I often feel like the least forgiving place in this world is the place that should be the most. As the saying goes, "the church seems to shoot their wounded."
This saddens me how few people recognize how imperfect we all are, and how all sin is equal in the eyes of God. When will we try to be as forgiving as God.
I know I can't post them all, but if you follow Post Secret, you will be astonished how many of them are about carrying around guilt and shame years - sometimes even decades - after something happened.
...Women who are vegans because egg yolks remind them of their abortions
...Men who feel bad about the way they treated people in high school
...First time sexual experiences that were not what they expected
...Mothers missing their daughters because they don't speak after and event
...Fathers knowing they should never have left their kids
...Business deals that fell through
...Friends mistreating and taking advantage of other friends
Stop carrying the guilt around with you. God forgives - even if we don't.
Be sure to visit Post Secret for more interesting looks into the human condition.
Andy is looking for both of these in his future wife. However, Andy is willing to compromise on #2 if #1 is true.
Also, I have a surprise third post-secret for this post but it is in response to a comment that I feel is looming by Sarah (probably) or Erik (maybe) or Allen (long shot). But don't leave it up to them - as all three might fail. It will only come when expected comment is said.
Be sure to visit Post Secret for more interesting looks into the human condition.
It's a surprisingly cold March evening in a city much further north than Atlanta. Two teenagers find themselves in a cheap, Pontiac Grand Am - that is at least a decade old - after a high school sporting event. She had been there to cheer the team on to victory; he was suppose to take her home afterward. But neither of them really wanted to go home and - since there was no school the next day - they went for a drive. The two had been dating for sometime, and as teenagers often to do, they thought they were in love.
It was one of those drives that as they get older they will have less and less. Drives that really have no purpose - just an excuse for spending more time together until curfew. A drive that always ends too soon, but a drive that lasts forever in the memories reserved for the "good times."
On this particular drive, one thing lead to another on the starless night, and the two made love. It was the kind of love that those older and more experienced wouldn't call great, but it was all that they knew, and it was great for them. And just because the greatness might have been lacking, the mechanics worked the same, and against all odds, one of the million sperm released found its way to its destiny. It was a sperm that would change everything. And the only witness to this unexpected world changing moment was a moose...
Admit it, until you got to the moose part, you thought I was writing about my own experience? But there are no moose in Indiana and this isn't my story. It is the story of Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston - with some creative liberties I am sure.
Bristol Palin is the 17-year old daughter of Sarah Palin - John McCain's running mate. And in a move that caused everyone to rollover in their grave, Bristol Palin is 5-months pregnant, and John McCain knew this and still selected Sarah Palin as his running mate.
My first thought is if you would have told those teens whenever/wherever they were doing it that this event would have national implications, I bet they would think you are crazy. But then I realized what I really should be thinking about is how glad I am the mistakes I made in high school (and beyond) weren't under the national spotlight.
But here is where I am going to make everybody, no matter where you stand on this story, angry. This story both highlights the hypocrisy of Republicans/Christians, as well as the illogic of the Democrats/Secularists.
I am not for politicians, pastors, and leaders stepping down in their roles when they make stupid personal morality decisions. I have been saying so for years. Whether we want to admit it or not, the mindset behind those who think leaders need to be perfect come from those who subconsciously think they are perfect...and that there families are perfect.
But Republicans & Christians a like (not saying they are the same) need to recognize that most of us are hypocrites, but that is ok. That's the point of grace. Life is messy. Families are messier. And we all do stupid things from time to time. The idea that "Sarah Palin can't run her household" or that "Bill Clinton shouldn't have been leading a country" is absolutely ridiculous. Some of the greatest leaders of all time have had huge moral failures in their life, but with out them, this world would be drastically different.
Two Examples (I could list more): The Apostle Peter & Martin Luther King, Jr.
Liberals on the other hand need to stop using this as an example of a woman's and/or family's "right-to-choice." Just because a family chose to keep the baby, does not change the moral question of when life begins, and therefore, the value of not taking that life, one bit.
Those who read this know that I am open to the discussion on when life begins. But the idea that Bristol's situation indicates that we shouldn't defend life is absurd at best, and deplorable at worst.
I will say one more thing that will infuriate everyone even more. Levi & Bristol should not be getting married. A shotgun wedding is taking a bad situation and making it a permanent, worse situation. If the kids are in love and would have gotten married anyways, then fine. But a baby is never a reason to marry. It doesn't make the conception anymore "holy," and it shouldn't make everyone else feel better with the situation.
My sympathies go out to Bristol and Levi. To use a hockey term: who knew two teens slipping one past the goalie would have such large implications on the election of the most powerful man in the world.
On a side note, I have been asked by a few to comment on my feelings about Sarah Palin as VP. I will do so in a blog that will be release on Monday. Enjoy the weekend.
My freshman year of college I took Psychology of Religion. It was one of the greatest classes I ever took. It assigned two books. One was my favorite book of all time, Sheldon Vanauken's A Severe Mercy. The other, a book by Erich Fromm, To Have or To Be.
Fromm's book had an interesting premise. He position was that a century ago we were a "being" culture. 100 years and an industrial revolution later, we are now a "having" culture.
One classic example was how a century ago, when referencing marriages, men would say that they are a husband or that they are married. Now, Fromm says, men have a wife. We went from a state of existence to a state of possession.
Same rings true with children and jobs and hobbies and pretty much everything.
And the problem is much larger than just a semantic one.
When I was in 7th grade I took French. The first verb I learned was être - "to be." The second verb I learned was aller - "to go." The third verb I learned was avoir - "to have."
It was far more important for me to know Je suis Américain2 before I learned J'ai une voiture.3
Why? Because even at the core of language, being and existing is more fundamental to our human experience than having and owning.
The problem is that in our increasing materialistic world the inverse seems to be true.
Fromm explains the rise in divorce as one of an identity crisis. If marriages are possessions, then like all possessions, when we tire of the marriage we drop it for a new one. As apposed to the idea that if at our core, our existence is tied to that marriage, to drop the marriage would be to drop one's existence - which we would be far less inclined to do.
It truly is a challenge to overcome the social pressure of the "having" culture - and it doesn't get easier with age. I find myself comparing myself to the neighbors and friends far more than I ever did before.
Henry David Thoreau once wrote, "It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly." I think that is a sentiment Fromm would agree with, and one I should pay more attention to.
One of the key sponsors of the conference Allen and I just left was The Kim Komando Show. If you don't know who that is, she does a "technology" talk radio show. It's mildly informative. But her appeal is that she is sexy (sort of...ok not really, but you can tell she thinks she is).
Anyways...so she's hosting this luncheon and sure enough, it is like the sorority house at Arizona State University let out and the babes are just everywhere. It went from a conference of balding, fat, old men in their 50s to American Pie Beta House. She even went as far as putting one girl with very nice breasts (yeah I noticed, leave me alone) in a very nice, but provocative formal dress that had a slit up to the middle of her thigh with her boobs hanging out. As you can imagine, with a conference full of men, it was a huge success (even though her talk was mediocre).
Right as Kim's talk was about to start, Allen mentions to Phil about how there are all these young girls around and maybe Andy will find a date. I, hardly amused, say, "that would never work out", and get back to what I was doing. Allen then says, "I think Andy's gay." So why are you wrapping up your series on Lori Gottlieb's article Marry Him! with this. Simple...
My conclusion after spending nearly two weeks thinking about this is that I think Gottlieb is right and wrong. She is right for woman. You should probably settle. But she is wrong for men. I know. Super sexist huh? But it is true.
I say this for two reasons. It is unfair, but true, that women have more of a deadline facing them in the event that they are looking to have a family. Gottlieb goes into great detail on why this is true.
But my reasoning is not simply biological. It is sociological as well. Woman have an uncanny ability in dealing with disappointment. If marriage isn't what they thought it was, or their husband doesn't turn into John Cusack, they deal with it. I sincerely envy women because of this.
Men on the other hand don't. I am not saying this is good. I am not saying they shouldn't work on it. But the fact is, men are awful at dealing with disappointment in relationships. Hence the reason a majority of divorces are due to men looking for what they feel they missed in getting married. Therefore men should pay particular attention to what they are looking for in a marriage when they are dating and stick to it.
So what does this have to do with ASU sorority girls above? Simple. I am not gay. I am persistent. I am not settling for anything that won't realistically work out in the long run. And while I can never be John Cusack in Say Anything, and the sex probably won't be like Aaron Eckhart and Katie Holmes in Thank You For Smoking, I still have what I am looking for, and not settling for anything less.
So if there are any fun, cute girls, who are cool being in ministry, look forward to having an adventurous sex life, love Jesus, love to travel, and are pretty independent looking to settle, feel free to shoot me an e-mail (extra bonus points if you have blond hair ;) ).
I hate the grocery store. I usually go once a month. The longest time inbetween grocery store trips on record since moving to Georgia is three months. I have to say, and as sexists as this sounds, I look forward to getting married in hopes that I never have to go to the grocery store again. But the grocery store has one positive, and no it isn't the lonely, single girls who think the grocery store is a great place to pick up guys (it isn't). The #1 best thing about the grocery store: I can still push the cart through the store and ride on it like superman. Immature? Absolutely. But this brings me to a profound thought: I am glad I don't have ovaries...
Welcome to part 4 of my series on Marry Him! an article written by Lori Gottlieb in the magazine The Atlantic.
By the time 35th-birthday-brunch celebrations roll around for still-single women, serious, irreversible life issues masquerading as “jokes” creep into public conversation: Well, I don’t feel old, but my eggs sure do!
This is the universally unfair deal breaker that truly proves it is harder to be a woman than a man. Like the picture above, a single man in his 30s has relatively little worry about his singleness. He still has plenty of time to start his family Better yet, not only can he start a family, men seem to get more attractive to woman as they age, so he will be able to find a woman to start a family with. Thus, the man is free to go strolling through the grocery store like superman.
But it isn't quite true for his potential equal half. In contrast, a single woman in her 30s knows full well that her time to create the family she always dreamed of is coming to a quicker end than she would like. In addition to that, the older she gets, the less attractive and interesting she is to members of the opposite sex. It's a lose, lose. She isn't free to approach her 30s as an free wheeling time to go romping through grocery stores. She has a clock and a calendar to worry about.
I am not saying it is fair. In fact, I wish it weren't the case. I truly mean that. If I had any say, there would be some equalizing factor that would allow a woman to act like superwoman, or at least bring men down a peg. But the truth is the truth, and that is what we deal with here. No matter how hard it is to accept.
So where does this leave us. Well, in an unprecedented move, I am splitting Lori Gottlieb's score. She gets a point for the "woman" side, but does not get a point for the male side. This leaves her score 2-2 for woman, and 1-3 for men.
Which brings me back to the question at hand: is Lori Gottlieb right? Should we be much more willing to settle for love? You'll have to tune in tomorrow for my conclusion, but I'll give you a hint: the aforementioned score tally should indicate where I am landing and I may never get a date after this.
I once got into a heated argument in a restaurant in Elat, Israel on whether or not chick flicks were as damaging to relationships as porn. My position: yes! In fact, it is worse because chick flicks are more subtle...
Welcome to part 3 of my series on Marry Him! an article written by Lori Gottlieb in the magazine The Atlantic.
In my formative years, romance was John Cusack and Ione Skye in Say Anything.
What fascinates me is she uses the same person as my favorite writer Chuck Klosterman in Sex, Drugs & Cocoa Puffs
If Cusack and I were competing for the same woman, I could easily accept losing. However, I don't really feel like John and I were "competing" for the girl I'm referring to, inasmuch as her relationship to Cusack was confined to watching him as a two-dimensional projection pretending to be characters who don't actually exist. Page 2, Sex, Drugs & Cocoa Puffs
As a single, 20-something man who has a bit of an ego and no problem asking women out, I completely understand what he is saying. In the marketplace of "dating," I can't compete with Say Anything. I don't compare with Matthew McConaughey in How To Lose A Guy in 10 Days. And if they were real people, really "competing" for the same woman, like Chuck, I wouldn't mind losing to them. But they aren't real! And you know full well the real John and Matt would make awful boyfriends and worse husbands.
And before you respond, "ohh I like those movies, but I don't expect that in real life," all I have to say is bull crap! Chuck is correct again when he writes:
[men and women] will both measure our relationship against the prospect of fake love...The main problem with mass media is that it makes it impossible to fall in love with any acumen of normalcy. Page 3-4, Sex, Drugs, & Cocoa Puffs
A couple of months ago or so I had a conversation at Starbucks with one of my "Stolen" girls. She is smart, funny, attractive, successful, ambitious; simply put: she is amazing. But she said something that floored me. She signed up for internet dating. What!? She even made the statement that, modesty aside, she thought her and [a couple of her friends] were real "catches" but they never get pursued. They don't get asked out.
And while, yes, I will beat up on men for becoming wusses (especially within the church), I have to say they have some justification in being wusses given that the perceived expectation is so high. Which brings me back to Gottlieb's comment on settling...
Based on my observations, in fact, settling will probably make you happier in the long run, since many of those who marry with great expectations become more disillusioned with each passing year.
I have to give her the point for today (if you are keeping track, settling is up on not-settling 2 to 1). I sometimes think I would be happier abandoning my expectations because I have come to realize these expectations are built on fictionist fantasies. It isn't that I don't want to find true love, it just seems that true love is fundamentally different than what we have seen. And just as I don't expect my wife to be Pamela Anderson, I shouldn't have to be John Cusack.
Option #1: You get married. Have a great family. Love your kids. Love your wife. For the most part, your life is full and complete. You are content. But here is the catch: there is little or no passion in your life. It's boring.
Option #2: You have an incredibly passionate life. You are successful with your work, you pursue your interests, and you have wonderful friends. Life is rarely dull, but you never get married.
Which do you choose...
Welcome to part 2 of my series on Marry Him! an article written by Lori Gottlieb in the magazine The Atlantic.
Here's the unfortunate thing about the above scenario. Most of us don't get to pick, it just sort of happens. But if you could pick, which would you? I think Gottlieb would pick option #1 and here's why...
Once you’re married, it’s not about whom you want to go on vacation with; it’s about whom you want to run a household with. Marriage isn’t a passion-fest; it’s more like a partnership formed to run a very small, mundane, and often boring nonprofit business. And I mean this in a good way.
This is about the most disappointing thing I think I read in the article. As Allen said to me, "you're never going to get married now are you?"
But I want my cake and eat it to. I want option #1 and #2. And (for now) I won't settle for less. So I continue to search. But will anybody I find out there be any better than anybody else I have previously dated?
...while Rachel and her supposed soul mate, Ross, finally get together (for the umpteenth time) in the finale of Friends, do we feel confident that she’ll be happier with Ross than she would have been had she settled down with Barry, the [boring] orthodontist, 10 years earlier?
Here's the catch. I think we do think she will be happier with Ross because we project our own theoretical happiness on their relationship. But in reality, if this were the real world, she wouldn't be.
So what is the point to dating and searching for "the one?" I find that all of my past relationships have failed because of one of four reasons (which I will explain more later this week). Is there a point in looking for someone who meets all four? Will it make me any happier than someone with three?
I don't know the answer to it. And even though she probably deserves it, I won't give Gottlieb the point on this one. I just can't. I am 25 and I am going to hold onto the idea that marriage is more than a boring nonprofit. I at least hold onto hope that it is a sexy, exciting nonprofit, and I am going to keep looking for someone to give my tax deductible "donations" to.
On our way to Phoenix, Allen threw an issue of The Atlantic at me and told me to read an article titled Marry Him! by Lori Gottlieb. It's long, but it's well worth the read.
Here's the brief synopsis of the "feminist" writer (picture Carrie Bradshaw): she decide she was getting too old to have a baby the "traditional way" because she couldn't settle on a husband, so she was artificially inseminated. The realization that followed was that she wishes she just would have settled and got married to one of the men she dated in her 30s. That's hardly a romantic position. That's hardly a feminist position. And it is a position I am not sure if I am comfortable with. But I do think the article is profound in many ways...
Of course, we’d be loath to admit it in this day and age, but ask any soul-baring 40-year-old single heterosexual woman what she most longs for in life, and she probably won’t tell you it’s a better career or a smaller waistline or a bigger apartment. Most likely, she’ll say that what she really wants is a husband (and, by extension, a child).
I am not 40. I know, brilliant. I am not a woman. Even more brilliant. I have no clue if this is true or not. But I believe her. It's kind of like that old adage you never see a tombstone with, "I wish I spent more time at the office" written on it. Humans desire the companionship of marriage (and by extension, a family) more than anything else.
It's like in the Bible where Paul talks about staying single unless you can't control the "passion" inside. Most pastor's will teach the passion is in reference to sexual desire. I think those pastor's fundamentally miss what Paul is talking about. It seems more likely he's talking about companionship. He's talking about knowing someone so intimately that the relationship transcends all other relationships. And when you think about it, that's harder to abstain from than sexual pleasure.
So she continues...
Is it better to be alone, or to settle?
[married woman], like me, would rather feel alone in a marriage than actually be alone, because they, like me, realize that marriage ultimately isn’t about cosmic connection...
I found this interesting because of an all female chapel I sat through at APU in 2003. I was the only man in the room of some 1,200 college females (and I still couldn't get a date, but to my credit, I was in an invisible room directing the event). But one of the speakers was doing a Q&A about being single in her 40s and someone asked simply, "aren't you ever lonely?"
Her response was simple and it stuck with me. "Sure I get lonely, but so do my married friends."
I have often reflected on that statement over the years and found solace in the idea that the loneliness that comes with singleness doesn't go away in marriage, it just mutates. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that being single and lonely isn't any different than being married and lonely. At least being single I can travel the world, right?
But Lori's article got me rethinking this whole position. Because 4.5 years later I think she is right. Every single person I know past the age of 23 (except one) would probably admit they desire a full marriage relationship, even when they acknowledge that marriage is hard.
But there are no married people I know who want to leave a marriage because it is lonely (they may want to leave for other reasons, but loneliness is not it). Therefore, there must be something fundamentally different, and secondary, to the loneliness found in marriage when compared to the loneliness found in singleness.
So far, Lori wins 1 point on should I settle or should I not. Lets see what the rest of the week brings, but I promise she won't win them all...
I checked the mail today and got a save the date from Kim in Minneapolis. Kim always draws my mind towards two things: 1.) the fact I wanted to date her my first two years of college, and 2.) the song Champagne High by Sister Hazel - which incidentally is about a guy at a wedding who realized how he missed his chance. So you think you know why this song reminds me of her don't you? You'd be wrong...
You think the song reminds me of her because I somehow think I missed my chance with her? Sorry. Nope. I never asked her on a date because she was in a relationship when I knew her and then she moved. That was pretty much the end of it and I don't feel like I missed anything.
Ok if that isn't it, you think she introduced me to the song? Wrong again. That would be Sara.
But the song does draw my mind to two girls I do feel like I missed my opportunity. I know when I get the save the dates to their weddings I will feel like I am on a "Champagne High."
But the day's irony doesn't end there. I have recently been trying to digitize all the Scrubs episodes for my iPod. Sure enough, the next episode after visiting the mailbox was "My Cold Shower." This is one of my top 5 favorite Scrubs episodes. But it is particularly fitting for the Champagne High moment. Scrubs decided to use Stolen instead of Champagne High in the last scene - probably my favorite scene in all of Scrubs - but I don't blame them, it fits.
That scene is so powerful. That feeling is so raw. Maybe I am the only one. But I understand the emotion in this scene. It's like in Top Gun when Meg Ryan tells Kelly McGillis that there are "hearts broken all over he world tonight...because unless you are a fool that boy is off the market."
Most of you know how devoted I am to work and what I do is pretty much my life. So this next statement should not be taken lightly. If you could tell me, 100% for sure either one of the relationships would work out, I would drop what I do and move there in a second - even if it meant working at McDonald's.
But I have no guarantee either would work out, so I don't do it. Maybe it is because I am not a romantic, and am a realist (*read* cynic). Maybe it's because I am a wuss. Maybe it's because I believe in fate. Maybe it is because I think as soon as I get what I want, I no longer want it. Whatever it is, I stay here in Alpharetta.
But this post isn't about them. It is about singleness. It's about missed opportunity. The realist in me moves on. The realist in me looks for "their qualities" in others. The realist in me knows there will be others, and there will be one that is even better. But then again...here's hoping to Atlanta's job growth and maybe some job will "steal" one of them to Atlanta. Here's hoping. I'll keep a bottle of champagne ready...
Ohh...are some of you not happy I didn't give any clues who these girls were? Ok here are the clues...but you have to be a real Sherlock.
1.) They live somewhere in the "middle" section of this map (not the lightest part, and not the darkest part...the middle part). I'll give you a sub-hint, she isn't in the middle of the Atlantic.
2.) Neither is an ex-girlfriend.
3.) The Scrubs episode after "My Cold Shower" has a song at the very end of the episode that reminds me of one of them.
Good luck! According to census data, that narrows it down to about 12 million women!
Ohh...and if you are still wondering why Champagne High reminds me of Kim. It reminds me of her because we would listen to Sister Hazel on the drive to church Sophomore year - and that was my favorite Sister Hazel song (until Tear by Tear).
Andy's blog aims to be like a Scrubs episode, mixed with a Chuck Klosterman column, centered around the topic of faith. It is open, honest, raw, and a little embarrassing. It is a place to discuss religion, politics, ministry, pop culture, and well, just life - especially focused on the time of life we call our 20s!
Andy is the Executive Producer of The Allen Hunt Show; a progressive (in the literal sense), talk radio show based in Atlanta, GA aimed at bringing faith back into the public discussion. Andy enjoys travel, aviation, web design, politics, friends, and faith. He holds that the secret to a full life is loving God and loving people - which he fails at constantly.
Andy grew up in Fort Wayne, IN. He now lives in Alpharetta, GA.
Andy's Blog
My freshman year of college I took Psychology of Religion. It was one of the greatest classes I ever took. It assigned two books. One was my favorite book of all time, Sheldon Vanauken's 
One of the key sponsors of the conference Allen and I just left was The Kim Komando Show. If you don't know who that is, she does a "technology" talk radio show. It's mildly informative. But her appeal is that she is sexy (sort of...ok not really, but you can tell she thinks she is).
I once got into a heated argument in a restaurant in 
You are given two options:
On our way to Phoenix, Allen threw an issue of The Atlantic at me and told me to read an article titled 
I checked the mail today and got a save the date 
