Katie got her first N

At her school, they have what they call the self-manager program. Every day, the students, with input from the teachers, rate themselves on several categories of behavior. For kindergardeners, they give themselves Y's or N's for each day in honesty, respect, self-discipline, and responsibility. As they get older, eventually there will be seven categories, as everyone in the whole school participates.

Katie had been perfect. Perfect attendance and nothing but Y's everyday all fall. Until today, when she gave herself an N in self-discipline. Mrs. Massey was amazed because the incident happened while she was out of the room. But evidently while they were at the science center, and supposed to be working, Katie got herself involved in a game of chase with Matthew and McKenzie, the troublemakers.

I had expected that the first N would be very traumatic for her. But she told me the story very matter of factly, then went to get her afternoon snack, and the day went on quite normally. She made a mistake in playing when she should be working, and she knew it, owned up to it, and took her N like a kindergardener. And we talked a little bit about how important it is to be good the rest of the week - 3 N's in a five day period means the ultimate humiliation - losing your self-manager badge - and there is no way Katie will risk that. So she will be perfect for a week, I am sure.

stud tourney

On a whim last night, I went away from my usual hold-'em and Omaha and played in a seven card stud tournament on Poker Stars. I had never played stud before, but thought, what the heck, and I ended up winning it.

I think that I would make a better stud player than hold-em player because of my bridge experience. Because I am used to the whole deck, it is relatively easy to keep track of the cards folded and how that changes the odds on a particular hand. Stud has a larger set of possibilities per hand, and I enjoyed it, though it did get cumbersome at times.

Just random thoughts .......

twelve years later

A story in the New York Times today about the fact that there is significant doubt as to the guilt of a San Antonio man executed 12 years ago. There are too many flaws in our justice system - in any human organization - to execute people. There is no recourse, no escape hatch. I don't think we should execute people even if we have complete certainty about their guilt; life is too precious.

Anyway, you can read the story here. Registration may be required.

http://select.nytimes.com/mem/tnt.html?emc=tnt&tntget=2005/11/22/national/22execute.html&tntemail1=y

good news

I got some good news today. The social security administration made a mistake in calculating what we should be receiving, and I am going to get an extra couple hundred dollars each month and a lump sum for the underpayment for the last 20 months or so. So that should pay for Christmas and then some.

And in other news, the Spurs are really good. Tonight they didn't use Horry at all but instead distributed his usual minutes among Nesterovich, Muhammed, and Oberto. The Kings made a nice run in the fourth quarter, but it was never really in question tonight. Duncan was efficient as usual. Parker has averaged eight layups per game thus far, which is silly.

I was thinking about this as I was watching the game tonight. The Spurs have been in the play-offs every year since Duncan entered the league, and the Kings every year for almost as many, with both of them going deep into the playoffs most of the time. And yet they have not played in the playoffs at least since the Kings were in KC, if ever. I wonder if two teams from the same conference have been to the playoffs more often and never met.

Yes, this is the kind of stuff I think about. What is worse is I may spend two hours in the next couple of days looking through the archives on NBA.com answering the question.

quotes

I have been reading a very interesting little book by Robert Fulghum - author of All I Needed to Know I Learned in Kindergarden - called Words I Wish I Wrote. It is a delightful little book, the perfect kind of book to stash in the bathroom and read in bits and pieces as you do your business. It has quotations of people that have been inspirational to him in his development. Several of them have stuck with me the last several days. Maybe later I will comment on them further, but for now I am just going to quote them because I am tired.

In the midst of winter, I found there was within me an invincible summer.
--Albert Camus.

After the final no there comes a yes
And on that yes the future world depends.
No was the night. Yes is the present sun.
--Wallace Stevens

And my personal favorite so far:
You can count how many seeds are in the apple, but not how many apples are in the seed.
-- Ken Kersey

And with that, good night.

shorter, maybe not as good

I came across this link reading Andrew Sullivan today. It is from the Washington Post about Intelligent Design. A month or so ago I linked to a wonderful article in the New Republic about intelligent design versus evolution and the ramifications of the actions in Dover. I still think that article is better because it more carefully articulates the problems with the intelligent design as scientific theory. But for a primer, this is a nice article.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/17/AR2005111701304.html

The Kansas state board of education evidently has decided that intelligent design must be taught alongside evolution in science classrooms. It is a poor decision, and frankly it makes me sad to think of my cousins learning their science in Kansas classrooms. Fortunately I trust my aunt and uncle enough to talk intelligently with them about this. How many children have that luxury? Call me crazy, but the curriculum of science classes should be science.

This is an old battle, but it must be won anew in every generation, or so it seems.

House at it again

STATEMENT BY JIM WALLIS:

The prophet Isaiah said: "Woe to you legislators of infamous laws ... who refuse justice to the unfortunate, who cheat the poor among my people of their rights, who make widows their prey and rob the orphan." Today, I repeat those words. When our legislators put ideology over principle, it is time to sound the trumpets of justice and tell the truth.

It is a moral disgrace to take food from the mouths of hungry children to increase the luxuries of those feasting at a table overflowing with plenty. This is not what America is about, not what the season of Thanksgiving is about, not what loving our neighbor is about, and not what family values are about. There is no moral path our legislators can take to defend a reckless, mean-spirited budget reconciliation bill that diminishes our compassion, as Jesus said, "for the least of these." It is morally unconscionable to hide behind arguments for fiscal responsibility and government efficiency. It is dishonest to stake proud claims to deficit reduction when tax cuts for the wealthy that increase the deficit are the next order of business. It is one more example of an absence of morality in our current political leadership.

Budgets are moral documents that reflect what we care about. Budget and tax bills that increase the deficit put our children's futures in jeopardy - and they hurt the vulnerable right now. The choice to cut supports that help people make it day to day in order to pay for tax cuts for those with plenty goes against everything our religious and moral principles teach us. It says that leaders don't care about people in need. It is a blatant reversal of biblical values - and symbolizes the death of compassionate conservatism.

The faith community is outraged and is drawing a line in the sand against immoral national priorities. It is time to draw that line more forcefully and more visibly.

I applaud those House members who have stood up for better budget priorities and fought hard all year to keep issues of basic fairness at the forefront of this debate. And I thank those on both sides of the aisle who stood up and did the right thing in voting against this bill, despite pressure from the House leadership. These strong voices provide some hope for getting beyond an ideology that disregards the role of government for the common good.

prophet Chait

From the October 8, 2004 Los Angeles Times.

Jon Chait writes for the New Republic, and it is through their site I found a link to this article.

Jonathan Chait:
He's So Bad, He Might Be Perfect

Under an odd logic, Bush deserves another term. Shouldn't he suffer for his blunders? An editor at the paper suggested that I use this week's column to try to make the most honest and persuasive case I could for President Bush's reelection. At first I was skeptical. To say that I consider Bush a "bad" president would be a severe understatement. I think he's bad in a way that redefines my understanding of the word "bad." I used to think U.S. history had many bad presidents. Now, my "bad" category consists entirely of George W. Bush, with every previous president redefined as "good." There's also the fact that, on a personal level, I despise him with the white-hot intensity of a thousand suns. What I'm saying is, advocating Bush is kind of tricky.

But then I thought, what the heck. Why not try it for the sake of intellectual experimentation? After all, lawyers often defend some pretty repugnant clients, right? In keeping with that, I won't attempt to deny that my client has done some awful things. What I'll argue instead is that his very awfulness is the reason he deserves reelection.

Begin with the premise that a second-term Bush administration is unlikely to make things a whole lot worse. First of all, domestically, GOP moderates and deficit hawks have finally begun to wake up and realize that they have to rein in Bush's reckless fiscal policies. At the same time, if John F. Kerry is elected and tries to raise taxes or rein in spending, he'll probably suffer substantial political damage, as Bill Clinton did in 1994. But, unlike Clinton, he'll not enjoy Democratic majorities in both Houses, which means he stands a good chance of failing. That would be the worst of all worlds: Democrats would suffer the political costs of demanding sacrifice from the public, without the corresponding benefit of making the country better.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker has estimated that there's a 75% chance of a major financial crisis within the next five years if we don't reduce our budget deficit. That may be too high, but assume he's right. Whoever holds office would quickly become extremely unpopular, whether he had tried to deal with the deficit or not. If the choice is Bush doing nothing versus Kerry doing nothing, why not let Bush take the blame for his own mess? Why have a Democrat bail him out?

The foreign policy calculus is pretty similar. We don't have enough troops to fight the war we're in, let alone start another one. So there's no reason to fear Bush botching yet another war. And, as much as I desperately want to be wrong about this, the odds of Iraq evolving into a stable democracy look pretty grim right now. If such a scenario ever had any chance of succeeding, it would have required lots more ground troops to keep the peace and allow reconstruction. Now it's probably too late to do anything but salvage something short of total anarchy. If Kerry is president, conservatives will blame him for the failure in Iraq - if only we still had a leader of Bush's unwavering resolve, they'll claim, we would have won the war. If Bush is president, he'll be held accountable for his own bungling of the invasion.

That leaves the usual trump card - social policy. Plenty of my fellow liberals freak out at the thought of Bush appointing two or more Supreme Court justices. But maybe he deserves that too. Hear me out. Right now, Republicans get the best of both worlds. They get tens of millions of social conservatives marching to the polls to vote for them every two years but, because key points of the social-conservative agenda never gets enacted, they suffer hardly any political consequences for their positions.

Now, suppose Bush does appoint a couple justices. Maybe they will overturn Roe vs. Wade. If Roe falls, presumably states would decide how to deal with the abortion issue, and a reinvigorated pro-choice, center-left majority would be able to protect abortion rights in most places. In fact, the fear of a backlash would probably cause Bush's justices to chicken out and uphold Roe anyway. Then how would Republicans persuade social conservatives to keep supporting them?

Bush's presidency is a great mass of contradictions. There's an enormous gap between his purported values - fiscal discipline, toughness against terrorists, a commitment to social conservatism - and his true record. Sure, it would be emotionally satisfying to see Bush rejected by the voters once again. But maybe, for this president, defeat is too kind a fate.

a good quiet day today

It has been a largely peaceful day here today, and I am quite grateful for it. Katie spent the night with my parents and went to a children's play this morning. And so I could sleep until I woke up, which I did about 8, have a nice breakfast, start a new book, and then spent some time watching FSU lose and Notre Dame win with my dad.

Katie then came back, and we came home to pick up the house for our guests coming over to watch the Spurs. Katie was anxious all afternoon for them to get here, but it was close to suppertime before they arrive. Katie's friend Jordan is spending the night, and we had about eight kids over here for a while tonight, all between ages 5 and 8, I think. So that was nice and quiet. The weird thing is that about six times someone left the refrigerator door open. What the heck is that about? Is there something genetic that prevents kids from shutting the door to the fridge? Why doesn't Katie have that? I just don't get it.

And the Spurs played pretty well tonight, especially since they absorbed a 15 point loss. The bottom line is that Arenas was filthy - I mean some of those shots were ridiculous and they all found the hoop. And Duncan was horrible - 3 for 18 from the floor, and all of the shots within the offense. The bottom line is that the Spurs still need Duncan to play well for them to be a great team. The good news is that he plays well 91% of the time, but that still leaves them with four losses per year attributable to his crappy play. Well, now there will be three left this season. And there was a time in this game when Duncan had missed 10 shots in a row and Arenas had hit 11 of 12 for the game, and the Spurs led. That in and of itself is a good sign for this team.

And so now the five game road trip is over. They got three wins, and a winning record on the road is always a good thing. Home for three games against three very different teams now. Atlanta is just awful - horrible, bad as any team in the league. They quite frankly don't do anything much very well, and Joe Johnson is adapting to having to be a point guard but without the finishers Phoenix featured. Life is a lot easier when you line up next to raw talent like Marion and Stoudamire. And then you have the Rockets, who play like the Spurs, only not as well. The Spurs will beat the Rockets everytime unless McGrady goes simply berserk. If he throws down 45, then they can beat the Spurs, but is he is under 40 it is a stone cold lock for the Spurs. But it will be a slugfest, with the two best defensive teams in the West (and two of the four best in the NBA) get together. Anytime you have two teams that play the same style, the better team almost always wins. And that is what we have here. And then Phoenix returns this weekend. It will not be the same as last year, with Stoudamire out, and the Suns playing a more conventional lineup. Quite frankly, I think the Suns became less of a threat to the elite teams in the West by getting rid of the wings and playing Marion back at small forward.

And now I am going to sleep. No telling how long the girls will sleep, so I need to fit in what I can.

hope

I finished the Jim Wallis book I have mentioned here before. It is simply amazing. I think my Christmas shopping is done, as I can just order 28 copies from B&N.com and then hand them out.

I came across a Wallis quote on hope today also, and I so enjoyed it.

Perhaps the only people who view the world realistically are the cynics and the saints. Everybody else may be living in some kind of denial about what is really going on and how things really are. And the only difference between the cynics and the saints is the presence, power, and possibility of hope. And that, indeed, is a spiritual and religious issue. More than just a moral issue, hope is a spiritual and even religious choice. Hope is not a feeling; it is a decision. And the decision to hope is based on what you believe at the deepest levels - what your most basic convictions are about the world and what the future holds - all based on your faith. You choose hope, not as a naive wish, but as a choice, with your eyes wide open to the reality of the world - just like the cynics who have not made the decision for hope.


There is a chapter about Middle East peace, and in it he says something very profound that applies there but throughout our lives, too. He talked about both sides seeing themselves as victims, and when you are victims, you do not feel accountability.


I think those two thoughts are ultimately why I am hanging out less and less with my widow friends. It is largely circumstantial, also, as I am not a member at the ywbb anymore and so I don't know what is happening in their lives as much. But I think these thoughts get at the heart of why I am not a member there anymore.

I hope. It has not been squashed out of me. And I am not a victim. Becky was a victim, but I have come to see loss as part of being us. I don't have a monopoly on loss. I am not more devastated by it than others. I am broken, but who among us isn't? It is that hope and vision of overcoming victimhood that I tried to convey, and it was a message that simply wasn't welcomed by very many people.

Anyway, I am very inspired by this book. I want to see candidates endorse not only the language but the actions. The closest campaign I have seen to this book is the campaign by the governor-elect of Virginia. I think there is a lot of what I love about Bill Bradley in this book also. McCain, too.

Buy it. Read it. Don't be surprised if you unwrap it next month.

why would anyone listen to Pat Robertson

A few weeks ago I linked to a tremendous article at the New Republic about evolution versus intelligent design. The article was sparked by a lawsuit going on because of the Dover school board forcing a disclaimor to be read by science teachers before they could teach evolution. The article is fabulous. I recommend it again.

Now Dover had its elections on Tuesday like the rest of the country, and the eyes of the world were on it because of Scopes II. And in the most heartening election result of the day - except perhaps the Virginia governorship - Dover kicked the bums out who had hijacked their science classrooms. The evangelicals can get onto school boards using stealth tactics, but once exposed, it turns out again and again that Americans prefer science to be taught in science classrooms and not theology, for ID is nothing but poor theology.

And so now we get to Pat Robertson. How was there a time when people took this man seriously? On the 700 club yesterday, he said,

"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover, if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city. And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there."

There's good theology for you.

Sojourner's campaign against torture

Go to this website: http://go.sojo.net/campaign/wwjt

It is Sojourner's Magazine's campaign to get the House of Representatives to pass the McCain amendment outlawing torture for our troops. It passed by some 90-9 in the Senate, and yet the Administration and the House are dragging their feet on this thing. (Of course, one of the nine is our very own John Cornyn from the state of Texas.) I don't think I was ever likely to vote for this guy, but how hard is it to vote against torture?

While you are there, read some articles at Sojourners. I think every progressive Christian or Jew interested in politics and religion should be a subscriber to this magazine and the New Republic. They are pretty much indispensible.

clarification

I don't think that it is that all people who voted against this thing were inspired by meanness. I know several people who are top-drawer people who voted in good conscious for this initiative. I don't understand that. I don't understand what possible positive they saw in voting the way they did. I don't understand why they didn't see the hurt they would inflict.

Oh well. I am stopping by Micheal's on my way to work to get a little pink triangle I can wear on my shirt.

predictible, but sad

Texas has stood firmly on the side of bigotry tonight, right where we would expect it to stand. Nearly 70% of the people of this state voted to deny civil rights to homosexuals. Nearly 70% of the people of this state decided that churches cannot decide for themselves who can marry.

I think this will be looked on as one of the last gasps of a bigotry whose time has come and gone. The religious leaders who supported this will be looked upon with the same disdain as the religious leaders who supported the segregation of schools throughout the south.

There are some elections that go the other way that are easier to accept than others. This is a tough one because I don't see anything on the other side but simple meanness. I don't see any religious justification for this law. I don't see how this does anything positive whatsoever. It certainly sets civil rights back in this state.

We shall overcome. We shall overcome.

But tonight we shall just be sad.

thoughts on the Spurs

Spurs won tonight in Chicago, marking the ninth straight win in that series for the Spurs, but it took overtime to do so against a game Bulls squad. The Spurs came out smoking, hitting five of their first six three balls and enjoyed a 12 point lead after the first quarter. And then they were pretty much hanging on the rest of regulation. The lead was eight at half and just one after three as I recall.

Finley was horrible shooting again tonight, missing his first eleven shots before hitting some big shots late in the game. Parker seemed to penetrate at will and distributed well also. The Spurs missed a ton of open looks or his numbers could have been much more gaudy.

The key to the game in overtime was simply poise. The Bulls seemed to force their offense too much; the Spurs made a couple of shots early to get back into the lead. And then a couple of key mistakes by the Bulls opened the door for their demise. Pop stood up to tell Parker to take a time out, and Duhon froze for a moment assuming the timeout would be called, and Parker blew right past him for an uncontested layup. Ginobili stole the ball from a defensive rebounder who just didn't protect the ball. And then the game was out of reach.

I am beginning to agree with my SIL that the Van Exel signing may not have been so smart. The jury is way out on that of course. In some respects I guess it is a risk free signing. I don't think even Nick at his most outrageous can disrupt this locker room, and if he proves to be garbage as the backup point, those minutes can easily go to Barry. When partnered with Ginobili in particular, I have no concerns with that backcourt for 12 minutes per night. But he has been terrible thus far. His defense is simply not up to snuff for the Spurs. He shoots too quickly too often - not even Horry is that much a gunslinger. And he has shown stretches of being lazy with the ball. That simply won't do in this town.

All that being said, it is four games into the season. There is a lot of work to be done with this team. But that is the biggest question mark to this point.

thoughts on stuff

The Chiefs picked up a big win yesterday, and I have been surprised by the outpouring of amazement that they went for the win in the final seconds of the game. If you didn't see it, the Chiefs made it to the one yard line with five seconds left and no timeouts down by a score of 23-20. So they could have kicked the field goal and sent the game to overtime. Instead, they left the offense on the field, and Larry Johnson followed tackle Will Shields, tight end Jason Dunn and fullback Tony Richardson right up the gut and into the end zone, and the Chiefs won 27-23.

People were talking about how courageous a choice it was to go for the score, but the simple fact of the matter is that it is logical. The field goal is roughly a 99% proposition. It was a closer kick even than an extra point. But overtime is essentially a 50/50 proposition. Meanwhile, on your home field, you should be a 70% favorite to bust it in from a yard, especially when you can run behind Shields and company.

Maybe it was courageous. I don't think that near as much as I think it insightful and well thought out. Which in the waning moments and with such adrenaline and intensity, is tough enough.

All Saints' Day

We had our All Saints Day service at church today, and as usual it was quite good. Last year, it about ripped my guts out. The day before we had dedicated Becky's scholarship at Trinity, which had already taken plenty out of me emotionally. Catholics celebrate ASD on November 1 regardless of the day of the week, but evidently us Methodists pick a Sunday around that time to do it. So when I went to church that day, I didn't know to expect it, which made it all the more emotional.

So today was nothing like that, but it was a powerful service nonetheless.

I spent a lot of time thinking about it during and after the service. I remember quite vividly the Easter service. It was the day before the anniversary of Becky's death, and they called the kiddos up to the front of the church so John could talk to them. Usually Katie totally digs that stuff, but for whatever reason, she with so many of the kids didn't want to go up there. And so we went up there, and John talked about the meaning of Easter in very simple terms. He had his grieving collage, a series of pictures of people from his life who had died. And he talked about some of them. And he told the kids that Easter means that death doesn't get the final say. Easter is the promise that we will see those who have died again.

And so I sat in the pew thinking about that today. And at first, I thought, if I were preaching, I would say that same thing again.

But then again, I don't think I would. Easter means death doesn't get the final say. But it doesn't mean that death gets no say at all. Claiming that would be dishonest, because we hurt because of death. We overcome that pain as Christians with the hope that Easter provides. But it is right and good that we experience the pain of losing someone close first.

And so death had its say again this morning for a couple of hours. I did some crying and lit a candle and can't believe another month has come by; I am in the 20th month of this part of the journey now.

I think I like the Jewish tradition of the unveiling of the headstone on the Sabbath after the first anniversary of the death of a loved one. And yet at the same time I like the communal grieving that takes place on All Saints' Day.

And now to sleep.

up close and personal

I went to the Spurs game tonight, and they are good. Better than I expected against a team that was supposed to be on the fringe of being an elite team in the league. When we were driving home from the game, the guys on the radio were debating who the Spurs likely Finals opponent will be, which is way premature. But they are good.

On opening night, they basically got nothing out of Bowen, even defensively where he was abused by Carmelo Anthony. But tonight he was studly against Lebron, holding him down especially after the first quarter. Tonight they got nothing out of Finley except a 3 in garbage time, but they didn't need him. This team is deep enough to overcome an off night from players. Ginobili is clearly not healthy yet; I was shocked when a jump ball tussle lifted his shorts up over his thigh; the brace he has been wearing is huge. Barry looks way more comfortable than at any point last year. Van Exel tonight had several rebounds - six I think - and just seemed to have a nose for the ball.

I liked everything I saw from the Spurs, except allowing 28 points in the opening quarter.

Lebron lost his poise for about four possessions each way in the second quarter. He got a garbage call - they whistled Duncan for a charge, and not only was Lebron inside the defensive circle, and not only did he come under Duncan and not give him the space to turn, and not only did he flop, but he wasn't set either. But he got the call anyway.

A time out ensued, and the crowd gave it to the refs, who deserved it. And on the next possession down the floor Lebron was called for a garbage charge. Ginobili flopped, and it was classic makeup call. But Lebron lost his poise for a couple of possessions, and Ginobili got open for a couple of easy shots, Lebron forced a couple of bad shots on the other end, and the little lead the Cavs enjoyed most of the second quarter became a five point deficit, and the game was never in question in the second half. He has immense talent, but you simply can't throw away a couple of minute stretch against the Spurs. Their focus is unreal already.

sheesh

Just in case you missed it, e-mails from former FEMA director Michael Brown during and immediately after Katrina. The best story on this I have seen is at the New York Times. I don't know if registration is required there or not. CNN.com also had a good story with the same details.

In an e-mail message sent on Aug. 29, the day the hurricane struck, Mr. Brown exchanged messages about his attire with Cindy Taylor, deputy director of public affairs at the agency, according to the report. "My eyes must be deceiving me," Ms. Taylor wrote to him, apparently referring to public appearances he had made. "You look fabulous--and I'm not talking about the makeup." Mr. Brown, in turn, responded: "I got it at Nordstroms. ... Are you proud of me?" An hour later, he added: "If you'll look at my lovely FEMA attire you'll really vomit. I am a fashion god." Democrats said that Mr. Brown also found time to e-mail his assistant to inquire about a sitter for his dog. "Do you know of anyone who dog-sits," he wrote on Aug. 30, the day after the hurricane struck. "If you know of any responsible kids, let me know. They can have the house to themselves Th-Su." In another instance, on Aug. 29, he sent Ms. Taylor a message that Democrats said suggested he was overwhelmed. "Can I quit now," he wrote. "Can I come home?" A few days later, he wrote a similar message to an acquaintance, saying, "I am trapped now, please rescue me."


This presidency is the biggest failure of government in the history of this country. There is no bread? Let them eat cake.

A better day to be a Methodist

The council of bishops happened to be meeting in North Carolina this week while the judicial committee handed down its deplorable rulings. And this is the pastoral letter they crafted in response:


A Pastoral Letter to the People of The United Methodist ChurchFrom the Council of Bishops

By grace you have been saved through faith.
-Ephesians 2:8

Grace to you from Jesus Christ who calls his church to welcome all peopleinto the community of faith as it proclaims the Gospel.

The Judicial Council, our denomination's highest judicial authority, recently issued a decision regarding a pastor's refusing a gay man's request for membership in the church. In the case, this man was invited to join the choir at the United Methodist Church in the community. As he became more active in the choir and the church, he asked to transfer his membership from another denomination to The United Methodist Church.

Because he is a practicing homosexual, the pastor refused to receive him into church membership. The Judicial Council upheld the pastors refusal of membership.While pastors have the responsibility to discern readiness for membership, homosexuality is not a barrier. With the Social Principles of The UnitedMethodist Church we affirm:

that God's grace is available to all, and we will seek to live together inChristian community.

We implore families and churches not to reject or condemn lesbian and gay members and friends. We commit ourselves to be in ministry for and with all persons.(Para. 161g, 2004 Book of Discipline ofThe United Methodist Church)

We also affirm our Wesleyan practice that pastors are accountable to the bishop, superintendent, and the clergy on matters of ministry and membership.

The United Methodist Church is committed to making disciples of JesusChrist with all people. We, the bishops of the Church, uphold and affirm that the General Conference has clearly spoken through the denomination's Constitution on inclusiveness and justice for all as it relates to churchmembership:

The United Methodist Church acknowledges that all persons are of sacred worth. All persons without regard to race, color, national origin, status, or economic condition, shall be eligible to attend its worship services, participate in its programs, receive the sacraments, upon baptism be admitted as baptized members, and upon taking the vows declaring the Christian faith, become professing members in any local church in the connection. (Article IV, Constitution of The United Methodist Church)

We believe the ministry of the local church, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is to help people accept and confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. We call upon all United Methodist pastors and laity to make every congregation a community of hospitality.

Nov. 2, 2005
Lake Junaluska, N.C.

Spurs looked good tonight

The first night of the season was an overwhelming success; the only bad thing is that George Karl wasn't there to see it. I had so hoped that Ginobili would blow him a kiss when he got his ring - Karl said a lot of stupid things about Manu during the first round of the playoffs last season. But the only kissing during the ring ceremony was Brent Barry planting one on David Stern's cheek.

The Nuggets came in hot. Not only were they the best team in the preseason, but they finished last season strong and came in with a severe revenge factor since the Spurs bounced them in four straight games after dropping the opener last season. But the Spurs were simply too good. The early returns on Parker's shooting is excellent - the Spurs brought in Steve Kerr's old shooting coach to mentor Tony - and if he becomes a consistent mid-range shooter, then that adds a wonderful dimension to the team offensively. Tim was Tim, and Finley was a difference maker in the fourth quarter as the Spurs ran away with the game.

The defense was not up to snuff. Bowen struggled with Carmelo Anthony, one of the toughest matchups in the league for Bruce because Anthony is bigger and stronger and is playing better without the ball right now than at any point prior to this in his career. But the bottom line is that he got too good position against the wings, the rotations were a half-step slow, and the end result is giving up 49% shooting, which is not acceptable for the Spurs.

Carmelo might be up for a bigger season than I had imagined. So I was pleasantly surprised with the Nuggets play. And the Spurs still whooped them. Definitely a good sign from opening night over here. I didn't get to watch the game as carefully as I would have liked - we had friends over, and it was noisier than I like for a game. But it was fun.