Give your tears to me

Uffda.

I’m down to the last, most difficult, and probably the most important chapter of the whole set of SONG.

I want to get it done today because I’ve got a weekend of work coming up and am flat running out of time.

SO.

Onward, b.

I know, but I honestly don’t know how I’m going to be able to do it.

By beginning says Sass.

Needs must says Alia.

Don’t be an idiot, just get it done says Aine.

Take a deep breath says Caileen.

Here, I will help you says Sidhelagh.

And I smile.

Help me, yes … but I still have to be able to see what I’m doing. That’s not an easy thing to do through tears.

Give your tears to me says the Mother.

Okay, maybe I can do this after all.

Pay your bills first says Mamm.

COPPER INTO THE SEA: Danann and Sidhelagh of SONG

*laughing because they're laughing*

The above is one of my earliest sketches; there are very few of this couple (or of any of the Characters, now that I think of it ... hmmm ...). 

Danann and Sidhelagh are the two 'first' Characters of SONG - Danann is the grandson of Mamm of Dunnottar and Sidhelagh is his wife.

The two of them are exactly the same age; having been born at the same in the same place of two different lineages, they are what in the books we refer to as 'Spirit Twins'. Inseparable from birth and bound for all time by one of those mysterious Sidhe things that eternally link two individuals, they marry as soon as they're old enough.

The four daughters they produce are Alianora, Sass, Caileen, and Aine - the Sisters of Dunnottar whose Stories we tell through the generations as they unfold.

Danann grows to be a good six and a half feet tall; Sidhelagh doesn't.

Even so they are well-matched.

The mystery of who Danann's father is and the identity of both of Sidhelagh's parents is never quite fully solved, although as the books progress we learn a bit more here and there.

They are on my mind at the moment because I'm finishing up the rewrite of They Are My Song, the first of this series of books.

I'm procrastinating is what I'm doing.

I've left the hardest part of this project until the end because I don't want to have to do it.

Knowing full well that I must and therefore I will, I still put it off as long as I can.

Because this couple dies.

In battle.

Writing it the first time shocked me half to death. I had no idea they were going to DIE when I started this whole thing, else I might not have started it.

But they do.

And I have to write it all over again.

The 'copper into the sea' title comes from the colors of their eyes. Danann's are copper while Sidhelagh's vary as much as the colors of the sea do. From dark dark green through the pale but brilliant blue of sun dancing off a wavelet, Sidhelagh's eyes mirror her emotions.

When I finish with this rewrite all of the books of SONG are going to get re-released with their updates and revisions and all that.

A part of finishing this is getting more and better sketches of all of our Characters done, including Danann and Sidhelagh.

Meanwhile, the one up top will have to get us through.

2nd Amendment

*sigh*

Once again, for those who are slow on the uptake.


The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Period.

It's written in English, grammatically proper, spelled correctly, and doesn't even use any words that are unclear in definition.

So what part of that one relatively short little sentence do people not understand?

The federal government does not have the authority to regulate, legislate, or any other kind of '-ate' anything to do with the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

The Constitution of the United States of America and the attached Bill of Rights (first ten amendments for those who might not know) delegates and restricts the powers of the branches of our federal government and it addresses those of the states and the People.

Here's a Legal Link to some background, going back to the Federalist Papers and the ratification of the Constitution itself.

Here's a bit of what you'll find:

[note:  it's a bit like reading Shakespeare - you have to read it three times. Once just to get used to the language; once to get the general gist of it; and finally to understand. Be patient with yourself and take your time - it's worth it, trust me.]

The Federalist Papers

Alexander Hamilton in Federalist, No. 29, did not view the right to keep arms as being confined to active militia members:

What plan for the regulation of the militia may be pursued by the national government is impossible to be foreseen...The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution... Little more can reasonably be aimed at with the respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed and equipped ; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.

James Madison in Federalist No. 46 wrote:

Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments,to which the people are attached, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it.

Here, like Story, Madison is expressing the idea that additional advantages accrue to the people when the citizens' right to arms is enhanced by having an organized and properly directed militia.

The Federalist Papers Continued – "The Original Right of Self-Defense"

The Founders realized insurrections may occur from time to time and it is the militia's duty to suppress them. They also realized that however remote the possibility of usurpation was, the people with their arms, had the right to restore their republican form of government by force, if necessary, as an extreme last resort.

"The original right of self-defense" is not a modern-day concoction. We now examine Hamilton's Federalist No. 28. Hamilton begins:

That there may happen cases in which the national government may be necessitated to resort to force cannot be denied. Our own experience has corroborated the lessons taught by the examples of other nations; that emergencies of this sort will sometimes exist in all societies, however constituted; that seditions and insurrections are, unhappily, maladies as inseparable from the body politic as tumors and eruptions from the natural body; that the idea of governing at all times by the simple force of law (which we have been told is the only admissible principle of republican government) has no place but in the reveries of these political doctors whose sagacity disdains the admonitions of experimental instruction.

Hamilton explains that the national government may occasionally need to quell insurrections and it is certainly justified in doing so.

Hamilton continues:

If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.

Hamilton clearly states there exists a right of self-defense against a tyrannical government, and it includes the people with their own arms and adds:

[T]he people, without exaggeration, may be said to be entirely the masters of their own fate. Power being almost always the rival of power, the general government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments, and these will have the same disposition towards the general government. The people by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress. How wise will it be in them by cherishing the union to preserve to themselves an advantage which can never be too highly prized!

Thus the militia is the ultimate check against a state or the national government. That is why the founders guaranteed the right to the people as opposed to only active militia members or a state's militia. But of course, via the militia clause, the Second Amendment acknowledges, as well, the right of a state to maintain a militia. (For more on militia see: http://guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html.)

Hamilton concludes, telling us the above scenario is extremely unlikely to occur:

When will the time arrive that the federal government can raise and maintain an army capable of erecting a despotism over the great body of the people of an immense empire, who are in a situation, through the medium of their State governments, to take measures for their own defense, with all the celerity, regularity, and system of independent nations? The apprehension may be considered as a disease, for which there can be found no cure in the resources of argument and reasoning.

Again, it is the recurring theme of the people's right to keep and bear arms as individuals, enhanced by a militia system, that (in part) provides for the "security of a free state".

See, THIS is what our education system seems to have been neglecting for a very long time. EVERY American citizen should know this stuff. It would avoid a lot of conflict if we all knew what the heck we were talking about.

Gun Control

Actually, in my know-nothing humble opinion, gun control is in the hands of the one holding the gun.

But that's just me.

The United States of America's Constitution, 2nd Amendment, guarantees American citizens the right to bear arms. This right cannot be infringed by the federal government, period.

That's a given.

However, local, county, and state regulations are definitely permitted. Many places have many different levels of gun rules on their books.

We are a big nation.

As citizens we have the right to choose where we will live.

Being as there are so many options open to us, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if you oppose gun control you live where there isn't any. If you support it you live where regulations are strict.

Let's see how things stack up.

On the one hand you've got folks saying that more gun control is safer.
On the other hand you've got folks saying that less gun control is safer.

To me, it doesn't really appear that gun control actually has a whole lot of impact one way or the other, at least not without more to go on than the below numbers.

Which means that there are other factors at play, factors that carry more weight than the level of gun control.

At the moment I've got other things to do than look up all of those possible factors.

Here are some links for your perusing pleasure: 

IF YOU WANT STRICT CONTROL

MOST LENIENT CONTROL

Those are the top ten in each category of 'most' or 'least' ... the other thirty states fall somewhere in between.  

HERE is a link to statistics for crimes by state, going WAY back, for you to wend your way through if you want.

HERE is a bit of a better breakdown 

Violent Crime Rate By State

Rank U.S. State Rate per 100K population
1 Alaska 635.8
2 Nevada 635.6
3 Tennessee 608.4
4 New Mexico 597.4
5 Florida 540.5
6 Louisiana 514.7
7 South Carolina 497.7
8 Delaware 489.1
9 Arkansas 480.1
10 Maryland 446.1
11 Missouri 442.9
12 Alabama 427.4
13 Michigan 427.3
14 Oklahoma 406.0
15 Texas 405.9
16 Arizona 399.9
17 California 396.1
18 Massachussetts 391.4
19 New York 381.8
20 Georgia 377.3
21 Illinois 370.0
22 Indiana 365.3
23 Kansas 348.6
24 North Carolina 329.5
25 South Dakota 326.5
26 Montana 323.7
27 Pennsylvania 314.1
28 Colorado 309.1
29 West Virginia 302.0
30 Wisconsin 290.3
31 Washington 285.2
32 Ohio 284.9
33 Nebraska 280.4
34 Mississippi 278.5
35 Iowa 273.5
36 North Dakota 265.1
37 New Jersey 261.2
38 Hawaii 259.2
39 Connecticut 236.9
40 Oregon 232.3
41 Minnesota 229.1
42 Rhode Island 219.2
43 Utah 215.6
44 Idaho 212.2
45 Kentucky 211.6
46 Virginia 196.2
47 New Hampshire 196.1
48 Wyoming 195.5
49 Maine 127.8
50 Vermont 99.3

INFJ Battles Just In Case Anyone In The Other 98% Might Care

If you're INFJ I don't have to explain much of anything.

Since we are a decided minority, rare as hens' teeth, the other 98.9% (or so) MIGHT (doubtful, but maybe ...) be interested in knowing what sorts of things our little group has to contend with that they don't.

Just last night I got hit with a deluge, unexpected, and I reckon I'm not the only one in the whole wide world to have felt it (we're a small percentage but we're still many).

It was that man in Vegas kicking loose with some seriously bad energy, and the initial confusion, fear, pain, and anger first of the tens of thousands of our folk he took aim at and then of most of the rest of us as we learned about the attack.

That much energy whomping into the air can and does and will have an effect on INFJ, whether we know its origin or not.

In a sense, we could be compared to plants - take the carbon dioxide out of the air, process it, and send it back out as oxygen. The difference is that we ourselves have absolutely NO use for what comes into us from out of the air, and it's a painful and frequently traumatic process, not to mention exhausting. We have zero control over what's out there that might 'invade' us at any given time. We are rarely the originators of what has to filter through us, either.

But it is what it is, as my girls would say.

You know what's the hardest for us to process, at least what's hardest for me?

Injustice.

War itself is bad enough, and difficult, but ... warriors are warriors; they know what they're getting into and they know how to do what they do. It's their job.

Remember Desert Storm back in the day?

That affected me - but it was what happened shortly after that time that put me face down on the floor, not having a clue what on Earth had laid me out. I knew it was something, so I went looking. I tended to avoid the news at the time, as it was mostly just disturbing to my peace of mind, but I had to find out, if I could (sometimes you just can't and you never do know what it might have been) what had happened. Turns out it was the slaughter of innocents. Injustice - absolute hate-filled injustice.

Last night, because I did have the news on and knew it was Vegas, I at least had a heads up. So I was prepared for the proverbial sledgehammer to hit. It still knocked me for a loop but I diverted a lot of what was flowing through me onto something else, a picayune irritation that I could still justifiably 'rant' about, something my on-coming morning staff could at least have a hope of 'understanding'. There's no way in this world in which we live in that I could have even come close to expressing exactly what was happening to me. I reckon it might be construed as 'over-reacting' to something that's actually nothing I'd normally even notice, but ... I used a ridiculous little thing to divert/deflect from the very-much-larger issue. When I got home to some alone-time is when I could at last 'send it on through' so to speak, when the physical and emotional ramifications wouldn't impact anybody else. There's absolutely NO point in even trying to 'explain' what cannot be comprehended ... all it does is confuse people.

As our world seems to be constantly in conflict, with injustice flaunting its power every which way from Tuesday these days, I think a lot of people sort of become immune to the whole ordeal except when something of great magnitude leaps onto the radar.

INFJ has no immunity to such things, ever.

So how do we cope?

As best we can.

Fortunately we are the chameleons of the personality-type world and early on instinctively adopt whatever self-preservation tools best suit the situation. Eventually, as soon as we can get some alone-time, those emotional chickens come home to roost and we have to sort it all out - but in the meantime you might never know what's going on inside of us.

We'll use things like putting up invisible shields, if we can. We'll cognitively separate ourselves from whatever it is, if we can. We'll find a way to enforce the alone time we need for healing and for 're-charging' our shields so we can keep on keeping on. We'll, if we're both lucky and determined, learn to 'flip' the crap we cannot avoid as fast as we can and send it back out as something positive, or at least neutral.

Unless you've 'been there' you won't understand us. We don't expect true understanding but deeply appreciate respect for what it takes just to be us in a world that can't understand and mostly doesn't want to. We are expected to 'conform' so it really is a fortunate thing that we have that capability. We can generally at least adapt to folk who will not even try to recognize what we might be up against at any given time.

Do we whine about how hard our lives are to live?

Not usually.

There's no point.

If you're INFJ you already know.

If you're not, you never will know.

So we just cope as best we can and keep on keeping on as best we can.

We are instinctive people readers but even people who know us still lie to us ALL THE TIME. Is it uncomfortable to know that someone's lying to you? Of course it is. We rarely call anybody on it, but you can bet that we know. Why don't we call it out when it happens? Because we're also the ultimate in conflict-avoidance. If you 'get it' that it's damned uncomfortable to be lied to and know it, you can maybe guess how horrible it would be for us to be constantly calling out every lie. My opinion is that it's an act of grace to let almost all of the lies slide - the other person has reasons for lying (which we also pick up on, by the way) so not only would we be intensely uncomfortable if we made an issue of every lie we're told, we'd also be making the other person almost as uncomfortable. Which, just to complicate things, totally goes against our rules of personal integrity. We aren't in the business of hurting others. People lying to us or about us is hardly ever a battle we'll choose to pursue. It irks us to no end but most of the time it's not a worthy battle.

It's when others are affected that we're more likely to step up and speak out, which brings us right back to that injustice issue.

If/when we take a stand on something it's going to be something that's worth it. When we act, it's almost always instinctively. We kind of just know stuff ... makes things awkward at times if we're expected to explain ourselves, our motivations, our criteria for doing what we do (or not) ... what are we supposed to say? My gut says so? The fact that our guts are practically always dead on isn't always immediately apparent based on what's available to the five traditional senses, which too frequently means we keep our mouths shut when we ought to be opening them.

And so be it.

When I don't trust somebody there's a reason for it. I might not be able to articulate it and you might not be able to see it, but the reason is most assuredly there, and valid. Likewise when I DO trust somebody that others look at sideways.

Yet another battle - the people thing.

INFJ gets 'peopled out' because people are energy suckers, like vampires. Believe me, most of the energy we get stuck taking in (against our will) is NOT an addition to our own reserves. Inevitably it costs us more to process than we would gain even if the energy was positive, which it mostly is not, at least not in our terms. You would not believe the expense involved in making small talk or showing an interest in something that somebody else likes but that we think (but would never SAY) is just a waste of time and energy to even discuss let alone actively put any of said time or energy into.

We can and do love being in social settings, because we love people in general. It's just costly for us. When we walk away for a bit of alone time, we're doing it to generate more of what it takes to interact because we want to share that interaction. Because you matter enough to us that we want to be able to afford to spend more time with you. If that means taking a re-charge break, that's what it means. It's kind of like going to the bank or to an ATM when you're going shopping. If you're close to INFJ you'll 'get it' and if INFJ is close to you s/he might make sure you understand. Sometimes it's tempting to have a code to avoid misunderstandings when we have to walk away in the middle of something. INFJs, it might not hurt you to do something like this. You do NOT need an excuse (going to the bathroom, taking a smoke break, checking on something). Just come right out and say, 'I'm going to the bank' if you're among friends. Of course, if they're friends in the first place they no doubt already know - but if you and your friend are among others who do not know, a code of some kind so s/he can let the others know that you're not just bored and being rude by walking away in the middle of a conversation or activity or whatever. 'Excuse me but I'm peopled out' is likely NOT a phrase of choice, however. The implication is that you've had more than enough of their company (which may or may not be the case, but saying so out loud is probably going to be construed as an insult whether you mean it that way or not).

If you're fortunate enough to run across somebody else who can and will spend hours on end discussing things most people have never even thought about, cherish that person. Don't ask me to explain it because first of all I can't and even if I could I wouldn't - but time spent with such persons is like hitting a serious jackpot in terms of energy. Instead of you having to constantly spend your reserves in their presence, you'll find said reserves growing. Weird? Yep. But true. I ain't even kidding you.

Pffft.

Enough already.

The battles of INFJ are infinite in quantity and scope.

All we can do is the best we can do, and hope for enough renewal on a regular enough basis to keep us going. Yes we are a distinct and very tiny minority, percentage wise. So be it. We respect others a heck of a lot more than they even try to respect us, generally speaking. And we're, generally speaking, okay with that. We truly do understand you a heck of a lot more than you understand us, and for that you ought to thank your lucky stars.

One thing more, however.

One battle you do not want to be even remotely close to is the one that happens when INFJ has finally FINALLY had it.

INFJ has a formidable intellect and skills we haven't even touched on in this post, creativity being one of them.

You might not even know you've crossed a line until it's WAY too late.

God Bless America Land That I Love (and part sermon, part science lesson)

God Bless America Land That I Love
Click on the link - it's the music and lyrics but no vocals - YOU do the singing, my friend. And while you're singing, listen with your heart and wrap your mind around the concept of the words.


Last night at this time I was just doing what I do.

Then things changed.

Suddenly it felt as though hatred and anger were everywhere, inescapable. Thankfully I was at work and so HAD to do what I had to do.

A part of me wanted to do nothing more than to shout in the loudest Voice I could manage to find:

"HEY! All you haters out there, you who can't think of a single solitary thing to love or even like or even acknowledge as good about our nation, YOUR nation - yeah YOU!!! ARE YOU HAPPY NOW? Are you pleased with what your hatred and angst have wrought? Are you feeling smug and self-satisfied that your rhetoric has taken root? IS THIS WHAT YOU WANT FOR YOUR NATION? Is it? Well whoopee for you, congratulations and all that."

Followed by a big long string of cuss words that I generally don't use.

When word came that islamic state was claiming 'credit' I shook my head.

No, I'm afraid this one was 'made in America' - not the America I and most of the rest of us know and love but an America of a newer vintage, an America whose darkness is the antithesis of the America whose light has been a beacon of Hope for all this time.

The night wore on.

The numbers climbed.

Video footage emerged.

Grief vied with outrage.

For a time, grief won.

Then outrage kicked in.

Something drove that man.

Something did harm to him.

And he did harm to others.

I can't, and wouldn't if I could, tell anyone else to shut up and sit down no matter how much I sometimes want to. I don't get to choose for anybody else what to think, or to feel, or to believe, or to say, or to do (so long as nobody is harmed, and even then it's not up to me to judge although I'm certainly entitled to my opinion). And I thank God that I live where none of us have the right to choose for anybody else.

Did I pray last night?

Yes.

Did it do any good?

Yes.

Were all of my prayers 'traditional'?

No.

A goodly portion of those prayers weren't anything my preacher-dad would have recognized. They might have made my Quaker ancestors blink, but they'd not have been appalled.

A heads up for you.

From here on in this post I'll be in preacher mode, or lecture mode ... whatever you want to call it.

...

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The same was in the beginning with God.

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.

And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.

People assume, for whatever reason, that 'the Word' means the Bible. The book is filled with words, this is true, but THE WORD is the Holy Trinity, Indivisible and Immutable.

Now, I'm just a little old lady and not an expert on anything, so nobody listens to me and I'm okay with that. There's a much greater Voice that makes up for my lack of one ;) so I've nothing to fret about.

The thing is that science does acknowledge that our world with all its ever-changing forms is solidly based on a premise of three. Triangles comprise the Spiral, phi, 1.618..., the Golden Mean, Perfect Balance, which governs the (can't create it, can't destroy it) energy that comprises everything in our world. Most of the time science goes with body and mind, but cannot and will not deny the third part which is Spirit. Even though it is not understood, the significance of that third part is as much a part of the equation as body and mind. What, for example, enables that 'spooky action at a distance' that Einstein wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole? Now we call it 'entanglement'. It's the effect of acknowledgement and engagement; I think of it as 'the power of prayer'.

That having been said, I think it is a gift to humankind to be able to 'personify' concepts so as to wrap our heads around them in a way that's meaningful to us. Does that in any way change the science of anything? No. Does it in any way change the nature of God? No. Our search for understanding is requisite only to us. That it IS requisite to us is pretty much a given as it's been a part of humankind from the get-go if our most ancient artifacts are any indication.

There's a Mystery both out there and in here, in our own selves, that we may never truly comprehend - we can also never deny it. That is the Mystery of the Spirit as a part of the Holy Trinity. The gift given us is the ability to recognize and acknowledge that third part of the equation. It's intuitive, a part of our human makeup.

Is our world itself a sentient being? I have no idea and neither do you. But that there is something, beyond what we can now comprehend, is that 'given' I was just talking about. Our search is insatiable, has been all along. That alone is a pretty fair indicator that the 'something' we seek to understand is quite very real and quite very much an active participant in our world. Even when we can't 'pin it down' we intuitively sense that it is there.

Whether you 'see' or 'interpret' that force as Energy (governed by phi) or as God is essentially irrelevant. It's the search itself, the acknowledgement that the search is on-going, that provides validity.

The Spirit aspect of the Trinity has as many functions as the other two aspects. One of those functions is to Guide. So when we search for Truth, it behooves us to be in a frame of mind to follow that guidance, no matter what.

If you know me at all you know full well that I don't happen to think that the propensity for humankind to 'personify' in terms of what we're familiar with (family, biological elements, etc.) can possibly be 'right' if we're going with the Father and the Son but not including the Mother as an equal in that triangle. I do understand that the society of the time the current 'interpretation' came to strength was patriarchal. I'm not concerned that the Mother has been in any way changed. We can't do that any more than we can change the Spiral that defines and maintains the balance of our world. It's just a personal irritation for me is all, that our personification process seems to have gotten stuck in the rut of 'male'.

Even so, the personified Son gives us knowledge, and warning:

Mark 3:28-30: "Truly I tell you, all sins and blasphemes will be forgiven for the sons of men. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven, but is guilty of an eternal sin."

Even the patriarchs who put the pages of words together did not leave out that telling bit. Of course they weren't necessarily intending for the Spirit to be presented as female, but the fact remains:  they left it in.

Because the Trinity cannot really be separated, it's maybe a little hard to get a visual. However, the three parts are distinct from one another even though they are one and the same. Yeah, hard to wrap our heads around because it's kind of hard for us to envision discrete and separate entities and one entity that cannot be divided at the same time. We'll 'separate them' here for a moment, for clarity.

It's like there's the Father and the Son taking all the hits we can throw at them, all the insults, all the hatred, all the denial, all the physical and intellectual attacks, and they just stand there and take it, and forgive. And there's the Mother too. A part of the Trinity, and apart from it, same as the Father and the Son. And she's the one you really don't want to mess with. It's not that she is any more unforgiving than the Father and the Son, but (and this might come across as patronizing but it isn't) it's like if you mess with the Mother the wrath of all three of them will descend on you.

Over a century ago a guy by the name of Rudyard Kipling wrote a poem, a line of which is appropriate for our current purposes:

'The female of the species is more deadly than the male.'

We still refer to Mother Nature.

And we all know better than to antagonize Mama Bear by messing with her young.

Instinctively perhaps, we do acknowledge the Mother, even when our 'organized religions' aren't totally on board with it. 

And what, of course you're asking, does any of this have to do with God Bless America?

I'll try to explain what I'm getting at here.

Lots of people mock prayer, and that's okay. They just pray in a different way, and that's okay too. Whether you're invoking a deity or activating entanglement, it's all the same thing. You're using your own energy on behalf of another and that's what counts. God Bless America is a prayer. Thinking good thoughts for another is a prayer. Hoping for a positive outcome is a prayer. Cheering your team to victory is a prayer. Or whatever you want to call it. Refer to it however you want, all of us are praying all the time.

Now, among the words of the book that was assembled from many others, are some that include reference to 'armor'. Interestingly, while the 'armor' pieces are indeed all there, a weapon is also included - 

    

That Sword of Justice and that Dove of Peace are one and the same thing, with Mercy (not pictured) in between them. They are aspects of the Mother as they are aspects of the Trinity. The Son has been identified as the Word - but do not forget that the Trinity is inviolable. What is applied to one applies to all. I find it interesting that the part of the Trinity presented as being armed is the Spirit - the Mother. Everything else is protective, defensive 'equipment'. That sword of the Spirit, however, is a weapon. Intended to be used for defensive purposes, it is nevertheless the only part of this particular equation that's likely to be lethal. And the Mother wields it.

"the belt of truth, the breastplate of righteousness, the shoes of the gospel of peace, the shield of faith, the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God"

*laughing*

I often think that the complex simplicity of quantum physics is a lot easier to 'get' than the complex simplicity of God. Trying to explain is complex. Knowing is simple, once you get the gist of it.

What happened in Vegas last night at about this time did not just happen out of nowhere. The energy that man loosed on tens of thousands of our folk, and on all of the rest of us by association, did not just suddenly spring into being (can't create energy; can't destroy it; it just changes forms). I do not know the story of that man, but I surely felt and recognized that form of energy.

We call it hate and it seeks to divide and conquer.

It is the flip side of the coin that makes up our nation and our world, the opposing darkness constantly battling the light as balance on all levels must be kept. The thing about that darkness is that the stronger it becomes the stronger becomes the reaction to it. Whatever drove that one man to use that energy in such a way ran smack up against the equally (perhaps more) powerful energy of those who stepped up to combat what it wrought. Instinct and/or training kicked in (I have a strong hunch that it's both - I don't think a person trains to protect unless that instinct is already strong in them, and even without training the instinct will take over when need be) and ... people did what needed doing when it needed doing. Last night's attack and the response to it doesn't stand alone. There are countless incidents, large and small, past and present (and doubtless future), that illustrate challenges to and the defense of the balance required and enforced by the concept of phi (for lack of a better term).

Mine own response lies in the opening of this post. Go back up there and read it again if you want to. In between the traditional prayers was a concentrated, specifically directed prayer of a different kind. Whether or not either had any effect I haven't a clue. It was just what I did. The non-traditional prayers were for that loosed energy to 'flip' from bad to good, from hate to love, from dark to light. Energy can and does change forms, and directions for that matter (look up entanglement and particle-wave things). Even putting mine own energy into 'flipping' took some doing - because that wrath was very much a factor.

Yes I know this is getting long.

I don't care.

See, energy itself is just 'there' everywhere. It's inherently both positive and negative and as such is balanced. How we choose to use it at any given time, for good or ill, is variable and that we do indeed have a degree of 'control' over, certainly on a personal level and perhaps on an entanglement (prayer) level as well. I chose, and still do choose, to weigh in on the side of the possibility that entanglement (prayer) is a more powerful force than we give it credit for. Doesn't hurt anything or anyone, and might help.

So yeah.

I pray.

God Bless America Land That I Love

There's More to This

Yeh.

It's dawned on me what has been niggling at the back of my mind for some time now - the differences being expressed by various groups of our people.

On the one had you've got the ones who seem unable to find anything the least bit encouraging about our nation. They can only focus on the negative.

On the other hand are those who would rather focus on the positive.

America is a blend of both wonderful good and detestable bad.

There's no getting around that.

I think the difference I've been picking up on is that the people on the one hand are apparently so wrapped up in hate and vengeance that they refuse to look for any way out of the bad other than seeking to punish anyone and everyone they think might be either guilty or complicit.

The people on the other hand aren't so narrowly focused that they cannot see and address the issues of the bad - with an intent to first identify what's causing the problem so that they can then take steps to minimize/eliminate the roots.

So on the one hand (and my ability to even try to remain un-biased is rapidly diminishing) we've got a bunch of wound-up people spewing really nasty things at and about people who, on the other hand, are trying to calmly go about the business of healing what ails this nation.

I'm pretty sure I don't have to identify which is which.

One thing I have noticed is that EVERY hateful hurtful thing hurled by the folk on one hand at the folk on the other hand is pretty much EXACTLY a mirror of what the folk on the one hand ARE and precisely what the folk on the other hand ARE NOT.

I get the distinct impression that we are all, me included, being forced into making a choice by the folk on the one hand.

Since I have to choose, I choose to remain politically an Independent (as that's in my DNA I suspect and likely cannot be altered) but I've just about come to the conclusion that I'll throw my two cents in with the folk on the other hand.

The gloves are still on, figuratively speaking, but I've untied the strings.