My son and I at a community service project last Fall.

This morning, while sitting at the kitchen table, the question that I had expected my son to eventually ask me, was finally asked. After taking the self-applied clip-on tie off of his undershirt, buttoning his top button, and correctly reseting the tie, he looked at me and said:

“Daddy, why don’t you go to church with us?”

Kim happened to be walking down the hall, but she heard the question and raised her eyebrows at me as if to say “He’s your son!” She realized that this was going to be a man to man conversation, and continued to the bathroom to prepare herself for the upcoming church service.

I looked into my son’s earnest eyes, and contemplated his even more earnest question. As many parents do, I weighed the merits of a short answer that would stop his questioning (but be less than truthful), against a more truthful answer than might take a series of answers and explanations about things that he might have trouble wrapping his mind around. Today, I chose to give him the more honest answer.

I told him that it was because of my beliefs. Although the church and I share some of the same beliefs about living a moral life, we differ on so much more. The main difference, as I told my son, was the church’s view of the other, the outsider, the adherent of another faith, and/or the unrepentant sinner. This church (like many others) believes that after death, certain people will end up in some sort of hell. For most of my life, I have believed the same. But in the past few years, for a variety of reasons, I no longer do.

Before explaining anything else to him, I let him know that despite his desire to be just like me in so many ways, his beliefs would have to be his own. Whether my words of explanation will have any more influence on him than my actions, only time will tell. But, I wanted to express to him how personal everyone’s beliefs are, and how they should have some measure of respect.

After describing hell as a place where people were sad and crying for ever and ever, and where God could not/would not ever see them or rescue them, my son replied that he did not want to ever go there. I told him that some people believe that the population of hell is made up of people who deserve to be there. I shared with him my belief in a God who would not create someone who would eventually end up in hell. In fact, I read a great quote in a book by Samir Selmanovic just yesterday:

“I have become convinced that a God who favors me over others is not worth worshipping.”

In the end, my son walked away with a couple of new thoughts about God and hell, and an apparently sufficient answer about why daddy wasn’t going to church.

Really, I just can’t wrap my head around the belief that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and at the same time that God is the creator of this mess that falls short of Him. If God is responsible for the situations in our life that lead us to make choices, then He is also somewhat responsible for those choices. If He is not responsible for those situations, then everything is just chance and chaos. God cannot judge our actions justly if we are all playing with different pieces on often vastly different game boards.

I’m sure that I could say more about this, but I’ll save it for another time.

Not believing in hell is just a stone’s throw away from not believing in “sin”.  In light of my Christian upbringing, this is a belief that challenges much of what is commonly understood about the purpose and nature of Jesus, the namesake of Christianity. If there is no hell, and there is no sin, then what was Jesus all about? If he was just a great moral teacher, and not God incarnate, then this changes everything. Depending on what criteria you use to classify a Christian, then you may not consider me one anymore. To be honest, I myself often wonder if I should claim that for myself anymore.

I feel like I’m a sort of religious no man’s land. Where I’m going to end up is unclear (pun intended). I just know where I don’t want to be:  In a place where God loves me (enough to give me life in heaven) more than he loves other people (so little that He lets them die in hell). If you’ve found some place where I could find myself more at home, please let me know.

It’s hard not to love this story and the people involved in it.

Sadly, this was not the first time that Polanski was caught in the public eye for events other than his work in the movie industry.  As I wrote about last month, his pregnant wife was murdered just a few years earlier by the followers of Charles Manson. Strangely enough, after the hot tub incident in 1977, he fled to Europe to avoid jail time associated with the crimes committed against Samantha.

That was over 30 years ago. Since then, Polanski has continued to make films. He even helped make the career of the actor Adrian Brody, whom he directed in the 2002 film “The Pianist“. Yes, THAT Roman Polanski, who won an Academy Award for the film. We’re not talking about a small time director, hiding in his basement somewhere. We are talking about one of the top 20 directors in the world today.

On Saturday, September 26, 2009, he was finally arrested by Swiss authorities on his way to the Zurich Film Festival to receive a lifetime achievement award.

Now, how you feel about this story will vary wildly based on a lot of things. If you are a film student, or a film maker of any ilk, you may be saddened or outraged at this news of a peaceful man who has given so much to the world and deserves to be pardoned for crimes that happened so long ago.

If you are a parent of a girl around the age of 13, you may be cheering the news of a pervert and predator who was finally served the justice that was long overdue.

If you are neither, perhaps imagining a 13 year old girl that you know and a 43 year old man that you know in a hot tub together will help to distill your feelings. American culture frowns on sexual relationships between adults and minors. But there are many cultures in the world that do not. So, in that case, is this a moral issue or a cultural one?

When I read Samantha’s account of that night on CNN.com, where she repeatedly asked Polanski to stop, and had to fake an asthma attack to make that happen, I sense my desire for justice swelling. Shouldn’t a man in his 40s understand the wrongness in such a blatant violation of someone else’s will, let alone her body?  What could there be to excuse his behavior?  How can there be justice for this act that took advantage of one of society’s less protected?

Well, according to Samantha, justice has already been served. Or at least, according to the same CNN article, she has long since forgiven him.

What?!?!?!?

Samantha is now 45 years old and has put the matter far behind her. In fact, she seems much more upset about the judicial system and media scrutiny that followed the crime, than the crime itself:

“He’s just a stranger to me. I met him twice, three times. … His life really has nothing to do with my life.”

and

“Looking back, there can be no question that he did something awful. It was a terrible thing to do to a young girl,” she wrote in her Los Angeles Times piece. “And honestly, the publicity surrounding it was so traumatic that what he did to me seemed to pale in comparison.”

So, is justice something that a society always needs to enforce in an effort to protect the vulnerable? Or is this just the case when the wronged seek out such assistance from society? If judgement is not meted out by Polansky’s human peers, is there a cosmic judgement by God that is being felt or will be felt in the future? Either way, should society respect the wishes of the victim to drop the charges in this case? Or was this a type of crime against society that needs to be met with a clear resolution of intolerance?

I wish I knew the answer, but it does have me thinking.

A group of his Hollywood peers seems to think that he should be released immediately, if not pardoned. I wonder how I would feel about this case if the victim or the perpetrator were a friend of mine.

Before reading on, I would really encourage you to read the entire speech online at www.whitehouse.gov.  Many people have accused the President of being a skilled orator, with a dynamic speaking presence that can mesmerize an audience, whatever the subject matter may be.  So please, take the time to read it yourself, so that you are not hearing his voice or seeing his actions, but just the content of his message.

Well…. what did you think?  Pretty chalk-full of liberal propaganda right?  Most of the uproar about this speech has come from Americans who do not believe that a (insert adjective here) President should have an audience with young, moldable minds.  Is it because he is a Democrat?  Is it because he is young?  Is it because he is (gasp)… black?  I really don’t know.

I really believed that the President has the right to such a request to speak to the nation’s youth.  I wondered why people would be against it.  After reading the speech myself, I am even more convinced of his intentions to encourage America and promote American ideals.

Having some background in preaching myself, I was reminded of some of the better sermons that I have listened to in my life.  His call was not to judge the world and everything that is currently besetting our country.  He didn’t bemoan the financial crisis or speak ill of past leadership.  He spoke directly to the student, and put the responsibility right on the individual to take charge and make right the world in their own unique way.

Encouraging kids to continue their education to reach their dreams?  Propaganda!

Sharing stories from his own life to illustrate what perseverance can result in?  Brainwashing!

Building up children to set high goals and understand the work needed to achieve them?  He is the antichrist!

Now, these answers have come from people of varying degrees of political extremism.  But they are real responses to the idea of the President speaking to America’s children.  If you have a problem with the speech, is it because you are an American, or because you are a Republican?  Would you be opposed to a speech made by John McCain (whom I voted for….TWICE!) under similar circumstances?

It’s almost been a year since we officially voted a young, black, democrat with a background in Islam to the White House.  When will more of us treat him with the respect that his office commands?

Thank you for your investment in today’s American youth, Mr. President Barack Obama.  You have earned these 15 minutes with my children.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlPqkIABjKs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMzVCa8fWT4

In wondering what it means to be human, I practically dismissed the notion of learning anything from studying animals behaviors.  But since this is a social phenomenon, it seems to transcend our differences from simians.  The phrase: “Imitation is the highest form of flattery” is usually used to appease someone who has just had their image or actions stolen or copied by someone else, and he or she is not happy about it.  I’m not sure how much time I have spent thinking about how deep this idea goes, but I am thinking hard about it now.

I wonder where the line could be drawn for where our connectedness with others relates to our mimicry of each other.  My friend Ben is a skilled soccer player.  When he takes the field, he is focused and determined.  Almost without fail, when he is involved in a play, his teammates (myself included) raise their game.  We see Ben hustle, and we instinctively hustle in response.  He doesn’t need to ask us to follow him, we just mimic him and do it.

But when Ben saw an opportunity to challenge an opposing player who was about to head the ball, he charged, leaped, and threw himself at the ball with his own head.  When the dust had settled and Ben had an inch long gash under his eye that would require several stitches and sully his good looks for a time, I realized that I had drawn a line in my mind as to where I would stop mimicking Ben, so that I could avoid that outcome.

Whether I am too soft of a player or not (which I certainly am), is not what is most interesting to me.  It’s the fact that what I admired and mimicked about Ben had reached a breaking point.  Now, I would love to blow kisses to Kim during my soccer games, but if Ben began to mimic that, I would have to challenge him to a game of “wanker” (A childhood game of ours that involved at least 2 teenage boys, a swimming pool love seat, and not a bit of the homoerotic sensuality that the name might imply.  You may know it as “king of the mountain”, and the pool allowed us to experiment with all types of suplexes and wrestling moves.  For whatever reason, we called it “wanker”, and I was often crowned king.).  There was obviously also a limit in my mind of what Ben could do to mimic me, and still be appropriate.

What is this dividing line that we must be mindful of in terms of our social activity?  ”Mob mentality” has been researched and documented vigorously, and it has been shown that an individual will behave quite differently in a mob of people than he or she would in the same situation, by himself or herself.  Just because a behavior “seems” right at the time because of the actions of those around us, does not mean that it aligns to with principles that we hold ourselves to personally.  It a type of social intoxication, that many people try to avoid by becoming monks and hermits.  These actions seem too one-sided to me.  I would rather look for the line than retreat to one side and avoid contracting social diseases altogether.

Any thoughts on “the line”?  Is there a line?  Anybody feel more comfortable going the holy (meaning “separate”) route?

I found a great couple of videos on Youtube today that I wanted to share here.  Billy Wingrove watched this Nike commercial about the 1998 Brazilian soccer team at the airport when he was barely a teenager.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=munMGzeqCQE

After seeing this, he was inspired to become like the players he saw.  He felt that he didn’t have a strong chance to become a pro player, but he did aspire to a level of freestyle soccer where he could complete those moves.  After years of visualization and determination, Nike released this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvTwE3sUr9E

Just a great example of what can happen when one sets a HUGE goal and stays with it despite all obstacles thrown in the way.  I love it.

In an attempt to comment on this book, but not spoil things and discourage another from reading, I will do my best to straddle the line and be more or less vague about the details. In essence, this book is about what happens to a society that gives everyone what they want. Wars are abolished. Crimes and murders are more scarce than scruples at a Bluth family picnic. The society is, in many ways, perfect. The end is finally achieved from so many of the efforts of civilization over history.

The main tool for the success in this system is a system for everyone receiving their desires (which seems so incredibly distasteful to those who choose to “die to self”). Pre-natal and early childhood conditioning facilitate this. One’s natural urges are changed so that society can meet everyone’s desires. Humans are created in such a way that no one has a relationship with the original owner of the sperm and egg responsible for one’s genesis. In fact, the concept of a mother and father is a type of vulgarity.

Breaking this bond is paramount in the system of human reproduction in “Brave New World”. Babies are hatched in a lab, and not born of a woman. Familial connections are wiped out. This greases the rails for a series of chemical and behavioral modifications, that effectively change the response habits of each person. In a very real way, what is desirable to someone is the choice of the leaders of society. If they do not want someone to like puppies, they will bombard a young child with electric shocks, deafening alarms, and painful strobe lights while in the presence of a puppy, until any desires associated with a puppy are destroyed. Natural urges and desires are placated by a psychotropic drug called soma (Interestingly, a muscle relaxant drug called Carisoprodol is sold under the name “Soma” in the USA, even today). Soma makes everything that is uncomfortable just go away. Essentially, the world is full of drug addicts who vacillate between acquiescence and oblivion.

As I grew up, I was constantly chided for misbehavior and rewarded for compliance. I do the same today with my children. It’s a basic pattern of parental behavior. I know that it is different for some of us, but for me, the desire to please others was extreme with me, and still is. I felt validated when I was loved and praised, and disablingly low when I was ignored or banished. It’s not that I didn’t rebel against certain people, but my overriding desire in most situations was to please others and gain or keep their acceptance. In later years, this turned into a desire to be accepted because I wanted to be a good example of a Christian to those around me. In high school, I wanted to please people so that I could be popular and accepted by the “cool” kids.

After that, I can’t really say why I wanted to please so many people. I just… did. Even today, if there is a room of people, I want everyone to like me. Everyone. This is my desire, and I can’t really say why. I believe that it is at least partly a result of the conditioning that I began with myself at a young age and grooved into a deep gorge over the years.

Is it my fault? Probably. Is it my responsibility to deal with any consequences of this behavior? Of course. Was I born with this desire? Is it natural? That’s where my answers get fuzzier and fuzzier as I examine my own life and the behaviors of those around me. It’s the nature vs. nurture debate.

The son of an alcoholic who finds his first taste of beer much smoother and more pleasant than his friends. The woman whose dad never hugged her who now enjoys having men explore her body. Any number of situations can be shown to relate either back to childhood or earlier. But, which is it? In a lot of cases, our desires are not matters of choice, but of situations that are clearly out of our hands. And if you believe in God (which I do), does responsibility for our desires have any dividing line? If it is human nature, who’s fault is that?

Am I innocent to purchase an iPhone made in China if I am ignorant that life was lost during its production as the result of an effort to keep trade secrets safe? Does my knowledge of any product’s origin make me complicit in any moral or ethical failings that occur on the journey to my consumption of the product? If so, do I blame society for influencing my desires for these products? Do I blame my nature for having the desires? Or do I hold the blame to myself and just wish for the blissful ignorance of childhood?

I’m 29 years old, and I hold no answers. I may never. Is it wrong of me to be skeptical of those who do claim to know?  Are you?

“Dazes in the studio.  A major strand of our cultural DNA has left us.  RIP MJ.  I think we’ll mourn his loss as well as the loss of ourselves as children listening to Thriller on the record player.”  John Mayer

I have so many memories of my adolescence that were colored by Michael Jackson’s music.  Of all the people in my Jr. High, I was probably the biggest Michael Jackson fan of them all.  Ryan Rivetto and Ben Thompson can surely testify to this, as I exposed them constantly to his music with explanations as to why they should share in my joy and passion of the music, lyrics, and accompanying videos.  As I’m writing this, MTV is playing Michael’s Dirty Diana song, which was the only one that Ryan could tolerate (mostly because he could imagine Pearl Jam covering it).

My personal favorite song was Smooth Criminal.  You may remember the video where he is hearing the white gangster (not gangsa) suit, breaking pool balls, and doing “the lean”.  I’ve embedded the video below if you want to see what I’m talking about:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-WVpQ0ZG8Q

When Alien Ant Farm covered this song during my college years, I about peed my pants.  It was a ridiculous (in a good way) amalgamation of the music of my childhood and the music of my young adulthood.

Today, the day after, has been easier for me to deal with this emotionally than it was last night.  The more I’ve thought about it, and wondered why it was affecting me so much, I think that Jon Mayer’s words above shed some light on things.  Michael Jackson’s missing childhood has been discussed and pointed to as the cause of much of his erratic behavior over the last 20 years.  It was as if at some point, he got locked into a state of arrested development.  He spent his time with younger children, sometimes crossing sexual lines with them as he showed his affection and love.  Macaulay Culkin was one his best friends, nearly 20 years his junior.  His home was a type of amusement park with toys that would put all other man caves to shame (in many senses of the word).  He wanted to go back to that part of innocence of playing and loving.  He sang for world peace.  He wanted to Heal the World.  Michael wanted to return to that time of his childhood.

I won’t try to speak for other fans, but his death left me feeling the same way.  I think back to dancing in my bedroom with my sister (poor girl had few options for entertainment back then).  I remember sitting in my bed, just letting the lyrics of his songs pour into my mind and heart, filling me with dreams of doing something huge, achieving my dreams, making a difference, and having true love.  In a strange way, his love for children greatly impacted my life and my own love for children.  I’ve noticed that the first thing most people will use to describe me to others is my love for my children.

It’s so freeing to go back to those times in my mind.  It’s easy to be intoxicated by memories and dwell on the good, the beautiful, and the hopeful.  I’m sure that there were times of stress and pain, but I’ve pushed a lot of them out of my mind.  I see a lot of times in my life where I have made decisions that reflected my desire to go back to a world that doesn’t exist like my mind tries to tell me it did.  I know that Matt Van Tassel wishes that Jon and Kate’s drama would go away soon, and he may just get his wish with all of the media coverage of this death.  With apologies to Matt, I see a lot of Jon’s behavior being a result of this same kind of thinking.  Wanting to relive his twenties or live them for the first time, I’m not sure.  Just my opinion based on what I have viewed through the lens of my own experience.

So Michael, I am so very sad about the things in your life that did not reflect your principles of love, peace, and beauty.  Your music impacted my life and helped me to become who I was, who I am now, and who I will be.  Though some parts of your life were tragic, I celebrate you and thank you for living it in a way that allowed me to share it, albeit from a great distance.  Rest in peace.

Jonathan from "The Neverending Story II"

For me, one of the joys of parenthood is exposing my children to movies from my childhood that I loved.  I’m not sure if I’m just trying to share my early joys and excitement from films with them, or if it is some sort of devious attempt at creating little Zac clones, one 90 minute bite at a time.  Regardless, our latest film was “The NeverEnding Story“, from 1984.  It’s the story of Bastian and his alter ego:  Atreyu, and how he fights the nothing by continuing to dream and hope for things that seem impossible and fantastic (leaning on the “fantasy” root of this word).  We found the DVD at Wal-Mart, and to my surprise and delight, it included the sequel:  “The NeverEnding Story II“.

It always seemed odd to me that a movie with a title like “The NeverEnding Story” would have a sequel, as I kept watching the film over and over, keeping with the “neverending” theme.  My children did not particularly like the sequel, and instead asked me if they could just watch the original film again (and again, and again….. my plan is working!  Ahem.)  I did not enjoy the sequel either, but I did notice the fact that it was one of the breakthrough roles for young actor Jonathan Brandis.

I remembered Jonathan from his roles in Ladybugs and Sidekicks, not to mention the NBC series Seaquest DSV.  He was kind of a hearthrob in my pre-teen and early teenage years for most of the girls around me.  I must admit that my haircut in 7th grade was largely influenced by Mr. Brandis:

Me in 7th grade

Jonathan and his sweet hair

Some of my friends lovingly referred to this as the “butt cut” due to the clear part down the middle.  My hair did not have the body that his had, so I didn’t fully succeed with my imitation.  It was a look that I admired, and he was someone whom I admired.  He was four years older than me, which made him infinitely cooler than me, but also seemed to give me something to shoot for, as I matured.  He seemed to have it all:  good looks, good health, a successful movie career, and lots of famous friends.  It was an enviable situation for most boys who grew up in Generation Y.

After SeaQuest, his acting career started to slip from the heights of sharing the screen with Chuck Norris.  He was no longer cast as the lead in movies, and quickly fell into the background of movies that were themselves in the background of the American pop culture consciousness.  He said that he wanted to start writing movies, but found that it did not “pay the mortgage”.  He began to drink a little more, and looked to figure out what his next step in life would be.  On November 12, 2003, Jonathan’s friends found his body hanging from a nylon cord in his apartment complex.  He was 27.

I was so saddened to hear this, and especially surprised that I didn’t hear about it until late 2007. His autopsy report showed that he had no drugs and only a .03 alcohol content in his system.  He left no suicide note.  Jonathan’s role in the Bruce Willis movie Hart’s War had been cut out, and his friends were aware of how much this hurt him. I can’t image what pain his parents went through at that time and what they still go through each day, knowing that Jonathan should still be with them.

Years of research in cognitive psychology field has yielded a lot of data about how our performance follows after our thoughts of ourselves.  I am fascinated by this and continue to learn more about this through my work with The Pacific Institute.  I wonder how much of what Jonathan thought of himself had to do with his career as an actor.  I wonder how much his financial situation took a toll on his psyche.  I wonder what it would be like to have to compare your success level to… yourself, at a younger age.

My favorite part of the first “Neverending Story” movie is when Atreyu looks into the Magic Mirror and sees Bastian.  Engywook, a helpful gnome tells Falcor, the luck dragon, about the Magic Mirror:

Engywook:
Nonsense!  You don’t understand anything!  The worst one is coming up.  Next is the Magic Mirror gate.  Atreyu has to face his true self.

Falkor:
So what?  That won’t be too hard for him.

Engywook:
Oh!  That’s what everyone thinks.  But kind people find that they are cruel, brave men discover that they are really cowards.  Confronted with their true selves most men run away screaming!

After reading this in his book, Bastian throws the book across the room, not believing it to be true.  It is nearly impossible for him to believe that he could share the same identity as Atreyu, the brave warrior.  In my 29 years, I’ve been encouraged to believe that anything is possible, if you put your mind to it.  It was a phrase that screamed potential for greatness and success.  Now, more than ever, I still believe this.  But I now understand the potential for destruction that goes along with putting your mind towards something, or letting your mind get put towards something that you do not intend it to.

We all have great potential.  It begins in our minds.  I am more and more conscious of my thoughts each day.  What are you thinking about?

Rest in peace Jonathan.  Your life continues to speak to me.