Stumbling Toward Truth

The events of this week surrounding same-sex marriage will be pounced on by pundits, acclaimed by supporters, decried by critics, and seared by comics. I hope there will also be time and place for it to be savored for the extraordinary slice of life it is.

Yes, it is something to be celebrated by advocates of social justice. It will be analyzed by historians and political scientists and students of American culture. But there is something else here, something serendipitous, perhaps even bewitching.

Over a few days two of the most powerful men in the world came to a nexus of decision on one of the most conflicted issues of our time. It occurred in the home of a family hosting the Vice President of the United States. And, according to the leader of the free world, it occurred at his own dinner table talking to his kids.

Cynics, stand back. Do not deny the country this moment, whatever your own sense of justice may be. There is an eternal truth here, one even more powerful than the issue of marriage, if we allow ourselves to seek it.

On Sunday I listened to Vice President Biden's interview on Meet the Press. I was charmed by his response to David Gregory's very direct questioning. Biden, often described as a "loose cannon" for his sometimes blunt or politically incorrect locution, framed the issue in an entirely new and remarkable way. The question, Biden said, is "Who do you love?" He illustrated the point by describing his reception by two children at the residence of a family in which the parents were of the same gender. Biden seemed to be truly taken by the love he saw in that home. The experience may not rise to the level of epiphany, but it sounds like it came pretty close.

Some media reports described Biden's comments as another "gaffe" and the initial response of the White House minions was to minimize the statement as wholly consistent with current policy. Well, they're wrong. By defining the issue as being about love, Biden changed the landscape and the policy wonks were suddenly out of their element.

You've got to love this guy Biden. He's smart and tough and experienced, but he also has one heck of a big heart and he can't seem to disconnect that heart from his mouth. Good for him. And good for us.

A few days after Biden's comments President Barack Obama had a stunning interview with ABC News in which he declared his support for same-sex marriage, the first American president in history to do so. He had long been criticized by his liberal base for a position that supported civil unions but stopped short of marriage. For some time he described his position as "evolving."

But change was on the way, and he explained it to Robin Roberts thusly, just as he said it before the copy editors cleaned it up:

You know, Malia and Sasha, they've got friends whose parents are same-sex couples. And I-- you know, there have been times where Michelle and I have been sittin' around the dinner table. And we've been talkin' and-- about their friends and their parents. And Malia and Sasha would-- it wouldn't dawn on them that somehow their friends' parents would be treated differently. It doesn't make sense to them. And-- and frankly-- that's the kind of thing that prompts-- a change of perspective. You know, not wanting to somehow explain to your child why somebody should be treated-- differently, when it comes to-- the eyes of the law.

When the story of this week is told by media critics, historians, and politicians it will undoubtedly be referred to from a policy making perspective as bumbling and undisciplined. As of now, no one knows what the political consequences will be. From the ABC interview it appears that the president wasn't thrilled with the timing of Biden's statement. As for Obama, some find his admission of an evolving point of view to be a sign of weakness or lack of conviction.

As for me, I rejoice in a week in which powerful men come to life-changing decisions because they looked at two people and saw love, or sat around their kitchen table wondering how they could explain to their children that they supported something that even they knew was unfair. If Joe Biden disrupted a political timeline because his heart overflowed with love, so be it. If Barack Obama is willing to admit that he's evolving, that he's not sure about something, then we're all better off. Even those of us who don't ride around in stretch limos understand all too well that certitude is difficult to catch and usually wrong once we've caught it.

I love this stumbling, bumbling week. Somehow a convergence of gaffes and uncertainties, seasoned with a dash of love, got us a little closer to truth.

All it needed was my granddaughter's magic wand--I can only imagine what a sprinkling of Ashley's angel dust might have added to this already mystical week in May.

Mortality and Other Annoyances

The Aging Process, a photo by reign 60 on Flick

They tell me that I'm going through the "aging process." I always thought of that as something that can be fixed with a pad of steel wool and a can of Rust-Oleum. I'm now informed that it is far more cosmic than that--something I had begun to suspect a few years ago after a round of doctors appointments to check on a few maladies of seeming little consequence.

What I discovered is that the "aging process" is a default disease. Floaters in your eye? Just part of the aging process. Ringing in your ear? Yeah, that just goes with age. Bladder not fulfilling its part of the deal? Growing old has its issues.

The thing is that while there may be a default diagnosis there is no default treatment. While I am a reluctant pill popper, I figured that surely something as universal as this "aging process disease" could be annihilated by a fat pill, white in color, with letters like 6YTK inscribed on them. Far from it. Turns out that everything requires a different pill and each one costs something like $357.62, unless you inquire about a generic version, in which case it costs $4.98. Glad I asked.

I'm starting to get annoyed, however. It's the little things. I'm always happy to get those 10% senior discounts; my longstanding reputation as a good steward (which my kids translate as "cheap") overcomes admitting that I am old enough to be worthy of this act of benevolence on the part of the local merchants. But just once it would be good to have them inquire as to my eligibility rather than have it assumed. I want to be carded when ordering Denny's Grand Slam Breakfast.

It may be that part of this is punishment from beyond. I used to travel a lot and that put me sitting across many hundreds of tables accompanied by many more hundreds of people, often seniors. Most of these dear folk seemed able to talk only about the side effects of their various prescriptions, the bedside manner of their physicians, and the latest Medicare loophole to exploit. I know my eyes glazed over. I know I muttered silently something to the effect of "Dear God, why oh why me?" I'm now wondering if this is the Medicare version of the Myth of Sisyphus, whereby one is sentenced for all eternity to push a Tylenol up a long  hill with the tip of his nose, only to reach the peak and watch helplessly as it rolls back down again? 

Is that it? Am I now to be known by my ailments rather than my accomplishments, meager as they may be? Will I be remembered as that guy with all those problems he talked about at dinner--ear-ringing, shoulder-aching, back-tightening, eyes-matting, knee-throbbing, belly-expanding, mouth-drying, Parkinsons-pending, arthritis-invading, libido-impairing, memory-fleeting, weight-adding, bladder-misbehaving, hair-thinning, skin-splotching, and on and on?

If that is all that remains, the living of a life seems kind of trivial. I will have to acknowledge that this rant is a cover-up of sorts, allowing me to use my aches and pains as a way to avoid thinking critically about my own life, distilling from it the kind of insights that could be ennobling as well as disappointing. 

Somerset Maugham called it The Summing Up. Frederick Buechner described it as his sacred journey. Dean Acheson immodestly referred to his life as a Cold War diplomat as being Present at the Creation. Maybe we all need to revisit the path over which we have traveled, letting it speak to us in new ways. 

Now, if only i could find the damn thing. Where are my glasses?

Sex, Politics, and Stupidity

a photo by gwilmore on Flickr.

American politics never cease to amaze me. I just watched 30 minutes of Andrea Mitchell Reports, always a thoughtful interview program on MSNBC.

It began with a terrific analysis of the U.S./China relationship by Jon Huntsman, former ambassador to China and former Republican candidate for president of the United States. He demonstrated a vast command of the history and culture of China and urged all candidates to avoid the sound bites and give the issue the thoughtful reflection that this very complex and highly consequential matter deserves.

Jon Huntsman

I never did understand why Huntsman didn't make a bigger splash in the GOP nomination process. He always seemed to be a guy who understands the importance of bipartisanship; he was appointed to the ambassadorial post in China by Democratic President Obama. The Republican base saw that as a problem not as evidence of his ability to be effective across party lines.

Instead of listening to the likes of Huntsman the party preferred a three ring circus where the lion tamer was up first, soon replaced by the high wire artist, and then completely taken over by the clowns. And the ringmaster? Nowhere to be found.

Foster Friess

So just as I settled back appreciating Huntsman's civility and intelligence, there cometh Foster Friess, the millionaire backer of Rick Santorum's presidential aspirations. Asked about the statements attributed to Santorum that contraception was "dangerous" he dismissed the issue by saying, "Back in my days they used Bayer Aspirin for contraception--the gals put it between their knees." Even the veteran reporter Andrea Mitchell was nonplussed, stumbling along in an effort to salvage a moment of grace out of the statement's stupidity. 

It's this kind of stuff that comedians like Bill Maher loves. On the Tonight Show he left Jay Leno cracking up when he said that Rick Santorum "believes that life begins at erection." I laugh right along with everyone else, always willing to be titillated by a little naughty joke or edgy comment now and then. 

But then I stop. Do we realize that the world is laughing at us? We have people who are considered serious candidates for leader of the free world babbling on about social issues that have been settled for decades, sometimes generations. 

Mr Santorum, it is not contraception that is dangerous. It is you.

"Out of My Heart"

Yesterday Ashley, my three-year old granddaughter, asked me where my mommy and daddy were. She has been working at understanding family relationships and just recently Ashley and her mom had put together a family tree.

I think she was quite surprised to discover that her much beloved "Unca Boo" was actually her daddy's brother. One family meal around the dining room table usually makes that resemblance quite clear.

But now as we were drawing together (okay, one eye was peeking at the Chiefs game) she inquired about my parents. I told her that my mom and dad were no longer with us, that they lived a long and good life and had died a few years ago, even before you were born.

I saw a little ripple of concern cross her forehead. She lifted those beautiful eyes of hers. I looked right at them and saw deep waters stirring in there. Her eyes moved to the living room and I knew she was making sure that her mommy and daddy were in view.

"But they are still here, aren't they?" she asked, now coming back to me.

"Yes, they are," I replied, but not too quickly. "They are always right here in my heart," I said, touching that spot in E.T. fashion.

She was quiet for a few moments, putting the pieces together. Then she said, somewhat softly but with assurance, "My mommy and daddy are out of my heart."

Then she picked up a blue pencil and returned to her drawing.

It took me a little longer.

Applauding Death at the GOP Debate

There were many reasons for those of us interested in social justice to despair during the Republican debate on September 7, 2011. I never thought I would hear Social Security described as a "Ponzi Scheme." I hardly know how to explain why we are nominating one party's candidate for leader of the free world from among a pool of prospects at least half of whom don't believe in evolution and minimize or dismiss the effect of global warming. It says something, although I'm not sure what, that in a field of eight the two most "moderate" in their views are Mormons, usually not bastions of political moderation. But the thing that really set me back was something not mentioned much. ABC news reported it this way:

Texas Governor Rick Perry apparently loses no sleep over authorizing 234 executions in more than a decade as Texas governor. Perry has authorized more executions than any governor in the history of the United States. He said at a Republican presidential debate Wednesday that he has never worried that the state of Texas has executed an innocent man. “I’ve never struggled with that at all. The state of Texas has a very thoughtful, a very clear process in place,” Perry said.  “When someone commits the most heinous of crimes against our citizens, they get a fair hearing, they go through an appellate process, they go up to the Supreme Court of the United States if that’s required.”

Okay, I'm an opponent of the death penalty, so I listened to Perry and was appalled by his cavalier attitude, but I'm familiar with his swagger and bravado and I expected it. But I was not prepared for what happened next:

When NBC’s Brian Williams asked Perry the question about the death penalty and pointed to the 234 executions – even before Perry answered – the Republican debate crowd erupted in applause for the governor’s actions. Perry pointed to the applause as indicating a vast majority of Americans supports capital punishment. The most recent execution authorized by Perry in Texas was in July.

I think even Brian Williams was taken back and perhaps that is why he pushed the candidate for his feelings about the applause. Perry showed not a lick of concern that innocent people might be executed, even though there is considerable evidence, amounting at least to reasonable doubt, that innocents are numbered among Perry's 234 death warrants. Instead we got a Texas style "you hurt a Texan you pay the ultimate price." It was not clear what would happen if the crime happened to a Frenchman visiting Texas.

Here is what frightens me. We're living in a very volatile climate these days. Many of our civil liberties have been undercut, purportedly in the cause of homeland security. Economic woes are exacerbated by a dangerously low trust in our culture's institutions, particularly government and big business. The ground is dry, the air is hot. It's no time to be playing with matches.

Politicians like Perry appeal to the worst of our fears as a pathway to their own ambitions. He won't be elected president. Eventually his mouth will catch up to his charm. But before that happens he can do a lot of damage to the fabric of our society. We need leaders with heart, not heartless leaders. We need those who understand our fears and calm them with words and actions, rather than exploit them with phony rhetoric.

The capital punishment issue is a very difficult one. Virtually all of those who face execution are guilty of the crime--not all, but most. They are not particularly nice people but the issue is not really about them. It is about us. Killing in the name of the state is barbaric, totally ineffective, and outrageously costly. And perhaps worst of all--it cheapens us, taps those inner demons within us. In the hands of he-who-would-be-president Mr. Perry, it is justice we got when he sent 234 men and women to their death. But it did nothing of the kind.

We stand alone as the only country in the Western world who still uses the death penalty. We should be booing, not applauding.