Here it is, folks: This is the place for all things KCDad. Here you can discuss communism, KCDad-style. Or you can discuss the teachings of Jesus as interpreted by KCDad. Perhaps you want to just sit and soak in the profound teaching of KCDad himself. This is the place. Now is the time.
But from now on, if the conversation on any other post strays away from the post’s original topic into KCDad-Land (which will be determined at my sole discretion), the comments will be moved to this post for that discussion to continue (hence the “repository” moniker). I’ll leave a little note in the comments section of future posts if the discussion is redirected here.
That doesn’t mean that all of KCDad’s comments (or responses to KCDad’s comments) will be moved here. He isn’t being quarantined. This is simply an attempt to keep posts on topic. As long as the comments are related to the original topic, they’re fine. It’s only when they veer into the “communism vs. capitalism” or “The Gospel According to KCDad” or similarly-recurring motifs that they’ll be moved to this thread for further argument and development.
wow… lots of followers of this thread… why so quiet? (Other than to add irrelevant secular music allusions.) You do know that Handel’s Oratorio, Messiah, was intended to be inspirational, not dogmatic. That is why the libretto draws from various out of context passages that are not related. Note also, that the piece is called Messiah, not THE Messiah, a recognition that there is an “Anointing” that is not a one time thing, nor is it a one person thing.
Oh, don’t jump to conclusions, I didn’t read the thread. I was waiting for it to wear itself out. I don’t know about everyone else, but I follow CJ’s blog because it is about all things Peoria. It seemed to have been hijacked for awhile, and I admire CJ for his comment.
ahhh, I see. Forgive me for presuming someone commenting on a thread might have actually read it.
lmao! What a colossal waste of internet time. Really, who is fooling who here?
Not hijacked, for he remains here within his virtual impoundment where his unique brand of BS is still permitted. Readers here are forewarned of the crap accumulating herein, yet still they come, not unlike the inexplicable desire to see Frog Boy or the Four-Legged Girl.
It is rich in irony that his every comment is, in effect, self-eulogizing, a farewell to his former life as a commenter who could wander the blog without restriction pissing people off; an acceptance of his sentence of confinement in this cyber-cell.
If I could offer my epitaph on this solemn occasion: “He strove to be Karl but was found to be Groucho.”
We hardly knew ye.
KCdad needs to discover Peoria.com. Plenty of wingnuttery there.
mahkno, nontimedum, and emtronics… thanks for your 2cents worth… I see that you unable to keep up with the discussion so you just make fun… how pithy.
You might take time to read Plato’s Allegory of the Cave sometime. You will recognize yourselves as those still chained in cave making fun of the one who has been outside the cave and come back to share his discoveries.
Since reading doesn’t seem to be your strong suit, here’s the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2afuTvUzBQ
kcdad, I just checked your blog again and am glad to see that the anonymous function is now allowed. As you said, maybe more people will visit it now, especially those who want to delve into deep discussions – whether they agree with your point of veiw or not.
KCDad — I’ve been following your comments on this thread (and others). I have to say, I still don’t know quite how to take you, despite your voluminous responses. If I read your comments correctly, it appears that your goal is to be deliberately provocative in order to get other people to think about their presuppositions. That’s your teaching method, I believe. Thus, I’m never quite sure whether you really believe the things you say here, or if you’re just saying them for shock value… or both. Either way, I’m not interested in having rhetorical arguments solely for what you perceive as my own benefit. That’s why I’ve commented little on these threads.
CJ, I don’t want you to take me or leave me. It is the ideas that matter. Whether they come from me, Thomas Paine, Karl Marx or Jesus. The source is irrelevant. You see these arguments as rhetorical? Interesting.
Irving Berlin quipped “If Marx had been Groucho instead of Karl, the world would be in less of a snarl”,
I agree that it’s neither noble nor advisable to tease the gorillas at the zoo. Not sure if it was ignoring my policy of not commenting after happy hour or simply the rabid atmosphere in here.
Fortunately, the rest of the blog is now like nerves after pain.
Usually, the way we attack others says more about ourselves than it reveals about the “others.”
True, Sharon. Especially when the criticisms are personal and have nothing to do with the arguments presented.
At one of our friend’s house there is a little dog that barks at everything. Every time we, or anyone else, go over to their house, the dog barks frantically at our arrival. Anytime we begin having a conversation, the dog starts barking incessantly. We’re not sure if the dog is mean, scared or deranged. At first, we thought maybe the dog was trying to tell us something – like it needed to go out, but try as we might, we just couldn’t understand why the dog was barking so much. We tried ignoring the dog, but ANY little sound made it bark all the more. Also, it seemed like the more we tried to ignore it, the more it tried to get our attention, like peeing on our legs. We like dogs, but there’s just something about the way this one acts that severely tests our good nature. We no longer care to figure out what the dog wants, we just want it to shut up. We really like our friends, but it’s becoming more than unpleasant to visit them at their house, with that dog around. Thing is, it’s not even their dog.
Blog rule – Be kind and respectful of others. Your argument is more persuasive when you debate the issue instead of engaging in personal attacks. The goal here is civil discourse.
The recent trend to compare people to animals seems to me to be a bit barbaric and offensive–the civility seems to be missing. If you believe that someone’s opinion isn’t worthy of a response, then why respond?
Sharon – maybe some want you and kcdad to take your “conversations” to his blog and return this one to CJ.
Sharon, the “issue” debated on this thread is all things kcdad himself. That’s the topic CJ created. For this topic you can not separate attacks on the issue from the person. I do not believe I broke any blog rules. I attempted to make a simple analogy. I didn’t intend it as “barbaric”.
I can’t help but notice the timing of your pleas to “be nice”.
Truth hurts: I’ve already done that (my August 28 post) and should have left the discussion sooner–I totally agree with you. Jon, I disagree; of course, you can attack ideas without attacking the person who holds the ideas. I didn’t interpret C.J.’s creation of this topic as an invitation to attack Kcdad. While I don’t believe you broke blog rules (and I recognize it’s not even my business if you did)–your analogy took me aback; it just seemed out of character for you–at least, the way you have previously presented yourself on the blog. Kcdad, you bring your own passion to the discussion, and your opinions have elicited strong responses from all of us–mine just aren’t as negative because even when not agreeing, I understand your arguments. I do find it interesting that while several have participated in this discussion, the anti-Kcdad responders have not been criticized for prolonging the discussion.
Emerge: Please note that I have placed my response under its appropriate post–the Kcdad thread. I know what answer you want me to give. 🙂 BAM and In the Know responded to my 150 comments. Then–the answer for which you are looking–Kcdad actually said he agreed with me, but then disagreed with In the Know and turned it into a capitalist vs communist debate–and then everybody (7 people) that has posted since followed suit to argue with him or deride him. Please note that at no time have I returned to the capitalist vs communist (or Christian) debate since I made my promise on August 28. I did take out a minute to defend Kcdad (as I would anyone) against those who chose to compare him first to a gorilla and then to a dog. I wouldn’t use animal imagery to describe anyone–even Glen Beck. In all due respect to Kcdad, I am tired of the communist vs capitalist arguments–but they will never end if people can’t resist responding to Kcdad. When I choose to return to the Christian discussion and/or debate (when I have more time and the inclination), I will go to Kcdad’s own blog.
🙂
Sharon, first of all, this is all in fun, so with that in mind….
Let me see if I understand your defense of kcdad correctly. You’re not offended when Mahkno suggests kcdad join the “nuttery” over at Peoria.com. You’re not offended at nontimendum’s first post mocking kcdad for being confined to a “cyber-cell” where “his unique brand of BS” is permitted. You’re not offended when, on another chain, kcdad says to Stephen “you are a moron”.
But when a couple analogies are made comparing his actions to those of an animal, you feel compelled to defend kcdad against this “barbaric” treatment?
Isn’t that kind of like the anti-PETA?
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/advocacy_group_decries_petas
WARNING: This video may offend some people.
Jon: I didn’t mean to pick on you alone. I did catch the “moron”–and do believe Kcdad is guilty of name-calling, also. It’s the animal imagery that caught my attention–especially, since there was no other message in the post–just the comparison. I’m about to conclude that maybe it’s a “male” thing and I should just accept these examples of male humor. Remember that teachers are asked to report bullying in the classroom–just a carry-over perhaps. 🙂 It’s just a reminder to me to be more careful about my criticisms of District 150. I do try to stick to actions, not people–but I’m capable of being insensitive, also. Please don’t expect me to watch any pro or anti-PETA videos.
Yes. I called Stephen a moron. I meant it in the nicest possible way. A moron can not be judged harshly for not being able to conceptualize complicated ideas… they have a very low IQ and low reasoning faculties.
That definition that I was responding to..
“The def of communism states that the community provides for the needs of the individuals.”
… was completely brainless and inappropriate to any intellectual discussion. I challenged him to show me where he got that definition, and am still waiting. Only a fool argues from a position of ignorance.
If is going to make up meanings as one goes, well that kinda leaves one open to insult.
Lewis Carrol in Alice Through The Looking glass points out the idiocy of that communication with Humpty Dumpty saying to Alice: When I use a word it means exactly what I intend for it to mean , nothing more and nothing less.
I’m still laughing about the proposal for the Peoria Charter School–the one that promises that the school will meet the needs of students at all times. I know that a while back a teacher went to the podium at a BOE meeting and started to point out that 150 had produced a document with grammatical errors. Gorenz stopped her and told her that speakers were not supposed to be critical of others. Maybe I’m being too insensitive by pointing out these errors. This post is probably not related to anything at all–just felt like writing it.
kcdad is self-defined as a moron….it all makes sense now. He is not to be judged too harshly.
Sharon, I concede that my animal metaphor was highly inappropriate. It is with all due sincerity that I offer an apology to gorillas everywhere.
Aha! Again… you miss the point. Even changing your sign in doesn’t help. I can define the words I use… and use pretty well accepted definitions… not ones I just make up or happen to hear in Bill O’Reilly’s stage act.
KCDad said (on another post):
Nice Wikipedia quote. Here’s a quote from the U.S. State Department on what kind of government Cuba has:
And here’s a quote from the Oxford American Dictionary:
And, just for fun, here’s another quote from the Socialist Labor Party of America:
I can’t believe this is even necessary, considering everyone knows Cuba is a communist state. I feel like I’m defending the proposition that the Pope is Catholic.
There is no point in defending it CJ because KC knows all and will reply with another post that will first begin with a tirade about his intellectual superiority and/or your gross ignorance followed by a kcdad-ism. A kcdad-ism is a rebuttal which attempts to counter an argument by presenting information and opinion completely irrelevant to the original discussion yet the author proposes that it does in fact prove his/her point. Nothing can beat a kcdad-ism, its like throwing dynamite in a game of rock-paper-scissors.
All I have to add is this. I lost half my family under communist rule. The reason? My family would not fall in line what the local commissar thought they should be in line with. The family was never in favor with the communist revolutionaries. Once frowned upon, it was a matter of time.
C.J. “everyone knows Cuba is a communist state” Are you serious, or are you teasing the uninformed?
You have offered 2 definitions from “American” (meaning United States of America) sources. Why in the world of Gilligan and the Skipper would you trust a US definition of Cuba or communism? If we are moving towards more and more Socialism in our government, it would be self destructive to try and identify Cuba or any other “enemy” as Socialist… they have to be demonized worse than that… we could call them fascists… but they aren’t… so let’s give ’em the death sentence and call them communists… that’ll scare everyone.
As far as “written in early 1979 for the Weekly People”, this doesn’t say Cuba’s government is communist, only that it isn’t Socialist. AGAIN… this is what critical thinking is about, people, WHY would a Socialist labor Newspaper want to distance itself from Cuba to the American people? Think real hard about that…
The problem with throwing definitions around about “communists states” is that you get this kind of nonsense:
“a professed allegiance to a communist ideology as the guiding principle of the state”
Under this definition yes, Cuba can be called communist, however you can also call the United States a Theocracy because of professed allegiance to One God, and our “Christian principles”. Wait a minute… What do we call Medicaid, AFDC, food stamps, FEMA, Public Education and our national defense if not SOCIALIST programs? What is insurance but a communistic pooling of the communities resources for the benefit of the few? (There is certainly no possibility of everyone deriving benefit from insurance) Maybe we are like Cuba in that we profess one thing while doing something completely different?
We claim we are free market capitalists… THAT obviously isn’t true. The last 1.5 trillion dollars pumped into the banks and financial institutions and car manufacturers
proves that. But even over the past 50 years we see how the government has regulated tariffs, import quotas, wages, prices and every other aspect of our economy…
HUH??? A government with a “professed allegiance” to a communist ideology? Isn’t that like saying a man is faithful to his wife if he “professes monogamy”?????
I guess my point is, and you know this is true, that a true communist government CAN NOT EXIST. What would a communist government look like? It would like Vermont town hall meetings where the people gather to decide policy and programs to implement… regular town people, not paid “wise men”. It would be like a family sitting around the dinner table discussing whether they were going to put in a swimming pool or go on vacation to Florida this year.
“Since the time Fidel Castro came to power, the Cuban Government has been condemned by certain (mostly dissident) Cuban groups, some international groups, and foreign governments for engaging in activities labeled by some as undemocratic.”
I love this statement… I wonder if you can find people (right here in the US, for example) that might criticize the United States of “engaging in activities labeled by some as undemocratic.” ???????
Don’t get me wrong. I am not defending Cuba or its political government or policies… I am trying to point out that by demonizing some other group we tend to forgive our own “trespasses”. “We aren’t THAT bad. Thank you God that I am not like that (tax collector)!” OH LOOK, I GOT JESUS BACK INTO THE CONVERSATION!
George, watch how this goes: I lost half my family to The United States’ policies of Fascism. When my father wouldn’t give up a family vacation that had been planned a year in advance, he was fired and black listed from getting any job. He was told that he needed to live to work, and if he didn’t believe the company had his best interests in mind, then the company could not trust him to have their best interests in mind. He couldn’t get a job in the town or in his field after that and when he tried to start up a competing business on his own, the government refused to give him a business license and sent the IRS to investigate him. They took everything he owned including our home without due process and never brought any charges against him.
What was the name of that guy in the late 40s that built his own car company… a movie was made of maybe 10 years ago starring Jeff Bridges… ????
From MayoClinic.com:
Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance and a deep need for admiration. They believe that they’re superior to others and have little regard for other people’s feelings. But behind this mask of ultra-confidence lies a fragile self-esteem, vulnerable to the slightest criticism…
Narcissistic personality disorder symptoms may include:
* Believing that you’re better than others
* Fantasizing about power, success and attractiveness
* Exaggerating your achievements or talents
* Expecting constant praise and admiration
* Believing that you’re special
* Failing to recognize other people’s emotions and feelings
* Expecting others to go along with your ideas and plans
* Taking advantage of others
* Expressing disdain for those you feel are inferior
* Being jealous of others
* Believing that others are jealous of you
* Trouble keeping healthy relationships
* Setting unrealistic goals
* Being easily hurt and rejected
* Having a fragile self-esteem
* Appearing as tough-minded or unemotional
When you have narcissistic personality disorder, you may come across as conceited, boastful or pretentious. You often monopolize conversations. You may belittle or look down on people you perceive as inferior…
But underneath all this grandiosity often lies a very fragile self-esteem. You have trouble handling anything that may be perceived as criticism. You may have a sense of secret shame and humiliation. And in order to make yourself feel better, you may react with rage or contempt and efforts to belittle the other person to make yourself appear better…
Whether you decide to seek treatment on your own or are encouraged by loved ones or a concerned employer, you may feel defensive about treatment or think it’s unnecessary. The nature of narcissistic personality disorder can also leave you feeling that therapy or the therapist is not worth your time and attention, and you may be tempted to quit. Try to keep an open mind, though, and to focus on the rewards of treatment.
To all you people obsessed with kcdad and his postings……..
It would seem that there are a large number of you concerned with kcdad and his…..musings.
Jon,
You obviously spent a great deal of time on your last post. It makes me think…who has the problem here, kcdad, or you people intent on discrediting him? Seems to me you are ALL playing into his hand.
A little insecurity perhaps….?
Tucker: The Man and his Dream (1988).
Jon- I am a licensed clinical counselor. I did not realize you were qualified to diagnose individuals.
Keith, I never diagnosed anyone. Why do sites like MayoClinic.com exist? So that people can get information and if they feel there is a problem, they can seek professional help. Re-read the last paragraph of my post – “Whether you decide to seek treatment on your own or are encouraged by loved ones or a concerned employer…” I encourage kcdad to visit a professional therapist, if he hasn’t done so already.
I know that my previous comments were not as sincere. Frankly, I just thought kcdad was a jerk and found a little humor with him. Then someone suggested he “seek therapy”. That got me thinking – and after researching it a little, I just think it might not be a bad idea.
Jon, like many “fundamentalists” tend to project their feelings onto others… Although I appreciate the tongue in cheek concern, I have not only seen a therapist in the past, I have been one. Part of being a group and family counselor is the requirement to participate in group therapies to learn the dynamics. My original undergraduate degree is in Social Work / Counseling.
kcdad — Cuba is communist, and not because the United States says they are. The political party in power (which took power and holds power by force) calls their own party the “Communist Party of Cuba” (“Partido Comunista de Cuba”). Please, for the love of God, just admit you were wrong about something.
Lost half your family? How? Was your family executed, murdered too? Most people feel that murder or death is a step or two up from being black listed or losing a job or having a home unjustly taken. But keeping your vacation plans alive is important too, I suppose.
Your story is a fantastic rationalization to something. And I suspect it would be an exaggerated account with missing key details, if not a straight up lie. I doubt every word. What kind of man doesn’t relinquish a vacation if he knows his job is in jeopardy? Still, I think you’re lying about it all. Communists are pathological liars.
Nonetheless, was your family homeless then? What was the nature of the business license the government refused to give your father? Which governmental entity exactly denied him the license? What was the IRS outcome? Did your father have a legal rep? The ACLU was around, why didn’t he seek their guidance? Have you tried legal recourse today? The records are still there. You should be able to prevail in court for your family if your father was unjustly persecuted and his property unjustly confiscated by the government . There is precedent. You should contact the ACLU or a good lawyer.
However, if half your family is gone by execution and murder, then no lawyer can help you regain your loss.
Kcdad’s “I guess my point is, and you know this is true, that a true communist government CAN NOT EXIST. What would a communist government look like? It would like Vermont town hall meeting”
Is it possible that Kcdad expects us to notice that when he talks about communism, he doesn’t capitalize the word–that he is talking about communism in its philosophical terms, not as it has been adapted and/or practiced by Cuba and the U.S.S.R? Even the dictionary defines lower-case communism as a theory, but labels capitalized Communism as associated with the Communist Party. I believe he does spell it out in his statement above. I think he is referring, also, to the kind of communism that was described in the New Testament–when one group of Christians agreed to own everything in common. I believe that that experiment with lower case communism didn’t work out either–but it wasn’t a form of government, just a community. I never thought of it before but I assume the word communism and community have the same derivation. But he isn’t advocating Soviet Union Communism–the capitalized word that elicits so much emotion from most.
Am I right or wrong, Kcdad?
“The political party in power (which took power and holds power by force) calls their own party”
Well, if the Republicans call themselves republicans we must be a republic. If the democrats call themselves the Democratic Party, then they must be democratic and we must be a Democracy… right? What then about eh Bull Moose Party, or the Know Nothings? The Populists or the Progressives?
What about a party that calls itself the Peoples Democratic Party, or The National Peoples Party? Workers Party? Social Democrat Party? How about The Christian Democratic Union? What can you imply from their name?
Here’s a list of American Political parties throughout our history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States
George…. “What kind of man doesn’t relinquish a vacation if he knows his job is in jeopardy?”
A man whose family is more important than his job. You don’t know anyone like that?
“You should contact the ACLU or a good lawyer.” Ha ha! For what? To get a money settlement?????? THAT’S the whole problem!
Sharon, you are so close to being right, you might as well be!
OK, everybody, can you now begin–when you choose to have discourse with Kcdad–to discuss with him on the basis of his definition of communism (see my post and his immediately above) instead of reacting to what you think he means: the capital C Communism of the U.S.S.R. and Cuba.
MY definition???? THE definition. Just because Americans call themselves a Democracy or a Republic doesn’t mean they are one.
“Machiavelli divided governments into two types, principalities ruled by a monarch and republics ruled by the people.” True, we not be ruled by monarchs… but what would you call The Kennedys. The Rockefellers, The Bushs, etc? Check their lineages out and you will see a long line of political power. Does anyone really think the people have any say in the running of our government?
“Communism” means what it means. commune -ism. community-ism. gemeinschaft, in German.
‘Communism (from Latin: communis = “common”) is a family of economic and political ideas and social movements related to the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, or STATELESS society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general, as well as the name given to such a society.” (See Liberation Theology)
In the last half of the 19th century the terms socialism and communism were often used interchangeably… however, this is now the 21st century and it has been nearly 120 years since the two were distinguished as different stages of societal development. WAKE UP PEOPLE! Get with the 21st century.
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761572241/Communism.html
Agreed: “the” instead of “your”–you didn’t make up the definitions.
kcdad, that link you provided on communism was particularly enlightening. Did you include it to prove your point, or CJ’s? I’ll quote from your source:
“Today, single-party communist states are rare, existing only in China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea, and Vietnam.”
Maybe it is you need to get with the 21st century.
“They (Marx and Engels) reserved the term communism for a final stage of society in which class differences had disappeared, people lived in harmony, and government was no longer needed.
The meaning of the word communism shifted after 1917…”
So, you are correct if you define communism (and conclude that Cuba is not communist) as was the original intent of Marx and Engels – and as communism was defined before 1917….
But CJ is correct when he, and apparently the rest of the world, uses the modern definition of communism.
Jon: Why can’t you accept there is a difference between communism and Communism as in Communist Party–the modern definition is still, as always, two definitions? Just as Catholic and catholic have two very different definitions.
Sharon, did you read any of the link? Did you read CJ’s original question, based on kcdad’s statement, carefully? You are the only one capitalizing Communism. That isn’t the question or the issue.
If one says Cuba is a communist state – that is correct by the modern definition.
If one says Cuba is NOT a communist state – that is correct by the original definition in which the general meaning has since changed.
Economics is a social science in which the models, or theories, are ever evolving. The GENERAL definitions change over time. The meaning of the word capitalism has evolved over time as well.
Jon, yes, I read C.J.’s post–then I wrote mine. I’m the only one using capital C Communism–but all of you, except Kcdad, ought to be. Kcdad isn’t advocating Communism, just communism. Cuba is a Communist state, not a communist state. Maybe it’s the English teacher in me that recognizes the difference between lower case and upper case words. Have you checked a dictionary–the definitions have not changed? Check out the capital C definition–that’s the one to which you are reacting. A Christian group in the United States could decide to form a community based on the principles of lowercase c communism and they would still be Christians. I just have a funny feeling you aren’t going to understand that concept. By the way, you probably would still disagree with Kcdad’s preference for communistic principles (probably I might, also–with some nuances)–but you wouldn’t be fighting the same battle that you are fighting now–your arguments would have to change considerably.
So if I use the capital Communist, is that referring to the USSR version? Lenin’s version? Cuba? China?
Should we tell the editors of Encarta, the source that kcdad and I both referenced, that they SHOULD be using the capital C when referring to Cuba’s communism?
Can we do the same for capitalism? Do you think the definition of capitalism has changed from what Adam Smith to John Maynard Keynes to Milton Friedman to Paul Krugman believed it to be?
Yes, kcdad is advocating the original intent of communism, not the commonly accepted definition of the modern term that today manifests itself in Cuba and elsewhere. He specifically doesn’t clearly initially clearly define his term, the original term, for shock value – to build up your defenses so he can “teach” you to break them down.
You keep bringing up capitalized examples, but they are irrelevant. The original issue was about the general term communism.
As for “communistic principals”, I actually favor more “socialism” in our current version of capitalism. It has been happening in the U.S. for decades. It is generally what Marx predicted – with the ultimate result of his definition of communism. I doubt we ever get there – unless we continue to advance like some of those species you see on Star Trek (ugh oh – talking Darwinism now).
Jon and even C.J.: Kcdad’s “Don’t get me wrong. I am not defending Cuba or its political government or policies… I am trying to point out that by demonizing some other group we tend to forgive our own “trespasses”. “We aren’t THAT bad. Thank you God that I am not like that (tax collector)!” OH LOOK, I GOT JESUS BACK INTO THE CONVERSATION!” How could you possibly misunderstand Kcdad’s words? And as far as the Christian message is concerned, isn’t he using the concept of the speck in another’s eye versus the log in one’s own? I have been trying to present this argument to Christians for much of my adult life. Let’s take care of our own individual sins, sins of the church, and sins of our country–and then maybe our example would be so powerful that just maybe we could actually influence the rest of the world and even win it over to Christ.