Another Musical Treat!

We have a nice little choir at our church that I have the pleasure of working with.  I began acting as director of the choir earlier this year when the previous director became unavailable, leaving a group of enthused singers without leadership.  Although inexperienced in this area, I was willing to give it a try, and I'm glad I did.

A few months ago I shared a video featuring our men's quartet.  The quartet continues to sing at church as well as the choir.  This time, those of you who missed the real thing have an opportunity to hear the choir sing our recently presented Christmas number, "In The First Light".  I hope you enjoy it as much as we enjoyed singing.

I hope this leads you to contemplate the meaning of this glorious and holy birth to your own life.  To God be the glory!  And a very  

Merry Christmas 

to you and those you love.  Thanks for letting me share my humble posts with you.

Unto you, a Saviour . . .

When I was a teenager, my dad built a nativity scene for our front yard and also had an idea for a sign to go with it quoting Luke 2:11, "For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."  I remember my brother sketched out the sign and we both painted it in.  It looked pretty nice.  When I was grown, married and owned our first home, we decided to do the same as a declaration to the neighborhood of the wonderful meaning of Christmas to us.

I've been setting up this nativity scene every year for about 30 years now.  I made it out of four sheets of plywood and designed it to hold together with hook and eye latches.  Originally, the inside was painted a plain color, and Mary and Joseph were inverted tomato cages covered with sheets with sheet heads filled with newspaper and grotesque faces amateurishly painted on.  After the first ten years or so, I decided to get a bit more artsy.  I created a scene of animals inside the shed and made painted cutouts of Mary & Joe that don't have to be assembled each year.  When I say "created", I mean it, as my children could not identify my species of animals.  I told them those animals existed back then but don't anymore.  They were already too old to believe that. 

Every year I tell myself I'll add something new for the following year; but it never happens.  Maybe that's how traditions are supposed to be -- you just don't want to change them.  Mostly, I think it's just being lazy.  Also, I'm not such a great artist anyway.  I had dreams of making angels, wise men, camels, etc., but maybe simple is best, especially as that plywood seems to get heavier each year.

Over the years we've met people who had seen our display for many Christmas seasons but didn't know who lived in this house.  When we moved, people from the old neighborhood said they missed it.  When I first made it, our oldest daughters were 2 and they stood inside the shed with the holy family, as they were the same size.  I guess it was like playing with life-size dolls.  Now our children are all grown and have their own homes, but they're all coming home for Christmas this year to fill our house again with our beautiful family!   I wonder if they'll pay any attention to my nativity display, laugh at my animals, remember playing with the tomato cage people.  Mostly I hope they, and the neighbors, remember the message of love the angels proclaimed that night long ago -- that God had come to earth to save His people from their sins.  The sign is the best part of my little display, for its message is clear with or without the rest, and for that I give credit to my dad.  

Thanks for reading my thoughts, and have a wonderful and  
Merry Christmas this year.

Back to Politics, or "It's Not Your Grandfather's Century"

OK, so that World Series thing didn't work out so well for our Tigers.  We all take a rest for the winter, and next spring we'll be ready to once again proclaim, "Bless You, Boys."

It's just a few days now till the big election of our next president.  I've already cast my vote; you see, I've achieved that special status in life where I'm able to vote early (or absentee) simply by virtue of my age.  In fact they said I'll automatically receive an application for an absentee ballot for every election from now on.  Of course, I'm not disabled in any major way; I could easily go to the polls next Tuesday and wait in line like normal people, but why should I?  

That brings up another beef I have with our election system:  In this great country that prides itself on free elections and the privilege of every citizen to cast a vote, why do we make voting so difficult?  Why do we hold our elections on a Tuesday?  (Find out here.)  That gives most working people about an hour before work and 2 hours after work to make it to their precincts to, again, stand in line to vote.  Other modern nations hold elections on the weekend, when most voters are generally available to vote.  I understand that some states do allow early voting.  I'm not sure how this works, but early voting in some places began this week.  That makes a lot of sense.  I suggest we open the polls for 4 days, Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday.  That should give everyone a good opportunity to vote while avoiding long lines at any one time.  And I truly expect long lines this time here in Michigan because in addition to being a major election, we have numerous proposals on the ballot that many will read through for the first time while in the voting booth.

And why hold these elections in November, when much of the nation could be hindered by early winter weather?  This goes along with holding the president's inauguration in January, sometimes in freezing weather on the Capitol steps.  Here's an idea:  Let's vote in mid-September after everyone is back from summer vacations, install the new president in mid-October and the new congress November 1st. This would eliminate a lengthy lame-duck season, take advantage of nicer weather conditions and have officials in place before the new year begins.  

Maybe our election process is enshrined in the Constitution (I haven't checked), but I'll repeat myself once again: We don't live in the 18th century anymore!  Don't even ask about the electoral college process; I'll save that tirade for another time, but it relates to my recent post about our being a nation rather than a collection of independent states, and the fact that WE DON'T LIVE IN THE 18TH CENTURY ANYMORE!

That's it for now.  Please be sure to vote, even if it means standing in a long line.  While you're there, think about the process and how it might be improved.  Feel free to post your thoughts here.  Thanks for reading.

And then there's the whole primary process . . . .

 

 

Bless you, Boys!

One of our local TV sportscasters coined the phrase "Bless you, Boys!" during the glorious summer of 1968, when our beloved Tigers won the A.L. pennant and the World Series.  Someone wrote a catchy song that year, too: We're all behind our baseball team -- Go get 'em, Tigers!  That team had players like Kaline, Cash, Horton, McLain and Lolich.  Both the phrase and the song were revived during the awesome 1984 season when our team held first place from day 1 and won it all again.  That was the Morris, Gibson, Parrish, Trammell and Whitaker team.  

Now here we are once more.  The good guys have won their division and the pennant, and tonight they face the San Francisco Giants in the World Series.  I've heard "Bless you, Boys" a few times as well as the "Go, Get 'Em" song.  It's going to be a great series with Verlander, Cabrera, Fielder and Jackson, and a whole roster of potential heroes.  Tonight is game 1, and it'll all be over a week from tomorrow.  So let's sing a round of "Go get 'em Tigers" and proudly proclaim, "BLESS YOU, BOYS".

This handsome bus driver is a Tigers fan.

Yes, that's me in my new career as a bus driver for our local school district.  After 4 years of retirement, I saw a posting for new drivers and I decided this is just what I had hoped to be able to do after leaving the corporate, office, sit-at-a-desk-all-day, work on a computer, answer the phone, attend meetings work I had done for 30 years.  I get up early to take those precious kids to their schools.  Then I'm off from about 9:30 till 1:30 before returning to drive them back home.  It's good, honest work and there's no pressure for me to perform or advance.  Plus I only drive about 2 miles to the "office."

Well, the game is on so I'll sign off.  Nothing political or controversial here, unless you're a Giants fan.  Thanks for reading, and Go Tigers!

The USA -- is or are?

This is a post I've been wanting to write for quite a while.  I was finally prompted to do it while watching the first debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney, and it touches on some of the core differences between the ideologies of the candidates and their parties.  Mr. Romney stated that it is up to local and state governments to make decisions about things like education and health care; that it is not the role of the federal government, implying of course that Mr. Obama favors a stronger role for the government in D.C.  I guess most of us realize that democrats are known for leaning toward a strong central government while republicans cling to the concept of strong local government.  Before I share my thoughts on this, I ask you, my reader: "Which is correct to say, 'The United States is a great country,' or 'The United States are a great country?'  

Think about what this means:  Are we primarily a united nation composed of 50 states?  Or are we 50 individual states which collectively comprise a nation?  I feel this is a very important point, and it has in fact been debated basically from the beginning.  The British colonies that declared their independence in 1776 were all formed initially by different charters from the kings of England.  It wasn't easy getting all thirteen to agree to take the drastic step of standing against the crown, but they had to do it together or not at all.  The fact that thirteen colonies agreed to be bound together in their fate did not erase their many differences.  The citizens of America tied their identities and loyalties to their colonies much more than to America as a nation, and this continued on through the Revolution and independence.  The name of our country clearly reflects this.  Each colony regarded itself basically an independent state, united to one another by common interests, needs and concerns.  We were initially The United States of America (plural).

Many feel that The United States (plural) became The United States (singular) following the Civil War.  In fact the war was primarily fought over the question of whether any of the states had the right to separate, or secede, from the rest.  The war's result being a reunified nation, it was felt that the question had then been settled: we are one nation, The United States of America.  It became official in 1902 when the House of Representatives' committee on revision of the law ruled The United States should be treated as a singular, not a plural term.

So what does this mean for us and what does it have to do with this evening's debate?  My take on it is this:  We live in the 21st century and the country has come a long way from the 18th century frontier nation that was formed out of necessity as a sort of coalition against a strong-handed monarch on another continent.  Today we are Americans much more than New Yorkers, Michiganders, Californians or Texans.  We move easily from state to state.  The very term of 'state' means to us a subset of our nation rather than an independent entity.  We have progressed from an infant, frontier, democratic experiment of a nation to a world-leading economic, military and industrial powerhouse.  I doubt we could have accomplished this as a collection of 50 independent states.

I believe it is inevitable that a strong nation will grow more centralized over time.  Progress demands that laws, customs, transportation systems, manufacturing and trading opportunities be uniform and free from obstruction within a country's borders.  To accomplish this there must also be a strong government entity to oversee and regulate commerce in a way that assures smooth business transactions throughout the nation.  Any difference in laws or regulations among the states only serves to impede the smooth operations necessary for progress.

This brings me to the crux of my argument.  One of our great political parties is commonly referred to as progressive, while the other is self-proclaimed as conservative.  To me these two terms serve well to indicate the overriding attitudes of the two parties.  "Progressive" implies moving forward, making the changes necessary to advance.  On the other hand, the root of "conservative" means to keep or preserve the current state of affairs.  This is the party we hear calling us to adhere to the constitution and to the intents of our founders (looking backward).  The other accepts that the world is changing and that our attitudes and practices sometimes need to reflect this (looking forward).  The ideal of strong local and state governments may be quaint and out of touch with the needs of today's realities.  I question the wisdom of having differing statutes by state on matters such as voting age, driver licensing, marriage requirements or education standards and funding.  This ties to one of my earlier posts where I suggested it may be time to rewrite our 18th century constitution to bring our nation's legal system up to the times in which we live.

I hope this piece makes sense.  I've tried to put my thoughts down in a way that can be followed and understood.  You can agree or disagree -- that's the purpose of this site!  And that's what makes the USA a great country.  Maybe these lines will help you to decide how to vote next month.  Just be sure to VOTE, and thanks, as always, for reading my humble post.

Another Michigan Motorcycle Trip

I took another trip on my motorcycle over Labor Day weekend.  This time I went to the southwest corner of the state, then up the west coast.  I left Sunday afternoon with a definite destination in mind; after that I just wandered up the Lake Michigan shore at my leisure.  How does this post fit into my blog title?  That's easy; whenever I'm on my motorcycle, I feel like I am one cool dude.

The Old Rugged Cross Church

In April we held a hymn sing at our church.  While researching background information on several hymns, I came across the interesting fact that one of the best loved hymns of all was written right here in Michigan in 1912.  As it turned out, it was also sung publicly for the first time the following year, in Michigan.  The story got more and more interesting upon learning the history of the church of the original performance.  A small congregation near Niles, MI was holding a series of revival meetings.  The minister invited his friend, the Rev. George Bennard, to help in the services.  Having written most of the hymn the previous year while in Albion, Rev. Bennard brought the music with him and finished the words and music during the revival.  He then sang "The Old Rugged Cross" for the first time publicly during those meetings in a small church in Pokagon, MI.  In a few short years, the hymn became well known worldwide.

The barn as it appeared 40 years ago.

That's the background story.  A short while later the congregation moved to a larger building and sold the old wooden church to a farmer who used it as a barn (which was its original purpose before being acquired by the congregation.)  The building was used as a barn for 50 years or so, then fell into disuse and became overgrown and neglected.  However, people in the area knew this old building as the "Old Rugged Cross Church," and to some it was not fitting to see it fall into decay.  They organized, raised money, re-acquired the property and began the huge task of renovating the church.  Today the job is about 80% complete and once a month they hold a hymn sing in the church.  That was my Sunday evening destination.

Exterior view after 15 years of work.

Original reed organ and pulpit back where they belong.

The pews are replicas based on the originals.

We made a contribution to the restoration efforts 
and got this brick placed near the front entrance.

The building is beautiful inside and out, with many original pieces or replicas.  I arrived an hour early to tour the church and the adjacent memorial garden of meditation, and I was not the first one there.  By 6pm, the place was packed with 100+ people ready to sing -- and did they sing!  Before the service, they took requests, and that's what we sang, one right after the other.  People of many denominations were there, singing praise to their Lord through these many beloved hymns.  What a triumphant sound!

Proof that I made it to "the coast."

The next day, I continued on to New Buffalo and turned north to ride the Lake Michigan coast.  Much of the time I couldn't actually see the lake, but I could often smell the fresh lake effect in the air.  In St. Joseph, they have several points to look out over the lake, as the city sits on a bluff high above the shore.  I made it to Muskegon that second day.  I had never traveled this part of Michigan before, so I really enjoyed seeing new places.  I should add that I had great weather for this trip.  On Tuesday I rode straight east from Muskegon across the mitten, again on roads going through towns I'd never seen before.

Well, that was it -- a nice little trip, the last of the summer.  Really it was, because I had to go to work the following day.  That's right, I have a new job.  I'll write about it later.  Thanks for reading my blog.  Let me know what you think about anything mentioned here.  God bless.

4 Guys Singin' Gospel

We have a small church in Rochester, Michigan, where we've attended for about 21 years.  Over that time, I've sung with the praise team and played hand percussion in the band.  Last year, I became director of our small choir.  I also sing with some other men as the Faith Gospel Quartet.  We're just 4 guys who got together a few years ago because we all enjoy singing.  We rehearse about once a month and plan to sing in our church every couple of months or so.  This isn't the 'big time', but we do enjoy it, and the congregation seems to appreciate the music.

Over the past 30 years, I've been able to write a few songs that I thought maybe were pretty good.  They just come once in a while from the Lord.  When I sit down to write a song myself, it seldom turns out; but when the right inspiration comes, the song is usually complete in a short time.  Last year I wrote a song about the wonder of God's love.  You know I try to tie my posts into the title of my blog, "I Am One, etc".  The basic concept of this song is that, while we know that Jesus gave His life for the world, His sacrifice takes on greater significance when I think that He did it for me -- little, old, insignificant me.  But He did!  And He did the same for you!  It's truly a wonderment.

Anyway, each time I tell my family (who all live across the country now) that we just sang in church, they say: I hope you recorded it so we can hear it.  Well this time I did.  So here's a little number called "Don't Make Sense."  I hope you enjoy it, and may God bless you for listening.

Why, exactly, are these things illegal?

I hesitated greatly before posting this edition of my blog.  I'm going out on quite a limb here, I know; especially as I know my own family reads these posts, I don't want them or anyone else to think that I am advocating dangerous or immoral behaviors.  However, I've thought a lot lately about why a society enacts laws upon itself.  This post has to do with freedom, and the laws that we as a society allow to restrict that freedom.  As a consequence, I've come to question the validity of some of our many regulations.  This post also relates to the title of this blog once again -- that each of us is a unique individual with special qualities, rights and values.

Ahh . . . Freedom!

We need laws, of course, to prevent anarchy.  We Americans love our freedom, but most of us recognize basically that "my freedom ends when my behavior infringes upon my neighbor's freedom."  Therefore we need laws to govern our property rights and contractual agreements, to regulate traffic and to maintain our safety.  Whenever the exercising of one person's rights crosses paths with another's, there is potentially a valid need for regulation.  If there is legislation in place to govern a specific crossing of paths before it occurs, by definition you likely wind up with a criminal and a victim.  Our court system is in place to sort these matters out and assign due penalties and rewards.  However, many crimes are so-called "victimless" crimes; that is, the suspected criminal is charged with illegal behavior that hurt or endangered no one but him or herself.  That is the subject of this discussion.

If someone jumps off a 3-story roof, to the best of my knowledge that is not a crime.  If that person, however, injures another during the act, he would be guilty of assault, or something like that.  My point is that, assuming he survives and injures only himself, the jumper is only guilty of being stupid but has not committed a crime.  (Correct me if I'm wrong please; perhaps there are ordinances against roof jumping.)  At any rate, this is an example of a victimless event.  The freedom-loving roof jumper has only injured himself.  But if this is not a crime, there are many others that are, and I sometimes wonder why.  For example, whose freedoms are infringed if I choose not to wear my seat belt?  And yet, I can be ticketed for not doing so.

Many of these victimless acts are attempts to regulate moral behaviors; that is, some (or most) citizens believe a certain behavior to be morally wrong, so they outlaw it.  Now I've heard the mantra repeated many times that "you can't legislate morality."  That's preposterous.  I'd guess that nearly all legislation is in place to regulate moral behavior in some sense of the term.  The key to determining if legislation is needed should be whether one person could be injured or have his rights infringed upon by the acts of another.

Again, most of these regulated actions are enacted based on the moral principles of some segment of our society, perhaps even the majority.  However, we can each of us live our own lives according to our own moral standards without enforcing our standards upon all of society.  Ours is, after all, a secular government.  That is, legislators are prohibited by the constitution from establishing a particular religious faith (or moral code) as a guide for governance.  Finally, let's be clear that I am not expressing my own moral beliefs here.  I'm trying to separate my behavioral beliefs from the behaviors that must be demanded of my fellow citizens, for the sake of safety and social order.

I will not expound on these behaviors at this time; rather I'll simply offer them up for general discussion.  Remember, the point of this article is not to question one's own moral values, but to ask whether it is valid to impose these values upon all.  Keep in mind also that some of these "illegal" actions are in fact legal in certain states or districts, but they are generally regarded as illegal in most of the country.  Also, there may be legitimate reasons to keep these actions outlawed; if so, let's discuss it.  Finally, most of these activities occur every day throughout the land, legal or not.

That all being said I ask, "Why, exactly, are these actions illegal?"

Gambling

Assisted suicide

Prostitution

Drugs of various kinds

Polygamy

Same-sex marriage (civil unions)
 

Driving without a seat belt or motorcycle helmet

This is not a complete list of victimless crimes, just a quick sampling of a few major, hot button issues.  Hey, thanks for reading.  These are things I have thought about lately; what do you think? 

40 years - Wow!

Happy Anniversary!

This past weekend I celebrated 40 years with the love of my life.  We were barely adults when we got married half-way through college in 1972, but the Lord has always been so good to us.  We finished college, were led to good jobs, raised four great kids, and have owned two homes, among so many other wonderful blessings over these years.  
Linda, thank you for saying "yes".

Our friendly B&B

Well, we celebrated with a short trip to a quaint town in southern Michigan.  The actor Jeff Daniels was raised in Chelsea, MI, and lives there still.  Several years ago he founded a small professional theater there and we've often talked about visiting it - this was our opportunity.  We drove to Chelsea Saturday afternoon and checked into a nice B&B, a 130 year old restored Victorian home with very welcoming owners.  We strolled around the town (that doesn't take long) and chose a nice Mexican restaurant for dinner.  

Linda at the Purple Rose Theater

Returning to our room, we changed into our theater attire and headed just around the block to the Purple Rose Theater, where we enjoyed an intimate performance of "On Golden Pond".  I say an intimate performance because the theater has only 175 seats and feels much smaller than that.  

That was it.  It was nice to get away for a night just to make sure this event didn't get overlooked.  Interestingly, there was another couple in the B&B that same night who were also celebrating their 40th anniversary.  We had a nice talk with them as we shared breakfast together Sunday morning.  Another aspect of the quaint town of Chelsea was the sound of trains going right through town and the clock tower that chimed out every 15  minutes all night long.  Rather than being interruptive it was actually quite nice.

Life has been quite a trip and, the Lord willing, we're no where near done.  We look forward to sharing many more years together, just like Norman and Ethel Thayer, the characters in our play.  Thanks for reading and letting me share my life and thoughts.

Politics and Religion - Let's Talk

This is my third attempt to write this post.  It has to do with two topics that have been dominating my thoughts recently, but my mind is so muddled by all that I've been reading that I can't seem to organize my thoughts in a way that will make any sense.

So, we've all been told NOT to discuss politics or religion in polite company.  I say, "Why not?"  I enjoy both of these topics and I enjoy discussing them, but I understand why most people do not.  Most people need to "be right."  They have taken positions regarding religion and politics and just can't give alternatives any degree of credibility -- it must be their way or it's wrong.  One of the books I read recently actually explained why this is.  This book, The Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt, explains that people make most moral decisions quickly and intuitively, without needing much time to reason things out.  Our reasoning follows our decision and almost always is manipulated to explain the decision we've already made.  Since religion and politics are both areas of moral belief, rarely can we ever change a person's mind through reasoning alone -- it too often turns to a heated argument between entrenched positions.  Mr. Haidt is a psychologist, so this book is based on scientific tests and experiments.  I've never been able to deal with psychology, so I didn't read the entire book, just enough to get the main idea.


The other book I read about the topics at hand (and I think I'll take a break from religion and politics now for a while) is called God's Politics by Jim Wallis.  This book was more interesting to me, as it spoke directly to issues of concern.  One of the main tenets of this book is that "God is not a Republican, and He is not a Democrat."  The author explains that we have one major political party in the U.S. that openly claims God is on their side.  Then we have another party that seems too embarrassed to mention God at all.  Regarding morals, one party claims to be on God's mission to stop abortions, prohibit same-sex marriage and promote "family values."  The other party, however, follows the teachings of Jesus to care for the poor, the sick, the downtrodden and needy.  Even wealth redistribution is a Biblical principle: it's called the Year of Jubilee.  Instead of claiming that God is on "our" side, we should all rather make every effort to be sure we are on His side.


So let's talk -- yeah about religion.  Believe what you want; just know that some of it is probably not accurate.  A dash of humility helps a lot here.  Live your faith, respect others, let your light shine.  Let your faith drive your politics, knowing that you'll not find a perfect match.  We only have two major political parties, and each is far from perfect.  Neither party is very right and neither is very wrong.  Don't listen to the extreme right or the extreme left talking heads on TV, except for their entertainment value if that's what you enjoy.  Yeah, let's talk about politics too, and let's seek to be moral people.

Here's a thought:  How much money has been given to the campaigns of President Obama, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Michelle Bachmann, Herman Cain and John Huntsman over the past year or so?  I have no idea, but it's a big number, with lots of zeros and a big dollar sign.  And all for what? To purchase television time and bumper stickers, campaign buses and jets?  Think of what all that money could do for the poor, for education, for AIDS and cancer research.  Instead we're willing to see all those millions spent by people trying to get elected to office.  There has to be a better way.


Hey, thanks for reading.  I hope this post hasn't rambled too much, but I'm having a hard time articulating my muddled thoughts about religion and politics in America today.  May God bless you as you live your faith.

Michigan Motorcycling

I promised an update about my motorcycle trip to NW Michigan, with photos.  However, my camera refused to work and just shows an error message that evidently can only be corrected by an authorized service dealer.  So I have no pictures.

I drove 275 miles to Boyne Falls on Memorial Day, which was a beautiful, near 90-degree day across Michigan.  Along the way I stopped a couple of times to visit relatives at their lake cottages.  My plan was to stay at Boyne Falls and take day trips out to places like Mackinaw City, Petoskey and Traverse City.  Tuesday was a much cooler day, and I wound up riding to Grayling to visit friends who also have a summer home there.  Before I left home, all the weather talk was about the holiday weekend and record temperatures.  So I really didn't pack anything for cooler weather; I had figured that if it cooled down it would still be in the 80's or at most the 70's.  

By Wednesday the morning temps were in the 40's and only reached the upper 50's in the afternoon.  That may sound warm enough, but it's another matter when one in traveling 60 mile per hour on an open machine.  Well, as it turned out I put my rain suit on over my leather jacket and did manage to ride in relative comfort. So I set out for the Traverse City area and stopped to visit more friends in Frankfort.  I discovered that just about any road I chose to explore would turn out to be a great motorcycle ride.  All of NW Michigan is hilly and filled with lakes, so all roads turn out to have plenty of pleasant curves, plus the pavement is smoother than downstate.

I had planned to return home on Friday, but the forecast called for a high likelihood of rain.  So I made the decision to head home a day early and I'm glad I did.  I finished the trip without being rained on at all (unlike last year's trip), and yes it did rain Friday.  Altogether I rode about 950 miles -- a pretty good week.  Again, I apologize for no pics, but thanks for reading anyway.

Visiting the South

Rocky trails, waterfalls, millionaires, bear escape, spring rains, great steaks and bad BBQ.  That's a quick summary of our recent vacation to Tennessee and Georgia.

Peaceful Mountain Streams

We had two basic destinations: Gatlinburg, TN and Savannah, GA.  We've been to Gatlinburg before and we enjoy the mountain scenery.  The Great Smoky Mountain National Park is a wonderful place to experience nature.  

Rocky Trails where I had trouble keeping up

We made a few hikes into the mountains, where we discovered that Linda's regular walking exercise discipline really paid off, as she was able to continue on after I had to give up on the longer trails.  Nevertheless, I enjoyed seeing mountain brooks, waterfalls, towering trees and rocky gorges.  

Self Portrait - Contemplating the Universe
(or Watching out for Bears)

My lack of endurance saved me from encountering the black bear, but, praise the Lord, Linda stared it down and survived to tell the tale.  Of course, she didn't have a camera.  I had the camera, and with the extra time on my trip back down the trail I tried some artistic shots of myself and other scenery.

While staying at Gatlinburg, we made a day trip to Asheville, NC, to tour the super mansion of George Vanderbilt, Biltmore Estate -- it was beautiful.  We spent over 2 hours in the house, but it was a rainy day so we didn't walk the grounds and gardens like we had hoped.  This place is definitely worth visiting, especially on Mother's Day when all mothers get in free.  Built in 1895, it is the biggest (at 175,000 sq. ft.) single family home in the U.S.  See my previous post for a stock photo of the mansion, as we were not able to take photos inside the  home, and the weather prevented outdoor shots that day.  We also took in a dinner show at Pigeon Forge -- it was a fun program that included  rock & roll, country and gospel music, all performed by quite talented local entertainers.

Chocolates, anyone?

This was our first visit to Savannah, so we took the trolley tour to learn the basic layout and history of the city.  We could get off and on trolleys all day long for one price, and the drivers were all quite informative and entertaining.  Of course, it rained there too, but it was fun to see all the historic homes, churches and squares, like the one where Forrest Gump shared his box of chocolates and told the story of his life.  As Savannah is very scenic as well as historic, we learned that many movies have been made there over the years.

Linda & Dave, on a
rainy day at Biltmore

No, we didn't take many pictures, but at least we did try some of those arm-length self photos.  Oh, and the great steaks were found in Gatlinburg, also on Mother's Day, and also free for all mothers.  The disappointing BBQ was unfortunately found the next day in Pigeon Forge.


So, in the spirit of this blog, let me just say we are each unique; and so were George Vanderbilt and Forrest Gump.


Thanks for reading.  Next up is a motorcycle trip to NW Michigan.

Dixie Bound

This week we are taking a vacation, and we're heading south.  Specifically we're going to Gatlinburg, TN and Savannah, GA.  We have a timeshare resort in both cities.  We love Gatlinburg because of the Great Smokey Mountain National Park where we like to explore the hiking trails into the woods.  When one gets away from the crowds, the mountains seem like a place untouched by humans, except of course for the trail on which one is walking.

Savannah, on the other hand, is a place we've never visited before.  Our resort is right in town, so our plan is to spend a day strolling through the old town, getting a taste of its charm, perhaps planning a return trip with more time.

Biltmore Estate

One more highlight of this trip, while we're in Gatlinburg, will be a visit to Biltmore, the extravagant mansion of the Vanderbilts in Asheville, NC.

We're never good at taking pictures, but I will try to make a great effort to take photos of this trip and include them here in a summary blog of our vacation.

Later this month, I plan to take a solo motorcycle trip to northern Michigan, using another timeshare resort as my base while making daily excursions around the beautiful northwestern corner of the mitten.  I did this trip last year, and despite cool, wet weather I had a marvelous time.  I'll try to take pictures here too.

Thanks for reading.

The state of the Church & the State

I enjoy history.  I'm a lifelong church member and active participant, and like most Americans I'm concerned about the role and direction of our governments.  So when I saw this book about Roger Williams, who apparently played a prominent role in formulating the idea of "separation of church and state" that our founders wrote in the 1st amendment to the Constitution, I knew I wanted to read it right away.  

I had no idea just how radical the concept was in the 18th century.  To begin an explanation, however, I must refer to another book I recently read about church history and the lives of the popes.


The Christian church was, of course, born in the days of Roman rule.  When the new Christian religion finally became accepted officially by the empire (after a few centuries of alternating tolerance, intolerance and persecution), and as the church evolved toward a structured hierarchy of governance headed by the Bishop of Rome, the emperor was very much involved in church appointments.  This continued on through the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, as the church jousted for power with various kingdoms and empires in Europe.  Popes appointed kings and emperors, and kings and emperors appointed popes.  If temporal and spiritual powers were not one and the same, they were certainly very closely linked.  Nothing really changed after the Reformation.  Rather it merely created more players in the struggles to affect people's beliefs and behavior.  As a prime example of the mixture of power, the king of England was also made the head of the Church of England, and Queen Elizabeth holds that position today.  A 17th century group of dissenters called Puritans began to seek relief from an over-dominant English church with a risky voyage across the sea to a faraway land called America, and that is where the story gets really interesting for me.

Before reading a recent book, Roger Williams and the Creation of the American Soul by John M. Barry, I was naive enough to believe that those Puritans came to America to establish a form of worship free of intrusion from the state.  I was quite wrong.  They merely sought to worship in a way they felt was right, and anyone wanting to join them would have to conform, under dire penalties from the church or state, which were indeed one and the same in this new land of freedom.  It was just like Europe, only different.  Roger Williams was a Puritan minister.

Williams came to Massachusetts colony like the rest, to escape the over-reaching arm of the English church.  However, he had had experiences within the English court system that gave him a broader view of what he felt was wrong.  While others came to set up their own system of equally-intrusive religious dictates, Williams recognized the need for individuals to be allowed to live and worship as each saw fit, even if such decisions violated accepted practices of the majority.  I won't labor you with more detail of the book; alas, you may want to read it yourself.  Nonetheless, the point I'm making is that, given the many hundreds of years of struggle between the powers of the church and various heads of states as a historical background, one can more readily understand such a system being established immediately upon Europeans' arrival in this new land, and why it was such an extremely radical idea to suggest religious and temporal powers ought to be completely and legally separate.


So how does this concept play out today?  All nice and settled?  Hardly.  As private citizens of the U.S.A., we can each vote as our individual desires and dreams dictate.  However, many of us (as we wish) are members of churches or other religious groups, and as such our thoughts are influenced by our beliefs.  When a group of citizens with common beliefs on a specific topic become large enough to exert influence in the political scene, it is sometimes impossible to separate their religious views (the church) from their political votes (the state).  Nor should it be necessary to do so.  However, no matter how strongly our moral beliefs are held, we need to remember that ours is a secular government, set up that way by our wise forefathers who had seen the abuses caused by the mingling of church and state, and who desired that people of different cultures and faiths should reside peacefully together, bound by a common sense of liberty and the rights of all to pursue their dreams.


This is a much bigger topic than I am able to grasp, but I enjoy contemplating its ramifications in our time.  We can all think of current social issues that grate against our moral and religious belief systems.  How do we, as citizens of a certain faith, vote on issues that will impact behaviors and lifestyles of others?  How far can one group of citizens impose its values upon others, while still supporting the ideals of "liberty and justice for all?"  

I have more questions on this topic than answers right now.  If you have anything to add, I'd like to hear it.  Thanks for reading.