Faith in a time of protest

It seems to me that religion is not the right word for faith any more. I had an odd experience this weekend where I felt like the church service was attending was for lack of better words frowned upon by the traditionalists at the church I was attending.

So let me back up a bit, I am fortunate that I to go a church that is large enough it can offer a both contemporary services and various traditional services. In the very beginning, the contemporary service was held across the street and was seen more as a service project than a service recognized by the church. Eventually, the contemporary service moved into the smaller chapel on church grounds and took over the time slot once devoted to the children's service. Quickly outgrowing the small chapel, the one of the contemporary services was then placed down the hall in a room that used serve as the mass gathering place for health fairs, church wide meetings and the church program fair.

Sounds great right? I service that outgrows it's assigned home. That is so successful that the population of the church is growing? Wrong. As someone who is semi-involved in the church community, I cannot help but feel shunned by the 'traditional' church goers. Honestly, you would think that people would be excited that the church community is growing? That more 'young people' are attending; but sadly it does not appear that way.

Today, the contemporary service was delayed because our worship space was being used for the town hall meeting. A fellow usher informed me that he did not understand why the main chapel was not used for such meeting as it had more room. I shrugged and said the church probably wanted to allow for a transition between meetings and church services. And that's when it hit me, why is the collective contemporary service not standing up for itself. In an age of individualism and freedom, why are we constantly being treated like the step-child of our church.

So here's my question, is the religious affiliated 20 and 30-year-olds a group decreasing in its activity in the church? When asked a fair majority of individuals in this age rangs say they are spiritual, but not religious; they believe in God, but do not have a church home. Is this a phase or this age group finally looking for something more like our generation? Something they can relate to?

Feeling a bit like we could change the minds of those 'traditional' church goers, I was ready to stand up to any doubter when we first moved to our current location. I allowed people to just peak in and cut through on the way to their service; but now I just find the 'traditional' church goers are unwilling to change and open up. Unfortunately, I fell like the administration of the church is very similar, which is resulting is quite a deterrent. Resulting in two different sides being brought out within me - to either fight back and move on.

I think a lot of people are having the same debate and choosing to make a stance by moving on. The search to find your church, no matter why the change, can be long and challenging. However, I am wondering if in this age of protesting and expression, more people are not choosing to protest and stay at home. Choosing to find their faith and spirituality in other places. I know I find God when I meditating and running, neither of which are entirely possible or considered reverent for a church setting. There are many weeks where I find God in those places more than I do in Church. Is this a generational transition or a transition in a time of protest?

Is the greater congregation choosing to listening and question everything, leading to those who leave when they don't agree? It's about time to recognize that religion or the lack thereof is something you should connect with, not oblige yourself to attend.
  

Define journalism

This past week The New York Times' editor Arthur S. Brisbane asked his readers if truth was necessary in journalism. Let me sum up my response Mr. Brisbane: CBS and the Bush National Guard Story. Still not convinced? Stephen Glass of The New Republic.

Journalism at its most basic level is designed to keep an eye on society, politics and government to make certain that there is an unbiased view of every vote, situation and decision being presented to the American people. How are your readers supposed to believe in your company and in the news you are presenting them if they know it is fake, not research and just published? If they wanted news with no evidence or proof they would venture to the tabloid section of their grocery store. The New York Times, I believed, has better standards to uphold.

In Sept. 2008, the Wednesday edition of 60 Minutes, known as 60 Minutes II released a news story about President George W. Bush's time with the National Guard. Within hours of the story airing, the American public watched as one of the nation's major news companies was questioned in the most serious fashion.

George W. Bush was up for reelection and his military service history was coming to surface. CBS news received documentation that lead producers and news journalists to believe that Bush had defied direct orders from his superior while stationed in Texas with the National Guard. Additionally, other documents lead CBS to believe that one point Bush was in Alabama instead of serving time with the Texas National Guard. The days following the story airing, many of the sources CBS worked with in order to present a truthful story were suddenly changing their stories, some to the extreme of telling CBS executives and members of the unbiased committee formed to look at the story, that they never shared information about President Bush with members of the CBS 60 Minutes II teams.

Following the findings of the unbiased committee, which including members of the Associated Press, CBS asked four of the its executives to resign and the story producer was terminated. In November, Dan Rather announced that he was stepping down as anchor of 60 Minutes II. The organization under went suggestions from the unbiased committee that reviewed the story, leading to many changes within CBS in order to develop past this point in its history.

Another company that grew passed its once momental problems is the political magazine, The New Republic. Turned upside down by Stephen Glass, the magazine had one of its best writers caught red handed by Forbes Digital Tool for fabricating a story about a teenage computer server hacker, according to Vanity Fair.

Beginning with gracefully woven stories of truth and fiction, Glass found himself the "protege" of The New Republic, but with each new story Glass found a need to upstage himself. As his time at the political magazine continued he worked with three different editors, it was the last Charles Lane, known as "Chuck," who would finally place together all the pieces that lead to the discovery that Glass completely fabricated "Hack Heaven," a story about a teenage hacker who was being paid by a California company to not hack into their servers, according to Vanity Fair.

When Glass roped his younger brother into playing the part of one of his fabricated executives, Lane found himself with no choice but to fire Glass and publish an apology to the dedicated readers of The New Republic, notifying them that Glass had fabricated 27 of the 41 stories he had written for the paper, according to "Shattered Glass" and Vanity Fair. Hoping that the magazine would be able to continue functioning in the wake of lies.


All this Mr. Brisbane to say that the truth is the foundation of journalism. Report the truth, the hidden answers and the sought after stories - even if it might contribute to the collapse of your network; this action is simply the ethically right route to take.

Although I do not necessary agree with how these companies handled their situations, they owned up to the situations they discovered. They owned up to what could have potentially ruined their companies; I think you, the writers of The New York Times and journalists all over can do the American public the same courtesy of reporting the truth, really finding the truth on all aspects of American life, rather it is political races, government choices, protests or any other event. We, the readers and citizens of America deserve that much.

Education sucks in Dallas

Sometime during my high school career, I found myself at a wedding shower in Albuquerque, N.M. A friend of my mother's asked me where I attended high school, I mentioned my small college prep school with no thought to how snobby I could sound. My answer was quickly followed up by, "oh, is that private?" 

The Dallas Independent School District (DISD) has been failing our school children for over two decades. One example of the issues surrounding DISD can be found during my middle school years, DISD went through 3 superintendents in less than 18 months. Our most recent superintendent left the position in May and departed Dallas for another job over the summer. A semester later, the DISD board is just now defining what they would like in their next superintendent.  

Growing up, I did not have much say in private vs. public because there was no option - if you could find the money, your children went to private school; if you had no problem finding the money, your children went really good private schools. 

It is still this way.  DISD is working to improve it's self, a just retired gentleman, named Mike Morath has giving himself 10 years to turn around DISD. He wants to reinforce with parents the importance of their presence by starting a program in the 2nd grade to show parents the positive influence they can instill in their children. This is absolutely wonderful, I wish Dallas had enough good public schools for our children; but until then - what? 

Growing up, I had in my head, the Episcopal School of Dallas (ESD) offered one of the best educations a student could ask for, while having an administration who was attentive to the needs of each student, family and community member. As I've matured, my opinion has changed. For many years I questioned if it was because I knew more about other schools or if it was because the school was failing its students.

Towards the end of 2011, ESD began to crumble among the mix of rumors, allegations and unmistakable lack of regard for its community. ESD found itself in the middle of a sex scandal and with it the drop of the focus from education. "Following nine weeks of testimony, on September 21, 2011, the Episcopal School of Dallas was found grossly negligent in how it handled a sexual relationship between a teacher and a 16-year-old student, and has been ordered to pay the girl's family an amount of $8.6 million in compensatory damages and another $700,000 in punitive damages," according to WFAA, ABC affilate in Dallas. In addition, it was recently announced that the Assistant Headmaster of ESD is resigning effective immediately and the Headmaster is stepping down. A committee has been formed to find his replacement.

So now the private schools are crumbling from the top and the public schools are crumbling from the bottom, before long the middle will be left. What does that say? 

We have left our children with a large challenge, in fact a challenge larger than some students are when standing tall. The challenge - how to succeed in school when your school is fighting against you. What happened to school board members who were no longer going for the world record of "longest serving school board member," but instead fighting for a better school, a better education and better teachers? What happened to a school board that didn't hide behind the pillars of its buildings, but owned up to its mistakes and tried to change the world? What happened that we now leave our children with schools that no longer lead by example, but instead lead with a checkbook?

Without a good education, a good support system and a good set of leaders, students are less likely to succeed, less likely to challenge themselves and more likely to wonder why they are at school. So here's my idea: start over. 

Currently the ESD school board has a member who has served well over 10 years? I personally find it short of insane that this person has been on the board that amount of time. Due to his length in service, I think this person should resign their position. If only due to the philosophy that the only constant is change. 

So let's change, it's start our school boards over and get a fresh look on how to save our children from failing school systems. For it is the educated, kind of heart and those willing to admit fault that can create change. We need to instill these traits in our children, and how can we do that without a quality education system.

During my Jesuit Volunteer year, a Jesuit priest reminded a room full of eager volunteers that we cannot change the world; but instead we can create the foundation for change and lead the way for real change. As depressing as it sounds it is true - Martin Luther King, Jr. died before he saw all 50 states allow someone of African American origin vote in an election; Abraham Lincoln died before all 50 states freed their slaves and changes will continue to come long after we die.

But we must believe in change, set the foundation for change and do nothing but demand change - our children deserve the best, so why is even the best education staring to fail our children?

Responsibilities for the Freedom of Expression in a digital world

In my junior year of college, I was introduced to PostSecret while helping a friend clean their room. The only book placed on my friend's bookshelf with any form of grace was the first PostSecret book. Beautiful in it's brown paper cover, I was welcomed by a collection of postcards that released people from their buried secrets.

When I first discovered this secret sharing, judgement free zone, PostSecret allowed for people to share secrets via Facebook. However after several less than ideal posts, the PostSecret team remembered a foundational idea in the community - a space for individuals to share their secrets, their thoughts and their fears free of judgement and anonymously.  Fortunately six years later, the PostSecret team figured out a way for people to share their secrets immediately and whenever they wished while being anonymous - an iPhone application.

Through the use of the iPhone application people were able to release their secret when they had the courage, versus holding on to the courage for sometimes years at a time. However, sadly many people abused the PostSecret application. Which resulted in a tough decision by it's founder, Frank Warren and other members of the PostSecret team. The letter announcing the change states:

The PostSecret iPhone App is Now Closed

It pains me to announce that the PostSecret App is now closed. In some ways, this is because of its success. It reached the top-selling spot in the App Store and users shared over 2 million creative secrets.

99% of the secrets created were in the spirit of PostSecret. Unfortunately, the scale of secrets was so large that even 1% of bad content was overwhelming for our dedicated team of volunteer moderators who worked 24 hours a day 7 days a week removing content that was not just pornographic but also gruesome and at times threatening.

Like the PostSecret Blog, the App was designed so each secret was absolutely anonymous. Unfortunately, that absolute anonymity made it very challenging to permanently remove determined users with malicious intent.

Bad content caused users to complain to me, Apple and the FBI. I was contacted by law enforcement about bad content on the App. Threats were made against users, moderators and my family. (Two specific threats were made that I am unable to talk about). As much as we tried, we were unable to maintain a bully-free environment. Weeks ago I had to remove the App from my daughter's phone.

Like many of you, I feel a great sense of loss from this decision but please know that we fought hard behind the scenes to find a permanent solution. We even tried prescreening 30,000 secrets a day. Deciding to remove the App from the App Store last week and holding back the release of the Android version cost us money but we feel it was the right thing to do.

To the vast majority of people who shared their earnest secrets and compassionate replies on the App, you inspired us with your honesty, humor and humanity. Even though this good faith experiment has come to an end what you shared lives on.

While the PostSecret App is now closed, PostSecret, and the PostSecret blog, are still very much open. Thanks for helping to keep the true spirit of PostSecret alive by mailing your secrets in 2012.

Sincerely,

-Frank Warren

I found myself saddened by the news that yet again another communication outlet was stopped in its tracks by people abusing it. Another you may ask?

Facebook is full of people sharing information that quite frankly I do not want to know; and I am not just talking about the "dyed my hair" or "painting my nails with my BFF" posts, but instead the posts about someone's dating life, political views (which are always right) or the infamous drunk and completely inappropriate post. Thanks to Facebook, I can set my News Feed to not update me about the individuals who choose to only post opinions and activities to which I do no have the patience to read. However, many people choose to complain instead of editing their hearing, their reading or their opinions.

It is a basic human right to have an opinion and to share it without fear of repercussions; however, the idea of "without fear" is becoming less and less likely. Occupy: Berkley found itself protesting the Chancellor's actions when she supported the police silencing the protesters. But the point of this column is to focus on our right (and responsibilities) surrounding the idea of the freedom of speech.

The American Civil Liberties Union states that,

"Freedom of speech, of the press, of association, of assembly and petition -- this set of guarantees, protected by the First Amendment, comprises what we refer to as freedom of expression. The Supreme Court has written that this freedom is "the matrix, the indispensable condition of nearly every other form of freedom." Without it, other fundamental rights, like the right to vote, would wither and die."

I believe in all that is represented by the Freedom of Expression and because of that belief, I find myself believing in the attached, but seldom mentioned, responsibilities. Responsibility one: You have the right to ignore someone's expression that you disagree with just as much as you have the right to state your opinion. Responsibility two: You will not agree with everything that everyone ever says - just learn that now. In this day and age where you can have selective hearing, recognize that this is your responsibility if you cannot listen to other's opinions without freaking out.

All that being said, I could not agree with the PostSecret team more - it saddens me to see the PostSecret application close especially with it being the number one selling iPhone application, according to Warren's letter. It just shows how much people are hiding - funny since we have the Freedom of Expression. Nonetheless, we as a society are not mature enough to handle the freedom to share our thoughts, secrets and actions right as it is all happening. The ironic part - Facebook is making it easier to share all of these and PostSecret is back to the good old days of postcards and the United States Postal Service.