Who is a Good Samaritan?

One of the teachings in the Bible that I have contemplated increasingly over the past few years is that of the Good Samaritan, as presented in one of the parables of Jesus (Luke 10:25-37).

This is a key teaching but, in part because people have heard it so many times, I think it has to some extent lost its impact, had its meaning obscured and diluted, and been reduced to a children’s story. And, once a child thinks the point of the story is that they need to be nice to their little brother or help their mom around the house, they are probably never going to understand it correctly.

There are, however, two critical points to this parable. One is the importance of being kind to people who are not like oneself. The other is the importance of helping people without the possibility of reward.

Part of the reason people are often confused by the meaning of this parable is likely that they have heard the terms “good” and “Samaritan” used in conjunction with one another so many times that they have subconsciously established a relationship between them. “What is a Samaritan? Well, it must be an especially good sort of person.”

The reason, however, that Jesus used a Samaritan in his parable is that it was an ethnic group that his audience would have found particularly objectionable. To us, the term “Samaritan” is intrinsically meaningless; there a mere 700-or-so members of this group still alive today and, even for those of us who might have known that, their existence almost certainly has no bearing on us one way or the other.

It is just as certain, however, that Jesus never said anything that was meaningless, and if he told that parable today he would therefore have to use a sort of person other than a Samaritan in order for the parable to make sense to his audience. What sort of person would that be?

Well, it might be the type of person for which his particular listeners had the worst or the most ethnic slurs. The one that they told the nastiest jokes about. The ones that they crossed the street to avoid, would have never had as guests in their homes, and would have forbid their children to marry. Today, any particular audience would likely hear the parable of “the good illegal alien.” “The good Arab.” “The good African-American.” Whoever his listeners would be most offended by is who he would insert.

I am probably making it sound as if this teaching would have been very unpopular — and I bet it was! While we revere Jesus and hold him in the highest regard, in his own time many people were really annoyed by him and with what he had to say — to the extent that they were willing to subject him to a mock trial and have him tortured and killed. They did not do that to knowingly fulfill a prophecy, they did it because they hated Jesus and because his words were an affront to them.

Last year, I covered an especially disturbing murder trial. After the defendant was convicted, her defense attorney called about a dozen character witnesses in an attempt to sway the sentence that the jury would impose (and succeeded in this regard). Many of these witnesses characterized the killer as a Good Samaritan, describing the things that person had, apparently selflessly, done to help them. This, however, displays an extreme misunderstanding of the teaching. When you help people that can testify on your behalf in court or serve you in any other way, you are not being a good Samaritan — you are paying the premiums on an insurance policy.

I am certainly not suggesting that helping one’s family members, friends, or neighbors is not a desirable thing. But, if the people you are helping can pay you back in any way, then your actions are meaningless in the context of the parable of the Good Samaritan. To the extent that helping people who can help you in return is a Christian value, it is just as much a Jewish value, a pagan value, a Muslim value, even an atheist value. Jesus and everyone else already knew that Jews helped Jews, Romans helped Romans, gentiles helped gentiles, and no one needed to tell a parable to illustrate that.

So, according to the words of Jesus, there are probably few greater things that one could aspire to be than a “Good Samaritan.” Doing so, however, just might be a lot tougher than you thought.

Bully for Conformity

As coverage on local and national news alike would suggest, it would seem that the subject of bulling is finally being taken seriously in our country, which I can only take as a positive development. Amongst all the talk about concerned school administrators on the one hand and indifferent ones on the other, one impression of the phenomena that I have long noted has, as far as I can tell, not been discussed at all.

That is, in short, the idea that "bullies" are in many cases not the enemies of the school administration but, in fact, its tools. When I was in high school, at least half of the bullies were varsity athletes, "good kids" that got a pass from teachers/administrators/coaches. A number of the very worst bullies were also the kids of teachers or school employees, and, even when their parents were explicitly told what their kids were doing, they did nothing to intervene. Bullying occurred not at the hands of kids who had been abused themselves, etc. (it is too nice to think that they might have been), but rather by kids who were being give a pass on their behavior.

These bullies were fully aligned with the power structure and harassed and menaced others in proportion to the extent that they were outsiders. Some of them clearly even saw themselves as little policemen, trying to stamp out disorder in the society in which they were favored. The more people were like everyone else, the less likely they were to be bullied themselves. One of the more popular songs was Pink Floyd's "Another Brick in the Wall," and kids sang the lyrics to it knowing exactly what they meant ... but they were damn sure to sing them when, where, and how they were supposed to.

So, bullying probably brings to mind different images to most of us -- but I would suggest that in some cases it should bring to mind the idea of the order, conformity, and homogeneity it is meant to encourage.

The Price of Extremism

Every time I watch a movie about Northern Ireland, the civil war in Yugoslavia, the genocide in Rwanda -- not the mention the news about more current events -- I am reminded of the cost associated with the extreme absurd result of intolerance amongst the peoples of a nation.

This, I think, is why I have chosen to reject the most extreme religious and political movements in our country today ... the essence of what they believe is irrelevant, even if in some cases it happens to be more compatible with my own beliefs with those of the opposition, because they are willing to trample on the "wrong" beliefs of others.

Sure, it feels good to rail against people with beliefs opposed to your own, to demonize and villify them, and there is so much more of that in our society than there has ever been before. Incivility and intolerance have become commonplace among the leaders of some our nation's factions. I recently read a news story about an event in which a state official publicly referred to the President of the United States as "a Chicago thug." Disgusting. It is a sign of how far that we have slipped that a roomfull of of middle-aged women applauded that comment rather than being revolted by it.

And, if you really believe in something then you might believe that doing anything to achieve the ends associated with it is a good thing ... It's not. Not in a country like ours; this is the crux of disaster, this sense of moral right. Whatever else you believe America is about, it's about tolerance, and accepting that other people have a right to live as they choose ... even if you don't like it. The consequences of intolerance are only worse.

Sex, and the crap that follows.

If you are a woman and you want to sleep with a man, it follows that you will have issues. Not simply issues related to the particular incident, but issues from the other women in the sphere of the man you are/have slept with. This I have found is a more recent phenomenon. Ten years ago, it seems like you could go have casual sex if you were careful, and then go about your merry way, being friends or not with the guy, with no ill effects. Nowadays it seems like more and more the boys you end up sleeping with are happy to let you suffer and the other women in their lives suffer the consequences of something which should have been between just the two of you. They call it being open and honest. Really? Well... shit. I can't argue that, it is honest. It is also cruel and sometimes just rude. I don't want to deal with some crazy girl you are sleeping with who is in love with you and says she can handle a non committal sex only relationship, and then freaks out completely when you admit openly that you and I have slept together. What we do is between us, and what you two do is between you two. Seem shady? Well... Let me put this delicately... It seems like the women in your life would be much happier if you would instead of the "honesty" tried for more "Discretion". There is no need to flaunt the fact that you have several women you sleep with, you tell a girl once and then you let it go. You don't brag about it and you don't introduce the parties to each other, or expect them to happily skip down the lane together now do you? You do? Wow... then you have either, a lot of balls, no regard for any woman, or no brains. Now.... Some girls can handle the casual thing, but I'm here to tell you we're rare! There are many more ladies out there who will tell you that they are ok with it, and then flip the fuck out when you take them up on their cavalier, yet ultimately fake acceptance of another female in your realm. Discretion boys, is the better part of valor, it will keep the women in your life happy. There is a reason that people say ignorance is bliss, and I'm not telling you to lie to your ladies, but you don't have to rub it in either now do you? All of this is after a year of watching a couple of people who are very good at being honest, and the girls they deal with falling apart when their worlds are shattered. Be nice boys! and hey.. Girls? Stop being psycho bitches to the other women in your men's lives, they are in the exact same boat as you, so recognize, and move on. As a side note, the author is not involved in the above described drama, I am merely an audience member.

~Jules

American Values

How many people feel their skin start to crawl, and feel a weight start to press down upon them, when they hear the word "values" these days? Is that what the Founding Fathers intended? That people would feel sick and apprehensive when they considered the values that defined their country?

I don't think so.

America was a country founded on the promise of a dream of freedom.

So here is a value for you ... and one that will work for you when other people observe it ...

Mind
Your own
Fucking
Business

That's right. Mind your own fucking business. Don't worry about other people. Don't worry about what they're doing. And, if we ever got to point where everybody followed that advice, you wouldn't get that scared, sick, clammy feeling when you heard some asshole mention the word "values" ... Because you would know that it wasn't being used to bend you to someone else's will and make you live your life in some way you did not want to.

An Un-Friending

Recently, I received a series of reproachful email messages from a close friend of 30 years, in response, he said, to the post on this site about the Tea Party (with which he claims to have no affiliation and know little about).

Based on that post, he accused me of being a socialist, a Nazi, a racist, crazy, a follower of Jessie Jackson, and, furthermore, suggested at least a couple of times that people in general and I in particular do not have the right to live wherever we choose in the country (this latter suggestion is so outlandish that I assumed he was joking the first time he made it, but he subsequently clarified that he was not). There were some other accusations and personal attacks in there as well but they all sort of rambled and one thought did not necessarily follow another in a way I could understand and I could almost sense rage behind his broken, jumbled, and repetitive prose. He made it clear in them however, that we were no longer friends.

To suggest I am not very upset by this would be untrue. I take friendship very seriously and it never occurred to me that our friendship would ever end, much less over uncertain views of mine that I never approached him with and which he had to seek out. Certainly, it would seem to me that there is more here than is meeting my eye, but I don't know what to do about it.

So, all very strange and disquieting. But it would seem to be a sign of the times ... How often are people being un-friended these days for forwarding intolerant, bigoted, email messages to everyone in their address books? Not often enough, apparently, or they would not keep doing it. But suggest tolerance and moderation and that is going too far.

A Lack of Original Thinking

The past week or so, I have been sort of beating myself up for not following up on the Tea Party-oriented thread that precedes this one ... I know what I want to say, but between the newspaper I help run, my little publishing company, the book I just got contracted to write, etc., I just haven't had the time to give the subject the attention it deserves. And everyone else who emails me things, makes posts I see to Facebook, and the like, has been dutifully staying on top of their commentary.

And then it struck me: I can't remember the last time anyone sent me anything that reflected an opinion in their own words. It is all other people's ideas -- ideas about healthcare, the president, minorities, etc. -- that they agree with so much that they want to share it with everyone they know.

OK, so not everyone is a writer, not everyone is particularly articulate, and there is nothing wrong with agreeing with what someone else thinks, right? But shouldn't people be expected to come up with their own ideas at least once in awhile? It really does seem a little lazy, a little pathetic, even somewhat ominous.

You may not agree with my views in general, and that's fine; you'll probably be happier if you don't. But, for what it's worth, I do care enough to say what I really think, not just hit "Forward" and distribute someone else's thoughts because I can't come up with any of my own. And the next time you're inclined to do that, please hesitate just a few seconds ... And consider whether you would be saying the same thing if you had to say it yourself.

(Re)Considering Allegations of Racism

My friend L.H. recently wrote to me to complain about my characterization of Tea Partiers as racists in my previous post, "Teabagged in Searchlight, Nevada."

"I think you have fallen victim to media stereotyping and not thinking open mindedly like what you complain about in your blog," he said. "I have questions about tea patiers, who is in charge what is their agenda etc. I have never been to one of their events so I do not know what goes on. However labeling anyone who opposes any form of socialism that is presented by the democrats as a racist has no justification. My friends who go to Tea party events are mixed race couples and I don't think that they would take their children who are labeled as African Americans or Asian Americans to racist events. ... I think that the whole tea party thing is a lot of angry people and some others trying to make money off of them but labeling that group as racist places you in the same category for letting someone else decide what you think."

I have to admit, and am a bit embarassed to do so, that I did use the term "racist" pretty casually and without any careful consideration before doing so. That is a pretty serious charge -- and one that I have long thought gets made too quickly in our country anymore. My friend has made some incorrect assumptions about what led me to do so, but his challenge deserves a response and has prompted me to do some soul-searching about what prompted me to make this characterization.

Following are factors that may or may not have played some role in my subconscious determination that Tea Partiers are racist, along with factors I have subsequently consciously taken into consideration. (It will take me a few days to get all my thoughts out, but they will appear in this space.)

-- The Media Told Me to Think It --
To start with, this comment seems predicated on the myth of the "liberal media." I would, however, challenge any American to conduct a simple experiment: Select the TV news channel of their choice -- CNN, MSNBC, Fox, it doesn't matter -- watch it for an hour during prime time, and count the number of commercials for the pharmaceutical industry, the most lucrative in the country, that appear. This should make it pretty clear that to the extent that is a single "the media," it is in fact exceedingly corporate in nature and not liberal at all.

Beyond that, a little reflection will also reveal that, far from being reviled by the media, the Tea Party is in fact a media darling. Consider recent Tea Party events in Nashville, Tennessee, and Austin, Texas, which received national media coverage. Only 200-400 people showed up at these events and nothing newsworthy actually happened at them. What other group gets coverage at all for such trivial activities?

If "the media" wanted to hurt the Tea Party it would just ignore it.

-- Nationalist Movements Tend to be Racist in Character --
First, I think it is fair to characterize any organization whose members dress themselves in clothing made from American flags is nationalist in nature. And, unfortunately, I cannot think of a single nationalist movement that is not racist to one extent or another. Major ones that come to mind are Nazism, Japanese imperialism, and, closer to home, the No-Nothing and Native American political parties of the 19th century (and no, I don't mean American Indian; do your homework before bitching about this one).

Tea Party Supporters Make Racist Comments/Wear Racist Regalia.

The Tea Party Denies Being a Racist Organization.

Minorities Would not be Part of a Racist Organizations.

Teabagged in Searchlight, Nevada

SEARCHLIGHT, NEVADA -- My wife and I had the unpleasant experience of being stuck in a traffic jam deep in the desert east of Las Vegas, Nevada, on Saturday, March 27, as a result of a Tea Party rally taking place just outside of the little town of Searchlight. I had originally posted about this to my travelblogue but, as I prefer for that site to remain apolitical, shifted the piece here instead.


During our slow drive past thousands of cars parked alongside both sides of the road, we had the opportunity to look at the Teabaggers -- angry, shambling, salt-of-the-earth racist slobs clad in pieces of American flag, whose rebellion against "big government" completely coincidentally serves the needs of a big business establishment that must despise them even more than the average college-educated moderate.

Did Jews get scared when they saw rallies like this in 1930s Germany? The few blacks and Mexicans driving on the road through this mob scene looked nervous and kept moving.

"Ugh. I find these people to be repugnant," my friend Geo, a professional magician, said to me. "I had a group of these people show up at one of my shows a number of months back. Unfortunately this was prior to my being aware of who and what they were. So I missed a golden opportunity to mock them on stage."

On some level, however, I actually feel sorry for them, because they are just shills and too dumb to see that they are being manipulated and used by the same establishment they think they are protesting. They are, for example, opposed to the Healthcare Bill because it supposedly deprives them of some freedom. Conveniently, however, this also just happens to serve the needs of pharmaceutical insurance companies who want to maintain the status quo. A lot of the Teabaggers clearly are just hateful, nasty people, but I am not oblivious to the fact that a lot of them are just normal folks who are both scared and not bright enough to think for themselves (and, as history has shown, that is an ominous combination).

Of Airbuses and Camels

Following is a supposed news story, subject "Oops," that someone emailed me, followed by my reponse. Something did not seem right about this story and, when I researched it out, I found it to be a fabrication. That said, I probably wouldn't have bothered to respond to it at all, much less launch this site in response to it, if some hateful prick hadn't concluded with "That's why God gave them camels!"

----- BEGIN ORIGINAL MESSAGE -----
I GUESS THEY CAN AFFORD ANOTHER ONE!

Subject: Oops

OOPS!

This brand spanking new Airbus 340-600, the longest passenger airplane ever built, sits just outside its hangar in Toulouse , France without a single hour of airtime.

Enter the Arab flight crew of Abu Dhabi Aircraft Technologies (ADAT) to conduct pre-delivery tests on the ground, such as engine run-ups prior to delivery to Etihad Airways in Abu Dhabi.

The ADAT crew taxied the A340-600 to the run-up area.

Then they took all four engines to takeoff power with a virtually empty aircraft. Not having read the run-up manuals, they had no clue just how light an empty A340-600 really is.

The takeoff warning horn was blaring away in the cockpit because they had All 4 engines at full power.

The aircraft computers thought they were trying to take off, but it had not been configured properly (flaps/slats, etc.)

Then one of the ADAT crew decided to pull the circuit breaker on the Ground Proximity Sensor to silence the alarm. This fools the aircraft into thinking it is in the air.

The computers automatically released all the brakes and set the aircraft rocketing forward.

The ADAT crew had no idea that this is a safety feature so that pilots can't land with the brakes on.

Not one member of the seven-man Arab crew was smart enough to throttle back the engines from their max power setting, so the $200 million brand-new Aircraft crashed into a blast barrier, totaling it.

The extent of injuries to the crew is unknown due to the news blackout in the major media in France and elsewhere.

Coverage of the story was deemed insulting to Muslim Arabs.

Finally, the photos are starting to leak out.

A French Airbus: $200 million dollars

Untrained Arab Flight Crew: $300,000 Yearly Salary
Unread Operating Manual: $300

Aircraft meets retaining wall, and the wall wins.
PRICELESS!!!

"That's why God gave them camels!"
----- END ORIGINAL MESSAGE -----

Oops, indeed! Where should we even start with this one ...

First, this Airbus wreck story isn't entirely true and, in particular, the conclusion we are supposed to derive from it -- i.e., that Arabs are stupid -- is based on a fabrication. Check out http://www.snopes.com/photos/airplane/etihad.asp As a general rule, when people send out reports that they do not have the moral courage to place their names on, it is because those reports are false. The next thing you get like this won't be true either.

Second, racism of this sort is problematic in all sorts of ways. I will only briefly touch on a few of the pragmatic ones. For one, how do we reconcile Arab/Muslem inferiority with our inability to successfully occupy or subdue two rump nations inhabited by them? (I know now we just blame the black president, but that doesn't satisfactorily address the eight years leading up to his election.)

Third, what does it say about our attitudes toward fellow Americans who happen to be Arabs or Muslims? Whether you like these peoples or not, these sorts of hateful attitudes toward other citizens weaken and divide our nation and, because I love America and the Constitution that as a soldier I swore to uphold, I have to repudiate them on that basis alone.

Fourth, in my life as a working adult, I have found something between a third and a half of white Americans I have dealt with to be sub-competent in their chosen occupations and, to one extent or another, to ultimately be a detriment rather than a benefit to our society. And yet I never get email messages, for example, about worthless white middle-managers who devalue the companies they work for; white hawks who clamor for war but would never actually be themselves willing to fight; or middle-class white people who have squandered the advantages they were given and made nothing of themselves. This, rather than the incompetent Arabs, is a problem you actually need to be worried about -- especially if you believe white men and women have a legacy of leadership to uphold in our country.

Finally, as a person of faith, I think it is somewhat perilous to invoke the name of God in a racist commentary ... Does God actually love Arabs less than us or anyone else? Jesus didn't think so, and when he was asked in Luke 10:29 "Who is my neighbor?" he pointed out that the most odious sort of person you could envision is (i.e., in his case a Samaritan; see also "Who is a Good Samaritan?"). Now, Jesus does go on an on, and I would not blame anyone for not listening to anything he had to say, but I guess the Christians out there are obligated to, so I figured they might want to know about this.

Dissemination of falsehoods like this has become disquietingly commonplace and, even more disturbing is that so many people who receive and then indiscriminatly forward messages like this to everyone in the address book don't seem to care that they are spreading lies. It is important to me, however, to not be that proverbial person who stood by while false witness was borne against others, or while Rome burned, or whatever.