Encouragement for This Season's Mover

Having a military career means lots of moving.  In the last fifteen years I have moved my family no less than nine times; an average of once every 20 months.  Military members also often help each other move.  Over an entire career, that is a lot of moves I have participated in.  Over time, our nomadic lifestyle has disciplined us into developing adaptive and persevering natures.  We grow not only accustomed to change but over time thrive and even yearn for it.  

I realized recently that my “adaptive and persevering” nature has developed a thorn.  I have become condescending towards those that rarely move and therefore buckle under the pressure of doing so.  However, in a moment of my significant lack of sympathy in my neighbor’s struggle, I was hit with an epiphany; moving is not normal.  Consider the first move of Man.  Adam and Eve lived in the paradise of Eden until they sinned and were promptly evicted from the premises (Gen 3:23-24).  Every time we move it is a reminder of original sin and the resulting alienation between Man and God.  Even in the best of situations, when we choose to move rather than be evicted, we are merely seeking something better than we have, ultimately searching for that which can only be satisfied when we finally arrive in God’s Heavenly Kingdom.  We drag our families around in pursuit of that better job, prestigious school district, bigger house, etc.  There is nothing wrong with any of these, yet our never ending hunger for such things is really an ancient echo of our eviction from Eden and our longing to return.

Moving will continue to be a part of life this side of glory.  Being adaptive and persevering through change are sound traits.  However, one should never become so callous to moving that they look down on those that rightly struggle.  Do you trust in the righteous works of Jesus alone for your salvation?  If so, you can go through the process of moving with the peace of mind that at least your move into the Kingdom God has already been accomplished.  

Here's to Complicating Your 4th

Every 4^th of July I have mixed feelings. There are, of course, the patriotic emotions that are hard to avoid when one is surrounded by loved ones under a firework filled night sky. Why the mixed feelings? As my wife often points out, I am a rule follower. I am most comfortable when I obey the established authority. As a child I obeyed my parents. As a Christian I obey God. As a citizen I obey my government. In this context I realize that I would most likely have been a Loyalist during the time of the American Revolution. I cannot see myself taking up arms against my country, in that case England, and my King. 

I sympathize greatly with the often misunderstood "traitor," Benedict Arnold. He first fought beside his countrymen (English & American colonists) in 1755 against the tyranny of France and their terrorizing Indian tactics during the French and Indian War. Later, believing in the American struggle against British oppression, Arnold took up arms against his country and became the most brilliant soldier of the Continental Army, most notably at the Battle of Saratoga, at which his right leg was desperately wounded. His private correspondence displayed both a spirit of rebellion against tyranny and a desire to see America eventually rekindle her communion with England.  However, Arnold was beside himself upon learning of the Franco/American alliance of 1778, an unthinkable treason to any British-American. Arnold changed sides and once again fought for his King.  Having traded his blue coat for a red one, Arnold later asked a captured Continental officer what the Americans would do if they captured him.  The officer replied, “Cut off your right leg, bury it with full military honors, and then hang the rest of you on a gibbet.”

I do not live during the American Revolutionary era, however. The American colonists won and I live on this side of history. I have since attempted to take up and participate in this experiment of liberty and the spirit of rebellion against tyranny. The mixed feelings continue, however, and will likely endure for some time.

The Taliban Are Not Terrorists

There are a few common misconceptions regarding the Afghanistan War that I would like to address.  

First: “Our military is fighting Taliban terrorists.”

The Taliban our military is fighting are not terrorists but rather enemy combatants of an insurgency that seeks to regain control of Afghanistan.  As such, when an enemy combatant is captured they become a prisoner of war (POW) and afforded the rights acknowledged by both U.S. and international law.   

Second: “We traded 5 terrorists for 1 U.S. soldier.  We don’t negotiate with terrorists.”

The tradition of conducting POW exchanges has an historical precedent found throughout modern warfare.  During the current Afghanistan War the U.S. has returned over 600 Taliban POWs since 2002.

Third: “The terrorists we have released are dangerous.”

Possibly.  This is more of an assumption than a misconception.  The recently released Taliban POWs swore to cease from hostilities for the duration of the war and must remain in Doha for the next year with monitored, restricted liberty.  One in ten released Taliban POWs have returned to fight in the war.  Will the recently released Taliban POWs rejoin the fight?  Possible, but not probable as the Afghanistan War will likely come to a close in the next year or two.  At that point in time, the remaining 140 Taliban POWs in Guantanamo will also be returned.  This is not to be lamented but solemnly accepted as a necessary condition for the completion of a tragic period of the early 21st century.  

What is to be lamented is that after nearly 13 years of war Americans still call the Taliban terrorists, demonstrating their significant lack of knowledge regarding the entering arguments for the war to begin with.  I say lament, but as an Active Duty Armed Forces member, Americans' general ignorance regarding U.S. foreign policy scares the hell out of me.

We Say Goodbye to Trip

Our dog, Trip, passed away last night. He lived a full life of 13 years.  As we bury him this Memorial Day morning, Trip was in a way a veteran to us. A few years ago he protected the children from a rattle snake. Taking a bite on the paw as he placed himself between the snake and our children typified his life of safeguarding us from danger over the years.

Our five year old asked the expected, universal question of all children that age (and all adults, if we are honest with ourselves), “Will we see Trip in heaven?” Our response is that we don’t know.  We do know God is love. We know God loves us. We know the Father is the creator of all things, including our precious Trip. If it would please us to be with Trip again in heaven, we believe it would please our Father, who in His providence both brought and took Trip away, to unite us once again.

The New Order: A Worthy Addition

The Wolfenstein family of games have come a long way since I got involved with Wolfenstein 3D back in 1992. The newest installment of Wolfenstein: The New World Order was released on May 20th and it does not disappoint. As one would expect from Bethesda, who brought us hits like Fallout 3 and Skyrim, The New Order is fantastic. The game takes place in 1960 Europe in an alternate timeline where the Nazis had won the Second World War. The gamer takes on the perspective of an American soldier attempting to overthrow the heavily technocratic Nazi powers that have since taken over the world.  One faces cyber men, robots, and drones in a dark, dirty distopia, where it is as if Nazis have joined powers with Skynet. The soundtrack is noteworthy, as well. The alternate timeline theme continues with a comical but somewhat creepy twist on our familiar sounds of the 1960s.  What if The Animals' “House of the Rising Sun” did not take place in New Orleans but rather NeuBerlin?

I was living in Germany when Return to Castle Wolfenstein was released in 2001.  The American edition of the game was illegal in Germany because of the Nazi symbols found throughout.  Because of this, the German edition had the Wolfenstein eagle symbol in place of Swastikas.  Anything related to the Nazis in games or toys is still illegal in Germany today; as such the German version of The New Order has been white-washed of any Nazi symbols.  Even the term “Nazis” has been replaced with simply “The Regime.”  I know anything related to Nazis is a sensitive issue in Germany, but the removal of such related symbols and terms always struck me as odd.  Like a vampire at the sight of blood or a werewolf at the sight of a full moon, is there a fear that there is something inherent to the German that will uncontrollably turn him or her into a psychopathic, world dominating Nazi at the mere sight of a Swastika?  Perhaps our way in America is also strange; train our youth through games to shoot those that wear the symbol.  

Awkward for One, Awkward for All

Social etiquette requires that we, if at all possible, not make others around us uncomfortable.  We have all experienced it; the collective, uncomfortable silence.  “Somebody say something,” we think to ourselves.  I was once at a social gathering where my host commented that although she was already my wife’s Facebook “Friend,” she would not “Friend” me because “that would just be weird because you’re a married man.”  I thought, “Yes.  That is weird...now...because you’ve just made it awkward for everybody listening.”  I do understand that for some people social media can mean nefarious business.  One does not need to be Facebook “Friends,” however, to engage in such activity as even the messaging capability is available to everyone, “Friend” or not.  Regardless, this person felt awkward with the concept.  I can comprehend that.  However, she made her awkwardness everyone’s awkwardness as thoughts of infidelity spread throughout the room.  I call this the “Awkward for One, Awkward for All” scenario.

A mother is nursing her infant in public...with her breast!  This may be an awkward situation for some, especially Americans, even if the woman is covered.   When I was stationed in Europe, I often witnessed women breastfeeding their baby uncovered.  At first I was uncomfortable.  I grew up in the U.S. where women rarely breastfed and when they did they were most certainly covered.  Rather than make my discomfort everyone’s discomfort, I took my cue from the Europeans around me who did not make a scene of it.  Today, I am fine being around a woman breastfeeding, covered or uncovered, but I know not all are.  In fact, some may not only feel awkward about public breastfeeding but may actually be against it.  They may even make passive aggressive comments about it.  Their discomfort becomes everyone’s discomfort, and that is poor social etiquette.

This post itself may have made you feel uncomfortable but what did you expect on Hardly Tolerable?

Does a Name Prefix Matter?

Every child enjoys receiving mail addressed to them personally.  I enjoyed receiving birthday cards from my great-grandmother more than anyone else as the envelopes were always addressed to “Master Kevin Reed.”  At first I was confused and my mother explained to me that “Master” was the proper title for a boy and that upon becoming a man I would be addressed as “Mr.” I then learned that young girls were addressed as “Miss,” unmarried women as “Ms.” and married women as “Mrs.” In this light, I found that the title “Master” made me feel significant.  I knew that while only a young boy, society was already acknowledging me and my place in it.

Today it is common for unmarried and married women alike to be addressed as “Ms.” In many situations one may not know if a woman is married or not and so it is believed safer to address a woman simply as “Ms.” However, I recently received a letter addressed to “Mr. and Ms.” Clearly in context of the correspondence the “Ms.” was really a “Mrs.” Was it a typo?  Not likely.  My experience has witnessed that many professional women today prefer to be addressed as “Ms.” Just as I understood as a young boy; a title reflects how society acknowledges a woman and her place in it.  The title “Mrs.” can be seen as too submissive to her husband, an irreconcilable trait for today’s professional woman seeking to be taken as an equal among male co-workers.  It is not enough that a married woman reject her husband’s surname, for a maiden name could also be mistaken for her husband's surname, and that just wont do.

If this sounds like a lament for the loss of the title “Mrs.” among married women of my time, it is true.  Hold the accusations of “misogynist,” however.  Remember that a title is how society acknowledges you and your place in it.  Women in my time have adopted the title “Ms.” because men have not treated them well in decades past, most specifically in the professional environment.  I regret the loss of the title “Mrs.” not only because the married association in the title of a woman is gone, but because it reminds me of why it has been dropped in the first place.