Cops & Racism Part 1

In preparing to write this, in addition to doing my own research I asked for the input of several police officers and have also received some input from several African American friends. One of the things that becomes more and more obvious to me is that the whole discussion of racism and solutions is extremely complicated and very messy. This first post on policing racism will just scratch the surface.

As I didn’t ask for permission to use the names of the policemen who gave me input, when referring to specific comments, I will use some names of policemen from some old TV shows–Adam 12 and CHiPs .

While some people will say that it is disrespectful to call a police officer a cop, that was the most common name the officers with whom I communicated used to refer to themselves so I will often use that term throughout my blog.

When referring to Blacks, the politically correct way to refer to them has changed multiple times in my lifetime and each individual has a preference on what they prefer to be called. I heard that a gal recently said–I’m not black–maybe chocolate—and I’m not from Africa so…

I will use the most commonly accepted terms interchangeably throughout the blog for variety’s sake.

While I think this is a funny image of a false dichotomy, give me Coke or Pepsi any day over Dr. Pepper:)

I have noticed that when someone defends cops, they are often viewed as not compassionate towards people of color. But I have also seen when someone points out what appears to be the abuse of a cop on a black citizen, that this person is viewed as anti-cop.

Yes, it is true that there are those who will defend the actions of law enforcement in almost every situation. But as Officer Reed said, there are also those who shout racism on every encounter between a white cop and black suspect without waiting to hear the facts.

Both of those positions are obviously biased and those who hold them will always find “data” to support their premise and ignore the rest. Neither of those positions are healthy and neither will help us find answers.

Blacks have historically been very oppressed by law enforcement. At the same time I want to acknowledge and express my gratitude to police officers for the professional way in which they handle millions of interactions they have with the public each year. At the same time, we should never put our heads in the sand and ignore abuses when they take place and police officers who betray the public trust, need to be held accountable.

Making a general statement (like cops are racists) may be popular and makes for great headlines. However, as I mentioned in my last post, such statements are never helpful.

We live in a very big country with 50 states, over 3000 counties, and over 19,000 cities. In my opinion, to state that police officers are racist is not only not helpful, but it is inflammatory which may be the goal of some who will make such a statement. To a person, each cop with whom I interacted agreed that there are racist cops although Officer Reed said he had not ever had to work with one.

It was very evident both in the statements of the cops with whom I have communicated as well as what we see in the news, that police departments are very different from one county to another and extremely different in various parts of the country. Officer Poncherello related to me that he worked in a canine unit for a number of years in Oregon. He was surprised to hear some of the statements made by trainers in Washington state with whom he worked. They would say things like “Let your dog tear them up”.

To end this post, I have decided to take a step back and talk a little about what causes racism today. A statement by officer Malloy initially surprised me. He said, “it is natural to be racist”. “It is something you have to fight against constantly”. When you live with “your people” and know nothing about another group with whom you interact at some point, it is normal to have distrust of that other group.

Whether or not you agree with his statement, I think we can all acknowledge that at times we don’t feel comfortable in any situation when it is something different. How we were raised will have a big impact on how we respond to someone different from us.

When I see a person shouting racist remarks at someone of a different color, I can guarantee, that the person yelling has no real relationship with someone of that color. Depending on our upbringing, we may easily reject what we don’t know. We must take time to make the unfamiliar, familiar and to make the abnormal, normal. I think the challenge is to get outside of our comfort zone and interact with people who don’t look like us on more than a superficial level.

As we continue this discussion about police & racism, among other things, we will look at some ways that officer Poncherello said a police department with whom he worked successfully addressed the issue of distrust.

Other topics we will address are systemic racism, brutality, statistics, accountability, etc. Feel free to suggest more topics for me to address.

Is America Racist?

The positions on this issue could not be further apart. You can read articles on both sides showing “their data” to support their assertions. And the two sides aren’t African American vs. Whites, for there are whites claiming systemic racism and blacks saying that other people of color are responsible for their own problems.

So for America to be considered racist, what would that mean? More than 50% of the existing population to be racist? As I discussed in the last post, it is not as simple as saying a person is racist or not racist. The same person, like me, can have both racist and anti-racist thoughts.

In my opinion, fighting about whether America is racist or not, makes for great headlines but increases the divisiveness and does nothing helpful.

I recently heard a statement I have fully embraced. “The general is the enemy of the specific.” It is so easy to use a broad brush to paint something one way, but in my experience it is much more beneficial to talk about specifics. Criticism is never helpful unless it is specific.

To restate, when I use the term “anti-racist”, what I mean by that term is, I need to speak up against racism in any form in which I see it. (Others use that same term to push their agenda which includes much more than that.)

I think it is pretty clear that racism is “alive and sick” in America today because America is made up of people. However, is there systemic racism in America? Again, before we talk about it, we must define it. Let’s go with this definition.

Racism resulting from the inherent biases and prejudices of the policies and practices of social and political organizations, groups, or institutions.

If organizations, groups and institutions are made up of people, and people are flawed which includes racism among other things, how can there not be systems which allow racism to exist and in some cases even flourish.

While some would argue that America is racist to its core, I would contend that the core of America is its Declaration of Indendence and the Constitution.

The natural response would be, is the core what it says or what it does?

That is the constant struggle in life whether it is on a personal level or at a national level–eliminating the dissonance between my behavior and what I claim to believe.

There are those who conclude because they don’t wish harm for someone who is of a different ethnic group, that they aren’t racist. However, if I don’t speak up when some person or policy is racist, I am at least complicit, and I would argue also encouraging racism.

Joseph Grenny in his book “Crucial Conversations” relates the true story of a lady who was admitted for a tonsillectomy but left the hospital with an amputated foot. “How can such a thing happen” is a normal question to ask. As it turned out there were actually seven people who could have spoken up to avert this tragedy but the intimidation culture in that hospital did not encourage dialog.

When the argument is being made that there is no systemic racism in America, often the person is comparing current day policies with those in our sordid past when the systemic racism was very blatant like “White Only” restaurants and home loans not being available to African Americans.

Thank God, and the work of our predecessors for those changes. But just because there aren’t racist policies that are so blatant, are there still some policies today which promote racism? It is my hope that as we are made aware of any, that we would not be silent.

Next week I will do my best to address the topic of racism as it relates to police officers and the charges that have been leveled against them.

Are you a racist?

I have heard many arguments about this topic when one essential element is missing–the definition of a racist and racism itself. However, I think we need to back up further than that to discuss where the term race came from. I thought that this term would have gone back to ancient times but was surprised to learn that using the term “race” to categorize the differences between different groups of people didn’t really happen until the 16th century. But by the 18th century, it became widely used for ranking people in the English colonies.

For our purposes, I will define racism as the belief that one group of people is inferior to another based on their ethnicity.

I am not a historian and although I have always loved learning about history, it was always my weakest class in school. Some of the information I am sharing comes from Britannica but similar content is available via a web search on your favorite search engine.

We typically think that skin color is an essential part of racism. However, even Voltaire, who is remembered as someone who fought against tyranny and bigotry said of the Catholic Irish that they were savages and a backward people.

Some English cartoonists used ape-like faces on Irish people to support their belief that the Irish were an inferior people.

Though skin color is not an essential component of racism, there is one component that is never missing. That is the de-humanization or devaluation of a group of people.

This is required for either the enslavement or the elimination of any group. They are no longer people but things. This has been true throughout history but how does that relate to us today?

We defined racism as the belief that one ethnic group is inferior to another. So How do we define a racist?

It would seem to be simple–someone who buys into racism–someone who believes that one ethnic group is superior to another.

But not so fast. How much do you have to buy into it to make you a racist.

Even if we want to fight against racism, if you are like me (God forbid), there are times when we have racist thoughts. In your heart of hearts, have you ever been surprised by someone like Ben Carson who was a brain surgeon? Or when you saw someone, just because of their skin color you thought it was more likely that they might need your help instead of the other way around?

For me, a racist is a person who has these racist thoughts but does nothing to fight against them.

Labels, as we talked about in a previous post, are a way to avoid talking about the real issue–because after I label you, I no longer need to take you seriously.

Nowadays, if you say something you don’t like about the policies of an African American politician, there are groups of people who will automatically accuse you of being a racist.

Being called a racist doesn’t make us one, but neither does denying it mean that I am not one. How many people claimed they weren’t racists when they supported the idea of “equal but separate”?

Is it enough to not be a racist? How many Christians in Europe claimed they weren’t anti-Semites, but didn’t raise a finger to stop the genocide.

It is important for me to not only not be a racist, but to be someone who fights against racism wherever I see it. Yes, I must be an anti-racist.

I have heard arguments as to whether racism is still an issue in America today. I think that is the wrong question, but we will tackle that next week.

“Black Lives Matter”

We have spent a month talking about the need to speak in a civil manner when we disagree. Based on the responses I received, it seems that there is a general consensus on a theoretical level to treat others respectfully regardless of the disagreement.

There is probably no topic that can put our theoretical agreement to the test more than the above statement. (Maybe I should have started with the toilet paper conflict.) Yes, I realize I am stepping into deep waters here, and again acknowledge that I am not an authority but just a fellow traveler. This will be an opportunity for us to test our ability to discuss a difficult topic, look at various points of view and interact without attacking the ones with whom we disagree. I plan to just take baby steps and slowly walk through this topic.

Going back to a previous post, I need to ask this question of each of us. What story did you tell yourself when you read those three words? For good or bad, we do use a filter based on our experiences and education to interpret everything. It is my guess that for most of us, we didn’t just dwell on those words.

It is very rare in today’s world to run into someone who will say that black lives don’t matter. It is my contention that the words themselves don’t cause such varied and conflicting responses, but the filter we are using.

[Quick detour] To be fair, I do need to acknowledge that as recent as the 60’s there are plenty of examples especially in the South in which it is obvious both by the actions and rhetoric, that black lives did not matter to many. [End of detour]

Instead of just thinking of the words “black lives matter,” we choose sides based on beliefs and opinions that we hold. Maybe we thought about an organization that has founders who have claimed to be trained Marxists or maybe we thought about a group of people who claim to be marginalized. Maybe we thought about those who have rioted or looted or maybe we have thought about those who because of the perceived pain of themselves or others have chosen to protest peacefully. Maybe we thought of people who we perceive always play the race card or the victim card. Maybe we thought of people who think that all policemen are racists or bigots. Or maybe we thought of someone we know who has expressed their pain to us.

Hopefully, we can all see that what we thought of when we read those words has a massive effect on how we respond.

I said I would just be taking baby steps in discussing this topic–so that is all for this week. I hope that asking ourselves that question will enable us to acknowledge that not everyone saying those words, means the same thing. And knowing that, by God’s grace maybe we can respond with more grace.

The Blame Game

You make me so mad! This is a phrase most of us have used at one time or another but this is, of course, making someone else responsible for my feelings. Sure, what someone else does can affect us, but what we do with it is on us.

I am not a psychological authority, and I know that there isn’t consensus in the mental health world as to how all of this fits together, but I read something which made sense to me so I will share it here.

The authors of Crucial Conversations claim that the more accurate statement would be, “I make myself so mad”. They contend that in most conversations we do fine, but in those crucial conversations we often do our worst. (Crucial Conversations Video Link)

The authors divide up our crucial conversations into four basic parts.

1) The initiating event takes place–something someone does or says to me–maybe even on social media.

2) In an instant, I interpret what happened and tell myself a story about it.

3) I have feelings based on that story.

4) I act based upon those feelings.

A Missing Step! I have heard for years that I need to take responsibility for my own feelings but step two in the above list was something I don’t recall hearing.

Bear with me for this real life simple example. I went to the market, grabbed what I needed and went to check out. The cashier told me she was closed so I went to a different register. While waiting in line, I noticed that same cashier continued to help additional shoppers and did not close.

What story am I going to tell myself? Even without any baggage it would be easy to tell myself a story that would cause me to be upset or resentful.

Like it or not, we all have baggage. It typically doesn’t take more than a couple of bad experiences in a town to now believe that this is how they are–after all it is our experience. Now all of our thoughts about that town go through the same filter.

Let’s talk about a very practical example of how we tell ourselves stories about others. If someone says either “Black Lives Matter” or “All lives Matter”, what do you already “know” about that person. The truth is that people saying those words come from many different places in life with many of their own life experiences. Is my mission in life to set them straight or to give them a piece of my mind (careful–we don’t want to run short:))?

How much more value would I contribute to my world if instead of blasting them for their “incorrect” belief, I would actually listen to them and potentially care more for them because I now know them on a more personal level?

When we have taken sides on an issues, the above thoughts can be as foreign as Иностранных–that is pretty foreign–but being open to the fact that I might not have all of the information allows me to grow.

Back to being refused service in the market–the missing detail is that between the time when she told me she was closed and when she started helping others, her supervisor told her to stay open.

The stories we tell ourselves can be true, false, or a combination of the two.

It has been very revealing to me to ask myself when I have responded poorly, “what story did I tell myself?”. Often, I realize that my story includes the motive of the other person. Is it possible I am wrong? Yes, more times than I would like to admit.

Digital Epitaph–I think a valuable question for each of us to ask is, “if someone were to summarize my life based on my social media posts, how would they describe me?”

Angry? Patient? Caring? Obnoxious? Always ready for a fight? Loving? You never need to wonder what he’s thinking? Teachable?…

What memory are you leaving?

Ad Hominem

What does a personal attack look like?

I used the term “Ad hominem” just to prove that I really learned something in school. I did enjoy my logic class at Cerritos college and, of course, a big part of that class was a discussion of “logical fallacies”. Though we use many logical fallacies without even thinking about it, the Ad hominem–attacking a person, instead of their argument is extremely prevalent. There are a ton of different ways this can be done–I will highlight some below. Is it possible that we resort to personal attacks because either our argument or our ability to articulate that argument is weaker than we would like?

Not qualified–this might be like me saying someone doesn’t have the life experience or education to be able to express an opinion on a subject. I cannot think of how many times at work, the laborer comes up with a solution that the professional engineers never thought of–nothing personal, Brad:).

Social Undermining-this is an attempt to cast a negative light on the speaker by attacking their actions, efforts or characteristics. Some examples might be like saying–“you obviously have too much time…”, “get a life…”, “I can’t believe you think…” Mocking would be another example–laughing at something where humor is not intended.

Guilt by Association–“Of course, that is what you think, you’re a liberal (conservative)”, “there you go, drinking the Kool-Aid…”

Questioning or attacking the motive–This is often speaking for someone else. Maybe saying something like “you just want…” or “you don’t care about…”

Labeling–this can be classifying a person into a category to discredit them–racist, homophobe, etc. They become an object to us, instead of a person.

Damaged Filter–Giving our take of someone else before their thoughts are heard. This can involve some of the other personal attacks–like saying “look at this article written by a conservative/liberal…” Like it or not, that will have an effect on how we view the article.

Black & White Thinking–this assumes that there are only two choices and they are mutually exclusive. While sometimes this may be true, it is often not the case. Saying something like “you either vote for my candidate or you hate our country” would be an example of this.

Name Calling–this is often done directly like saying–“you obviously are a sheep” or it can be veiled like saying “how can you be so stupid”. In either case it is de-humanizing, just like labeling which allows us to treat that person now as an object, instead of as a person with value.

What is most important to you? If I would ask myself that in the heat of the moment, how much hurt could I avoid. Is winning my argument that important? How does that compare to my desire to care for others? There are so many hurting people…I don’t want to create more.

Next week I get to blame you for my actions, after all, you make me so mad…

Attack

Why do I attack you?

These are some “reasons” that I came up with as to why we change from defending an idea to attacking a person.

It’s easier—much less effort is required and if we have practiced it enough, it has become a habit—which means we do it without even thinking about it. By the way, an excellent book of the science behind habits is The Power Of Habit by Charles Duhigg (video by this same author). I was surprised to learn that you don’t even need memory to create a habit. But I digress…

We just know they are wrong—There are times when I am convinced that the person with whom I am speaking is just plain wrong but maybe I don’t know how to articulate my position or haven’t done the research to support my beliefs.

We are frustrated that they don’t see something that is so obvious to us—it seems strange to us that someone else living in this same world could come up with such a different conclusion. But the truth is, we don’t live in the same world. Each of us have our own world of experiences and then our analysis of those experiences has the potential to further separate our beliefs.

We think that our intelligence or life experiences are superior. How easy it is to think that my experiences are more valid than those of someone else. If I was raised in a certain type of environment, does that make me an authority on everyone raised in that kind of environment? I have been reminded recently that no one person can truly speak for all persons of a “group” unless authorized by that group to do so.

We feel threated (though we might not admit it) that our world view might not be totally correct. What? I might be wrong? Unthinkable!

We feel shamed—this is a very hard emotion to deal with in a mature manner. I recall within the last year when I felt shamed by what someone did and I did not handle it well. This can easily happen when we put our “shoulds” on someone else.

We felt attacked—this can be real or perception driven. Regardless, our body functions just like it would if we were in real danger—fight or flight.

It feels good—to tell someone off. How much of social media rants are just to make us feel better, like we really did something of value.

I no longer need to treat them as human—truthfully, this could be a reason we do it, but regardless, it is a consequence of an attack whether it be name-calling or attacking in some other way. Sure we could talk about how the dehumanization of groups of people has resulted in mass genocide, but I think it is of much more immediate value to recognize we do the same thing when we attack a person instead of the idea.

Love? Are you Crazy?

It seems that much of the “discussions” on social media are attempts to show one’s superior knowledge and use a sledge hammer to beat that “wisdom” into the head of someone who lacks it.

A great quote says If I have all knowledge (which I don’t) but don’t have love, that knowledge is of no value. That “having love” is not referring to relationships with whom we are on the same page. As Jesus said, what credit do you get for loving those you love you—even those who don’t believe in God do that. Would it be a fair test to ask ourselves, when we feel we need to make a post which will correct someone in their erroneous beliefs, will that person feel loved after they had read my post?

I know, there will be people reading this post who will think I am crazy and that it is impossible to practice this in the real world. My response to that is that we (yes that includes me) are often too lazy to be kind and we do what is easy instead. If you don’t think it is possible to be kind, in the real world, in certain situations, feel free to give me an example and I am willing to give it a try.

Money back Guarantee

By the way, you have my commitment, and $100 guarantee, that I will not attack anyone on social media—I will reserve that for in person contacts😊. That doesn’t mean that I won’t disagree, but I will attempt to do that with kindness—knowing that people are more important than any opinion I may have.

If you have other “reasons” for which we fall into the trap of personal attacks, I welcome your input.

Last thought—I think too often, and boy can I be guilty of this, the more we agree, the more we feel like the person is a “friend”, but the more we disagree, the more we feel like that person is an “enemy”.

I don’t want my lack of embracing your beliefs to prevent me from embracing you as a person.

“Say What?”

Misunderstandings

Alan Greenspan

“ I know you think you understand what you thought I said but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant”

A summary of my first post is the premise that there is never a good reason to attack the person with whom we are communicating, regardless of how different our points of view are. While most people agree with that statement on the surface, why is that we fall into the trap of personal attacks? There are actually a lot of different “reasons”, but before we go there (in another post), I have noticed that misunderstandings can be a big roadblock to communication. Though misunderstandings are not unavoidable, we can take some steps to reduce them and to deal with them appropriately.

I was surprised in writing this blog and having someone else look at it, how often the phrase came up–“they will think you are saying…” or “it sounds like you mean…”

That's their problem

So who is responsible for the misunderstanding? As communication starts with “co”, the responsibility is often shared. Even in my first blog post, I was misunderstood–that sure feels more comfortable than saying–I failed to communicate with sufficient clarity, which is the truth. So the misunderstanding can be the sender, the receiver and often both–because we never hear or read anything with a clear slate but we have built-in filters (past experience, beliefs, bias, etc.) which affect what we receive.

Now let’s complicate it even more. Written messages like in social media do not include the tone, facial expressions and other non-verbal feedback which is a major part of communication. We have all seen or experienced times when someone’s post was viewed as serious when it was sarcastic, or viewed as patronizing when it was an attempt at caring.

Let’s take a detour here and talk about the difference between being kind and being nice–Steve’s perspective.

Being nice is like walking on eggshells, focusing on not saying anything that a person may not want to hear. This is based on fear and I think you get the point that I’m not a big fan.

Being kind, instead, is saying what needs to be said in a respectful manner even though it may be hard for the hearer to receive. It is based on caring about the person who is receiving my message.

Unfortunately, many people, like a previous employer I had, think that you can only be nice–not confronting wrongs, or you can attack the person for what they have done or not done. He once told me, people think I’m an “a-hole”–but I don’t care–I just call it like I see it. The truth is, if you don’t act like one, most people won’t think you are one. The other choice besides those two extremes is to be kind.

You can quote me–“Steve said not to be nice”–as long as you add, “but always to be kind.”

Hey, do you want to fight?

Okay, we get to the point where we realize there is a misunderstanding–what do we do? A common practice is to make fun of the other person–blaming them for not understanding–as, obviously, what we said was so clear anyone could understand what we meant:). Maybe we put a laughing face by their post or maybe we ridicule the person by acting like they are from another planet–how did you come up with that?

From a pragmatic standpoint, we have all seen that such a response is always counter productive. However, if our true intent is to communicate, when we observe the misunderstanding, if we seek to clarify, by rewording (repeating is usually not helpful), the doorway stays open for dialogue, and the relationship is not harmed.

Next week let’s dialogue about “reasons” we switch from addressing a topic to attacking a person. Your input is welcome.

“Can we all just get along?”

We Agree!

The world of social media is such a blessing but it can be just the opposite. If you are so inclined, please walk with me as we discuss social media communication. I will attempt to be a good listener and hopefully I will say something you might find helpful. After all, they say even a broken clock is right twice a day.

While the quantity of components included in communication vary depending on who you are reading, I am addressing the process referred to as “encoding”–how I take my thoughts and put them into a message for others to read.

I do have my own beliefs and feelings about the current discussions including such polarizing topics as Black Lives Matter, Covid-19, and the governmental responses to it. But as social media is not lacking for more opinions, I will reserve that for now. Amidst all of the controversy, it seems that there is consensus about one thing. There are many messages that are communicated in a hurtful way.

We can't agree about everything!

It has been said that if two people agree about everything, one of them isn’t necessary. So if you think you have found someone with whom you agree about everything, ask them if they agree about who should pull the trigger:)

Unfortunately, we have all seen posts that would be a perfect fit to replace the text in this picture.

Disagreeing isn't the problem!

I know some people hate conflict and their blood pressure goes up when they hear people discuss the varying points of view. But it is healthy for us to disagree–if we actually listen to the person with whom we are not in accord. Studies have shown that increasing the number of participants in searching for a solution increases the likelihood to come up with the best one.

In our current discussions, if I am convinced that I have a corner on “the truth”, I am closed to learning anything new which takes the “co” out of communication.

There is an identity crisis

I have noticed that there is what I am calling an identity crisis in social media. Just like a baby who is crying for the pain caused by them pulling their own hair, many of us have not distinguished our thoughts, opinions, and feeling from ourselves. So when someone disagrees with with our thoughts, opinions, or feelings–we feel attacked and then the fight is on.

I would encourage us to remember that our thoughts, opinions, and feelings are not us and they are not static. They are always changing–which is a part of the growing and maturing process. Let’s not hold on to those emotions and beliefs so tightly that they become more important than our relationships.

The Story Behind this URL

Notinittowinit.com (Not in it to win it). Now those of you who know me best are aware that there are few people you know who love competition more than me. Even at 64, I still jump and dive when playing volleyball. I was playing with some friends at work last year–and, of course, was the oldest player. A couple of the guys ran into each other on my team, and they were asked if they had gotten hurt. I kindly reminded them, if they get hurt, they can heal. But they will never get back the point they lost. The wife of one of those players corrected me, saying–“Look, you’ve already lived your life…”

I was listening to a talk by Andy Stanley recently–the title of which was “We’re not in it to win it”. Regardless if you agree with his conclusions or not, it hit me between the eyes that most of life we view as a competition. “How does my car/house etc. compare with someone else?” “My student/dad etc. is better than yours.” Applying that to our current context–because of my superior knowledge or experience, etc. my thought, opinion, or feeling is better than yours and I will do whatever I can to prove you wrong.

Let's Change our Focus

It certainly seems to me that Jesus had a different focus. Who would have more truth behind Him if He were to say–“My dad is better than yours”, or “You ought to see my house!”. While it is true that he challenged us to seek the truth and believe certain things, it appears to me that his focus was on following and loving–which are inextricably related. As Jesus said, the main way people will know you follow me is by the way you demonstrate love towards others (Steve’s paraphrase).

How do the people who don’t look like us or believe like us experience us? Do they feel that love or do we use our “knowledge” as a weapon to beat them into submission? There is a better way.

Though it isn’t a perfect fit, I think that song by B.J. Thomas from way back in 1979 can be a great reminder–“Using Things and Loving People”.

My prayer is that these thoughts would encourage each of us to re-focus on what is truly important.

I plan to post some additional thoughts each weekend.