Christmas Controversies 2.0

A commentary on Christmas controversies.

Advertisements
image
Christmas 2015 Starbucks controversy

During the 2015 Christmas season, I wrote a post titled Christmas Controversies. One of the quarrels I talked about in that post involved the Starbucks company, a disputation known as the Red Cup Controversy. Previous to 2015, Starbucks had red holiday cups decorated with snowflakes, Christmas ornaments or reindeer but in 2015 the company came out with red cups with just its green logo on it. Starbuck’s reason for the change was to embrace “simplicity and quietness.” As with any controversy, the Christian traditionalists saw this as an attempt to diminish the importance of Christmas.

starbucks
2016 Starbucks controversy from Huffington Post

It seems Starbucks is once again surrounded with Christmas controversy in 2016. The Huffington Post has an article called, People Are Raging Mad That Starbucks’ Newest Cups Aren’t Red, that reports Starbucks introduced a new green cup featuring a “mosaic of more than a hundred people drawn in one continuous stroke,” which the company says represents community and unity in a time of political divisiveness. Like last year many people are reacting with anger claiming this year that the holiday cup is threatened. Personally, I like the message that Starbucks is attempting to deliver. If you think about it, the message of “community and unity in a time of political divisiveness” is an appropriate message during Christmas. Thomas S. Monson, an American religious leader, says, “the spirit of Christmas is the spirit of love and of generosity and of goodness. It illuminates the picture window of the soul, and we look out upon the world’s busy life and become more interested in people than in things”.

Now I agree with Mr. Monson. If this is what Christmas is about then Starbuck’s message of unity is very much a Christmas message. It’s important to understand that the kind of love that Mr. Monson is talking about is what the Greeks call agape love. This is the highest form of love. It’s the kind of love that the Christian bible speaks of. It’s the kind of love that Jesus spoke of and modelled. It is selfless love. Agape love is unconditional love; a love that transcends and operates regardless of circumstances. It should not be confused with what the Greeks called philia, which means brotherly love.   Divisiveness can only be overcome with unconditional love so Starbuck’s message of “community and unity” is most certainly a Christmas message.

636167067021768560-copy-of-103a6339
Scene from “Hipster Nativity” set

Crux, an independent Catholic news site, has an article called, Retail ‘Hipster Nativity’ scene stirs controversy. This controversy is most interesting. This Nativity set, called the “Hipster Nativity” set features Joseph sporting a lumberjack beard as well as a man bun while using his iPhone to selfie the moment as the Segway-riding wise men present baby Jesus with amazon.com boxes. Now I can understand this controversy and why traditionalists might be angered by it. Upon first reading about this controversy, my reaction was, “this makes fun of the manger scene, a sacred Christmas symbol”. But then I thought about it. Maybe we North Americans are just too uptight. Maybe we just need to relax and look at things differently. So, that is what I did. Firstly, if you think about it, this nativity scene is a true commentary about our society. We are a technological and materialistic society. Maybe there is a message for our Western civilization. Maybe the “Hipster Nativity” set is a metaphor reminding us that consumerism is the cause of our divisiveness.  Secondly, if God is a loving God (that is what Christians believe, isn’t it?) would God care about such dissension? The Christian scriptures tell us in 1 John 4:8, “whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love”. Think about that. God’s very essence is love. Now we’re not referring to romantic love here. The kind of love that the biblical passage is referring to is agape love which means unconditional love, the kind of love that God has for humanity. The bottom line is, if God is an unconditionally loving God, then God would not be offended by the “Hipster Nativity” set. In fact, God is likely having a good laugh. Maybe we should too.

game
Santa VS Jesus card game from Amazon

Another interesting controversy is reported by Yahoo News called, This Season’s Most Controversial Holiday Card Game: Santa verses Jesus.  This is a “tongue-in-cheek” card game based on the question; who actually rules Christmas? Is it Santa or is it Jesus?  The creators of Santa VS Jesus Card Game, one of the top-selling card games on Amazon.com in the United Kingdom, splits players into two teams which go head-to-head in an attempt to win the most believers. This determines who will rule Christmas. The two sides, Team Santa and Team Jesus undergo Christmas themed challenges (puzzles, riddles, brainteasers) to win over believers. IBT’s article, Is ‘Santa VS Jesus’ Board Game Blasphemous? discusses the controversy. The article quotes Danny Webster, a spokesperson for the Evangelical Alliance UK, who says the game “trivializes Christian belief and equates them both as fictional characters.”  So once again I ask; Are we North Americans just too uptight?  Let’s look at this controversy differently. Maybe this game is really a blessing in disguise. Maybe it forces people to take a good look at Christmas and what the holiday is all about. Is it a holiday about gift giving, which is what Santa is all about, or is it about Jesus, a holiday where Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus? Whether you believe Jesus is the son of God, as Christians do, or that Jesus is one of many ascended masters (spiritually enlightened beings) or just a man who had a message worth paying attention to, it doesn’t matter. The bottom line is Christmas is about the “Spirit of Christmas” which is about love; agape love actually. It is a season to remind us that we humans need to be inclusive, joyful and most importantly unconditionally loving.  In other words, the very message Jesus delivered.

We can get so caught up in the mentality that Christmas is being attacked instead of paying attention to what is important. What is important you ask? I think the Baha’i faith has it figured out. This is a faith that emphasizes the unity of humanity transcending all divisions of race, nation, gender, caste, and social class, while celebrating its diversity. Baha’u’llah, the founder of the Baha’i Faith wrote, “The earth is but one country, and [hu]mankind its citizens.” Abdu’l-Baha’s, his eldest son, enhanced the message with the “unification of [hu]mankind” has now become “the paramount issue and question in the religious and political conditions of the world.” If we look at what has been occurring in our world recently we can clearly see that divisiveness is alive and well. The American presidential election was one of the most divisive in history. Brexit is another example of European divisiveness rather than unity.  I believe the Baha’i faith has the true Christmas message. We are all part of the human family and therefore we are called to unite through agape love. That is what Christmas is about!

2/3 Wildlife to Disappear by 2020. That’s Disturbing!

A commentary on climate change and endangered species.

A few weeks ago, an article on CBC.ca caused me some distress. The article is called; Two-thirds of wildlife will disappear by 2020, WWF. The news report says that according to the WWF conservation group, “worldwide populations of mammals, birds, fish, amphibians and reptiles have plunged by almost 60% since 1970.” It then goes on to say, “the decline is yet another sign that people have become the driving force for change on Earth”. Specifically, according to the article, this change is due to “the rising human population…threatening wildlife by clearing land for farms and cities”. It also lists other causes as “pollution, invasive species, hunting and climate change”. Think about that for a second. The year 2020 is only three years from now and according to the WWF 2/3 or 67%; more than half of the worlds wildlife will be extinct. I grew up seeing many of these animals in the wild or in zoos. To think my grandchildren will only be able to see pictures or videos of these animals is upsetting.

I went on to research this topic further. Another CBC report; A third of birds in North America threatened with extinction, states that “the first State of North America’s Birds report finds that of 1,154 bird species that live in and migrate among Canada, the U.S. and Mexico, 432 are of ‘high concern’ due to low or declining populations, shrinking ranges and threats such as human-caused habitat loss, invasive predators and climate change”. Still another CBC report, Hundreds of animals, plants locally extinct due to climate change, reveals that a “new study found local extinctions (this is when a species can no longer be found at a location where it once lived) related to global warming have occurred in half of species studied”. But the article that alarmed me the most was CBC’s, Giraffes threatened by extinction, put on watch list. Giraffes! Really! The article blamed shrinking living space as the main cause. It says the giraffe situation is worsened by poaching and disease. There seems to be a common theme here, that is, that we humans are the problem. Another common theme is climate change.

Now I understand that climate change is not the sole cause for the loss of wildlife but I’ve read enough articles to come to the conclusion that it is definitely a big part of the problem. We’ve all heard the stories about polar bears. The chief threat to the polar bear is the loss of its sea ice habitat due to global warming. The National Wildlife Federation’s article; Effects on Wildlife and Habitat,  goes into detail of how climate change is affecting wildlife.

There are still people who have “their head in the sand”. There is still debate about the cause of climate change. Is it due to human activities or is it a natural phenomenon? There is no doubt that climate change is happening as the CBC news article, ‘It’s a little scary’: On Lennox Island, no one debates whether climate change is real, says. If you are at all skeptical watch the documentary Chasing Ice. It’s a 2012 documentary film about the efforts of nature photographer James Balog and his Extreme Ice Survey to inform the public to the effects of climate change. My wife and I, on recommendation of my sister, recently watched it on Netflix. If you haven’t seen it, I would strongly encourage you to. In case you haven’t, here it is.

According to Wikipedia, a 2013 paper in Environmental Research Letters (a scientific journal) reviewed 11,944 abstracts of scientific papers matching “global warming” or “global climate change”. They found 4,014 which discussed the cause of recent global warming, and of these 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. To me that says that the vast majority of environmental scientists agree that climate change is due to human influence.

global_warming_0It concerns me when the president-elect in the United States tweeted in November of 2012 “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive” and who promised during his campaign to roll back President Obama’s efforts to combat climate change. According to CNBC, a business news site, “president-elect Donald Trump’s Energy Department transition team sent the agency a memo this week asking for the names of people who have worked on climate change…alarming employees and advisors”. The fear is that Trump is preparing a political enemies list. At least I can proudly say that the Canadian government is working on implementing a national climate change plan (see Manitoba will not sign).

Historically, the European immigrants came to North America with their Eurocentric world view; a view that tended to interpret the world in terms of European values and experiences; a view that saw European values as better than Aboriginal values.  In reality, the aboriginal people had the right values as they had the far superior values. Before European influence, many First Nation communities believed everything was connected. The spirit world was connected to the earthly world; the sea was connected to the land and that the sky was connected to the land. Consequently, humans co-existed with animals and plants, with equal rights to life. In this belief lies commitment to respect all living things. George Blondin, a highly respected Dene Elder who was born in the Northwest Territories, put it this way.

“We are people of the land; we see ourselves as no different than the trees, the caribou, and the raven, except we are more complicated.”

First Nations people were very religious and respectful of the Great Spirit, and other spirits that they believe inhabited the land and animals all around them. These people were taught from a very young age to respect and give thanks to the animals, birds, plants, land and water which gave them everything they needed to stay alive.

Maybe it is time to take a serious look at aboriginal spirituality. These people once had a sacred relationship with Mother Earth and had a reverent respect for the plants and animals.  The reality is if we don’t, we may end up living on a planet with 2/3 less plant and animal species or worse. That would be shameful and a complete lack of respect for our future ancestors. But then again, maybe, just maybe, science can come to the rescue. CBC has a news article called, Reviving extinct species within reach, which quotes Hendrik Poinar, a scientist at McMaster University’s Ancient DNA Centre, who says, “The revival of an extinct species is in reach.” He is referring to a new field of science called ‘de-extinction’.

Clairvoyants. Are they for Real?

A commentary on the power of thoughts.

If you watch America’s Got Talent then you’ve likely heard of the Clairvoyants consisting of a mentalist duo, Thommy Ten and Amelie van Tass. To watch them in action is “mind blowing” and captivating to say the least. It makes you ask, is this for real? Can this person really read minds? If you’ve never seen the Clairvoyants, then have a look at this video.

Now one thing I’ve discovered is no matter what you read, especially on the Internet, there are people out there who feel it is their sole purpose in life to debunk things. That is why conspiracy theories about the Kennedy assassination and the moon landing exist. The Clairvoyants are no different. There are lots of sites on the Internet putting forth explanations on how these two individuals do what they do. One of the common theories is that someone is communicating with the performers feeding them information. They suggest gadgets like a $200 device from a magic supplier called a thumper, are being used. This technology transmits Morse code via vibrations. (see Clairvoyants revealed). In my mind it would take a great deal of concentration while performing on stage to decipher the Morse code. Furthermore, if you watch the video above you will notice that neither Thommy Ten nor Amelie van Tass see the dice toss. So what message was sent? A guess perhaps?

So is this for real? A Clairvoyant is defined as having or exhibiting an ability to perceive events in the future or beyond normal sensory contact. So is beyond normal sensory contact possible? The Telegraph article, Why mind-reading is a science, not a magic trick, certainly suggests we humans have such an ability. It says “electrical activity within the brain means that our thoughts can be read and understood”. Another site, Live Science, is a site which delivers news about the natural and technological world. It’s article, Scientists Say Everyone Can Read Minds, says,

“Empathy allows us to feel the emotions of others, to identify and understand their feelings and motives and see things from their perspective. How we generate empathy remains a subject of intense debate in cognitive science…Some scientists now believe they may have finally discovered its root. We’re all essentially mind readers.”

So I say maybe Amelie van Tass can read minds. Just because we may have been taught that it is not possible doesn’t mean that that is the truth. “Yeah, right” you might say. “There is no way the mind is that powerful”. Check out these videos.

Japanese Dr. Masaru Emoto was one of the first to do experiments like these. Now if our thoughts can do this to water just imagine what our thoughts are doing to our bodies, which are made up of 50 – 65% water. The mind and body are not separate. Our thoughts have remarkable control over our bodies. I can personally attest to that. Many times I have told myself that I couldn’t do something and guess what? I couldn’t do it. Now I find myself wondering what would have happened had I repeatedly told myself that I could do it.

The Huffington Post published an article called; Can Our Brain Waves Affect Our Physical Reality? The article explains things this way.

Not only your brain, but your entire body has an electric field. Anywhere there’s a nerve cell, there’s electricity. It’s just concentrated the greatest around your head because that’s where the bulk of your nerve cells are.

Your thoughts are formed in this electric field. The measurable perturbations and disturbances in the brain’s overall electric field are your actual thoughts racing through your mind. As you read this article, the thoughts you are thinking of, the words your mind is processing, are all electrical impulses that can be measured if you had a few wires hooked up between your head and a machine. So thoughts are energy, the same as everything else.

The article goes on to explain how those thoughts (pieces of energy) influence the quantum field around us. In quantum physics they would say we are entangled with our environment so we can affect that environment and influence the randomness of it, just as it can influence us. Simply put, our thoughts can influence the environment around us, which is an environment consisting of energy. Albert Eienstein said,

“Everything is energy and that’s all there is to it. Match the frequency of the reality you want and you cannot help but get that reality. It can be no other way. This is not philosophy. This is physics.”

So if thoughts are merely pieces of energy, then wouldn’t it be possible for another person to pick up that energy and “read” it. It seems possible to me. To once again quote Albert Einstein , “The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don’t know.” So I say, it is time we open up our minds, release some of the old beliefs systems and start to broaden our minds. I’m coming to believe that possibilities are limitless. Who living in the 1980s would have thought that computers could do what they do today? Jamie Paolinetti says, “Limitations live only in our minds. But if we use our imaginations, our possibilities become limitless.” I’m beginning to realize he is right. If only I had learned this years ago. The only limits are those we place on ourselves. We believe it is not possible for one person to read another person’s thoughts, so we rationalize that it is a trick. What is a belief anyway? The late Wayne Dyer says, “a belief system is nothing more than a thought you’ve thought over and over again.” If only I had told myself over and over in my youth that I had a brilliant mind, then maybe I could read people’s minds. But then again, would I want to?