Some Commentary for Today

Excerpted from an op-ed in today's Globe:

In recent years, I have encountered criticism for being wishy-washy, with some bloggers parodying my columns as perpetual on-the-one-hand/on-the-other-hand vacillation. I can take the heat, but we've come to a sad pass when an attempt to see several sides of an immensely complicated issue is seen as unprincipled or weak-minded. In today's political climate, both commentators and audiences are all too likely to tune out not only arguments but facts that challenge their perceptions.
Perhaps this polarization is itself a legacy of Sept. 11. Perhaps, after the horror and destruction of that day, we are still looking for black-and-white moral clarity, only different people see black and white on different sides. For some, ``evildoers" include not only foreign enemies but liberals and leftists at home; for others, absolute evil resides in the White House itself. Ironically, today's more diverse -- and more fractured -- media contribute to the polarized discourse, allowing people to stay in comfortable ideological niches.
Some of the tensions and dichotomies we confront today may be tragic paradoxes with no good answers. Yet in many cases, solutions that transcend the either/or and address both sides of the issue are possible -- as long as one is willing to look at both sides.

Read the rest here.

Of Truth and Terror

I haven't been able to sleep until well past midnight the past two nights. Last night I got home from the Sox game and turned on the TV to quiet the thoughts racing around my head and hopefully lull me into a half-coma so I could eventually drift to sleep. This backfired (as it usually does) when I found myself drawn into a Sept 11th documentary on The Learning Channel. Two hours (3am) later I am knee deep in tears, had been awake for almost 24 straight hours, and found myself at a complete loss. Being that it was 3am, I eventually fell asleep, but I woke up today with that same heavy feeling - the same heavy feeling I get every year around this time.

Sept 11th means different things to different people. My experience is unique and important to me only, with crossover occurring only in the few moments where I shared the events of the day in the company of select others. I was in NY state, safely several hundred miles away from the city, but no matter where you were on the planet, that day was completely surreal. I am fascinated, if not morbidly so, by the stories of those who were actually there - of whom a friend from high school was one - of the deeply personal tales of tragedy and triumph that came out of that day. For the first time in hundreds of years, we had war in our own backyard, in the heart of where we call home. War came to us, not us to them and there was a distinct difference.

It is incredibly perverse to me that we, as a people who "belong" to a country, will speak with great horror and sadness of the tragedy (for it can be nothing else) of close to 3,000 innocent lives taken in those few hours that perfect fall morning, yet, in the same breath, chalk up the loss of Iraqi civilian lives as "part of the process" of war. Things are very different when it is so close to home...

But, as we all know, Sept 11th and Iraq have nothing to do with one another, and I only bring it up here as a passing thought that just ran through my head. Today I will go to my favorite place on earth and do the only thing I can think to do - give blood to the American Red Cross. I remember feeling, as idealistic late-teen and twenty-somethings, completely helpless. Given our professional rescuer training, most of the trainers at my college wanted to arrange a delegation and help with the search and rescue. In the end, we were discouraged from doing so because the offerings for help had become so overwhelming that NYC rescue services couldn't coordinate everyone and were having a harder time with the operation than if they just did it themselves. But the people I knew, we all did what we did because it was who we were - we were training for a profession where our entire existence was to help out in a crisis. Athlete gets injured, call in the trainer. To stand by and do nothing was not in our DNA.

Now Sept 11th is a day of reflection for me. It is a day (or often several days) where I evaluate and re-evaluate my life, my values, my beliefs. What have I done this year to help someone else? How do I feel about the world at-large and my country's place in it? Am I doing my part to be a force for peace and understanding in the world? Am I educating myself enough to be not just tolerant, but accepting? Am I intolerant of the things that need to be changed, and have I done anything to change them? Who, and what, is important to me? What about my co-worker, my family, my friend, my neighbor - what's important to them and can I help? It's almost as if, as the only way I know to honor those people who so unassumingly had their lives taken from them, I use this day as a personal reminder to never become complacent.

I haven't forgotten what that day and the weeks that followed felt like - and I don't need a bumper sticker to remind me. We are, simply, in a war of ideas where the casualties are far too many and too real. In a highly globalized world, I am no Patriot and have never been a flag-waving "proud American" - I mostly just felt like a human being who happened to be lucky enough to be born in a country that offers me a vast amount of opportunity, however imperfect it may be. It was extremely disheartening to know that, no matter what I thought of Islam and al-Qaida, had I been in those buildings I would have been killed as indiscriminantly as the next person just for being an American. I have a hard time wrapping my head around something like that, around that kind of hatred and extremism and senseless judgement. It puts someone like me in a precarious position - how do you not muddy the simultaneous truths of wanting the persons responsible for such an act brought to justice, but yet not judge the ideas that brought about this plan? Who am I to judge ones religious beliefs, but what do I do when those beliefs mean death to non-believers just for not believing? Obviously, in my point of view, islamic extremism (meaning jihad and senseless, grandiose acts of violence) is just that - extreme - but these people have a different point of view. How did they come to that view? What caused this sort of extremism? What made 19 men board 4 planes to kill themselves and 3,000 others? Why did they not only think this was okay, but honorable?

I don't have the answers. I don't think anyone does - or, more accurately, there are so many answers out there that knowing which one is right is not possible - and maybe there is no right answer. This posting is disjointed, I know, but its fragmentation is a literal reflection of how I feel about this whole experience in the first place. Because I am one person, and I can't rebuild the towers or make those people alive again or single-handedly change the course of history, I am doing the one thing I can do. I'm using today as a reminder to look outside myself, because you never know - you just never know. Does that mean I quit my job and join the Peace Corp? No. Does it mean I commit myself to a lifetime of permanent public servitude? No. I have learned over time that there is no shame in pursuing your own happiness (though trying not to have it at the expense of others is certainly preferable), as there are others better-suited for the roles I mentioned and many others I did not. But it is my job to remain an active citizen, to look outside my walls from time to time and keep my eyes open for the opportunity to help when I can, and to take that opportunity when it comes. I need to educate when able, learn when able, do when able. In that, I become not just one, but one of many - and that is when a true difference is made.

Here in Boston, tomorrow will be another beautiful, cool, sunny September day. This time, we hope, no tragedies - and maybe, instead, some small victories of sorts.

Onward, Upward

For the past few weeks I have been hinting at some changes in my life, both on my blog and basically in every conversation I've had with people (I have a hard time hiding big news that involves myself because I always want people to share in my excitement!). Despite wanting to scream these developments from the rooftops, I have done my best to keep the details quiet, mostly in case everything fell through.

I am glad to report that it didn't fall through, and I am moving forward. Today I gave my notice to the hospital where I have worked as an Aide for 2 1/2 years and I am going to begin working full-time at the personal training studio where I currently work full-time.

Leaving Physical Therapy for Personal Training is, on the surface, a downgrade. Here's why I say "downgrade" and "on the surface." Historically (and still currently, to an extent), obtaining a physical therapy degree that allows you to practice involves a great deal more education than becoming a personal trainer. The training field has always been a step or two behind in requiring degrees to be able to sit for their exams, versus PT (physical therapy) which has, at least for several generations, required a minimum of a bachelor's degree to practice (and now requires a minimum of a doctorate if you begin school now).

It is because of this educational gap that there are a lot of trainers out there who really have very little credibility or know-how other than the ability to study for and pass a single exam that then gives them "certification" and allows them to work. Disclaimer: not all bad trainers are uneducated, and not all uneducated trainers are bad - I am merely speaking in generalizations. Discounting the exceptions, training is a lot easier to get into than PT, and often is regarded as a "lesser field" in the world of healthcare.

This is all about to change.

A combination of an "obesity epidemic," the Baby Boomer generation hitting retirement age, a high demand for competent personal trainers as more people want personalized services for everything, and wages for trainers that are competitive (or sometimes better) with PT salaries has meant big things for the field of personal training. More and more highly educated - often former PTs - are sensing a business opportunity about to tip.

This is where I come in. I, along with several other people I am in contact with, want to change personal training and fitness as we know it. Some people I have spoken with aren't in it for the sake of the profession, but are riding a wave of success that comes with credibility. For myself, I want to build that success from the ground up by bringing personal training to a higher level. This means applying my own education - as it is so far and as I plan on continuing it - to the field to better myself and provide a better service to my client. By doing so, I say to my client, "I can provide you with a better overall workout due to my comprehensive understanding of the human body systems and the effect of exercise on them." That may sound like a mouthful, but my point will be made. Additionally, and this is a big point, I want to change the focus of personal training. Too often clients, enabled by their trainers, associate "being fit" with "having big muscles" or "running a few miles." I associate fitness with quality-of-life. How well can you perform your daily activities? Can you participate in your weekend softball league without injury or days of soreness afterward? Are you prone to injuries in your every-day life due to muscle imbalances, joint instability, or excessive weight? Are you depressed, feel lethargic, or feel unmotivated?

I want to show people how to train to combat one or all of these aspects of fitness. I want to show them that physical and mental health are not only related, but connected. I want to teach them that if you train movements, not muscles (a common theme in the up-and-coming fitness views), you not only will achieve the "look" that most people come to a gym seeking, but you will achieve real, applicable, functional benefits, as well.

This is the mantra that has been bouncing around my head for some time now, and I have been offered the opportunity to put it into play. While I am nervous to the point of being slightly physically ill, I think a lot of it is excitement. It's not often I choose to embark on something so ambitious as to completely change my life's plan. Granted, the end goal is the same, I just jumped onto vastly different pathway to it - and it might be for the best. I'm hoping that before I was trying to get from here to Seattle on back roads, and now I'm cruising on I-90 all the way. (I had to throw in an obligatory lame analogy).

So, wish me luck as I venture out (after Labor Day) into this new wilderness. And hey, if you wanna come work out with me, I'd be glad to fit you in :-)

West coast time, East coast reality

I'm actually not sure it's that I'm stuck on West Coast time, because we kept weird hours while I was out there anyway. Whatever the reason, I am once again having a restless, sleepless night here in eastern Massachusetts. I am barely back from San Francisco - it was AMAZING - and already I'm wondering about the Next Big Thing.

Let's not lie about it - I've got some things up my sleeves. Lately my life has been changing more than usual... at a faster rate, in different ways, you name it. I know I always talk about being in transition and at times I feel a little contrite and counterintuitive saying it. I realized it's because transition is not something I seek, it's just something that happens to me. This conclusion manifested itself as I was conversing with my friend whom I was visiting in SF. She seeks change, no question about it. She wants the new, the different - and maybe not in conventional ways, such as finding the latest trend or anything like that. It's more like she needs the novelty of experience. She wants to be a part of something that's new to her, so she can learn and grow and enjoy it in her own, novel way.

For me, change is something that, if anything, I resist, but that often finds me anyway. I mean, things just happen - that's how the world works. Some people can put up blinders and walls and what happens around them doesn't change anything for them, but I don't have that ability. Things that happen often profoundly affect me, even when they don't directly affect me. Little things changing around me - people, physical surroundings, events - affect me subtly, slowly, in ways I'm not even always aware of until one day I see my own change. I have always known I am somewhat maelleable, but I always thought it was a bad thing and something to be resisted, as in the definition, "Capable of being shaped or formed. Easily controlled or influenced; tractable." Suddenly, I have discovered the exact opposite: "Able to adjust to changing circumstances; adaptable." That doesn't sound so bad.

I just finished The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell, and one of the best things he said in the book was regarding his observation that people act differently when put in different situations. Most people would read that and say, Duh. But I think, more often than not, acting differently in different situations gives you the label of "fake" or of not being true to oneself. Certainly I have thought that of others on certain occassions, when I see them act one way around one group of people and a completely different way (often incongruously with how I see them) around a different group of people. I'm sure there is a gray area here between being unsure of and untrue to oneself and the ability to be malleable and adapt to your situation. The question is, which am I? Maybe I have been so afraid of the former that I never could embrace - indeed, never even acknowledged - the latter.

Gladwell writes,
"Character, then, isn't what we think it is, or, rather, what we want it to be. It isn't a stable, easily identifiable set of closely related traits, and it only seems that way because of a glitch in the way our brains are organized. Character is more like a bundle of habits and tendencies and interests, loosely bound together and dependent, at certain times, on circumstance and context. The reason that most of us seem to have a consistent character is that most of us are really good at controlling our environment."

Interesting stuff.

Along with all these quirky, slightly different ways I have been provided at looking at things, I find that right now I am actively pursuing change in my life. This is new for me, and I think mostly the reason I am awake right now. Obviously I have pursued change - I've moved, gone to school, worked different jobs, dated different people, etc. Change is impossible to avoid, and as someone who always wants to better herself, I'm going to have to embrace change at some point. However, most of my previous changes were in the normal course of my life. When you're done with high school, most people go to college; when a relationship doesn't work anymore, you stop dating; when a job isn't providing you with a way to meet your goals, you get a different one. This is the first time in recent memory that I am considering stepping away from the status quo - leaving the path I have worked so hard to set up for myself - for something new and uncertain.

Clearly, no risk I take is ever that extreme. I won't even drive without my seatbelt on - but that's because I consider that a dumb decision (being unbuckled), and there lies my point: it's possible to take risks that are also intelligent. They are risks because there is no guarantee, but it is an intelligent risk because one is informed, cautious, and leaps when the the other side of the cliff is reachable. It's still a cliff - but it's not a chasm. This is why my brain has been working overtime (plus I shut it off for 6 days on vacation and it has a lot of catching up to do). I am trying to take a smart risk. I see people identifying their dreams and going after them - my buddy Push (alias to protect the innocent) always seems to have his hand in 238743 different projects, from albums with his band, solo projects, starting his own company, and working the 9-5 in the meantime. There's someone who goes after what he wants, even if it's hard work and doesn't always bring the desired results - he still finds his happiness, and if something doesn't work out, it's onto something else that will.

So, I'm trying to take the first step in my own adventure of sorts. I'm still waiting on a few details but it's obvious I'm excited and hoping for the best. Could I fall on my face? Absolutely. Maybe that's part of the thrill - it's not as if I'm jumping without a net, but we're not talking Volvo-rated safety here... even seatbelts fail sometimes. This has been vague, but that's also kind of the point - trying to work it all out in my head without the specifics. What does my gut say?

My gut say... find out the rest of the details, first. Sit down, think it out. You want to do it, but does it make sense? If the answer is yes - Go.

"Into the infinite abyss..."

On the Green Monster with the 2004 World Series Champions trophy

I had to post this picture on here like an entry so I could use it as my new profile picture... because as technologically-savvy as I am, I am lacking on the programming abilities these days... In case you're interested, we won with a David Ortiz walk-off homerun in the bottom of the ninth inning, AND I was on tv because a Kevin Mench homerun earlier in the game hit the guy next to me. Fun times!

Frustrating Single-Mindedness

Today I received the following email (as a forward):

Dear God:
Why didn't you save the school children at ?. ..
Moses Lake, Washington 2/2/96
Bethel, Alaska 2/19/97
Pearl, Mississippi 10/1/97
West Paducah, Kentucky 12/1/97
Stamp, Arkansas 12/15/97
Jonesboro, Arkansas 3/24/98
Edinboro, Pennsylvania 4/24/98
Fayetteville, Tennessee 5/19/98
Springfield, Oregon 5/21/98
Richmond, Virginia 6/15/98
Littleton, Colorado 4/20/99
Taber, Alberta, Canada 5/28/99
Conyers, Georgia 5/20/99
Deming, New Mexico 11/19/99
Fort Gibson, Oklahoma 12/6/99
Santee, California 3/ 5/01 and
El Cajon, California 3/22/01?

Sincerely,
Concerned Student
-----------------------------------------------------
Reply:
Dear Concerned Student:
I am not allowed in schools.
Sincerely,
God
----------------------------------------------------------
How did this get started?...
-----------------
Let's see, I think it started when Madeline Murray O'Hare complained she didn't want any prayer in our schools. And we said, OK..
------------------
Then, someone said you better not read the Bible in school, the Bible that says"thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, and love your neighbors as yourself,"And we said, OK...
-----------------
Dr. Benjamin Spock saidwe shouldn't spank our children when they misbehaved because their little personalities would be warped and we might damage their self-esteem. And we said, an expert should know what he's talking about so we won't spank them anymore..
------------------
Then someone said teachers and principals better not discipline our children when they misbehave. And the school administrators said no faculty member in this school better touch a student when they misbehave because we don't want any bad publicity, and we surely don't want to be sued. And we accepted their reasoning...
------------------
Then someone said, let's let our daughters have abortions if they want, and they won't even have to tell their parents. And we said, that's a grand idea...
------------------
Then some wise school board member said, since boys will be boys and they're going to do it anyway, let's give our sons all the condoms they want, so they can have all the fun they desire, and we won't have to tell their parents they got them at school. And we said, that's another great idea...
------------------
Then some of our top elected officials said it doesn't matter what we do in private as long as we do our jobs. And we said, it doesn't matter what anybody, including the President, does in private as long as we have jobs and the economy is good...
------------------
And someone else took that appreciation a step further and published pictures of nude children and then stepped further still by making them available on the Internet. And we said, everyone's entitled to free speech....
------------------
And the entertainment industry said, let's make TV shows and movies that promote profanity, violence and illicit sex... And let's record music that encourages rape, drugs, murder, suicide, and satanic themes... And we said, it's just entertainment and it has no adverse effect and nobody takes it seriously anyway, so go right ahead.
------------------
Now we're asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them tokill strangers, classmates or even themselves.
------------------
Undoubtedly, if we thought about it long and hard enough, we could figure it out. I'm sure it has a great deal to do with..."WE REAP WHAT WE SOW,"
------------------
Pass it on if you think it has merit! If not then just discard it...but if you discard this thought process, then don't you dare sit back and complain about what bad shape this country is in!

I don't normally give any thought to these sorts of things because I assume everyone can see what crap this "logic" is and will disregard it, as well. However, I am increasingly uncomfortable with what passes for "reason" these days as more and more intelligent people blatantly diregard information that is inconvenient to their way of thinking while embracing and propagating only their half of every story. With this in mind, I felt like I needed to respond to this madness.

My response is as follows:

Speaking of education, whoever started this email could use some because that is a blatent misrepresentation of our country's laws and the situations in our schools.

Perhaps they could find out more than the just the "talking points" that one side of the issue spoon-feeds them (aka the conservative side in this instance)? I'm pretty sure no one said "Yay! Let all our daughters have abortions!" Or, "Let's not discipline students!" (Ever hear of detention, suspension, or expulsion? Corporal punishment is a LITTLE different. Do we WANT teachers - or parents - beating children??)

No one know why Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold did what they did - there is a lot of speculation, but not much concrete evidence. We DO know that they had access to the weaponry they used to pull off the Columbine massacre. We DO know that despite being close to graduation, they were still children, vulnerable to many influences in AND out of school. If you think that teaching one specific religion (christianity, according the the references of "God" and "the Bible" in this email), not teaching sex education, using corporal punishment, restricting women's rights, and legislating what we do privately (ie, in the bedroom as is implied) would have made a difference in Columbine - or in any school shooting - then you are nothing but a fool.

But, since it was brought up, let's examine the issues at hand.

"God" was taken out of the schools, yes. Is prayer explicitly outlawed? No, though it is certainly not encouraged and a strong argument could be made that it is often discouraged. Students can pray on their own if they want (though I would say that most don't and probably feel like they shouldn't or can't), but teachers do not lead prayers. This is done for 2 main reasons. The first has to do with a separation of church and state. Public schools - funded by public money - do not have prayer endorsed (ie, led) in schools by school officials at any level. Private schools, however, are often faith-based (though not always) and can have any sort of prayer services they want since they are funded with private money. This leads us to the second reason God isn't in school. People of MANY faiths attend public school. Again, as implied in this email, the writer seems to find it a problem that "God" and "the Bible" - indicating christianity - aren't in school. What about Jewish children? Muslims? Athiests? Agnostics? Buddhists? The list goes on. I am sure the writer values his or her ability to freely practice his or her own religion without having other religions forced on him/her. What if schools said, "There can be prayer in schools, but it can only be to Allah."? Someone may believe that their religion is the right one, but one of the great things about this country is that ALL religions are welcome without persecution or judgement. Perhaps the writer should remember this when complaining about America.

Let us address spanking and physical punishment both by parents and teachers. I was spanked maybe once or twice as a kid (that I can remember) by a parent, and I don't think it warped my mind. However, there is a fine line here. I am not one for "slippery slopes," and I will not argue that allowing spanking opens the flood-gates for abuse. However, there are enough abused children in this country (and here I am speaking about relatives) that I think at this point in our civilization it would be prudent to find other forms of punishment that do not involving striking someone. Think of the lesson this teaches - do something bad, get whacked. Not, "get in trouble," not "lose privileges." Which is closer to real life: doing something wrong and receiving a beating (or handing one out for missteps by others), or doing something wrong and receiving a punishment that results in the loss of privileges and freedoms? Why would we ever incorporate physical pain as a "lesson to be learned?" As for punishment in classrooms, certainly there are times where kids of all ages run amok. Would the writer of this email want a stranger doling out corporal punishment at the their own discretion? Would the writer want his or her child to be struck for speaking out of turn or various classroom offenses (that aren't criminal)? We entrust teachers with the SAFETY of our students, with keeping them from harm and arming them with the tools to succeed and simultaneously keep themselves from harm. Why then would we allow them to injure, however temporarily, our children? Are lessons of violence, however minor it may seem, as retribution or punishment the lessons we want taught in our classrooms?

I don't even know where to begin with the "abortion/condom" argument, it is so ludicrous. What kind of person thinks we are letting "our daughters have abortions if they want, they won't even have to tell their parents."? First, abortion being legal does not mean it is unrestricted. Second, it doesn't mean it's free. Third, it doesn't mean anyone can have one. And finally, it is misleading and juvenile to imply, as this writer does by using the term "our daughters," that it's a bunch of 13-17 year old girls who are having abortions (particularly because this is an email regarding secondary school students). Unfortunately I don't have the time or energy to look up the statistics (if there even are any publically available) on women who have abortions before turning 18, but I'm willing to bet it's a lot fewer than is implied. Certainly, a valid argument can be made that ANY girl under 18 having an abortion is too many, and I understand that. I sympathize with the wish that no woman - much less a child - have to make such a decision. However, all women should have a choice (I'm not even getting into the reasons why because it is just so obvious to me that any rational person would want to have control over their own body decisions and would extend that courtesy to others). Yes, women under 18 are minors. But, if they made the adult decision to engage in sexual intercourse - whether or not that decision is judged as "right" or "wrong" - that girl should be allowed the adult decision of how to proceed next. Don't give me that "what about the consequences" baloney - go talk to women who've had abortions and ask them if it was easy. Some say yes, some say no, and that is the nature of choice. I don't want this to turn into a debate on the merits of abortion, so I will tie it back into the email - regardless of how the writer feels about abortion, it is naive to think the laws of our country actually ENCOURAGE having an abortion. What about our laws says to you, "Hey, go end your pregnancy!" As for the boys, because obviously it takes two to make a baby, if they're using condoms don't you think pregnancy could have been avoided in the first place? One can debate the wisdom of handing them out freely in classrooms - and I'm willing to bet that happens very rarely. But what if your child said to you, "I'm going to have sex, and there's no changing my mind. I can either do it safely or with the risk of pregnancy and disease - you choose." I'm betting the writer would either cave into "the lesser of two evils" or just flat out disown their child. Think about this rationally. If a child is going to make a decision - again, GOOD OR BAD, it's their decision to make - wouldn't we want them to be as informed and as safe as they can be? I don't particularly think it's a good idea for people to go jumping out of planes, but I certainly think they ought to do it with proper knowledge and that canvas 'chute strapped on tight rather than with nothing at all.

As for the Clinton reference and doing what we want in the bedroom... can we please get over this? Did his BJ ruin YOUR marriage? No! Did his policies help our economy? Yes! Will gay marriage being legal mean the love you have for your spouse is less valid? No! Will building loving families create a more stable society? Yes! We all know that strong values learned in a family setting have a positive effect on children - what does gender have to do with it?? What if your husband or wife wanted to go down on you - that's sodomy! Do you think, as a consenting adult, you have the right to choose that?

And who the HELL said publishing nude pictures of children on the internet was free speech??? Honestly if this one is actually true then maybe we are in some serious trouble, but my guess is it's a misunderstanding/misrepresentation of some situation. It's pretty obvious that we go after child pornographers or other child sexual offenders aggressively in this country.

Finally, blaming the media is such a 1990's cop-out. Get with the times. Yes, it's unfortunate that violence tends to be glamourized throughout our culture. Yet, it is possible to screen what our children watch and listen to, and to have an open dialogue with them regarding what is right and what is wrong. Do not blame various forms of media (be it song, movie, tv show, painting, sculpture, etc) for bringing violence into the lives of our children. Wars bring violence into the lives our children. Religion brings violence into the lives of our children (please refer back to the history of christianity and bible scriptures). If you advocate corporal punishment, then YOU bring violence into the lives of our children. I learned of wars in our past, I saw Desert Storm and now see Operation Iraqi Freedom, I went to the Catholic church and was taught of the Crusades and how Jesus was killed. My parents taught me violence was wrong and demonstrated this to me every day. I know that violence toward others is wrong. How hard is this concept to follow?

Yes, we reap what we sow. But where do these seeds begin? We strive to give our children "roots and wings." If you aren't pleased with how your kids are, how your kids friends are, then look no further than yourself and your neighbors. Teach, learn, lead by example and expect dignity and respect from others - but do not judge. Didn't Jesus say that was God's job?

Finally, even if I didn't go through and rebut every single so-called "argument" made by the writer of this email, what did any of it have to do with school violence? The writer never even tied in what any of the supposed problems had to do with provoking, enabling, or encouraging violence in our schools - instead he or she just used these tragic events as a chance to grandstand his or her narrow-minded and uninformed views on "the way things should be," without regard to any of the direct circumstances surrounded the incidents, and lament the "sorry state of our nation" (while citing an instance of school violence in Alberta in 1999, which last I checked is in Canada, which just adds to the overall ridiculousness of this email).

If you've received the above email and agree with it, I ask only for you to consider the merits of the arguments made - which is kind of hard to do since no actual argument was made, just a far-fetched implied connection between the problems listed and the violence cited. No one says you have to be pro-choice, you have to be okay with sex education in schools, you shouldn't be religious, you should let your children be undisciplined brats, and you should not teach values. Again, the best part about our country is that people with ALL views co-exist here, and we try our best (sometimes better than others) to strike compromise and find fairness and middle-ground wherever we can when legislating. But just like my views should not be the letter of the law, neither should any one person's - and that means anybody reading this right now. Can we come to a collective agreement? Fine - hence, Democracy.

It is an absolute shame that the deaths of anyone - but particularly of children - is used to hype any one way of thinking. There is no one, definitely, right-or-wrong, black-or-white answer to why any school shootings - or violence of any kind - occurs. As we are all made up of a multitude of influences, how can we point to any one thing as the culprit? Conversely, how can we point to any one solution that, in all reality, may work for some but not for others? Just because finding religion and practicing safe sex worked to make you a good person, doesn't mean that's enough for someone else - in fact, radical islamics are deeply religious and have very strict rules on intercourse, and still kill people (and christians kill people too so that argument is moot).

I've officially worked myself into a froth over this damn email and I need to go to bed. I plead with everyone I know: THINK RATIONALLY! Get to know BOTH sides of an issue! Make a stand, yes, but be informed! Thank you.

*Steps off soap box*

The Things We Live For

While I wait for my microwave dinner (the 4th of the week) to heat up, here are a few of the things that are in my future and serve to currently get me through each and every day with the thought of reaching them:

* 13 days until my next Sox game
* 18 days until 4th of July fun (on the 3rd of July, though) and subsequently 3 consecutive days off for the first time since January
* 22 days until Dave Matthews Band at Fenway
* 29 days until MIKEY COMES and goes to the Sox with me
* 30 days until my "little brother" turns 21 (can you believe that??)
* 35 days until I head to San Francisco to visit Lindsay!!
* 49 days until I am DONE with Chemistry class

It sounds like a lot, and it is, but considering I'm 24, working 2 jobs at around 52 hours a week, and taking classes, I think it's some fun that I deserve to have!

And speaking of class, I have to jet off there now... will this ever end?? Oh yeah, in 49 more days.