In-Reply-To: 
Message-ID: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


Alan,
I will reply to this in sections because we have several good threads 
available.  It's too bad you can't post, it would be an interesting 
discussion.

On Mon, 14 Nov 1994, Alan Yasutovich wrote:

> > Psychologists have about as many theories as to why teens are what they 
> > are as there are teen councillors and tharapists.
> 
> I happen to find it quite believable that bordom is a problem.
> As much as I always am looking for free time, the minute I get it,
> I'm bored.  I've finished all of life's major hurdles.  And to
> some degree everything is repetitious.

Haven't you noticed that you are most satisfied and turned on when you 
are actively in pursuit of a worthy goal.  Doesn't matter whether it is a 
project at work, or adding the addition to the church.  Each has it's own 
rewards, but there is a simple satisfaction in the pursuit itself.

Suppose that you weren't ALLOWED to pursue worthy goals.  Suppose that 
every time you tried, armed, uniformed men would stop you, humiliate you 
publicly, and physically abuse you?

In the streets, the "Police force" are the Gangs.  They actually enforce 
the poverty cycle.  If you work and earn a pay check, they help you cash 
it, they walk you to the check cashing center, let you go inside, and 
then greet you as you leave.  This service can cost 90% of your pay (the 
check cashing center charges 10%).  This "Robin hoods" will then give the 
money to unwed mothers (who have sex with them to show their gratitude).
The irony of the streets is that no-one considers themselves intrinsicly 
evil.  They can completely justify ever action.  The prisons are full of 
people who committed the crime "for a good reason".

On the streets, the gangs are the law.  They wear uniforms (Colors), you 
know who they are from 1/4 mile away.  You don't enter their domain 
wearing any indication of colors from another group.  The police only get 
involved when the shooting (Automatic weapons) and looting (3 or more 
burgler alarms going off within 15 minutes) starts.  This means that one 
gang is trying to raid another gang's territory.

Out west, the gangs are franchised, like McDonalds.  The tactics and 
practices are so standard that the police can actually predict the nature 
and type of complaints.  Unfortunately, the criminal justice system is 
not able to effectively protect and defend the victims.  Nor can it 
effectively punish the perpetrators.  Ironically, the most effective 
deterrent is vigil-ante groups such as the guardian angels.  These 
groups give gangs the opportunity to pursue a worthy goal.  At 1:00 AM in 
a New York City Subway, it is very comforting to see that Red Baret.  
Even the panhandlers don't do business around the angels.

> > There are many good family programs,  I have been active in 
> > several, including the Mormons, Babtists, Presbyterian, Methodists, and 
> > Catholics.  I've personally been sprinkled, dipped, and lit (holy 
> > spirit), but I work in a ministry where 80% of the people I work with 
> > have been so badly abused by certain individual members of organized 
> > religion, that I find it hard to simply say "Send the gangs to church and 
> > the problem will be gone".
> 
> 	I woulndn't say that either.  Although if you could accomplish
> 	it, it would work.

Actually, you have to get them much earlier.  A street kid has ambitions 
about joining the gang by the time he is 7 or 8 years old.  The kids see 
the fast and easy money, pretty girls, belonging, and respect that the 
gang members get.  The gangs protect the little kids, especially those 
who are friendly to the gang.  Sometimes, the dealers will let the kids 
hold their guns while they do business.  By the time the kid is 12 or 13, 
he holds the gun and shoots the dealer as the gang arrives.  Revolution 
in the streets is easy.

> > different words for different types of sexual relationships.  The King 
> > James bible translates all of them to "lie with".  Hebrew has over 30 
> > distinctions of professional woman (yenta/matchmaker, marriage 
> > councillor, parental coach...) which are all translated to "prostitute".  
> > This had as much to do with justifying the Inquisitional process 
> > (torture, confession, burning at the stake of Midwives, Tharapists, or 
> > women who simply no longer satisfied their husbands), as it had to do 
> > with any spiritual principles.
> 
> 	Good stuff!  You've obviously thought through your own weak
> 	areas quite well.
> 
> 	Kind of a funny thing.  The church that I go to (Church of
> 	the Nazarene) is a group that holds many high ideals, but
> 	holds them in a spirit of human weakness, forgiveness, etc.

My kid's stepfather is a Nazerene.  Before that, my only experience with 
the nazarene was when an emotionally disturbed young man went to the 
preacher to get explanation of the verse "If your right hand offend thee, 
cut it off".  The preacher said that it meant just that.  The young man, 
who was ashamed of his masturbation, attempted to chop his hand of with 
an axe.  As a result, he was the first man to ever have all 5 fingers 
reattached successfully.

The irony here is that in Jewish culture, this phrase has a very 
different meaning.  In hebrew, you write with your left hand, and use the 
right hand for fighting/holding a sword.  If you lost your hand, you 
could still be a scribe.  To "cut off your right hand" was to purge 
yourself of your anger and violent nature.  Interesting how ignorance can 
have that effect.
 
> 	Lately I've been listening to a lot of people talking about
> 	personal growth and accomplishments.  It has been coming
> 	out in terms of their winning battles with alcoholism, drugs,
> 	etc.  It seems to me that most of these people (specifically)
> 	who have this background are a bit sullen, sad, whatever,
> 	like they lost their best friend.  Almost like the REALLY
> 	needed something to keep their head above water.

Alcholism and Addiction are ways to numb feelings that existed long 
before the addiction ever started.  For some it's the pain and guilt of 
incest, rape, physical abuse, or chronic invalidation by parents, peers, 
or lovers.  Every human being lives with the background conversation that 
there is something wrong with them (there isn't, but they can't believe 
that God made them different for a reason) because they are in some way 
fundemantally different.

> 	I drink.  Too much.  At home.  Not a problem financially.
> 	I don't get angry or whatever.  Just a few pops while I watch
> 	TV, work around the house.  My wife doesn't.  But even in our
> 	church circle it appears that many women have something or
> 	other to "get them through their day".

If when you really want to, you cannot quit entirely, OR if, when you 
indulge, you have little control over the consequences of your 
indulgence, you may be suffering from a disease which can only be treated 
through a spiritual awakening.  You may get that in a church.  I am 
paraphrasing A.A. literature (Big Book).

> 	It's surprising.

Not really.  The more intensly the culture is repressed, the more covert 
the acting out against it.  In extreme fundamentalist religeons, there is 
a high incidence of wife battering, incest, marital rape, and 
prostitution patronage.  In orthodox religeons, you even see murder and 
torture in the mix. 

> > I admit, I reacted a bit intensely.  I have experienced most of the 
> > practices listed above personally.  I really didn't respond well to the 
> > electrified stool (I started fibrolating) at the Campus Life crusade.
> 
> 
> 	I guess.  The thing about REAL christianity and a relationship
> 	with God, is that we, as believers, are supposed to present
> 	the ways of God to others.  That's it.  Not drag them in.
> 	Many people find themselves in the throws of it for other
> 	reasons. It is those people who get wrongly hurt.  Wrongly
> 	because christians overstep their bounds by judging others by
> 	their own standards.
> 
> 
> 	Heck.  I believe that drugs should be legal.  Because others
> 	and government should not be allwed to lord over what people
> 	do for/with themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> > I included the background below to simply give you a context for such an 
> > intense reaction.  I am amazed at how many people have tried to justify 
> > the acts below.  I have yet to meet a religous leader willing to be 
> > responsible for the consequences of these abuses.  Remember the opening 
> > them of this epistle is being responsible for the consequences of one's 
> > actions.  Leaders are responsible for the actions he represents.  If any 
> > Southern Babtist preacher would simply be responsible for the 
> > consequences of the one who took on "the power of God" to take away every 
> > friend I had at the time, (I was ex-communicated and declared anathama 
> > when I pointed out that his "Model Members" routinely tortured and abused 
> > the mentally retarded - I then quoted "What you have done to the least of 
> > my brothren, you have done to me".  No Fundamentalist Christian was 
> > allowed to speak to me, lest I poison their minds.  At one point, ten 
> > "Christians" whipped me with wet towels until the welts started 
> > bleeding.  They didn't even stop at 49 lashes.  It was more like 200.
> 
> 
> 	This is too amazing.
> 
> 
> > Secular psychologists have an entire spectrum of opinions.  Your preacher 
> > chose to focus exclusively on the "boredom" theory.  I originally 
> 
> 	It was just a comment related to the subject at hand.
> 
> 
> > One of the risks of groups like "Focus on the Family" is that it promotes 
> > a structure for economic discrimination.  The Republican Party leader 
> > just announced that they would be advocating voucher systems and target 
> > schools within 6 months now that the Republicans controlled "the hill".
> > This is an attempt at constitutionally circumventing attempts at 
> > integration, including forced busing, fair housing laws, and EEOC 
> > provisions.  The problem is that if the "poor", especially single parent 
> > families can't afford to suppliment their "voucher", the result will be a 
> > generation in 2010 consisting of 95% teen gang members, and 5% 
> > church-school and home-school educated elitists.  The "family values" 
> > agenda was first used in 1920, by the Klu Klux Klan, to justify 
> > segregation and the killing of Colored WW1 vets who had learned to 
> > appreciate white women in France.  The "focus on the family" attempted to 
> > depict "colored men" as irresponsible bums who had not been given the 
> > discipline of a good christian family.  It worked, Interacial marriages 
> > were prevented until the late 1960's.
> 
> 
> 	This is quite the political dissertation.
> 
> 	It is always true that the "haves" want to continue having.
> 	They don't really care about weather the "have nots" join in;
> 	when they finally have something.
> 
> 	Poverty (loosely put) is a major root for almost all unrest.
> 	(like the hunger principle you mention).  People or kids who
> 	have similar amounts of wealth can relate easier.  There is
> 	not the tendency to keep and maintain friendships for the
> 	sake of "what's in it for me".  The very rich can have their
> 	expensive parties knowing that each has the wherewithall
> 	needed.  And the poor can share a 6 pack.
> 
> 	I am of the persuation that people really can make their
> 	own way.  It can be hard.  I also am of the contrary opinion
> 	that reality cannot support what is perceived to be a 
> 	middle class american lifestyle.  Listen here.  Carefully.
> 
> 	I do not produce the output commensurate with the work that
> 	I do every day.  I doubt that you do either.  And people 
> 	> $100k per year CERTAINLY don't.  If a person worked a
> 	commensurate amount that would earn $100k in a year, they 
> 	would be dead.  So there will always have to be a fair share
> 	of "worker bees" working at minimum wage or less to make
> 	up for it.  So that we can live as we choose.
> 
> 	It's not sociology or politics.  It's simple math.  And there
> 	will always be that vying fo position.  A position to be
> 	reasonably comfortable by investing a reasonable and reguular
> 	amount of work and time.
> 
> 
> > Today, the target is more economic that racist.  The agenda is to keep 
> > the poor families from "corrupting" our "wholesome Christian children".
> > I used to debate regularly with a "pro-family" advocate, who eventually 
> > went on television as the Grand Wazier of the Klu Klux Klan.
> 
> 	Many times political or social "hoods" must be worn to add
> 	some kind of emotional appeal, more than just saying, "we're
> 	the haves.... and want to stay that way because we like it
> 	and we deserve to.  We don't want the don't-haves to come
> 	near and threaten what we have by looking greedy and
> 	milking a share out of the pie"
> 
> 	It works in CS, too.  It's called, "the best interest of
> 	the children". Much more powerfull than white hoods.
> 	And socially acceptable.
> 
> > Purity occurs as one of those "Innocent Victims of Cruel, Evil, Men".  
> > Maybe the poor are innocent victims of a culture which offers them not 
> > even the illusion of success through responsibility.  Maybe there is some 
> > truth to the belief that there is no way out of the ghetto but in a pine 
> > box.  Maybe the streets of the South Bronx, Harlem, Trenton, Chicago, 
> > Detroit, and Watts are immune to the possibility of possibility.  If that 
> > is so, we will soon see the poor taking to the suburbs, uzies and AK-47s 
> > in hand, looting and raping the middle class, when they rebel and try to 
> > stop the government from trying to take 70% of their income and give it 
> > to 70% of the population.
> > 
> > Myself.  I'm one of those who left the comforts of the Upper Middle Class 
> > to learn, first hand what it was to be in the streets of the inner city.  
> 
> 
> 	Why?
> 
> 
> > to do, I would be paid more.  I did eventually reach a pay rate of over
> > $2000/week.  I eventually even had two kids.  We joined the church for 
> 
> 	Doing what?  Sign me up!!!!!!
> 
> 
> > their family program.  They told me that I didn't need A.A. anymore.  I 
> > don't need A.A. that much, but I do need to give back what was given to 
> > me so freely and generously.  They wanted 10% of my income.  Leslie 
> 
> 	The state wants around 30% for CS.
> 
> 	I have heard (and believe) that there is a lot of simple
> 	transference of habit.  I used to have druggie friends.  And
> 	there was no problem with being responsible and smoking some
> 	pot at night.  But the "ring" of friends was that.  Just like
> 	booze.  If you hang with people who don't embibe, you won't
> 	either.  It's habit.
> 
> 
> 
> > stopped having sex with me for over 4 years,  I asked the church for 
> > guidence and councilling.  I was told I rolled the dice and got "snake 
> > eyes".  They did let me (and Leslie) know what the penalties of getting 
> > divorced would be (1/2 assets, 2/3 child support and alimony), in other 
> > words, I could forget about having sex -- with anyone.  The involuntary 
> > celebacy lasted 7 years, punctuated by 2 sessions/year "just so you will 
> > remember what your not getting" at random occaisions.
> 
> 
> 	Are you willing to explain this furthur?  This was a deliberate
> 	act on her part?
> 
> 	As for the church thing, that's interesting too.  I have a certain
> 	philosphy that I go by.  It's sort of painfull, but it works.
> 	I alwyas ask myself, "why am I here and why am I doing this".
> 	It happens whenever I get annoyed in any instance.  "I am
> 	at work for a paycheck".  Simple enough?  Don't have to get
> 	angry or concerned at all.  I am working on an addition to the
> 	building at our church.  The job has gone on for 1 1/2 years
> 	with me as a principle player.  I go there tonight.  Almost done.
> 	Got aggrivated by some changes recently.  I ask myself, "why
> 	am I here".  Simple.  To donate my time.  To help. Not to come out
> 	on top somehow.  That's it.  
> 
> 	So when "men" seemingly fail me at church, I rememeber why
> 	I am there.  And that I can't guarantee that I'll get the 
> 	support I need/want in any situation.
> 
> 
> > My wife decided she could "settle"  for $1000/month (I was making
> > $3000/month at the time) in Child Support, and married a man who collected
> > disability.  With her workman's comp (he taught her to play the system
> > too), my child support, and his disability, along with pay off the books,
> 
> 
> 	Ya, Yaaaa!
> 
> 
> > solution.  I have raised my concerns.  It would have been interesting to 
> > have this discussion on a public forum.  It might make a difference for a 
> > lot of people.
> 
> 	I will be back shortly, I hope.  Can read but can't post.
> 
> 	Gotta install inn.
> 
> > > 	And you don't have to apologise for your bluntness.
> > Actually, there was a lot of Knee-Jerk reaction.  I was quite abrupt, 
> > accusatory, and what you call "disfunctional".  Perhaps as we begin to 
> > discover more about each other's world, we may see that we actually have 
> > some very common goals and objectives.
> 
> 	True.  But what I was saying in that regard is simply that
> 	the commonality of people's attitudes with their expereinces.
> 
> 	People who conrtibute to cancer research often lost people
> 	to cancer.
> 
> 	And that is Purities problem.  To the extreme.
> 
> > This was very stupid of me.  When I post to a mailing list, or someone 
> > posts a reply to an article I wrote, their mailer "CC"s a copy to me.  I 
> > can usually reply to riots I've caused :-), by replying via my personal 
> > mailbox.  The PINE Newsreader interface does the same thing.  When PINE 
> > asked me if I wanted to include the Newsgroups, I thought that was 
> > because you had sent this as a "CC:" posting.  I very much apologize.
> 
> 
> 	That used to happen to me occasionally.  I'd hit the reply
> 	key and cross-post to every group carried in the original.
> 
> 	Got flamed occasionallyu.
> 
> 


From rballard@cnj.digex.net Tue Nov 15 02:17:11 1994
Status: O
X-Status: