last night was the memorial service for my father at the synagogue. about 275 people managed to join us. noam, my mother, edward, philip and the bishop of oxford spoke. here is what i said ... started off with the beginning of my lev post from last month and added a few notes.
"i had a dream. it may not, however, have been a dream. i don't know, and it doesn't really matter. i thought it was real at the time, because i was sitting on the sofa in my office listening to my mobile. i heard a voice on the other end, and i knew it was him. "daddy!" i said. "no," he replied. i know his voice, i've heard it all my life. "albert?" "i am not albert," he said, "my name is lev." there was interference on the line, and he began to fade out. i tried to get his number, but wasn't quick enough. "we'll talk again," i heard him say. and then the book-keeper woke me up - i was sitting on the sofa in my office.
the thing is - i don't dream like that. i'm a bit of a smartarse, and am pretty sure that if this experience came from my subconscious, it would've been much more ... smart. "i am martin buber!" the voice would've said, and sent me to the bookshelves in search of 'i-thou'. i would then figure out the subtle meaning, ponder upon the concept of connection, and be pleased about how smart i am. but things are different now. albert is dead. and he said his name is lev. he named it all with that one word: heart. not my style at all. it was, however, a message for me.
heart. that says it all, which is good, because i haven't the faintest idea what to say to you. i keep thinking that maybe, if somehow i can channel him ... here's rabbi f. in the pulpit again ... softly spoken ... wise, funny ... similar expressions and gestures ... if i could channel him then i could console you. somehow, though, i don't think i should.
my colleague rabbi s. was talking with me the other day about losing a famous father and how at some point one has to stop trying to console his public and say 'hey, i lost my daddy'. i thought - what a kick albert would get hearing himself compared to isaac stern! she has a point, though.
so - forgive me if i am neither articulate, nor funny, nor wise tonight. i'm sad. i am also blessed. when my father died, we had nothing left unsaid nor undone. he had e-mailed me every day telling me how much he loved me and how proud of me he was and what a great rabbi i am and will be. i, too, rarely missed an opportunity to say the same to him.
what i miss is being able to talk about kevin gallen's goal on saturday, and if only the goalie hadn't tipped that shot onto the post in the last minute. i miss the little twitch in the corner of his mouth just before he says something he thinks is extremely funny. i miss his eyes shining with tears as gunga din falls at last. i miss his mischievous mind, and his joyful heart. most of all ... his hands ... just being able to hold hands ... walking along the street, sitting in front of the television ... not saying anything, just holding hands.
when it became my responsibility to deliver sermons on the high holydays, i would spend hours on the phone with my father across the atlantic. i did not want him to help me write them, but i did want to make sure that i wouldn't embarrass myself with flawed reasoning or mawkish sentimentality. he'd make suggestions, and i'd argue with them all. one day he suddenly said, "i have to go now." "but i'm not done yet!" i said, anxiously. "you don't need me anymore," he said, "you'll be fine." and off he went.
i so didn't want him to go, but he was right, i did just fine. and that's how it is for us tonight. and that's how it's going to be.
lev - heart
as long as i remember that while excellent sermons are extremely important, the key is b'chol l'vav'cha, u-v'chol nafsh'cha, u-v'chol me-odecha ... with all your heart and all your soul and all your might. like r. akiva, daddy used up every last bit of his heart, and if we will try to do the same with our own, then his memory will surely be for a blessing.
Wednesday, April 20, 2005
Wednesday, April 13, 2005
japan 1 - 0 canada
as the population of the world gets older and lonelier, japanese scientists have invented a cuddly seal companion to banish boredom and the blues. in canada, the hunting season has just begun, targeting the same baby harp seals upon which the japanese invention is modelled.
pumpkin piglet
the first daffodil lifted up its head in my front yard today. after months of dirty white and grey and brown skies and ground, it is briefly uplifting to see the colours. i am enjoying the flowers, and new grass growing, and a red mist covering the trees on the horizon as the leaves begin to bud.
this is an autumn picture of piglet, a week before hallowe'en in seattle. i hope you enjoy this colour!
this is an autumn picture of piglet, a week before hallowe'en in seattle. i hope you enjoy this colour!
the world is quiet here
... i wish. i am thinking about the difference between an oasis of peace, within which one may rest, relax and renew oneself; and the muffled, gritty silence one may find by burying one's head in the sand. shabbat, of course, is an ideal that could be the oasis. i worry, though, that i am burying my head in it, just to block out the anxiety that fills me just by looking at the outside world. in my wanderings today i came across a recent piece by william safire in the ny times about privacy. i began to read it, followed some links, realised once again that george orwell was a prophet, and rued turning down the job in bangor since i would've been a reasonable fleeing distance from the haven of eastern canada.
it's not that the profile of the_ravaj existing is so threatening. i imagine that reading it would be much like looking in a mirror - is that really what i look like? no way! the fuzzy edges disappear when one views the hard copy. the problem begins with the fuzzy ethical perspectives of commercial marketers and skis downhill at olympic pace to the dizzy depths of government snooping, manipulation,and interference. to read now that they appear to have joined forces is severely interfering with my digestion.
it's not that the profile of the_ravaj existing is so threatening. i imagine that reading it would be much like looking in a mirror - is that really what i look like? no way! the fuzzy edges disappear when one views the hard copy. the problem begins with the fuzzy ethical perspectives of commercial marketers and skis downhill at olympic pace to the dizzy depths of government snooping, manipulation,and interference. to read now that they appear to have joined forces is severely interfering with my digestion.
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
andrea dworkin z"l
just read the news that andrea dworkin has died. radical frizzy zaftig jewish feminist in overalls that she was, my mother was a bit worried that i would emulate her. by the time i was thirteen i'd already achieved all but the politics. my mother posted a photograph of her on the refrigerator door, stridently stout, as a diet aid. i think it made me wary of fervour for activism rather than for cranberry cheesecake.
many years later, walking along seventh avenue in park slope, i saw andrea dworkin sitting outside a cafe on the other side of the road. she didn't look like she was in a very good mood, so i only stared long enough to make sure it was really her so i could honestly say that i had seen her sitting outside a cafe in the slope. may she rest in peace.
many years later, walking along seventh avenue in park slope, i saw andrea dworkin sitting outside a cafe on the other side of the road. she didn't look like she was in a very good mood, so i only stared long enough to make sure it was really her so i could honestly say that i had seen her sitting outside a cafe in the slope. may she rest in peace.
Monday, April 11, 2005
tomb of the unknown pig
one of the earliest shots, from the late 1980's, taken in east berlin a couple of years before the wall came down. the chocolate tasted like sawdust, and people wanted to buy my u.s. army issue rucksack from my back. it was forbidden to photograph soldiers, but we managed to sneak this one.
o dear delphine
just cannot quite let go of this one. the pledge drive ends in a few hours and i called in again. apparently delphine is not just off sick, she has cancer. i had a lovely chat with the lady on the line, and made the pledge anyway with the wish for a full recovery ('thirty six dollars' say i, 'aha - double chai! says the pledge-taker), and she will let me know what's going on. meanwhile, i got my name read out on the radio, along with good wishes for my heroine!
o, and with regard to delphine's origins: she was born in devonshire, and grew up in a place in london called knightsbridge :-)
o, and with regard to delphine's origins: she was born in devonshire, and grew up in a place in london called knightsbridge :-)
Sunday, April 10, 2005
mashed potato piglet
my grandmother's grandmother came from minsk, known as the potato capital of all the russias. i like to explain that this is whence i inherited my wide hips and low centre of gravity, the figure of a potato harvester. here, piglet views the devil's tower, made internationally famous by steven spielberg in a scene from 'close encounters of the third kind'.
alas, poor delphine
the wmrn pledge weekend continues. i wasn't going to, but decided to call in and see if that woman ever passed on my request for delphine's autograph. the gentleman answering the telephone appeared rather perplexed, but when i mentioned the magic words "she said she'd leave a message for kurt", i was put through to kurt himself. apparently delphine has been off sick this week, but he said he would call her at home and ask if she would be prepared to give me her autograph. he took my cellphone number and said he'd call back within the hour. i am still waiting by my phone :-( wishing delphine a refua sheleima.
Friday, April 08, 2005
darn it, delphine!
the connecticut public radio station is doing its spring fundraising, and asking for pledges. i have never called in a pledge, but this evening i dialled the number and offered them money if i could have a signed photograph of delphine marcus. the lady on the other end said probably not but she would leave a note for the station manager and i should call back tomorrow to see, although, she said again, she thought it quite unlikely.
emulating wolferl (tmi warning)
do i win a prize for pretentious post-title, or what?!
have you ever accidentally clogged up someone else's loo by depositing in it something utterly natural but utterly too dense or large or stubborn to make it round the s-bend and out towards the haven of the sewers? i discussed this issue recently with a (close) friend, and we decided that if the host had any hostly feeling s/he would have an industrial-strength plunger somewhere in the bathroom; and if there was no such implement to be found then one might leave with a smidgeon less guilt.
luckily it was my own loo. luckily i had the plunger. i bought it at the katonah fair, striding jauntily down main street with it mounted on my shoulder like a ww1 rifle, waving gaily at congregants wandering through the paintings and pleas for supporting the library. unfortunately it did not work. i returned to the friendly gentlemen at the hardware store in katonah, hoping to be handed a magic potion i could pour into the bowl and liquidate the misguided blob. the young man gave me a bottle, and i was delighted. then his boss took it away. apparently it would have caused a chemical reaction that would have blown up the blob and the bowl and the bathroom. instead, i walked to my car with a long dangly pipe and spring contraption called a toilet auger. i was not, however, able to forsee how completely unable to use it i would be.
we skip over the next bit. suffice it to say that
a. the auger, wrapped in a full-length garbage bag, is now out on the kerb
b. i had a novel experience in the dark in the woods at the edge of the property
c. the next day i called the landlady to get the plumber round
the plumber just left. it took him 2 minutes to fix the problem, and cost $132 and change. as i watched him flushing a few times to make sure all was clear, i told him how when i went to sydney, australia a few years ago, the first thing i wanted to do when i got off the plane was to find a toilet to flush. i didn't need to explain. "i'd've done the same," he said, "how was it?" i told him i'd been terribly disappointed because my first toilet there was designed to have no swirl at all (the water came down from all around the bowl at the same time). o well. he is gone. and i, i am relieved!
have you ever accidentally clogged up someone else's loo by depositing in it something utterly natural but utterly too dense or large or stubborn to make it round the s-bend and out towards the haven of the sewers? i discussed this issue recently with a (close) friend, and we decided that if the host had any hostly feeling s/he would have an industrial-strength plunger somewhere in the bathroom; and if there was no such implement to be found then one might leave with a smidgeon less guilt.
luckily it was my own loo. luckily i had the plunger. i bought it at the katonah fair, striding jauntily down main street with it mounted on my shoulder like a ww1 rifle, waving gaily at congregants wandering through the paintings and pleas for supporting the library. unfortunately it did not work. i returned to the friendly gentlemen at the hardware store in katonah, hoping to be handed a magic potion i could pour into the bowl and liquidate the misguided blob. the young man gave me a bottle, and i was delighted. then his boss took it away. apparently it would have caused a chemical reaction that would have blown up the blob and the bowl and the bathroom. instead, i walked to my car with a long dangly pipe and spring contraption called a toilet auger. i was not, however, able to forsee how completely unable to use it i would be.
we skip over the next bit. suffice it to say that
a. the auger, wrapped in a full-length garbage bag, is now out on the kerb
b. i had a novel experience in the dark in the woods at the edge of the property
c. the next day i called the landlady to get the plumber round
the plumber just left. it took him 2 minutes to fix the problem, and cost $132 and change. as i watched him flushing a few times to make sure all was clear, i told him how when i went to sydney, australia a few years ago, the first thing i wanted to do when i got off the plane was to find a toilet to flush. i didn't need to explain. "i'd've done the same," he said, "how was it?" i told him i'd been terribly disappointed because my first toilet there was designed to have no swirl at all (the water came down from all around the bowl at the same time). o well. he is gone. and i, i am relieved!
Sunday, March 27, 2005
piglet rushmore
i couldn't wait any longer. this is my all-time favourite piglet pic (so far!). i kept trying to hold it back, until this blog was a bit more established. but it's like not using your favourite perfume so you don't use it up - tui tui tui you could die tomorrow and then you certainly wouldn't smell of bellodgia. this shot was an accident - how i discovered the prefocus button! it was the reason i drove from virginia to seattle - to get this: president, president, president, president, pig. v. pleased.
a colleague informs me ....
US Supreme Court established three important holdings:
1.. there is a right under the Constitution to refuse medical treatment. Does this include "life-sustaining" care? The US Supreme Court stopped short: "for the purposes of [the Cruzan] case," the Court "assume[d] that the US Constitution would grant a competent person a constitutionally protected right to refuse lifesaving hydration and nutrition."
2.. this right to refuse survives the patient's incompetence and can be exercised by an advanced directive or a surrogate decision maker.
3.. States may differ in regards to safeguards that they employ to ensure that withdrawal of treatment reflects the patient's wishes when the patient is unable to make treatment decisions. Every state is different on what courts will and will not accept.
the cruzan case was in 1990 i think, and was the first right-to-die case heard by the supreme court. so the law of the land allows one to refuse sustenance, and if one's wishes are clear, this shall be upheld even if one is totally and permanently incapacitated.
assuming that we believe mr. schiavo, and the courts have done that consistently, according to the law this is how it will be. end of story.
until we live in a theocracy, this is how it will be.
depending on whose theo it will be, i may be emigrating.
1.. there is a right under the Constitution to refuse medical treatment. Does this include "life-sustaining" care? The US Supreme Court stopped short: "for the purposes of [the Cruzan] case," the Court "assume[d] that the US Constitution would grant a competent person a constitutionally protected right to refuse lifesaving hydration and nutrition."
2.. this right to refuse survives the patient's incompetence and can be exercised by an advanced directive or a surrogate decision maker.
3.. States may differ in regards to safeguards that they employ to ensure that withdrawal of treatment reflects the patient's wishes when the patient is unable to make treatment decisions. Every state is different on what courts will and will not accept.
the cruzan case was in 1990 i think, and was the first right-to-die case heard by the supreme court. so the law of the land allows one to refuse sustenance, and if one's wishes are clear, this shall be upheld even if one is totally and permanently incapacitated.
assuming that we believe mr. schiavo, and the courts have done that consistently, according to the law this is how it will be. end of story.
until we live in a theocracy, this is how it will be.
depending on whose theo it will be, i may be emigrating.
turn turn turn
this is some stream of consciousness musing, or perhaps just a first page of exploration. the question under consideration? well, it began with the case of terri schiavo, who is likely to die in the next few days. on the one hand, i really need to think about how to respond to congregants asking me about the jewish position on such a subject. this means checking out the responsa, which look at jewish law, and attempt to present an ethical position. already, i am swimming in water deeper than any i've dipped into before (and o do i miss my daddy - no more can my first response be to ask him what he thinks and feels). definitions of law, and ethics, and morals ... and how they relate to each other. and that leads to the second part. frank rich wrote in the ny times today:
"At a time when government, culture, science, medicine and the rule of law are all under threat from an emboldened religious minority out to remake America according to its dogma"
the rights of the individual within the rules of the community. what is the best case scenario, i.e., individual views differ, and how does the community make a rule that all must obey, e.g., pro or anti abortion. in the usa, i thought the separation of church and state (synagogue, mosque, temple, etc ... let's not go there just now) was an inspired way to deal with some of those problems. i agree with mr. rich that there is a threat, but am currently at a loss regarding how to deal with it.
back then to the jewish teaching with regard to the current question whether or not terri schiavo should be allowed to die by removing the tubes that feed and hydrate her. i turn to the central conference of american rabbis responsa. before reading this, i had a pretty strong view that if someone has made it clear that if they are brain dead they do not wish to be kept alive, then their wish should be respected. as a chaplain working in a hospital, i have counselled patients interested in creating a living will/advance directive. I know (and just checked it again on the phone yesterday) that this is my mother's wish.
so here's a question: what shall i do when the responsum clearly indicates a position different to the one i currently hold? as a rabbi, a jew and a human, am i required to adapt my thinking? is this a kind of teshuva, where i must turn my stiff stiff neck?
the responsum begins with the affirmation of the inviolability of human life, that it belongs to god, that we have no right to take it and god has the final say in its disposal. we do not "own" our lives. thus, suicide and euthanasia are prohibited.
so what if someone is dying already? the rabbis say that they still deserve all appropriate care. what is appropriate? since the law states that it is forbidden to take any action that will hasten death, and if you do so then it is considered murder, then it would appear that sustenance is required, and pain relief a bit of a grey area since morphine for example may hasten death. but sustenance is required.
at this point, i begin to feel the stiffness of my neck. terri schiavo is not actually terminal. therefore, all the more so should she not have sustenance removed. but this has me agreeing with the bushes and all sorts of people whose beliefs i abhor. ow. my neck is sore.
but i am a reform jew ... and a rabbi ... is there not another way to interpret the teachings? the responsum states:
"As Reform Jews, of course, we consider ourselves free to ascribe "new" Jewish meanings to our texts, to depart from tradition when we think it necessary to secure an essential religious or moral value. In this case, though, we fail to see why we should do so. We see no good reason, first of all, to abandon the traditional Jewish teaching concerning the inestimable value of human life. If the doctrine of life's essential holiness means anything at all, it means that we must stand in reverence before the very fact of life, the gift of God that renders us human. And this reverence does not diminish as human strength declines, for the dying person still possesses life, a life stamped indelibly with the image of God until the moment of death. It is an awesome and awful responsibility we take upon ourselves when we determine to kill a human being, even when our intentions are good and merciful. Such an action is the ultimate arrogance, for it declares that we are masters over the one thing--life itself--that our faith has always taught must be protected against our all-too-human tendency to manipulate, to mutilate, and to destroy."
i do not want to agree with the demonstrators and the religious right and the bushes but ow my neck i don't wish to be arrogant either. note - i am not talking here about stopping treatment, turning off machines, etc. jewish law allows that one may remove an impediment from nature taking its course. i am trying to turn myself towards the acknowledgment that to remove nutrition is to starve someone to death.
i hope the link works, so you may read the rest of the responsum yourself. i am off to think some more, and to get a neck rub!
"At a time when government, culture, science, medicine and the rule of law are all under threat from an emboldened religious minority out to remake America according to its dogma"
the rights of the individual within the rules of the community. what is the best case scenario, i.e., individual views differ, and how does the community make a rule that all must obey, e.g., pro or anti abortion. in the usa, i thought the separation of church and state (synagogue, mosque, temple, etc ... let's not go there just now) was an inspired way to deal with some of those problems. i agree with mr. rich that there is a threat, but am currently at a loss regarding how to deal with it.
back then to the jewish teaching with regard to the current question whether or not terri schiavo should be allowed to die by removing the tubes that feed and hydrate her. i turn to the central conference of american rabbis responsa. before reading this, i had a pretty strong view that if someone has made it clear that if they are brain dead they do not wish to be kept alive, then their wish should be respected. as a chaplain working in a hospital, i have counselled patients interested in creating a living will/advance directive. I know (and just checked it again on the phone yesterday) that this is my mother's wish.
so here's a question: what shall i do when the responsum clearly indicates a position different to the one i currently hold? as a rabbi, a jew and a human, am i required to adapt my thinking? is this a kind of teshuva, where i must turn my stiff stiff neck?
the responsum begins with the affirmation of the inviolability of human life, that it belongs to god, that we have no right to take it and god has the final say in its disposal. we do not "own" our lives. thus, suicide and euthanasia are prohibited.
so what if someone is dying already? the rabbis say that they still deserve all appropriate care. what is appropriate? since the law states that it is forbidden to take any action that will hasten death, and if you do so then it is considered murder, then it would appear that sustenance is required, and pain relief a bit of a grey area since morphine for example may hasten death. but sustenance is required.
at this point, i begin to feel the stiffness of my neck. terri schiavo is not actually terminal. therefore, all the more so should she not have sustenance removed. but this has me agreeing with the bushes and all sorts of people whose beliefs i abhor. ow. my neck is sore.
but i am a reform jew ... and a rabbi ... is there not another way to interpret the teachings? the responsum states:
"As Reform Jews, of course, we consider ourselves free to ascribe "new" Jewish meanings to our texts, to depart from tradition when we think it necessary to secure an essential religious or moral value. In this case, though, we fail to see why we should do so. We see no good reason, first of all, to abandon the traditional Jewish teaching concerning the inestimable value of human life. If the doctrine of life's essential holiness means anything at all, it means that we must stand in reverence before the very fact of life, the gift of God that renders us human. And this reverence does not diminish as human strength declines, for the dying person still possesses life, a life stamped indelibly with the image of God until the moment of death. It is an awesome and awful responsibility we take upon ourselves when we determine to kill a human being, even when our intentions are good and merciful. Such an action is the ultimate arrogance, for it declares that we are masters over the one thing--life itself--that our faith has always taught must be protected against our all-too-human tendency to manipulate, to mutilate, and to destroy."
i do not want to agree with the demonstrators and the religious right and the bushes but ow my neck i don't wish to be arrogant either. note - i am not talking here about stopping treatment, turning off machines, etc. jewish law allows that one may remove an impediment from nature taking its course. i am trying to turn myself towards the acknowledgment that to remove nutrition is to starve someone to death.
i hope the link works, so you may read the rest of the responsum yourself. i am off to think some more, and to get a neck rub!
Saturday, March 26, 2005
piglet opera house
i have to say that when i first looked at the sydney opera house in real life, all i could do was laugh. nothing to do with the architecture ... it was just how i felt upon seeing such an icon in real life. it had been a long time since i had seen such a thing for the first time. blase european that i think i am, the eiffel tower, the brandenburg gate, the tower of london ... old friends.
how did i get to be standing there? i flew from d.c. to los angeles (no memory how i got to d.c. from the valley), had a quick sugar-free ice-cream with leslie and lanlan in the airport, then 15 hours to sydney. it wasn't so long since the herniated disc problems, and so i had asked for a seat at the back of the plane so i could stand behind it and stretch during the flight. i got the seat, which was right next to the toilets, so i think i got to know everyone on the plane by the end. when deb collected me, it was first thing in the morning. "what would you like to do?" she asked. "the opera house," i mumbled in my sleep-deprived grogginess, "must take piglet pic at opera house." here it is.
how did i get to be standing there? i flew from d.c. to los angeles (no memory how i got to d.c. from the valley), had a quick sugar-free ice-cream with leslie and lanlan in the airport, then 15 hours to sydney. it wasn't so long since the herniated disc problems, and so i had asked for a seat at the back of the plane so i could stand behind it and stretch during the flight. i got the seat, which was right next to the toilets, so i think i got to know everyone on the plane by the end. when deb collected me, it was first thing in the morning. "what would you like to do?" she asked. "the opera house," i mumbled in my sleep-deprived grogginess, "must take piglet pic at opera house." here it is.
day after day after day
i am back from the first set of interviews. washington state was quite beautiful, although the dirty grey snow back east and the brown stubble slowly emerging from beneath it is not really much competition for cherry blossom on the trees and daffodils all over. i flew back last night, which meant i kind of missed purim. sweeties at the one congregation gave me a bag of hamantaschen (all mohn as well, since i'd ranted about my purist preference at some point during the interview). aaaaah, bless.
i haven't really watched television since august. having been a complete junkie my whole life (i got my own tiny black and white portable for my batmitzvah, and my mother said i did not leave my room again for several years ... and that was when there were only 3 channels), i just never got round to getting cable service hooked up. strange things have happened since then - i have read a lot more books, and they were nothing to do with work. sometimes i go to bed before midnight and turn out the light and go to sleep. i have discovered delphine marcus on wmnr! nu - the hotel rooms i stayed in during the interviews all had tv with cable, and i did watch a bit now and then. i saw the movie 'matilda', which was fun, and most of the rest of the time the machine was on, i left it on cnn. do not like them, but they seemed preferable to the other alternatives i tested. thus, i am now an expert on the case of terri shiavo, if having heard about it afternoon, evening and morning may be a qualification. the main comment i remember is some viewer writing in to respond to the question: should the supreme court hear this case? the reply was: absolutely. after all, we have to ... day after day after day!
the blogosphere is overflowing with comments from all points of view. don't want to clog it up with another blog. simply, two issues for me: that of right to life/death, and the bush family's apparent ignorance of the separation of powers, e.g., government and judiciary, that are at the root of u.s. democracy. through maimon's blogspot, i floated around and landed on this quote from andrew sullivan's site:
"THE HYSTERIA MOUNTS: I'm beginning to wonder if the Republican party will soon oppose the whole concept of an independent judiciary. Just read William Bennett's screed in National Review. It contains the sentence: "It is a mistake to believe that the courts have the ultimate say as to what a constitution means." Bennett and his co-author argue that Jeb Bush should send in state troops to reinsert the feeding tube and break the law if necessary. Screw the science. Screw the court system. Screw the law. I disagree with Jonah that this is a minor spat with no long-term consequences. We are looking directly at the real face of contemporary Republicanism. Sane, moderate, thoughtful people are watching this circus and will not soon forget it."
where are the sane, moderate, thoughtful people? "if you're not with me, you're agin me!" seems to be the message of the moment: if you won't fight for this woman's life, then you must be an advocate for murder; and if you won't acknowledge that euthanasia is morally permissible, then you must be a right-wing religious nut. all er nuthin. one more quote i found interesting:
"QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Here's the question I ask of these right-to-lifers, including Vatican bishops: as we enter into Holy Week and we proclaim that death is not triumphant and that with the power of resurrection and the glory of Easter we have the triumph of Christ over death, what are they talking about by presenting death as an unmitigated evil? It doesn’t fit Christian context. Richard McCormick, who was the great Catholic moral theologian of the last 25 years, wrote a brilliant article in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1974 called "To Save or Let Die." He said there are two great heresies in our age (and heresy is a strong word in theology — these are false doctrines). One is that life is an absolute good and the other is that death is an absolute evil. We believe that life was created and is a good, but a limited good. Therefore the obligation to sustain it is a limited one. The parameters that mark off those limits are your capacities to function as a human." - Jesuit theologian Rev John J. Paris, on how the religious right is deploying heresy in its absolutism in the Terri Schiavo case. I couldn't agree more. What some of these people are about is not respect for life, but its fetishization."
again from andrew sullivan's page. not that one must die asap to get to the next level since it is going to be so much better, but for those with a strong belief in an afterlife in heaven with god, jesus and the angels, well ...
i haven't really watched television since august. having been a complete junkie my whole life (i got my own tiny black and white portable for my batmitzvah, and my mother said i did not leave my room again for several years ... and that was when there were only 3 channels), i just never got round to getting cable service hooked up. strange things have happened since then - i have read a lot more books, and they were nothing to do with work. sometimes i go to bed before midnight and turn out the light and go to sleep. i have discovered delphine marcus on wmnr! nu - the hotel rooms i stayed in during the interviews all had tv with cable, and i did watch a bit now and then. i saw the movie 'matilda', which was fun, and most of the rest of the time the machine was on, i left it on cnn. do not like them, but they seemed preferable to the other alternatives i tested. thus, i am now an expert on the case of terri shiavo, if having heard about it afternoon, evening and morning may be a qualification. the main comment i remember is some viewer writing in to respond to the question: should the supreme court hear this case? the reply was: absolutely. after all, we have to ... day after day after day!
the blogosphere is overflowing with comments from all points of view. don't want to clog it up with another blog. simply, two issues for me: that of right to life/death, and the bush family's apparent ignorance of the separation of powers, e.g., government and judiciary, that are at the root of u.s. democracy. through maimon's blogspot, i floated around and landed on this quote from andrew sullivan's site:
"THE HYSTERIA MOUNTS: I'm beginning to wonder if the Republican party will soon oppose the whole concept of an independent judiciary. Just read William Bennett's screed in National Review. It contains the sentence: "It is a mistake to believe that the courts have the ultimate say as to what a constitution means." Bennett and his co-author argue that Jeb Bush should send in state troops to reinsert the feeding tube and break the law if necessary. Screw the science. Screw the court system. Screw the law. I disagree with Jonah that this is a minor spat with no long-term consequences. We are looking directly at the real face of contemporary Republicanism. Sane, moderate, thoughtful people are watching this circus and will not soon forget it."
where are the sane, moderate, thoughtful people? "if you're not with me, you're agin me!" seems to be the message of the moment: if you won't fight for this woman's life, then you must be an advocate for murder; and if you won't acknowledge that euthanasia is morally permissible, then you must be a right-wing religious nut. all er nuthin. one more quote i found interesting:
"QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Here's the question I ask of these right-to-lifers, including Vatican bishops: as we enter into Holy Week and we proclaim that death is not triumphant and that with the power of resurrection and the glory of Easter we have the triumph of Christ over death, what are they talking about by presenting death as an unmitigated evil? It doesn’t fit Christian context. Richard McCormick, who was the great Catholic moral theologian of the last 25 years, wrote a brilliant article in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1974 called "To Save or Let Die." He said there are two great heresies in our age (and heresy is a strong word in theology — these are false doctrines). One is that life is an absolute good and the other is that death is an absolute evil. We believe that life was created and is a good, but a limited good. Therefore the obligation to sustain it is a limited one. The parameters that mark off those limits are your capacities to function as a human." - Jesuit theologian Rev John J. Paris, on how the religious right is deploying heresy in its absolutism in the Terri Schiavo case. I couldn't agree more. What some of these people are about is not respect for life, but its fetishization."
again from andrew sullivan's page. not that one must die asap to get to the next level since it is going to be so much better, but for those with a strong belief in an afterlife in heaven with god, jesus and the angels, well ...
Thursday, March 17, 2005
piglet eiffel
trying to pack clothes for a two-interview trip is not fun. would rather consider the comment from the kotsker i think it was that abc showed me when we studied yesterday: do not put on a false face in front of the One who has no face - it is idolatry.
still working on the idolatry part in terms of understanding it. still working on not putting on a false face in terms of learning how to be real as much of the time as i can. love the concept that god has no face - that way no one person or group may claim that they are the only ones made in god's image.
so - off for a week for these interviews ... arrive back on purim, but late in the evening so i shall not be able to celebrate. decided it would not be a good idea to try and get on the plane dressed as a persian :-)
as for piglet eiffel ... the first of two or three fun shots from a trip to paris a couple of years ago. enjoy!
still working on the idolatry part in terms of understanding it. still working on not putting on a false face in terms of learning how to be real as much of the time as i can. love the concept that god has no face - that way no one person or group may claim that they are the only ones made in god's image.
so - off for a week for these interviews ... arrive back on purim, but late in the evening so i shall not be able to celebrate. decided it would not be a good idea to try and get on the plane dressed as a persian :-)
as for piglet eiffel ... the first of two or three fun shots from a trip to paris a couple of years ago. enjoy!
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
loft piglet
big game for qpr tonight. i was so excited yesterday and settled down to follow it online. o dear. did better than john mcc who went all the way to acton station before he figured it out. if we win, we are actually back in playoff contention. not so far away from promotion, which would mean playing the manures and chelscums and being seen by americans on their cable tv. nice dream. and i may dream it until 4:45 pm est today! in honour of this, i post this shot of piglet at mecca, actually sitting in the loft upper tier, watching my beloved r's playing chesterfield i think it was. uuuuu rrrrr's
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
die dreidel die
still in a bit of denial, and psyching up for massive job interviews in the next couple of weeks, so more refuge in the past tonight, and the worst car story of all.
there is a demon that lives on interstate 81 just outside of syracuse, ny. the day my grandmother died, a sheet of water thrown up by a speeding semi sent me and a rented car slamming into the guard rail. i walked away, and my mother said that omi took my place. some years later, in almost the exact same spot, another 18-wheeler overtook me and, as it cut in front of me, clipped the corner of the car and sent me spinning into the concrete divider, the back of the corolla concertina-ed up against it. as i walked away from the wreck, i remember looking back and seeing red liquid seeping from the car and thinking wow - somebody shot my car! i was a little dazed. next i am in the back of an ambulance (wow - my first ambulance!) immobilised on a backboard with some guy asking me stupid questions like 'how old are you?' and 'what do you do?' 'i'm a rabbi,' i said. 'really?' he replied, 'ian, the driver, is jewish. i'm not, but i can sing the dreidel song!' and he did. for a long time. i was tied down, and could do nothing about it. had i mentioned that it was memorial day? several months before chanukah. to this day i cannot hear that song without breaking into a cold sweat. in fact, some years later when i took my second ride in an ambulance (toxic reaction to painkillers prescribed for an herniated disc), after the fuss was over janet had something interesting to tell me. apparently, the ambulance lady had told her that throughout the ride across the 'burg i kept pointing at her and hissing 'don't you DARE sing!'.
i've avoided i-81 by syracuse ever since
there is a demon that lives on interstate 81 just outside of syracuse, ny. the day my grandmother died, a sheet of water thrown up by a speeding semi sent me and a rented car slamming into the guard rail. i walked away, and my mother said that omi took my place. some years later, in almost the exact same spot, another 18-wheeler overtook me and, as it cut in front of me, clipped the corner of the car and sent me spinning into the concrete divider, the back of the corolla concertina-ed up against it. as i walked away from the wreck, i remember looking back and seeing red liquid seeping from the car and thinking wow - somebody shot my car! i was a little dazed. next i am in the back of an ambulance (wow - my first ambulance!) immobilised on a backboard with some guy asking me stupid questions like 'how old are you?' and 'what do you do?' 'i'm a rabbi,' i said. 'really?' he replied, 'ian, the driver, is jewish. i'm not, but i can sing the dreidel song!' and he did. for a long time. i was tied down, and could do nothing about it. had i mentioned that it was memorial day? several months before chanukah. to this day i cannot hear that song without breaking into a cold sweat. in fact, some years later when i took my second ride in an ambulance (toxic reaction to painkillers prescribed for an herniated disc), after the fuss was over janet had something interesting to tell me. apparently, the ambulance lady had told her that throughout the ride across the 'burg i kept pointing at her and hissing 'don't you DARE sing!'.
i've avoided i-81 by syracuse ever since
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)