Don't Theorize, Realize, Polarize

Anyone surprised I haven't fumed at James Dobson's error-riddled, word-twisting diatribe against Barack Obama? I opted not to, it's really so ridiculous that it should induce eye rolling more than anger. There is an interesting website that tries to contrast Dobson's false attacks with Obama's actual words HERE though I don't think that site goes far enough.

In contrast to Dobson, I'd like to bring up what I see as some positive news about people that consider themselves affiliated with a religion in America. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life recently released a comprehensive survey of the religious beliefs and practices (or non-beliefs and practices) of Americans and how that interacts with their social and political attitudes. The survey was extensive, based on interviews of 35,556 adults. As surveys go, that's huge!

If you are interested in the full report, you can find it HERE. The questions and tables feel like a treasure. Over 60 in-depth questions, many of which have sub questions. The answers are all broken down by specific faith or "unaffiliated" (guess that would be Ulysses Everett McGill). Skipping around the pages is like grabbing handfuls of gold coins and letting them pour out (tinkling) into a pile as I look into the minds of my neighbors.

There are so many angles to take from the survey and discussions that could be started. For example, 20% of Evangelicals and 14% of Mormons believe religion causes more problems in society than it solves, compared to 49% of those affiliated with the Jewish religion and 59% of those unaffiliated. But I can only highlight a few issues.

At a basic level, I find it interesting that 92% of all Americans believe in God (even 70% of the unaffiliated). However, only 60% of those that believe in God believe that God is a personal God while 25% believe he is an impersonal force.



Absolutely startling to me was that only 24% of religious people in America believe their religion is the one, true faith leading to eternal life. 70% believe that many religions can lead to eternal life. In the specifics, a majority of every major religion except Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses believe many religions can lead to eternal life. Just as surprising, religious affiliated people seem to have a less dogmatic view of their own religion than I expected. 53% of Evangelicals and 60% of Muslims believe there is more than one way to interpret the teachings of their religion. Here is the breakdown of these 2 questions:



Some quick hits: 48% of the total believes evolution best explains the origin of human life (including the majority of many religions, though 54% of Evangelicals "completely disagree"). Religious people as a group are split almost evenly on the acceptability of homosexuality. The majority of every group believed the government should do more to help needy Americans, even if that meant going further into debt. The majority of every group believed environmental regulations are worth the cost. Even the issue of abortion is less polarized than you might suspect. Last one I'll mention, and this one also shocked me. A majority of every group but the Jehovah's Witnesses believe miracles still occur today as in ancient times. Even 55% of the unaffiliated agree with that.

So a few of my general observations are that maybe religious people are not as dogmatic as portrayed (and likely not as dogmatic as their leaders want them to be) but the Jehovah's Witnesses are a crazily dogmatic group. Can I win a prize for using the word dogmatic the most times in one blog? Evangelicals continue to be the most politically active and "conservative" of all the major groups. And most surprising, most everyone agrees that they and their religion do not have a monopoly on the truth.

Do you agree with what appears to be the result of this survey? Are spiritually minded people more open than usually portrayed? Have I just been unlucky in my contact with church people? Or are the percentages of rigid "truth hogs" still staggeringly high? If church-going people in America are not as narrow-minded as we thought, who benefits most from a stereotypical view of religion and religious people? Why are almost all "successful" religious leaders the zealots?

"In the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope."

We're Mild and Green and Squeaky Clean

I know people that loathe Wal Mart. I know people that love Wal Mart. I have heard arguments against Wal Mart employment practices; in favor of Wal Mart accessibility of products to low income consumers; against the store's promotion of consumerism; in favor of and opposing Wal Mart environmental efforts; and on and on. I found this news very interesting:

Wal-Mart puts the squeeze on food costs
The retailer is using its clout with vendors to hold onto its everyday low prices.
By Suzanne Kapner, writer(Fortune Magazine)

With gas, grain, and dairy prices exploding, you'd think the biggest seller of corn flakes and Cocoa Puffs would be getting hit by rising food costs. But Wal-Mart has temporarily rolled back prices on hundreds of food items by as much as 30% this year. How? By pressuring vendors to take costs out of the supply chain.

"When our grocery suppliers bring price increases, we don't just accept them," says Pamela Kohn, Wal-Mart's general merchandise manager for perishables. To be sure, Wal-Mart isn't the only retailer working to cut fat from the food chain, but as the largest grocer - Wal-Mart's food and consumables revenue is nearly $100 billion - it has a disproportionate amount of leverage. Here's how the retailer is throwing its weight around.

Shrink the goods. Ever wonder why that cereal box is only two-thirds full? Foodmakers love big boxes because they serve as billboards on store shelves. Wal-Mart has been working to change that by promising suppliers that their shelf space won't shrink even if their boxes do. As a result, some of its vendors have reengineered their packaging. General Mills' Hamburger Helper is now made with denser pasta shapes, allowing the same amount of food to fit into a 20% smaller box at the same price. The change has saved 890,000 pounds of paper fiber and eliminated 500 trucks from the road, giving General Mills a cushion to absorb some of the rising costs.

Cut out the middleman. Wal-Mart typically buys its brand-name coffee from a supplier, which buys from a cooperative of growers, which works with a roaster - which means "there are a whole bunch of people muddled in the middle," says Wal-Mart spokeswoman Tara Raddohl. In April the chain began buying directly from a cooperative of Brazilian coffee farmers for its Sam's Choice brand, cutting three or four steps out of the supply chain.

Go locovore. Wal-Mart has been going green, but not entirely for the reasons you might think. By sourcing more produce locally - it now sells Wisconsin-grown yellow corn in 56 stores in or near Wisconsin - it is able to cut shipping costs. "We are looking at how to reduce the number of miles our suppliers' trucks travel," says Kohn. Marc Turner, whose Bushwick Potato Co. supplies Wal-Mart stores in the Northeast, says the cost of shipping one truck of spuds from his farm in Maine to local Wal-Mart stores costs less than $1,000, compared with several thousand dollars for a big rig from Idaho. Last year his shipments to Wal-Mart grew 13%.

In fact, it's the small suppliers that are feeling the pain from Wal-Mart's pushback the most. Bushwick has seen its costs rise 10% over the past year, but has passed only half that amount on to Wal-Mart and its other retailers. For consumers who are having a hard time paying $3.80 for a gallon of milk, however, without those measures that sticker shock would be a lot worse.

Le Scaphandre et le Papillon

I am moved by the movie Le Scaphandre et le Papillon (The Diving Bell and the Butterfly). Breath-taking scenes, real emotion, funny, innovative film technique, sad, moving... As I try to describe it, I fall into the very cliches that the movie somehow (gloriously) avoids.

The story is of the bon vivant editor of Elle magazine, Jean-Dominique Bauby, who suffers a stroke. He survives with his mind entirely intact but can only move, and blink, one eye. He incredibly uses this one movement to communicate his expansive inner world and dictates a beautiful book.

"Through the frayed curtain at my window, a wan glow announces the break of day. My heels hurt, my head weighs a ton, and something like a giant invisible cocoon holds my whole body prisoner."

Contrary to the cocoon of his body, we get a peek of his illimitable imagination and memories.

"My diving bell becomes less oppressive, and my mind takes flight like a butterfly. There is so much to do. You can wander off in space or in time, set out for Tierra del Fuego or for King Midas's court. You can visit the woman you love, slide down beside her and stroke her still-sleeping face. You can build castles in Spain, steal the Golden Fleece, discover Atlantis, realize your childhood dreams and adult ambitions."

How do you make a movie of a man who cannot move or talk without placing a camera in his room and showing a man in his bed? Even artful placement? This movie does so by putting you in his place. The camera work, direction and editing are ingenious. You, the viewer, are and understand the man.

Another great accomplishment of the movie is that it compellingly (authentically) urges me to live in the moment.

"My life was a string of near-misses. The women I was unable to love, the chances of joy I let drift away… a race whose result I knew beforehand, but failed to bet on the winner."

I fear I make it sound nauseatingly regretful; it's not. It's a rare report back from the edge of life by a brilliant mind that was sharpened by the latest near miss, and delivered to us by an expert film artist.

Wet Missouri spring
Nature seems to mirror fact
Yet greens look brighter