Does It Matter?

My favorite way to spend lunch is with others I work with at school. We want everyone in our group to look forward to lunch time. In general we followed these general “rules”:

· No griping or complaining about things going on in and around school
· No crass, crude talk
· Keep things “light” -- I once again became known as the person who knows a lot of unusual things as well as the researcher, should a question come up (i.e. Why are sloppy joes called sloppy joes?)

Yes, sometimes something would come up, but the idea was not to dwell on “troubles” – even troubles at home.

Last school year, I found myself usually eating lunch the period that I least liked. I least-liked it because in that group were some who could be rather crass at times. It did catch me by surprise when the group was asked last year if anyone minded if the conversation got a bit raunchy. I waited for a moment before speaking up because I knew there were a few others who should speak up. That didn’t happen. So I said, “It would bother me. I realize at times something is apt to just be blurted out, but what would bother me is if the conversation kept on that topic.” After I said that, another person (a Mormon) said it would bother her, too. Another person in that group, a woman from my church, didn’t say anything. (She had eaten with this group the past few years, at least.)

After the Mormon woman spoke up, it made me glad I had said something because she knows I am a Christian. The one who asked knows I go to the Baptist church. It probably was good that I spoke up, perhaps reminding that other person from my church that we need to be mindful of what we convey to the world when we do not act the way we know we should – and the way they seem to know we should.

This year, because of situations in the personal lives of a few in that lunch group, conversations often deteriorated to the point where I had decided that I would just eat up in my room. I didn’t think that I had the “right” to control a lunchroom of adults. If any of the women asked me why I wasn’t coming down anymore, I would tell them then. (One-on-one seems a better way.) Before that happened, I had the two crassest of the group say something to me about their behavior/words. I thought that was interesting. I had not said anything to them, but somehow they sensed I was not comfortable with conversation – it might not have necessarily been crass or raunchy, but it had become excessively man-bashing since the two had recently been divorced or separated from their husbands. I did say to them that I appreciated the fact they realized that I was not comfortable with the direction lunch time was going, that it mattered to them how I felt about it.

Amazingly, they worked at thinking to tell me to cover my ears, if they felt the need to say something. That may seem odd, BUT it did keep them from going on and on about whatever it was they felt compelled to say. They didn’t want me sitting through lunch, covering my ears most of the time. Then these moments became fewer and fewer. More than once they have talked to me, one-on-one about their words and that they are trying to be more careful. Apparently, they do not want me not coming down for lunch. I did say to the one that if things got uncomfortable for me, I would be apt to just quietly leave. She said to me she didn’t want me to feel that I needed to do that.

For most of my life, I worked in a Christian environment. I was not put on the spot of having to decide whether or not to “hide” the fact that I am a Christian. Even in this, I could have just said nothing – but, most of those in that room know I go to the Baptist church. Yes, they probably have their ideas about “those Baptists,” but I wanted to be sure that I was not a negative; AND because “those Baptists” sometimes do create problems with how they are perceived, I have wanted to portray a more positive picture. Why? Because I believe that it opens up opportunities for me to bit-by-bit share what I believe and present to them things they can at least think about.

One of these women, loves darkness. Halloween is her favorite holiday. She has an interest in witchcraft. The list goes on. I appreciate the fact that she and I have been able to have some conversations, one-on-one, because of my not remaining silent when she posed that question last year, “Will it bother anyone if the conversation in here gets a little raunchy from time to time?”

Toilet Paper

The other day, while I was watching "Bathtastic" on DIY Network, a multiple-choice question was posted: How many rolls of toilet paper does the average family go through in a year? I forget the choices, but the answer was 119 rolls.

Hm-m-m-m, I thought. How do they determine that figure? Who really knows how much tp they use in their house over the course of a week ,let alone a month or year? I sure don't; but now that gets me wondering whenever I sit on the toilet.

1) How many people are in the family? I would guess 4, as it seems anything having to do with family is "4" in most instances. I would wonder if there are people home all day every day or are there ones at work or ones at school or at day care.

2) Are the families from only the USA?

3) Yes, average would mean there are those who use more and there are those who use less. I would suppose that mathematically, I could estimate how much tp a family of two would use . . . a family of seven . . . a family of twenty (the Duggars, for example). Based on the figure of 119, and assuming we are talking about a family of 4, then the average person uses almost 30 rolls per year.

Still, you can see by the numbers and such, that it really is difficult to accurately estimate how many rolls of toilet paper the average family uses in a year. But, does it really matter? Perhaps only to stores that sell toilet paper. Perhaps only to companies that manufacture toilet paper. Perhaps only to those people who work in the places that make the toilet paper.

Regardless, this trivia is like most other tidbits of trivia -- not all that important to know, but it does generate some conversation.

Is He or Isn't He?

I never have been convinced that Barack Obama is a true Christian. Interviews in the past indicate that, although the reader has to be a true Christian to know. Things Mr. Obama says about his system of belief do evidence a true understanding of the Bible.

It is true that the church he attended in Chicago was not Muslim. It is one that classifies itself as Christian; however, it preaches Black Theology and tends towards racism and intolerance in how its preachers (particularly) Rev. Wright, could stir up an emotional high among the congregants. No way can Mr. Obama be honest in saying that he had no idea what Dr. Wright preached. The only reason he left the church was because it became a political liability to him.

I don't think Mr. Obama is Muslim; but I don't think he is Christian. I think he is a secularist. Religion becomes a part of his life when it is needed for his own causes. Of course a Chicago community fund-raiser would attend a church like Wright's. If course, a politician would decide to actually attend a Christian church if accusations were going around that he was a Muslim.

Here is an item, one of many, I recently read. (This is because Mr. Obama has found it politically expedient to come out and say he is a Christian.)
===============
Born Again Obama or Machiavelli’s Disciple?

by Benjamin Wiker

Posted 10/03/2010 ET
Updated 10/04/2010 ET

I really want to believe President Obama, but his recent claim that he’s not a secret Muslim, but “a Christian by choice,” is rather hard to digest. Listen to this testimony:

“I came to my Christian faith later in life and it was because the precepts of Jesus Christ spoke to me in terms of the kind of life that I would want to lead. Being my brothers’ and sisters’ keeper, treating others as they would treat me, and I think also understanding that Jesus Christ dying for my sins spoke to the humility we all have to have as human beings, that we’re sinful and we’re flawed and we make mistakes and we achieve salvation through the grace of God.”

Sin, grace, humility—if he truly believes in all this, there is some hope for this most radical of regimes. I don’t mean that Obama is a closet evangelical just waiting to be outed.

The important thing about this testimonial (if true), is that I’d finally be able to peg Obama’s real motivations. He’d be a rather typical example, straight from the 19th Century, of a Christian liberal who stopped believing in the essential dogmas of Christianity but still clung to a heavily modified form of its social doctrines.

In this new liberal faith, Jesus was demoted to being a great moral exemplar, a kind of revolutionary put to death for preaching a radical social doctrine Roman and Jewish leaders found too politically unsettling. The liberalized form of Christianity had, and still has, its own evangelical goal that defined its decidedly political bent: heaven must be brought to Earth, and governments must take on the task of wiping every tear away.

If that is what Obama really is—not a Muslim, but severely liberalized Christian—then there’s at least a little hope. There is no doubt that Obama is a liberal, but liberalism is, in great part, the passionate embrace of Christianity, except without the embarrassing God part.

To be more exact, it’s a secularized form of Christianity, taking all the evangelical zeal originally directed to the kingdom of God, and pointing it toward constructing a this-worldly secular utopia.

But if Christianity still has some faint hold on his heart, Obama might yet see that government cannot take the place of God, that sins are very real and spread evenly among the population, both rich and poor, and that creating a kingdom of heaven is best left in divine (rather than bureaucratic) hands.

Yet, I confess, I’m having trouble. Perhaps I’ve spent too much time reading Machiavelli. In his inestimably influential how-to book for princes without principles, Machiavelli offered the following advice on how leaders should dupe the masses. The prince must “appear all mercy, all faith, all honesty, all humanity, all religion. And nothing is more necessary to appear to have than this last quality.”

Appear. Machiavelli, the unscrupulous teacher of realpolitik, knew that in politics, appearances were often deceiving, and that the most effective politicians were those who mastered the art of appearing to be pious, even while, behind the scenes, they engaged in behavior that would make a mafia don blush. For Machiavelli, religion wasn’t true—he was our first great modern atheist—but it was certainly quite useful.

I am not suggesting that Obama is a ruthless Machiavellian, slitting throats behind the scene. But whatever he intends, his sudden use of the language of evangelical Christianity—very sudden, i.e., as in “never happened before”—cannot help but seem to be a poorly orchestrated attempt to salvage whatever he can of the Left’s hold on the political helm by appearing to be a Christian.

There’s too much smoke from other fires—the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, but even more, the direct and powerful influence of the atheist social radical Saul Alinsky, who certainly seems to be much nearer the heart of Obama’s adult conversion (and, we add, there’s more than a whiff of communism among his current cronies). Moreover, how can we take Obama’s declaration of belief in Christianity seriously, when he’s had no qualms about plowing under Christian moral imperatives by his unwavering support for abortion and the homosexual agenda?

So, what does Obama really believe? Let us hope that it is something deeper than whatever might momentarily boost his ratings.

========

Mr. Obama would be an illustration of one of those who, at Heaven's gate, can't understand why he doesn't get in -- unless he realizes head knowledge is not enough.

Lizisms

What are Lizisms? Lizisms are one-liner observations worth remembering because of their practicality and/or obviousness in nature. Murphy may have his laws; Confucius may have his sayings. Why can't Liz have her "-isms"?

Some come to mind, at the moment, as far as rather easy-to-remember Lizisms. One comes to mind because it happened to pop out in conversations today. These Lizisms are not new to her, which means that perhaps Lizisms should be written down and illustrated for posterity.

Comfort trumps fashion.
This Lizism came as a result of Liz observing young female teachers who insist on wearing high spiked heels to school as part of their day's outfit. How can standing in those shoes on tiled cement floors all day be comfortable. Is fashion that necessary? Has the teacher thought of the long-term results as far as the ill effects those shoes can have on her foot health?

If you feed them, they will come.
(A variation of a quote from the movie Field of Dreams. The main character hears a voice telling him, more than once, "If you built it [baseball field in his corn field], they [star baseball players from the past] will come.")
This Lizism was most recently illustrated on a snowy, nasty Sunday morning -- the day of our annual church Christmas dinner. Those of us on the Social Committee were not sure how many, of those signed up to come, would come. On any given Sunday with weather like this numbers at services were always down. HOWEVER, on this particular Sunday, everyone (amazingly) made it. Based on years of observation, this attendance phenomena on a snowy Sunday was worth remembering and thus illustrates this Lizism, "If you feed them, they will come."

Time flies not only when you are having fun but also when you are busy.
No need to explain that one.

Some things about little boys never change.
Any female with no brothers and/or a husband may not truly appreciate this Lizism. How often have you overheard conversations about vomit, sweat, hawkers, and flatulence that become w-a-y more descriptive than you, ladies, are to hear? I was recently reminded about this with my own husband when I was not feeling well.

One I would include I can't because it is not a Lizism -- Just because it fits doesn't mean you have to wear it!"

So, perhaps the book I write and leave for posterity will be my collection of Lizisms.

musings

We can't lay all the blame -- or even most of the blame -- for the downward spiral the USA is taking on the President. We need to lay the blame with the American people, including those who call themselves Christians.

We point to prayer and Bible reading being tossed out of schools and now out of society. Were we doing that in our homes regularly? Are we now?

Are we careful about the support we give to the entertainment industry, an industry that is so influential on our society, mostly in a negative way? What movies do view, whether at the theater or in the privacy of our homes? What music do we listen to, buy? What programs do we watch on television? (I think that is the most subtle one of all.)

How about the way we dress? I think it is interesting, for example, that no longer is one piercing per ear enough in Christian circles, but two or three. I know of a teen in my own church who ruled out a particular Christian college because she could not wear more than one pierced earring in an ear. What about tattoos? What about the length of skirts, dresses, shorts? How about how low, guys, we wear our pants, shorts?

How about our language?

How does time online compare with time with God?

Do we make commitments to serve God, but then try to get out of them because something more appealing is drawing us away. In my church, soccer has become a type of god to many of the teens and young adults. Get to church late Sunday morning because of a late night out; dash out of the services because we have a game . . .

This is just a start.

Why is America in the predicament that it is? Why is it not the nation it once was? Why do Christians in countries where persecution happens pray for persecution to come to the Christian church of America? Hmmm . . .

Just Because

Years ago, when I was visiting my sister in California, we came upon a teaser line for an afternoon talk show: "Just because it fits doesn't mean you have to wear it," talking about bathing suits (maybe even underwear) that huge women can wear that seems made for much smaller, more shapely women.

I got to thinking that there are other "Just Because" statements that make perfect sense. One of those is this: Just because it's true doesn't mean you have to tell it. How often are we tempted to say something that is true, only because we really are wanting to make another person look bad? Is it really necessary that we say anything, if that is our motive? No.

Here are some ones meant to be more humorous than serious:

• Just because it's a rainy day -- and Monday -- doesn't mean I have to always be down. ;-)
• Just because it's on sale doesn't mean I have to buy it.
• Just because it's free doesn't mean I have to have it.
• Just because there is only a 20% chance of precipitation doesn't mean it won't rain or snow; conversely, just because there is a 70% chance of precipitation doesn't mean that it actually will rain or snow.
• Just because it's on Fox News doesn't mean it's the right perspective on an issue; conversely, just because it's MSNBC or CNN doesn't mean it's the wrong perspective.
• Just because it's midnight doesn't mean I have to go to bed!

Do you have any you could add?

THE BANE OF TEACHER TENURE

Tenure has lately been a topic of discussion at lunch time. Why? Because there are a few teachers in this school who really are a detriment, when it comes to teaching our students. Ironically, most, if not all of them, do not teach in areas that do state testing. There is not any real accountability for what their students do or don’t achieve.
.
In our school, one major area of weakness is the social studies area. One mother was telling how her daughter, a fifth-sixth grader, gets take-home pictures to color for her social studies homework – COLOR! Another mother of a child past fifth-sixth grade told her that that has been the teacher’s standard social studies assignment over the years. What happens? The next teacher has to work extra hard to get the students caught up because at the end of the eighth grade, they have a major social studies test that the state requires. The good news is that the seventh-eighth grade social studies teacher does an excellent job, but it takes the seventh grade students awhile to catch on to the fact that they have to do REAL work in that class.
.
The problem occurs again when the students reach ninth grade. There they encounter a young teacher who wants to be cool, like her students are. She wants the students to like her. She wants them to come to her to pour out their troubles. In many ways, she acts like a high school student. Anyone who has subbed for her will tell you that her ninth-grade classes are out of control, and she rarely leaves decent plans – when she does, they are inaccurate. Usually she is absent when it is too hot, when it might snow, when it is a Friday or a Monday.
.
The year she decided to marry her live-in (usually a sign that the couple would like to have a baby) , she often took long weekends, telling her students she needed the time to plan her wedding. The following year, when she was expecting, the long weekend pattern persisted. Then she began to claim she had pregnancy problems and needed to be absent often – however, she was well enough to come in on days she had promised to go with groups on field trips. (She herself never planned any field trips.) She was to go on maternity leave the end of March (baby due mid-April); she went in mid-December, managing to get an excuse from her doctor. (She was startled more than once when she would be spotted out shopping by other faculty when she supposedly needed to have bed rest.) She took almost all of the following year off (not all with pay), coming back in time to give local exams – if she decided to – to her classes.
.
Quizzes are rare. Tests are rarer. (Often she is absent on those days.) Why does she not feel any urgency? There are not state exams in social studies until after tenth grade. Thus it falls to the tenth grade social studies teacher to catch the students up and then cover the material they need to cover for their state exam. This teacher also teaches a senior elective, which means she teaches nothing for which she is “majorly” accountable. In this course this year, for example, the students needed to have current events. Rather than come to class prepared, she takes them to a computer lab. In front of her, one student will tell his girlfriend to find him a current event and print it off. She does. Then he hands it to the teacher. She highlights a few items in it and gives him a grade for doing his assignment!! That’s just one area in which she shirks her responsibilities with this group. Resource teachers who sit in her classes with their students don’t like her. They say she is lazy. They say she lets students get away with cheating . . . She has no control whatsoever. The tenth grade social studies teacher does not like her either. Says she is lazy. Subs say they hate subbing for her. Why? They say she is lazy and that she obviously has no control over her students.
.
What saves her? Tenure. To get rid of her would be a nasty, costly thing. The administration has to hope she finds a job elsewhere – applicants can indicate they do not want anyone to check with their past employer. The other possibility would be her crossing the line in some way. The current buzz is that she is out today getting a tattoo. Yesterday she told her students she was going to get that done today, and she had one of her students (not sure if a “he” or “she”) draw a sample on her back yesterday during a class . . . In the past, there have been complaints about her -- how often her chosen few get to go up to her room at lunch and watch movies for fun, movies that probably would not make it through an administrative check. Even today's "educational" movie she left for her sub makes no sense whatsoever as to how it fits the students' current studies.
.
In my own thinking, this young woman is a very insecure woman. I can’t think of any adult staff member who has a favorable view of her. She doesn't do much to mix with the adults. From when she first came as a long-term substitute to the present, she prefers to be friends with the students. The woman is also smart, when it comes to “the system” as she knows how to use it. She herself decided when she thought her tenure kicked in -- ahead of everyone else's for that year, in her thinking! It seemed as if she lived for that. Why? It would give her job security.
.
Who gets hurt? Students. That's too bad. Although I now benefit from tenure and from the support of a union, I haven't changed my mind as to how both hurt education and how costly both are, not just in learning but in cost as well.