Today is June 4. Forty-three years ago today Scottie and I were married. As the days dew closer to today I wondered how today would be for me. Somewhat to my surprise today has been a beautiful day. I arose after one of the best night's sleep I have had in a long time. And I woke up just feeling good, very good --physically and emotionally. Somehow today was a day of thanksgiving, not regret; a day of remembering good times and of recalling events that were so special to us.
Sure I still get the "blues" from time to time, and I expect I always will. And In a way I hope I always will.
As I said to my daughter today, there is a point at which grief gives way to wonderful memories that you relive and today as I look at the picture on my dresser of her in her wedding dress instead of tears, I feel a warmth and comfort. She now lives joyously among "the angels and the archangels and all the company of heaven" and I am sure she too is thankful for all that we shared together. It seems that while you are grieving you feel separated from one another. But when the time comes and the grief is replaced with thanksgiving you feel re-united; curiously enough, it's not a denial of the loss, but an embracing of it.
I share this in my blog today in the hope that others who suffer the loss of a loved one will know that with the love of those family and friends and angels whom God sends your way a day does come when your grief heals and is replaced with what I have experienced today, and carry with me most days.
June 4--it is a good day!!
Glenn+
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
My thoughts on Judge Sotomayor, et al.
I have been hearing so much crap from the Conservatives about her appointment, I feel compelled to add my two cents.
IT IS THE JOB OF SUPREME COURTS TO MAKE LAW:
I am sick and tired of hearing people, many of whom are lawyers, insisting that the want a Supreme Court appointee who will APPLY the law, not MAKE law.
In our legal system we have several ways laws are made: One is by the vote of elected bodies, City Councils, State Legislatures and the US Congress. The Second is my the decisions of Appellate Courts. Appellate Courts are all State Courts of Appeals and State Supreme Courts, and the United Sates Courts of Appeals, and the U. S. Supreme Court. Every time an appellate court publishes an Opinion in one of the official sets of books that record such Opinions their decisions declare one or more principles of law, and some of those principles MAKE NEW LAWS addressing issues that have never been addressed by a legislature, or by any other court. This then becomes newly made law. Lawyers cite that newly made law in their briefs, and other courts will rely on that new law until and unless that new law is overturned by a higher court.
Many of the issues that come before a Supreme Courts are issues of law that have never been decided before, or they have been decided by a lower court of appeals and the Supreme Court is asked to review the lower court's decision. These are called Cases of "first impression". This is how our "Common Law" system works.
Now to be fair, in making new law Courts must be very careful in the legal reasoning they used to do so. They just can't create a new principle of law out of whole cloth. The new principle of law must be a logical deduction that results from the reasonable implications of established principles of law. Those established principles of law are called "precedents".
So let's be clear: one of the primary jobs of a state Supreme Court and the U. S. Supreme Court is to MAKE NEW LAW.
MEDIA REPORTS ON LEGAL MATTERS ARE OFTEN MISLEADING:
Another matter: When the media reports the decisions of Supreme Courts they emphasize the outcome of the case, not the reasoning of the court. In doing so they often distort what the court really did. .
For example: (this is a hypothetical, not a real case) Suppose a State legislature passes a law permitting gay couples to get married. Suppose also that a law suit is brought alleging that in the process of passing that law the legislature failed to hold public hearings which the Plaintiffs say are required by state law (relying on AN INTERPRETATION of a state statute.) The case goes to trial and the trial court finds that indeed the legislature did not hold public hearings. But the trial court interpreted the the state statute in question to mean that the legislature is not required to hold public hearings.
The case is appealed on an issue of the interpretation of a state statute: Does that statute REQUIRE the legislature to hold public hearings before it can vote on such an issue. The case goes up to the State Supreme. Court. The Supreme Court rules that the statute DOES NOT require the legislature to hold public hearing, therefore the new law permitting gay marriage was passes in a lawful manner. The Press then reports the outcome of the case with a headline: "State Supreme Court Supports Gay Marriage". Actually the Supreme Court said nothing about Gay Marriage. All they said was that the legislature did not violate the law in the way tghe voted on and passed the statute that permits Gay Marriages.
The point here is that people have to be careful relying on the press' reports on legal matters. Time and time again the media reports on court decisions in a way that gets the most attention, not necessarily in the way that is accurate.
JUDGE SOTOMAYOR'S FAMOUS QUOTE:
Apparently in a speech a number of years ago Judge Sotomayor said that she hoped that an experienced Latina judge would render better decisions than a white male judge who did not have her experience of life.
I certainly have no way of knowing what she meant, and I do not pretend here to do so. But as I heard that quote, here is what it made me think of.
Before any appellate court, including a Supreme Court decides a case they read the briefs submitted by the lawyers and then they conduct oral argument on the case. During the oral argument as the lawyers make their their arguments to the court, the judges interrupt the lawyers to ask questions. The point of these questions is to help the judges better understand the facts of the case and the legal issues in the case and to help them project how any decision they might render will play out in the real world.
The questions a judge thinks to ask are shaped by that judges experiences in life as well as their legal experience. Therefore, a Latina judge, or an Africa-America judge, who grew up in "the projects", or a Native American Judge, who grew up on an indian reservation will undoubtedly ask questions that a white upper middle class male judge, who was born and raised in Marin County, California would never think of asking (and visa versa). The questions that judges ask and the answers they get from the lawyers shape their understanding of the case. And, their understanding of a case influences the decision they render So, in some kinds of casss the minority judge will ask better questions than a non-minority judge. In other cases the non-minority judge may ask better questions.
Why no one else has proposed such an interpretation amazes me. We wont know what she intended to say until the hearings occur. But I would not be surprised if her explanation isn't similar to what I have suggested here. Time will tell.
Glenn+
IT IS THE JOB OF SUPREME COURTS TO MAKE LAW:
I am sick and tired of hearing people, many of whom are lawyers, insisting that the want a Supreme Court appointee who will APPLY the law, not MAKE law.
In our legal system we have several ways laws are made: One is by the vote of elected bodies, City Councils, State Legislatures and the US Congress. The Second is my the decisions of Appellate Courts. Appellate Courts are all State Courts of Appeals and State Supreme Courts, and the United Sates Courts of Appeals, and the U. S. Supreme Court. Every time an appellate court publishes an Opinion in one of the official sets of books that record such Opinions their decisions declare one or more principles of law, and some of those principles MAKE NEW LAWS addressing issues that have never been addressed by a legislature, or by any other court. This then becomes newly made law. Lawyers cite that newly made law in their briefs, and other courts will rely on that new law until and unless that new law is overturned by a higher court.
Many of the issues that come before a Supreme Courts are issues of law that have never been decided before, or they have been decided by a lower court of appeals and the Supreme Court is asked to review the lower court's decision. These are called Cases of "first impression". This is how our "Common Law" system works.
Now to be fair, in making new law Courts must be very careful in the legal reasoning they used to do so. They just can't create a new principle of law out of whole cloth. The new principle of law must be a logical deduction that results from the reasonable implications of established principles of law. Those established principles of law are called "precedents".
So let's be clear: one of the primary jobs of a state Supreme Court and the U. S. Supreme Court is to MAKE NEW LAW.
MEDIA REPORTS ON LEGAL MATTERS ARE OFTEN MISLEADING:
Another matter: When the media reports the decisions of Supreme Courts they emphasize the outcome of the case, not the reasoning of the court. In doing so they often distort what the court really did. .
For example: (this is a hypothetical, not a real case) Suppose a State legislature passes a law permitting gay couples to get married. Suppose also that a law suit is brought alleging that in the process of passing that law the legislature failed to hold public hearings which the Plaintiffs say are required by state law (relying on AN INTERPRETATION of a state statute.) The case goes to trial and the trial court finds that indeed the legislature did not hold public hearings. But the trial court interpreted the the state statute in question to mean that the legislature is not required to hold public hearings.
The case is appealed on an issue of the interpretation of a state statute: Does that statute REQUIRE the legislature to hold public hearings before it can vote on such an issue. The case goes up to the State Supreme. Court. The Supreme Court rules that the statute DOES NOT require the legislature to hold public hearing, therefore the new law permitting gay marriage was passes in a lawful manner. The Press then reports the outcome of the case with a headline: "State Supreme Court Supports Gay Marriage". Actually the Supreme Court said nothing about Gay Marriage. All they said was that the legislature did not violate the law in the way tghe voted on and passed the statute that permits Gay Marriages.
The point here is that people have to be careful relying on the press' reports on legal matters. Time and time again the media reports on court decisions in a way that gets the most attention, not necessarily in the way that is accurate.
JUDGE SOTOMAYOR'S FAMOUS QUOTE:
Apparently in a speech a number of years ago Judge Sotomayor said that she hoped that an experienced Latina judge would render better decisions than a white male judge who did not have her experience of life.
I certainly have no way of knowing what she meant, and I do not pretend here to do so. But as I heard that quote, here is what it made me think of.
Before any appellate court, including a Supreme Court decides a case they read the briefs submitted by the lawyers and then they conduct oral argument on the case. During the oral argument as the lawyers make their their arguments to the court, the judges interrupt the lawyers to ask questions. The point of these questions is to help the judges better understand the facts of the case and the legal issues in the case and to help them project how any decision they might render will play out in the real world.
The questions a judge thinks to ask are shaped by that judges experiences in life as well as their legal experience. Therefore, a Latina judge, or an Africa-America judge, who grew up in "the projects", or a Native American Judge, who grew up on an indian reservation will undoubtedly ask questions that a white upper middle class male judge, who was born and raised in Marin County, California would never think of asking (and visa versa). The questions that judges ask and the answers they get from the lawyers shape their understanding of the case. And, their understanding of a case influences the decision they render So, in some kinds of casss the minority judge will ask better questions than a non-minority judge. In other cases the non-minority judge may ask better questions.
Why no one else has proposed such an interpretation amazes me. We wont know what she intended to say until the hearings occur. But I would not be surprised if her explanation isn't similar to what I have suggested here. Time will tell.
Glenn+
Monday, June 1, 2009
QUE TAL?
It has been quite a while since I posted anything. Actually I have been pretty busy and when I'm not busy I find it easier to do other stuff than to sit down and write. I really intend to be a little more disciplined about this.
Last Sunday was my last Sunday at the Church of the Holy Spirit. The past four months that I served there as the Interim-Vicar were a gift from the Holy Spirit to me. For one, it allowed me to slide into retirement instead of jumping into it. The truth is, I had planned a trip right after I left good Shepherd at the end of January. I had thought of going to Hawaii for a few weeks. I have never been there and it seemed like a good time to go, prices are down, etc. I had to put taking a trip on hold when the Bishop asked if I'd like to be the Interim-Vicar at Holy Spirit and help prepare the way for their new Vicar who would arrive in June. At first I was little disappointed about not having at least a week or so to get away before jumping back into the saddle. But once I got re-connect with the people at Holy Spirit I didn't miss the trip one iota. They welcomed me so graciously and made me feel truly wanted and needed, and that I truly had something to share that they really needed. There is no better experience in life and I am so grateful for every moment I was able to spend with them.
I also had the blessing of finding a new friend in the person of their new vicar, Julie O'Brien. We were able to talk over a lot of things about being a soon-to-be-ordained priest generally, and about starting her ministry at Holy Spirit. Sharing that experience with her, a person I came to truly respect and admire for her obvious gifts, her loving heart, and her great sense of humor.
Now I am getting ready for my trip to the Olympic Peninsula for the Arizona Highways Photo Workshop next week. I got a new Canon 5D, Mark II camera and I am learning my way around it slowly. It is a fabulous camera. For the camera buffs out there, I read some reviews on it before buying it and learned why it creates such marvelously sharp images. It is not because of how many mega pixels it has, though it has 21.1; it is because the mega pixels on the sensor are larger that in other cameras, except for the professional models. The larger pixels capture more light, leading to finer detailed images. I can't wait to experience it for myself.
Well that's enough for now. A few random thoughts and I am ready to call it a day.
A FEW RANDOM THOUGHTS
Music plays a very important part in my day and in my life. I have a very eclectic muscial taste. Mostly I like vocals with good harmony. It doesn't matter if its country, or pop or oldies. I like the experience of good harmony. For me, singing in harmony with others is one of life's great spiritual experiences. I sang in a Barbershop Quartet, as well as in our high school choir. Later I sang duets for parties in college with an old college friend. During the years I was the youth minister at Grace Church in Tucson, I helped form a music group from our high school and college kids that traveled around Arizona and around Colorado visiting churches and performing a wonderful repertoire of Christan music, much of which was written and arranged by one of the college kids in the group. I did not perform with the group, I just sang in practices with them..
But music has always been an important part of my life in general and my spiritual life in particular. Often when I have my prayer times I sing songs that are prayers of love and praise. Most of the music that I listen to isn't religious, but it is about life and love and joy and sorrow and loss and hope, all things that ae holy to me. Nat King Cole, Paul Simon, Peter, Paul and Mary, Johnny Cash, John Denver, Wynnona, Celine Dion, James Taylor, Phil Harris (whom only old folks will remember), the Mills Brothers, the Statler Brothers and many other are on my iPod. I envy other cultures, like the Germans,and the Irish who sing in their pubs and beer halls. To have a few beers and to sing with some friends, I can't think of a better way to spend an evening.
Well, these truly are just random thoughts, but again, that is all I said it would be.
Sing more, and sing more often, especially sing in harmony with good friends. It is good for the soul.
Glenn+
It has been quite a while since I posted anything. Actually I have been pretty busy and when I'm not busy I find it easier to do other stuff than to sit down and write. I really intend to be a little more disciplined about this.
Last Sunday was my last Sunday at the Church of the Holy Spirit. The past four months that I served there as the Interim-Vicar were a gift from the Holy Spirit to me. For one, it allowed me to slide into retirement instead of jumping into it. The truth is, I had planned a trip right after I left good Shepherd at the end of January. I had thought of going to Hawaii for a few weeks. I have never been there and it seemed like a good time to go, prices are down, etc. I had to put taking a trip on hold when the Bishop asked if I'd like to be the Interim-Vicar at Holy Spirit and help prepare the way for their new Vicar who would arrive in June. At first I was little disappointed about not having at least a week or so to get away before jumping back into the saddle. But once I got re-connect with the people at Holy Spirit I didn't miss the trip one iota. They welcomed me so graciously and made me feel truly wanted and needed, and that I truly had something to share that they really needed. There is no better experience in life and I am so grateful for every moment I was able to spend with them.
I also had the blessing of finding a new friend in the person of their new vicar, Julie O'Brien. We were able to talk over a lot of things about being a soon-to-be-ordained priest generally, and about starting her ministry at Holy Spirit. Sharing that experience with her, a person I came to truly respect and admire for her obvious gifts, her loving heart, and her great sense of humor.
Now I am getting ready for my trip to the Olympic Peninsula for the Arizona Highways Photo Workshop next week. I got a new Canon 5D, Mark II camera and I am learning my way around it slowly. It is a fabulous camera. For the camera buffs out there, I read some reviews on it before buying it and learned why it creates such marvelously sharp images. It is not because of how many mega pixels it has, though it has 21.1; it is because the mega pixels on the sensor are larger that in other cameras, except for the professional models. The larger pixels capture more light, leading to finer detailed images. I can't wait to experience it for myself.
Well that's enough for now. A few random thoughts and I am ready to call it a day.
A FEW RANDOM THOUGHTS
Music plays a very important part in my day and in my life. I have a very eclectic muscial taste. Mostly I like vocals with good harmony. It doesn't matter if its country, or pop or oldies. I like the experience of good harmony. For me, singing in harmony with others is one of life's great spiritual experiences. I sang in a Barbershop Quartet, as well as in our high school choir. Later I sang duets for parties in college with an old college friend. During the years I was the youth minister at Grace Church in Tucson, I helped form a music group from our high school and college kids that traveled around Arizona and around Colorado visiting churches and performing a wonderful repertoire of Christan music, much of which was written and arranged by one of the college kids in the group. I did not perform with the group, I just sang in practices with them..
But music has always been an important part of my life in general and my spiritual life in particular. Often when I have my prayer times I sing songs that are prayers of love and praise. Most of the music that I listen to isn't religious, but it is about life and love and joy and sorrow and loss and hope, all things that ae holy to me. Nat King Cole, Paul Simon, Peter, Paul and Mary, Johnny Cash, John Denver, Wynnona, Celine Dion, James Taylor, Phil Harris (whom only old folks will remember), the Mills Brothers, the Statler Brothers and many other are on my iPod. I envy other cultures, like the Germans,and the Irish who sing in their pubs and beer halls. To have a few beers and to sing with some friends, I can't think of a better way to spend an evening.
Well, these truly are just random thoughts, but again, that is all I said it would be.
Sing more, and sing more often, especially sing in harmony with good friends. It is good for the soul.
Glenn+
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
