because people don’t want their money to go to what they see as a primarily minority problem.


You point out that as we become more of a technological society there are less and less jobs for low-skilled workers. As a result future generations such as Rosa Lee’s grandchildren and great-grandchildren, trapped in the cycle of poverty, will have even fewer opportunities. If there is no intervention in their lives, what do you see in the future for them?


I was quoting there from the Swedish sociologist, Gunnar Mydral. He predicted as far back as 1962, in a book called Challenge to Affluence, the emergence and growth of the underclass which we are seeing today. As far as what will happen in the future? The underclass, according to the Urban Institute, is growing at a rate of 8% (that was how fast it was growing at the 1990 census). Now some sociologists are beginning to refer to the underclass as an undercaste. That’s because they see the dividing line as so definite, they don’t see any way for movement out of that underclass. The divide is that great they don’t see any solutions to this division. So this trend is growing and it’s a problem that’s not just going to go away. Also you must remember that these people in the underclass—2.7 million in 1990—they don’t even appear in the unemployment statistics.



How is that?

They have never held a job long enough to be considered employed, or they have never been employed, so they aren’t considered unemployed. So this group is not even represented in these important statistics. They’re invisible.


Near the end of her life, Rosa Lee is received back into her childhood church with open arms. Do you see anything more that her church or churches in general could do for those in poverty?

Yes, I think especially mentoring and tutoring programs are important. They can show a child another way of life they might never see otherwise. Mentoring and tutoring are two tremendous ways to help.


First published in Cornerstone (ISSN 0275-2743), Vol. 26, Issue 111 (1997), p. 33-34
© 1997 Cornerstone Communications, Inc.
Electronic version may contain minor changes and corrections from printed version.

And enough about these stupid bunnies....for crying out loud!

;)

Great story Amanda....boy I can't wait to hear Jon's response to this story. Should I prepare myself for another bleeding heart rant.... ;-) Not everyone that is poor is that way by choice or because they are lazy or something, but the fact is that we are turning into a country where everyone thinks they are entitled to a life of ease and comfort. Even if they have to get a paycheck for NOT WORKING, paid for by other people. IE...welfare. We live in a country where if someone is willing to work hard, just about anyone can pull themselves up by their bootstraps and make something of themselves. Why do you think immigrants stream into the US? No other country on earth provides the same opportunity to better oneself.

You might laugh at Amanda's story, but it isn't so far from the truth. We overtax the very members of our country that have made a decision to work hard and further themselves financially. The more you earn, the more we punish you. All of this to pay for many overfunded government programs. The Bible calls Christians to help the poor...not the government....I don't see much in scripture supporting welfare programs by the government. Actually one of the few responsibilites that I can see that the Bible DOES give to government, is the responsibility to use force bring wrongdoers to justice (police force/army). If you read the Bible, you will see a very limited view of government.....So you see, even Jesus would have voted Republican!

(That last one was for you, Jon ;-) )

Let's see... where to play bunnies... where to play bunnies...

Ruthy and I are speaking tonight, and I don't think that it'll go very long. So it won't be too late when fusion is over. I think we could probably get a game in at the church, but if we want to continue with another game we'd have to move. Like I said, I really don't wanna risk my cards at a food servery. We could invade my sister's house *wink wink* or crash Becky and Ruth's house once again :D . Someone offer a location!!!

On a side note, my bunnies are coming via UPS. I hope they leave them at the house even if I'm not there to sign... *worries*

HEY i wanna play bunnies tomorrow, but i have class at Alverina til 8pm, someone call me before 4:45 and tell me where ya'll are gonna play so i can come!! i mean put me in coach i am ready to play!!

No Kairsie. You are wrong. The moral of the story is "Vote republican." You know how I know this? I know this because at the bottom it says the following:

"MORAL OF THE STORY: Vote Republican"

Who are you to disagree with the story about what it's morals and values are? Stop donkeying around!


Bunnies. Tomorrow. Maybe I'll skip work.

*glee*

No dude, the *real* moral of the story is people are stupid, lazy, and greedy, and don't care to know the real story as long as they look good.

It's Jon. Not JoHn.

And I'll reply to the stilly story when I have a few moments.

Hey guys. Read this. A friend sent it to me. I'm interested in hear ya'll's opinion. :)

OLD VERSION
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he's a
fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!


MODERN VERSION
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks he's a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving. CBS, NBC, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.

America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing "It's Not Easy Being Green."

Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing "We shall overcome." .
Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.

Tom Daschle & Walter Mondale exclaim in an interview with Peter Jennings that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his "fair share.”

Finally, the EEOC drafts the "Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act", retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pa y his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients. The ant loses the case. The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow. The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Vote Republican

Speaking of Community Days..... John: We were there, too. The ash is what made it so much fun! I usually am not a big fireworks fan. In fact, I think they're kinda lame, but a nice excuse to hang out with friends. Anyway, the danger of burning ash made it just a little more exciting. :) That and the fireworks that looked like, uh..... nevermind.

................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
......................BUNNIES!!!!.........................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................

Jesse,

Your dad has a point... things should be planned ahead of time. However, plans often change, and cell phones make it possible to do things that never would have been possible without them. Like change your plans last minute, find your friends in a crowded area (like Community Days) or go on the ZMYG Road Trip. (That wouldn't have worked without cell phones.) So yes, it pays to plan ahead, but it also pays to have a cell phone to allow for greater coordination.

Jesse: I'm not sure we can stay at the church that late, so bunnies might not work there.

Jesse: "whuteva"
Yay! Bunnies tomorrow! Rock on!

Carrie: Sorry, hon. I did get your voice mail (ON MY CELL PHONE), but I was watching a movie with Bec.

Contrary to what SOME PEOPLE think, cell phones are great tools for getting the most out of one's day, and there is definitely something to be said for spontaneity! Why does everything need to be planned ahead of time?! What's so great about that? Yes, planning definitely has it's place, but when you live every single hour of your life by a preplanned schedule,....where's the fun in that?!

Ms. Snead, I believe you overestimate the frequency at which we check this blog. I don't know about the others, but I only have the chance to come on and check it one or two times each day. To invite us to see a movie within 2 hours of its start time is quite ludicrious. Why? because no one will see the invitation in time to do anything about it! I, in fact, am rather sad that I didn't know you were going until today, when it's too late. Why didn't you call me at home? If you had access to a computer, you had access to a home phone. I'm sorry my friends, but my father has a point in his argument for me NOT getting a cell phone:

You are all terrible at planning things ahead of time, and cell phones would be less of a necessity if you could learn to do so.

My sister will probably get angry at me for saying that, but hey, it's true!

I checked on the UPS website aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand.........


MY BUNNIES COME TOMORROW!!!

Let's play the bunny game after bible study, okay? Preferably at the church and not at the diner. I will not risk the safety of my cards.


*wiggles in excited anticipation*

Jesse: You are a poophead. Why? #1. You have the bunnies and I don't. #2 You disagreed with me. What were you thinking? Besides, you can just look at the bottom of a post to see who posted it. Don't be lazy, brother, dear. Here's the good news: I still love you and I will continue on my quest to get you a cell phone. :)

I don't like the puppies. They're to cute, well I don't like dogs in the first place.

Did you know a snail can live 3 years without eating?

I'm sorry, but I disagree with my sister on that point. I like the fact that Carrie and Becky put their names BEFORE the message, that way I know who's saying it while I read. If you have such a desperation to look to the bottom, you can do so, and see that its written from the shared "Carrie and Becky" account, and know that they are not talking to themselves, they are describing who is talking. Deal.

Oh, I loved the bunnies sooooo much that I ordered them for myself yesterday. Thanks Jon for introducing me to it. Thanks dad for letting me buy it. Thanks sister for being jealous. And thanks Red booster pack for giving me the edge over Jon. ;)

Oh, and Carrie, I don't think Ruthy had any spots. My spots were unique and my own. But they are gone, but I still am in danger of getting a fever and chills if I overexert myself late at night. Kinda scary.

Okay, back to work. I love this blog. Do you love the puppies??