The State of Sportsmanship

This weekend is a big one for we TCU faithful. 

It's Family Weekend, which is definitely an enjoyable experience (although my parents won't be here this year due to illness). It's the weekend, which excites college students nationwide this time of year because football season is in full swing. Personally, the fact that it's the weekend brings enough excitement as it is, just because I need to catch up on the sleep that I didn't get this week. 

But if one were to guess all of those potential factors that could make this weekend 'big,' he or she would be wrong. For those who don't know, this weekend marks the historical rivalry between Frogs and Ponies, the Iron Skillet game. 

Now, I don't mean to be rude, but the game isn't going to be much of a contest this year. TCU is ranked #10 in the nation and boasts one of the best defenses in the country. SMU is rebuilding, to say the least. For instance, for my fellow Washingtonians reading this, they lost to Washington State University last week. Enough said. I won't go on. 

Enough about how excited I am about the Iron Skillet, though. My intent here is to address the issue of sportsmanlike conduct. For some reason, both TCU and SMU have gone overboard this year with stressing the fact that the schools need have good sportsmanship, which insinuates that they need to improve. 

I don't know about SMU, but TCU certainly does not need to be told how to execute sportsmanship. Our students do not relish the opportunity to mock the opposing team or curse at the opposing fans; rather, they look for an opportunity to enjoy the great sport that is football with each other. Sure, there have been fights between the two teams' fans, but they are few and far between. And the traditional pranks they play against each other are harmless for the most part. 

Basically, officials from both schools need to consider the fact that the students that attend their institutions are standout individuals. It's not exactly easy to get into TCU or SMU. Both schools have $1 billion-plus endowments. Each has about 9,000 students. This isn't your average state school rivalry. It's not Ohio State-Michigan. It's not Washington-Washington State. It's not Auburn-Alabama. Compared to those, it's like junior high rivalries. I was offended by the schools' attempts at appeasing the abhorrent actions that are taken each year, which usually consist of some car paint, satirical signs, and maybe a banner plastered here or there. There are no burning cars, deaths, or lawsuits. And until there are, I'd appreciate if the two schools keep quiet. 

The State of Ideology

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2009808740_sirota07.html

I know, I've been abandoning my posts lately, but I'll get around to making another serious one eventually. 

For now, here's an interesting piece I found today while I was reading my news. It's a fantastic point. I'd suggest you at least review it. There's quite a bit of political jargon, but if you read the first two paragraphs and the last two or three, you'll get the idea. 

Until next time... 

The State of International Politics

I don't have to write anything for this post. This story explains it all. It's a very well written piece. It would do everyone some good to read this. 

http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14209932&source=hptextfeature

The State of Change

I've come to the realization that change does not come gradually. It either startles you enough to take action, or catches you off guard and ruins you. 

Now, this is just my view of change. I know there are those who think people don't change. There are also those that say people are constantly changing. There are even those that are afraid of change. They prefer not to state an opinion for fear of their lives undergoing any subtle form of transformation. 

After I graduated last summer, I was asked to write a column for my local newspaper. My mom seemed to like the column so much she copied it and glued it to a collage for my graduation. The other day, I realized the collage was propped up against the wall in our guest room, which has also served as my living quarters during the summer. My eyes were immediately drawn to the column. I've always read and re-read my past writing. I'm fascinated by how much change my work has undergone, even in the last year. Long story short, I was shocked (and horrified) at my cliche-laced work. It was packed with coming of age jargon and rhetoric. It was clearly an easy piece to write. I don't know if it was senioritis kicking in or my lack of sound writing ability, but there was a clear discrepancy between my style (and quality) then and my style now. 

And that's how I began pondering the manner by which change arises. 

But let me clarify.

Just because change comes quickly and in a disadvantageous manner doesn't mean it should be strategized accordingly.

This is where you expect me bash President Obama's current healthcare legislation. Not so. Unnecessary and cliche. I will say, though, that our country has implemented too many harsh changes in too little time. It's led to lost jobs, broken reputations and even economic crises. 

I'd venture to say that the current progressive mood in this country will soon come to a screeching halt. We can't afford another trillion dollar mistake (pardon the pun). We can't recover from another depression. And change is change. Even though changes are constantly being interchanged, they can be effective. Let's keep an eye out for our national well-being. Let's utilize our power as citizens of a free nation. Let's utilize the resources the government provides. And let's do so with sound consideration and speedy implementation. 

The State of Nature

It's been too long since my last post. I've missed the Blogosphere, even though I'm not actually that deep into it. 

Now, for today's post. 

I just returned from a weekend trip in Port Angeles, Washington, about a four hour drive from my home town of Yakima, Washington. It's a town rich in natural beauty: a typical view (even in the downtown) consists of a panorama of rich, blue sky, snow-capped mountains, and expansive water. And being surrounded by nature at all times got me to thinking. As my thinking deepened, I began wondering. Then, I was flat out astounded at the beauty surrounding me.  

On Sunday, my friend's dad drove us to Hurricane Ridge, located in the heart of the Olympic National Forest. I don't think I'd ever been frozen by my surroundings. I stood, almost cowering at the majesty of the Olympic Mountains. My eyes were utterly focused on sharp peaks and snow-covered mountainsides. I'm sure my mouth was agape at one point. 

When we reached the ridge itself and found our way to the lodge at the top, we came across a docile deer, feeding on the lupine-laced hillsides near the mountains. At that moment, I felt convicted. My experience on the ridge was characterized by awe and amazement, but I realized I hadn't been channeling my focus on the One who caused such a reaction. 

"The same God who I worshipped in church earlier today, the same God who created this peaceful animal, created these jagged-edged, rocky mammoths," I thought to myself. And Scripture ran through my mind: "The heavens declare His righteousness, and all the peoples have seen His glory." Psalm 97:6 (NASB)

I looked around. I wasn't just surrounded by mountains. There were groups of people. Children, women, men; young, middle-aged, elderly. Some Christians, some not. Some unsure, some decided. Some living in sin, some living for God. As I've experienced many times before, I was shaken by the Word of God. This scripture transformed my view of nature. 

According to dictionaryreference.com, "nature" is defined as "the material world, esp. as surrounding humankind and existing independently of human activities." 

According to the Western world, "nature" is a god in and of itself. The Western world has transformed something like nature, due to its sheer size, to the status of something worth worship. I'll let you think about that until my next post. 

The State of this Lifetime

If you haven't noticed, I seem to find blog subjects from my conversations and experiences. Today is no different. 

My parents recently returned from a vacation in Hawaii. While there, a series of notable events took place, both in Hawaii and back at home (here in Central Washington). My aunt's mother (not my grandmother, my aunt is related to me by marriage) passed away after a yearlong fight with cancer. My sister's friend left for a year in Iraq serving his country, but not before finding out that his wife is pregnant. And, in Hawaii, my mother learned how to surf. My mother explained the events as "a death, a new life, and a check off the bucket list." A popular secular slogan for the pattern of events in this life is "c'est la vie," which, in essence, means "that's life" in French. 

As often is the case, such mundane a situation as this led me to a more complex train of thought. People have made such loaded statements like c'est la vie into trite, empty excuses for the horrors and joys of this life.

I thought to myself two things. First, "is that normal?" and then, "does humanity create cliches to make meaningful events meaningless?" Such thoughts often appear in my mind, mostly due to the fact that I'm a realist by nature (although some people would call me an outright pessimist). But it's more than my mindset to me. Prepare yourself, I'm about to get all Christian up in here. Here's where I present my view of humanity through a biblical lens. 

Humans are imperfect—I know, that's hard to swallow for some people, but let's be realistic (not pessimistic). Likewise, humans are unable to approach perfection. Let me explain. You see, for us to establish that something is perfect, we must keep in mind the grammatical implications behind the word. Perfect is a superlative, which means it's the "highest form" of an adjective. So, when someone says, "it was the most perfect day outside," he or she has made a grammatical error, because once something is perfect, there can be nothing greater than it. Also, perfect suggests that there is nothing that surpasses the object being described. 

According to dictionary.com, there are 10 definitions for the adjective perfect. Each of them suggests the same basic idea, however: Something that is perfect is without flaw, without error. 

This is where we have to be realistic. Each and every one of us would admit to having made at least one mistake, even if we view 'mistakes' from a relativistic standpoint. Also, we would admit that we aren't without flaws in appearance. Even though our bodies seems symmetrical, many of our paired extremities (hands, feet, even digits) are different in length, width, and bone structure. Even though our eyes seem to be the same shape and color, if we were to view them under a microscope, we would see that there are distinct discrepancies in iris color and veins.

All of these thoughts are to serve as an introduction to human nature. Because I'm writing about this lifetime, I must take into consideration the people that are living it, right? 

In Romans 3:10, Paul writes, "as it is written, 'There is none righteous, not even one.'" This verse refers to what is written in Psalm 14 (my favorite psalm, by the way), at the end of its third verse. The message in this verse is not implicit. There's no code to decipher its true meaning. It doesn't require an in-depth exercise in biblical hermeneutics. Paul is making an explicit claim for the unrighteous nature of humanity. This unrighteousness is what makes us think that we can attribute perfection to earthly objects. 

Remember how the word 'perfect' is a superlative? That means it would have to refer to one person, place, or thing. This object—a being, actually—is God. In Psalm 14, David writes, "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good." This passage suggests that mankind does not naturally acknowledge the existence of God. Therefore, it makes sense that man would attribute such an exclusive word to myriad of people, places and things. Mankind is separated from God because of its sinful nature; therefore, it cannot know what true perfection is. If it knew that God was the Reason for the word's existence, surely mankind would use it scarcely, especially if it had inherent knowledge of God's holy nature. 

I hope I haven't lost any of those reading this post. It seems that my argument for man's flawed, imperfect nature was a departure from my initial point. But it's not. Think about it: If we considered the fact that life isn't perfect, we wouldn't have to make it a series of cliche sayings. The fact of the matter is, the secular view of life is indifferent. If we were inherently ingrained with the knowledge that God was the true source of perfection, we would not attribute it to a life that is characterized by death (my aunt's mother, Jackie), discomfort (my sister's friend leaving his pregnant wife to serve in Iraq) and the occasional moment of happiness (my mom's surfing experience). Based on those three examples alone, life is still only 1/3 good. There's not much perfection in that. 

Web sites utilized in this post:

http://www.biblegateway.com/

http://dictionary.reference.com/

For further information on the depravity of man (man's imperfect nature) see:

- THE BIBLE (the books of Isaiah and Romans in particular)

- The Holiness of God by R. C. Sproul

- The Great Divorce by C. S. Lewis

The State of the Housing Market

We all know how bad the real estate situation is in the United States. Sub-prime mortgages and the whole nine yards. We know that there were the over-zealous buyers who wanted a house they couldn't afford. We know that foreclosure rates are astronomical. 

But somewhere along the way, a crucial aspect of the crisis was left out. In fact, it could be called the the root, the source, of the issue. It's a root that is enormous, yet has gone virtually unnoticed. It's the people selling the houses in the first place. 

I recently sat in on one of my sister's epic TV watching marathons. On this day, she was watching HGTV. A commercial came on for The Stagers, a show in which a team of "professionals" comes into a house that isn't selling and implants the finest furniture, fabrics, dishes, appliances, paint, wallpaper, flooring and the like. Not surprisingly, houses that have been "staged" sell much faster than those that are left in their normal states. 

According to Stagedhomes.com, a home that has been staged sell in an average of 37 days, compared to the 182 days it takes an "non-staged" home to sell. This statistic shouldn't be a surprise. 

Home stagers' greatest draw is their claim for price increase. According to Mortgagenewsdaily.com, home staging costs range from a $200 consultation to a $6,000 hands-on operation. Either way, they claim homes will sell for a minimum of 3% more than their "pre-staging" price.  

Economically speaking, staging is an easy choice. Sellers pay a small fee for huge results. Real estate agents get a fatter commission on the house. Everyone's a winner.

Aesthetically speaking, buyers can see the house's "full potential" and gain a "vision" for interior decorating. The house itself will also undergo improvements (painting, flooring and the like) that will contribute to its overall appeal. Sometimes, stagers will do exterior work, too. 

But when it comes to the matter of ethics, staging is severely lacking. Consider this: a first time home buyer looks at a house that has been staged. It has the finest linens on its beds. Its furniture compliments the paint on its walls. The new flooring makes for an attractive foot space. The buyer is sold. He or she buys the place, realizing that it's about $10,000 over his or her budget, but the perks are worth it. 

I hope you're seeing the problem. 

Real estate professionals somehow have it in their minds that it's okay to treat buying a home like shopping at a department store. A person walks into the store and finds the clothing her or she wants. He or she tries it on. It fits perfectly, so he or she buys it. Then, he or she takes it home (no pun intended). It gets wrinkled in the car, so it needs ironing. It gets washed once, and the color fades. Then it gets stained. At this point, there's no way it can be returned, so the person gives it away or throws it out. 

Clearly, owning a home is different. Instead of the $20 a person spends on a shirt that can be returned, he or she is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a house that will need thousands of dollars for upkeep. The analogy can only be taken so far, but it's exactly the way real estate agents treat their clients' investment. 

Much like a salesperson at Macy's a real estate agent will follow you around, asking "how does it fit," and "if you need any more help, my names is ..." At the end of the day, a real estate agent is a glorified salesperson, only he or she gets paid more than deserved. It's as if real estate agents are being paid for the decisions their clients make. Ultimately, it's not just what the agent says, it's what the client wants. 

And that's the source of staging. Agents get an idea for what their clients want. They goad the struggling sellers into staging their home. They show buyers the house, knowing that they will be intrigued. When the house sells, the agents make sure the stagers get the borrowed goods out the house. Then the buyers move in, feeling misled, maybe even betrayed. 

Ultimately, the point is this: Staging treats a significant life decision (buying a house) as if it's an everyday occurrence. It's no wonder buyers have recently made impulsive decisions on houses they couldn't afford. It just goes to show that the real estate industry is a ruthless business. And I have no pity its current state. Ironically it's unethical endeavors like home staging that have run property values into the ground. It's led to an unhealthy trend in an industry that is oblivious to its mistakes.  

The State of Morality

As a Christian, it's hard for me to take a step without inserting my beliefs into the scenario. Sure, I apply my faith to deep issues: Ethics, salvation, destiny, philosophy and the like. 

But sometimes, I apply it to simple things. 

Although few people would pair the words "simple" and "morality" in the same sentence, I'm going to dare to do so today. 

Morality is simple, if you believe in truth. 

Like I said, I'm a Christian, and I have faith in the ultimate truth found in the God of the Bible. Therefore, I'm going to use the Bible to explain my claim for morality because, well, it's truth. In his letter to the Galatians, Paul the Apostle poses a question and a sort of challenge: 

"You were running well: who hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion did not come from Him who calls you. A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough. I have confidence in you in the Lord that will adopt no other view; but the one who is disturbing you will bear his judgment, whoever he is." Galatians 5:7-10 (NASB)

Now, if I were to present this as a Bible study or a sermon, I dissect it word by word. But, since I don't want to bore you, I'm going to use it as evidence for my initial claim. 

Paul flat out says that the Galatians were "hindered from obeying the truth." He doesn't try to qualify the fact that they had fallen away. He doesn't make an excuse for them. He's basically fed up, and he's going to bring the proverbial smack down:

"This persuasion did not come from Him who calls you (emphasis added)." Now, because Paul clearly says in his first statement that the Galatians have stopped "obeying the truth," wouldn't he, by saying that it wasn't "Him who called you" (i.e. God), be making a claim for the truth that is found in God? 

Then Paul brings the heat, so to speak. "A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough," he says. In case you didn't understand, Paul is not using this statement to in a positive manner. He's basically saying, "someone, I'm not sure who, but someone, came in here and messed ALL of you guys up."  

Paul continues, saying, "I have confidence in you in the Lord  that you will adopt no other view." Now, Paul was not just any old authority figure. He was inspired by God. He was a prophet. That means God was speaking through Paul ("in the Lord"), commanding the Galatians to turn back to obedience and, subsequently, truth. 

It's not difficult to apply this to modern society. Most of the issues that take place in the world happen because one person makes a poor decision. Madoff. Ahmadinejad. Kim Jong-Il. Mark Sanford. Even people like George W. Bush. The list goes on. The scandals accumulate. One person's mistakes leads to the demise of  a family. Next comes a staff. Then an administration. Even a country. 

We find people looking to their authority figures for truth. Then those authority figures define a society's morality. It's a chain reaction. It's exactly what Paul refers to in the passage in Galatians.

We mustn't look far to find the root of our demise, because most of the time it's authority figures. Why, then, do we continue to seek refuge in the authority of a worldly truth? Why do we so easily forget our own mistakes, thinking they could never happen with our authority figures? 

Morality is simple, if you believe in truth. We must not look for it in humanity and its flawed nature. It can't be found in knowledge.  Book books will not come with us when we die. Our days of education will pass. We will grow old. And we'll have the opinions of our peers and the academy as a source of hope. 

May it never be so. May truth be found where it is claimed. May we seek refuge in consistency that can only be found in the Ultimate Truth. 

A Critique of the Mass Media

Sunday for me is typically a day of joy. It's the Lord's day. It's a day that's usually characterized by  friends, family, church and rest. And while all of these characteristics were present today, they were also rudely interrupted by a simple conversation I had with my grandma and sister. It was over the state of the media in this country. 

I don't want to talk about what everyone else already knows. The mass media in this country has a corrupt reputation. It elicits millions of rolled eyes worldwide. Although I'm a proponent of print journalism, I must admit I've torn apart a newspaper or two in my day. Bottom line: the media in this country isn't in a good place. 

As a college student studying journalism, I'm constantly confronted with critics. They ask passive aggressive, leading questions regarding "the problem of the media" and "the death of newspapers." And I'm starting to notice the source of the criticism. 

You see, media in the United States are at a turning point. Broadcast journalism is more like narrowcast journalism. Print journalism has begun to lose its true image, as subjectivity and objectivity seem complementary. The industry failing as such an alarming rate, that if newspapers weren't littered with advertisements, they would cease to exist.  

My favorite local newspaper, the Seattle Times, used to be paired with the now-defunct Seattle Post-Intelligencer on Sundays (R.I.P, P.I.). Now, the Sunday Times uses an every-other-page-advertisement model. For instance, today two-thirds of the front page was news stories, one-third was "teasers," or sneak peaks for the stories inside. The section's last page, however, was plastered with a full-page Macy's ad. Sadly, this "over advertisement" is common to most major national newspapers. 

But let me get back to the conversation I had with my sister and grandma. I don't want to rant too much about the debacle that our media has become. 

Somehow, the three of us sparked up a conversation on the recent death of pop star Michael Jackson (I have no idea how it happened, it really hasn't received that must publicity). Removing the deeply sad story behind Jackson's life and the people he affected in his 50 years on earth, we shifted the focus and applied the event to the state of American media. 

Most Americans get their news from the major news outlets, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and the like. But has anyone else noticed that all of these channels have been dominated by developments in Jackson's death? If it's not a tribute to his life, it's news about his autopsy. If not the autopsy, it's Larry King interviewing a celebrity asking, "how long did you know Michael?" and, "share your greatest memory of Michael." 

I'm sorry, but isn't CNN supposed to be an international news outlet? Shouldn't it be reporting on developments on the election in Iran? What about the recent election in Thailand? And what about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Even here in the U.S., what about healthcare reform? Even as I flip through the channels now, there's an old interview with Michael on MSNBC. Now there's a commercial for OK! a celebrity gossip tabloid.

In our conversation, my grandma, sister and I came to the conclusion that the media report on what is most important in American society. That means this society places "The King of Pop" above "The War in Iraq" on its list of priorities. If that doesn't make you sad, it should.