Who better to elaborate on the topic of forgiveness than one so in need of it. That pretty much qualifies everyone to take a crack at this topic, but since this is my blog, here goes.
As a spectator society we love it when we see a great story unfolds in the press. Real life dramas are the thing of legend and great allegory. The rise of the great and would-be great just to learn the wisdom of humility and the folly of self-indulgence, and in the end, then to become a success story rather than a cautionary tale. Even the Betty Ford clinic owes such a tale for its very existence; all of its successes would be nil but for the public example of great humility offered by its namesake.
Consider how willing we are to forgive the performer, athlete, or politician when they voluntarily submit to their greater demons of substance abuse or other addictions. We applaud their personal awakening and wish them well, sure in the assumption that this will be the last time and they will emerge better, cured, and blessed. It is in these greater expectations we show a level of forgiveness; willingness to move on and allow that poor individual a chance to do the same.
At the same time we also are selective about to whom we grant forgiveness. Robert Downey Jr.; yes. Charlie Sheen; no. Daryl Strawberry; yes. Pete Rose; no. Bill Clinton; yes. Trent Lott; no. Adam Baldwin; yes, yes, no, yes, no, no, yes, yes, maybe, no.
Perhaps its not real forgiveness at all. Perhaps its the pretty face, the handsome features, the sense of humor, the political stripe, and last but not least, who is telling the story.
True forgiveness is and should be for everyone and by everyone. Take it out of the faith context for just a moment and consider it logically. If you only grant forgiveness on those who seem worthy, just what was it they did that made you think they needed forgiveness, and was it all that bad in the first place. Was it all just window dressing for a fading set of greater expectations that we hold ourselves to less and less as time marches by.
Lately we have had the chance to consider numerous examples of public mea culpas from the great and wanna-be greats, from both politics, sports. Lets consider two of them and let me offer a reason for unbridled and unconditional forgiveness.
Mark McGwire, former baseball great and once holder of a now steroid tainted single season home-run record, came out publicly and completely yesterday, confessing his suspected use of steroids. From my assessment he seemed to be contrite and sincere. He even went to the trouble of calling and apologizing to the widow of the former record holder, Roger Maris, so she would have it first hand and not have to read it about it or hear about it in the press.
Senate Majority leader Harry Reid's now infamous comments about then presidential candidate Barak Obama made us all think about a long and gratefully lost era in American racial relations. Its unclear if he himself harbored the view that the right skin shade and the right dialect on the right black candidate was a potential winning combo, or if he was merely projecting these values on the voting public (i.e. you and me). He has publicly apologized.
The yammering classes will have their say. Much will be printed, much will be said and much will be blogged. Notwithstanding all that is offered to explain why one, both or neither deserve any further good consideration, one thing rings clear and true. Today they both have heard the judgement of their behavior and that we, generally, expect more of people than what we saw in them on that day or days when they chose badly.
Messrs McGwire and Reid, now is your teaching moment.
First things first, if you mess-up, fess-up and ask for forgiveness. You change your ways and sincerely promise to do better. In turn we accept the fault as past and forgive, but not forget. We should expect better in the future and hold the individual accountable.
To be sure, no one is more worthy of forgiveness than any other, despite what you might glean from media or editorial spin machines. In particular comparing this persons transgressions to those of another smacks of making excuses.
So, whats on the other side of the coin? Why should I forgive?
There is only one reason. Because I can.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
You say Potato..
In case you are still on the fence about whether or not CNN has chosen sides in the political discourse, of which they are supposed to be objective observers, sample this headline from this morning's fare:
"Washington (CNN) -- President Obama and congressional Democratic leaders decided Tuesday to bypass a formal House and Senate conference to meld their health care bills, according to two congressional Democratic leadership sources.
The two told CNN that Obama and Democratic congressional leaders will instead hold informal negotiations to sidestep possible Republican delays of the process."
Now for an alternative view:
"FOXNews.com
President Obama and Democratic leaders agree to keep health reform negotiations a close-door affair, bypassing a conference committee that would have opened the process to scrutiny."
When I was young and coming of age as a political being it was less common for the offices of leadership to to be so brazen in the attempt of out-and-out intellectual dishonesty. Usually someone in the press would call them on it and make them atone. Now its so common for our leaders to be able to shovel such unbelievable mounds of baloney at us that we hardly blink in response. Almost as if we expect it. Sadly, we do.
What was even more uncommon was the degree a political partisan would bend over backwards to accommodate and defend the such actions without so much as a "what were you thinking?" in trying to get an explanation for one clearly crossing lines of accepted behavior. Nobody wanted to defend a scoundrel, without very good reason anyway. Luckily, there were few.
I am a father of a teen and an almost teen, both coming of an age when discussions of politics, leadership, and public service are had daily in their social studies classrooms. So, here is my question. What do I tell my kids about how to interpret this maneuver employed by the President and the Democrat Congressional Leadership? Is it a friendly get together to discuss the weighty matter of health care legislation so as to avoid burdening the public with such pesky details? Or is it an out-and-out end run past the legislative process designed to keep the light of day off of the details?
No matter! its going to happen the way it will and in the end I will thank the Democrats profusely. I try to teach my kids about concepts of right and wrong as if they exist. I bring to their attention as often as possible examples of what it means to have character, especially when I was the example of one who could have made better choices.
I applaud the democrats for being bold enough to not care, that in a world where they are the self appointed arbiters of the "meaning" of the law and ardent admirers of holding others to the letter of the law, that they are consistent enough to ignore the spirit of the law and disrespect the process of the making of the law, all for a greater good, I'm sure.
My kids need desperately to see fine examples of highly educated men and women take to the shadows when exercising their duties as keepers of the public trust.
My daughter needs to know that before her lay choices which will carry consequences. Thanks to the President, et al. she will see the highest levels of leadership demean themselves, the institution of government and the democratic process, all in a "noble" effort to give "the people" what they want.
Ya gotta love trite, overused and hackneyed phrases, simply because at one time the truth carried within was meaningful and widely accepted.
Mr. President, character is still who you are when nobody else is watching.
First things first, turn on the lights, open the doors, and show us some character, please.
"Washington (CNN) -- President Obama and congressional Democratic leaders decided Tuesday to bypass a formal House and Senate conference to meld their health care bills, according to two congressional Democratic leadership sources.
The two told CNN that Obama and Democratic congressional leaders will instead hold informal negotiations to sidestep possible Republican delays of the process."
Now for an alternative view:
"FOXNews.com
President Obama and Democratic leaders agree to keep health reform negotiations a close-door affair, bypassing a conference committee that would have opened the process to scrutiny."
When I was young and coming of age as a political being it was less common for the offices of leadership to to be so brazen in the attempt of out-and-out intellectual dishonesty. Usually someone in the press would call them on it and make them atone. Now its so common for our leaders to be able to shovel such unbelievable mounds of baloney at us that we hardly blink in response. Almost as if we expect it. Sadly, we do.
What was even more uncommon was the degree a political partisan would bend over backwards to accommodate and defend the such actions without so much as a "what were you thinking?" in trying to get an explanation for one clearly crossing lines of accepted behavior. Nobody wanted to defend a scoundrel, without very good reason anyway. Luckily, there were few.
I am a father of a teen and an almost teen, both coming of an age when discussions of politics, leadership, and public service are had daily in their social studies classrooms. So, here is my question. What do I tell my kids about how to interpret this maneuver employed by the President and the Democrat Congressional Leadership? Is it a friendly get together to discuss the weighty matter of health care legislation so as to avoid burdening the public with such pesky details? Or is it an out-and-out end run past the legislative process designed to keep the light of day off of the details?
No matter! its going to happen the way it will and in the end I will thank the Democrats profusely. I try to teach my kids about concepts of right and wrong as if they exist. I bring to their attention as often as possible examples of what it means to have character, especially when I was the example of one who could have made better choices.
I applaud the democrats for being bold enough to not care, that in a world where they are the self appointed arbiters of the "meaning" of the law and ardent admirers of holding others to the letter of the law, that they are consistent enough to ignore the spirit of the law and disrespect the process of the making of the law, all for a greater good, I'm sure.
My kids need desperately to see fine examples of highly educated men and women take to the shadows when exercising their duties as keepers of the public trust.
My daughter needs to know that before her lay choices which will carry consequences. Thanks to the President, et al. she will see the highest levels of leadership demean themselves, the institution of government and the democratic process, all in a "noble" effort to give "the people" what they want.
Ya gotta love trite, overused and hackneyed phrases, simply because at one time the truth carried within was meaningful and widely accepted.
Mr. President, character is still who you are when nobody else is watching.
First things first, turn on the lights, open the doors, and show us some character, please.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
