Time to Take a Bigger Moral Stand

Has anyone else noticed that there have been a lot of "sex scandals" in the news lately? If you watch any news at all, there's a good chance you have. A lot of women are speaking up and accusing famous men of inappropriate behavior, and some are even being accused of molesting children. It's difficult to say how much of it is true. But in any case, women and children are supposed to be treated with respect and we should oppose all behavior that runs contrary to that.

But as I look around and observe everything happening in our society, I have one question to ask. It may seem cruel, but we need to ask ourselves:

Should we really be surprised?

I'm always amazed at how everyone acts so shocked when they hear that some celebrity acted inappropriately. Has anyone watched prime time TV lately? Crass and immoral behavior is everywhere. How about turning the radio on to the top 40 stations? I can't believe the lyrics to some of the songs on there. Many of them glorify treating women like objects (or in some cases, female singers are doing it for men, too). And listening to it is as easy as turning on a radio. No one seems to have a problem with any of that; in fact, we can't seem to get enough. Why the double standard?

I was in my early teens when the Bill Clinton sex scandal was in the news back in the late 1990s. I'm sure this was not the first time that a President ran around on his wife or acted with moral indecency while in office. But up to that point, such behavior was usually concealed from public view. This was partly because we went a long time without the technology and ubiquitous news media we have today, and partly because we at least had enough decency to protect the public - especially children - from such lewd behavior.

This was a potential turning point in our nation's history. Perhaps it was a blessing in disguise that the public was forced to confront the moral transgressions of President Clinton. Parents had a chance to teach their children a lesson in right and wrong, about how it's important to stay strong while living in a sinful world. With technology starting to make it easy to bring immorality into our homes, this was an opportunity for us as a nation to stand up and say that we will not allow filth to run rampant in our society.

But if this was God's way of testing us, we failed miserably. We were told that "it's just sex" - that it's none of our business and that we should focus on the more important task of helping the President do his job. Did Bill Clinton's extramarital affairs impact his ability to make military decisions or to try to fix the economy? Well, maybe it didn't. But that's missing the bigger point. We didn't have to impeach Clinton to take a stand. We could have examined ourselves and decided it was time to tone down the sex and violence on TV and the radio, or at the very least not make it so easy for children to access.

Instead, it's become much worse. Nothing is sacred. I remember being shocked when I heard the occasional bad word on TV; now it's everywhere, even on the over-the-air channels. Sure, the media shoves this down our throats, but if we stopped watching it would affect their bottom line and they'd have to take it off the air.

Today, I hear elementary and middle school kids regularly using words that I didn't even know when I was their age. Adults aren't off the hook either; I frequently hear them use language in everyday conversation - even in front of children - that would have been unacceptable just a generation ago. With our moral standards lower than ever, why do we act so stunned when we hear about inappropriate behavior on the news? I don't understand it. We can't have it both ways.

Our lax moral standards may have brought us to a new low last year, when we were forced to choose between two Presidential candidates with far from stellar moral reputations. We either had to pick Bill Clinton's wife, who tried to shame many of the women who spoke out against her husband, or a man with his own history of treating women poorly.

How could it have come to this? As a Christian, I had to make a decision with which I was not comfortable with either of the choices. But that's what we get for letting our country slide so deeply into the moral abyss. Speaking out against Bill Clinton and then voting for Donald Trump is not necessarily hypocrisy. For many of those who did this, it was a necessary evil for living in these dark times. I believe that Trump's ability to gain the nomination from a major political party is a direct result of our failure to stand up to indecency in our public officials two decades earlier.

Whether we want to admit it or not, our elected officials are a reflection of us. And so is everything else we see in the news and on our televisions and computers. It wouldn't be there if we didn't ask for it. So what are we going to do about it? Are we going to continue to become outraged for a short moment the next time a big scandal breaks then go back to all the same TV shows and movies? Are we going to complain about the lack of leadership from our elected officials do but keep putting the same types of people into office?

Or are we all going to decide that things will only improve if we change our attitudes and our actions?

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results." This saying gets overused to the point of, well, insanity. But this is one instance in which it really applies. We can't act outraged over one moral indiscretion but glorify another. We need to hold our fellow citizens to high moral standards, but it may be even more important to do the same for ourselves. Evil will never completely go away, but if we find the courage to do this, maybe then we'll see fewer disturbing stories on the news.

Yes, My Thoughts and Prayers Do Matter

"Your thoughts and prayers don't matter."

How many times have you heard someone say this recently? Or seen it as a comment on a Facebook story about yet another awful shooting? It seems to be the fashionable thing to say lately.

I don't know about you, but I'm tired of hearing it.

I get why people say it. They're sad. They're angry. They're confused. They want to know how yet another gunman was able to slaughter an innocent group of people. And I agree that we need to do as much as we can to prevent these incidents from happening in the future.

But none of that is an excuse for disrespecting someone else's attempt to express genuine concern for those who lost someone. It seems that compassion for our fellow man is something we should encourage, not condemn. Isn't it disregard for others that causes most killers to do this?

Thoughts and prayers are all I can offer, as they are all most of us can. I couldn't have prevented this shooting from happening. I never met any of the people involved and never heard of them until this happened. I wish I could have stopped this, but I had no way of knowing it would occur.

None of us have the ability to prevent all bad things from happening. We can argue that changing this law or that law would have prevented this latest shooting, and maybe that's true. But evil people will do evil things. Guns have been used to kill people, but so have knives, trucks, bombs, and many other items for a long time. Evil has existed since the book of Genesis and will, unfortunately, always be with us, regardless of what weapons are available.

For those of us who feel helpless, offering condolences and seeking guidance from God is sometimes all we can do. These events don't make sense to us, so we have to look for hope in something bigger than we are, to trust that God has a greater plan even in the worst of times.

It's ok to ask questions. It's normal to cry out to God and wonder how this could happen. But God doesn't "cause" bad things to happen, nor does he "allow" them. Bad things happen because Satan is in control of this world. Mankind has chosen to turn their back on God, starting with The Fall of Man in the Garden of Eden. Therefore, we have had to see what life is like without Him. It's not pretty.

It's because God is not of this world that we seek Him. We put our faith in Him, the faith that despite all the sorrow we see here, this is not the end game. There is a greater plan in place. For many of us who are left behind after such a terrible event, that is all we have to hold onto. That's how we try to get through this. It's how we try to be there for those who are hurting the most.

If that's not how you want to cope, that's fine. If you think it's important to pass more laws to prevent killings, that's great. But don't put down other people for trying to show compassion. If you really believe that thoughts and prayers do nothing, than neither do your criticisms of those who care. Please have some respect.

To those who are distraught from this latest shooting, or who are still hurting from a previous tragedy: I hope you will accept my thoughts and my prayers. I wish I could do more. I would love to be able to bring your loved ones back, or to at least take away all the pain you've suffered because of your loss. And I wish I could prevent this from happening to anyone else ever again. But I can't. The best I can do is let you know that I do care and that I can pray for healing and understanding in this difficult time.

Perhaps if more of us did that, there would be less hatred and less evil in this world.

Why I Write

If you've been around me for any length of time, you've probably made the same observation as just about everyone else: I don't talk much. In high school, people who knew me referred to me as the quiet kid, and I haven't changed much in that regard since I graduated almost fifteen years ago.

I've always found it interesting that it's the quiet people that seem to stand out like a sore thumb. "Boy, you're quiet." "Why don't you say much?" This is what I've heard dozens of times from people I've just met, or even people that have known me for a while. Why do other people notice this so quickly? I've never understood that. I'm not trying to be a troublemaker. I'm not even trying to be different. I'm just being myself.

But that doesn't always go over well with everyone. We're expected to be talkative, and some people even get offended when we don't. Talking is almost our way of letting everyone else know, "Hey, I'm normal." Those who talk a lot often like to make sure the non-talkative folks know that they're different. Imagine it the other way around. I would never say to a garrulous person, "Wow, you talk a lot!" That would be rude, right?

I understand that, as humans living in a society, we all have to interact with each other. And I understand there are times that talking is necessary. I've even forced myself to get good enough at public speaking that I can teach a 90 minute computer class at work without any notes. But it's not how I'm most comfortable expressing myself. And I know I'm not the only one in the world who's like that.

Some people, when they are interacting in person with others, always have plenty to say. They know how to respond immediately. They're able to come up with answers right on the spot, without taking the time to think about it. There's nothing wrong with that. I think it's great that there are people like that. We need them.

But that's not me. I'm an observer. I need to absorb what's around me. Just because I'm not talking much doesn't mean I'm stupid, or I have nothing to say, or that I don't like you or don't care about a situation. Maybe it's easy to assume that, but it's also wrong. In many social situations, I would rather listen to others than hear myself talk because that's how I learn. But when I take time to reflect on what I see around me and want to make some observations and offer a response, I may want to express it somehow. And writing is how I do that.

When I have points I want to make, I like to take the time to sort them out and get the message as good and as clear as I can. You can't do that through talking; once you say something, it's out there and you can't take it back. Again, some people are fine communicating that way, and I don't have a problem with it. Just respect the fact that I'm not the same as you are.

Communicating is not just how we work with other people. It's how we make sense of the world around us. Writing is my favorite way to do both. It doesn't mean there's something wrong with me. I just like to see what I'm thinking on paper (or on the computer screen) so I can make sense of it and rearrange it so that it best reflects who I am and what I'm thinking.

I've been discussing why writing is important to me personally, but in this talkative world, writing still has a place. It's still an effective way to communicate with large groups of people. If I have a message I want to send out to the world, writing is the best way to do it, whether it's through websites, newspapers, or books (and I've done all three). Though people can get turn on their TV or get on YouTube to hear the news or to view a big speech, the written word is still available and isn't going anywhere.

Even writing between two individuals still has a place. It allows us to have a record of our correspondence that we can go back and look at again and again. We can read messages that we write to each other over and over, so we can absorb them and appreciate the other person for taking the time to do that.

But the biggest difference between voice/pictures and writing is that the latter requires use of imagination. I think that's why a lot of people are disappointed when Hollywood turns a book into a movie; more often, I hear that the book was better. When we read words, we have to visualize what the writing is describing in our heads. Television, for instance, does that for us. Our brains don't have to work as hard. When we read, whether we realize it or not, we're becoming better communicators. I'm proud of the fact that, through writing, I can even help others in this way.

Not everyone has to be a good writer. If you have other skills, be proud of them and use them to the best of your ability. But if you see someone who isn't talking much, don't make them feel bad about it. It's easy to do, even if you don't mean to. Quiet people often have a lot to say and have a lot going on in their brain and prefer to express it in different ways besides trying to impress everyone with their verbal skills or their ability to be loud.

And to all the non-talkative people reading this who prefer to write: Keep writing. Practice and get better at it. Find ways it can be useful. And most importantly, don't feel bad about who you are. The world needs all types of people, even if some of us aren't willing to acknowledge that.

My Favorite World Series to Watch

We just got finished watching a great World Series. I was born in 1985, so I've seen quite a few World Series, some better than others. Many consider the 1991 World Series, in which the Minnesota Twins beat the Atlanta Braves in seven games, as one of the best ever. I'm too young to remember that series well, though as I learn about it, I'm sure I would have enjoyed watching if I had been older.

So how would I rank my favorite World Series that I have seen? Here is my top five list:

5. 2011 - St. Louis Cardinals defeat Texas Rangers, four games to three

A World Series that goes seven games is always exciting, and even though I wanted to see the Rangers win their first title (plus I don't like the Cardinals), I still enjoyed this one. Game 6 was the memorable game, as the Rangers were one strike away in the bottom of the ninth. David Freese hit a two-run triple that Rangers outfielder Nelson Cruz just missed catching. Then after Josh Hamilton homered for the Rangers in the tenth, the Cardinals were again down to their last strike before rallying to tie it again. Freese homered in the 11th to force Game 7, which the Cardinals won easily. It ended up being the last Cardinals game for legendary manager Tony LaRussa and future Hall of Famer Albert Pujols, who left after the season to go to the Angels.

4. 2004 - Boston Red Sox defeat St. Louis Cardinals, four games to zero

OK, this series was no one's definition of a classic. Game 1 is the only game that was truly competitive as the Red Sox swept the Cardinals. The series was anticlimatic after the Red Sox came back from a three games to none deficit, including extra inning wins in Games 4 and 5, to beat the Yankees in the ALCS. But since the Red Sox broke "The Curse of the Bambino" and won a World Series for the first time in 86 years after so many near misses, it became one of the most historically important World Series of all time. For that, I will always remember watching it. (It didn't hurt that the Cardinals lost, either.) And yes, I'm aware that I omitted the White Sox victory in 2005, breaking their 88-year drought. I just don't like them, that's all.

3. 2017 - Houston Astros defeat Los Angeles Dodgers, four games to three

This series featured two teams that hadn't won a championship in a while: The Dodgers, even with their rich history, hadn't made the World Series since they last won it in 1988, while the Astros were seeking their first ever title. Both teams also won over 100 games in the regular season, so there was lots of talent on both sides. The teams split the first six games, including two of the most entertaining World Series games of all time. In Game 2, the Astros tied it in the ninth, the two teams traded two spots in the tenth, and then the Astros finally won it in the 11th; there were five home runs hit in extra innings. Then in Game 5, the Dodgers scored three in the ninth to tie it before the Astros won in the tenth, with a final score of 13-12. Game 7 was over early when the Astros scored five in the first two innings and cruised to a 5-1 win, but it was a great series and I was happy to see a team win their first championship.

2. 2001 - Arizona Diamondbacks defeat New York Yankees, four games to three

Given that this series took place just weeks after the awful 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York City, the Yankees would have been the sentimental favorite except for the fact that, well, they're the Yankees. Especially since they'd won four of the last five championships and 26 overall, I think the majority of non-Yankees fans would have been just fine with them losing. The teams split the first six games, including two extra-inning wins for the Yankees in Games 4 and 5 that both featured game-tying home runs in the bottom of the ninth. The Yankees were three outs away from winning their fourth straight title before Mariano Rivera had one of his few bad postseason outings, allowing the Diamondbacks to score twice during a rally that started with a hit from my all-time favorite player, former Cubs first baseman Mark Grace. Luis Gonzalez had the game-winning RBI hit to give the Diamondbacks what is, to this day, their only championship. The Diamondbacks had a lot of veteran players seeking their first championship, plus I was tired of the Yankees winning, so I took a lot of gratification in how this one ended.

1. 2016 - Chicago Cubs defeat Cleveland Indians, four games to three

Come on, was there ever any doubt? No matter what happens the rest of my life, this will always be my favorite World Series because it was the first time I got to see the Cubs win, ending their 108-year stretch without a championship. But for baseball fans in general, the story lines couldn't have been better. It featured the two teams with the longest championship droughts (Cubs 108 years, Indians 68). The Cubs rallied back from a three games to one deficit. And Game 7 was one of the most memorable baseball games of all time, going into extra innings before the Cubs prevailed, 8-7 in 10. Yes, I am biased, but looking at this as objectively as possible, it's hard to imagine a series that offers more than this one did.

Dishonorable Mention: 2003 - Florida Marlins defeat New York Yankees, four games to two

We were so close to what would have been the most anticipated American sporting event of all time, but instead we got this dud of a match-up. The Cubs and Red Sox, with their long championship droughts and legendary stories of curses, both had late leads in a potential clinching Game 6 of their respective League Championship Series before blowing it then losing Game 7. I still hate the Marlins for coming back from a three games to one deficit to beat the Cubs that year, while the Yankees again beat the Red Sox to win their sixth AL pennant in eight years. Four of the six games in the World Series were decided by two or fewer runs, but I don't remember many details about actually watching this series because I was so upset over the Cubs losing and the fact that we missed such a great match-up.

The Beginning of the Challenge

Today, I'm beginning what is perhaps my biggest writing challenge yet: I will attempt to write 50,000 words in 30 days.

Every year, thousands of writers participate in National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo for short). To finish, writers have between November 1 and 30 to write a novel at least 50,000 words long. Many writers have taken the work they created during NaNoWriMo and later published it with success.

Not everyone who participates writes fiction, however. Some write nonfiction. Some do academic writing. Some will even edit another author's work. I've decided to do 50,000 words of blogging. It's my challenge and my writing, so I can do whatever I want, right?

To become better at anything, including writing, you need to keep practicing. And to grow as a writer, you have to challenge yourself and set goals that are difficult yet achievable. I'm hoping that through this experience, I'll learn more about myself and grow as a writer. I'm not planning to publish what I write during this month, though that is the goal that some writers have. I'll share some of it with my family and friends, but the biggest reason I'm doing it is for myself.

I've done a lot of writing over the years. I've written for several newspapers and websites. I've written many term papers under the pressure of a tight deadline. I've even written a book. But this may the most difficult project I have taken on yet, both because of the short amount of time I have and also because I'll have to come up with enough topics to write about. I'm hoping I'll have the time and patience to get this done, but above all else I hope I have fun and become a better person because of this. If you all enjoy what I write, that will only make it better.

To get to 50,000 words, I'll have to write about 1,667 words per day. I plan to update my progress on my Facebook page and even on here. And my goal is to provide quality writing, not a bunch of run-on sentences, like the one you are reading right now, in order pad my word count, although this sentence will be the exception to the rule, and I promise not to do it anymore after this.

Thanks in advance for reading and for your support!

(Be sure to visit nanowrimo.org if you want to learn more about this program.)

Five Words and Phrases That Add Nothing to Your Writing

There is nothing that can spoil a piece of writing more than poor word usage. Too often, I see an otherwise great essay or story that was difficult to read because it used unnecessary adjectives and adverbs or cliches that add nothing to the story and just take up space on the page. Here are six examples that I see often.

1. Overuse of "very" or "really"

Example: My son was really happy that I took him out for ice cream after dinner.

What, exactly, is the difference between being "happy" and "really happy" in this sentence? Usually, the word "really" implies a higher than normal level of happiness, but that leaves a lot open to interpretation for the reader. Saying someone is "happy" lets the reader know a person's response to something at a basic level, which is good, but "very" or "really happy" could mean many things. It would be better to describe something a person did, to add more action to the writing. For example, "When I told my son that I was taking him out for ice cream after dinner, he was so happy that he jumped out of his chair and gave me a hug."

An even worse variation of this is "extremely happy" (or whatever adjective you use). Whenever I see a writer use "extremely happy" to describe someone, I always picture the music video for "Black Hole Sun" by Soundgarden where people are prancing around with creepy smiles on their faces. The word "extreme" carries a strong connotation and should be used with caution. Again, don't rely on an adverb that not only wastes space but also leaves the reader starving for details.

2. "It's obvious" or "obviously"

Example: Obviously, we have to do more to help parents afford child care.

There are three ways I could interpret this, and none of them are good:

1. If it's obvious, then why the heck are you wasting my time telling me that?
2. I don't agree with you. Can't you disagree with me without insulting me?
3. I didn't know that. Why are you saying it's obvious? Do you think you're smarter than I am?

In situations like this, the word "obviously" (or a variation of it such as "clearly") at best does nothing more than take up valuable space on the page and at worst can ruin your credibility with the reader. Either take the word out or remove the sentence altogether.

3. "Wide variety"

Example: At Brian's Family Restaurant, we offer a wide variety of breakfast choices.

"Variety" is a word that, on its own, is already open to interpretation from the reader. Adding an adjective such as "wide" to indicate, presumably, a large number of items makes it even more so. I'm not opposed to using the word "variety" in some cases. But I feel it's a word that should be clarified with examples, to give the reader more information. Here's an example: "At Brian's Family Restaurant, we offer a variety of breakfast choices, including toast, eggs, pancakes, cereal, bacon, and sausage."

In the above example, the writer can prove that the restaurant offers a variety of choices. As long as the menu contains at least two different things, then by definition, they offer a variety. But adding "wide" to the above sentence, at best, is a waste of space and, at worst, puts a lot of burden on the writer to prove his point. A reader could look at this and say, "You said you have a wide variety. But I like to eat hash browns for breakfast. Why didn't you list that?" Or the reader could interpret it even more broadly. "You said you have a wide variety, but those are all American foods. Do you have any foreign menu choices?" To me, adding "wide" before "variety" can only hurt the writer.

4. "On paper"

Example: On paper, the Dodgers are the favorite to win the World Series this year.

As a sports writer, I see a lot of writers use this phrase and I've tried to get away from using it. In the above example, "on paper" is a short way of saying that when we look at the rosters of all the teams before the season begins, the Dodgers appear to have the most talent. But on what other basis can we judge the teams? If it is a fact that the Dodgers are the World Series favorite, take "on paper" out of the sentence. However, it's more likely that this is someone's opinion and that not everyone agrees. If that is the case, the sentence should reflect that. "Many writers I know are picking the Dodgers this year" or "The Dodgers are getting a lot of love from writers as we begin the season" are examples of how to do this. Or better yet, the writer should take ownership of his claim: "I believe the Dodgers will win the World Series this year."

5. "Literally"

Example: I had literally just gone to the store an hour ago.

There may not be a more tired word in the English language than "literally" is. I hear it used in everyday conversation often, but sometimes it makes its way into writing as well. A lot of people are guilty of using it, but it adds nothing to what the person is trying to say. It's a word that some writers think emphasizes their point more, but instead, it's a dead word that takes up space on the page. I suppose it could be used in dialog if we want to make the dialog as realistic as possible, but even then I find the use of the word to be annoying. Avoid the temptation to use this word.

6. "It goes without saying"

Example: It goes without saying that winters in Michigan are always harsh.

If it goes without saying, then why are you saying it? I have never understood why any writer would use this phrase. If you include it in your writing, I'm going to assume that you did indeed think it was necessary to say it in order to make your point. If your point truly is so obvious that you don't have to say it, then omit it.

Do you have more examples? Let me know!

How can we understand God's will?

The concept of God is difficult for us to understand. He is not limited by many of the constraints that we humans are on Earth. There's no beginning or end for him - he has always existed and will always exist. He is not affected by the physical wear that our human bodies and many other material things are. It's sometimes difficult for humans to wrap their minds around it.

Another thing about God that many of us don't understand is his plan for all of us. When something bad happens to a good person, or things don't go the way we expect them to, we struggle to make sense of it. Sometimes, something that makes perfect sense and that we think should happen doesn't happen, or something happens that makes absolutely no sense. I'm someone who likes to think logically, so for me it's especially tough to figure this out. Faith is not always my strong suit.

Without publicly getting into too much detail, there are a few things that have happened recently that really disappointed me. I don't want to make it sound like my life is miserable; I do have plenty to be happy about, such as a loving wife and family, good health, and a decent enough job that I can pay my bills. But there are other things about which I'm frustrated, not just because they didn't go the way that I want them to, but also because they didn't make sense.

I'm 31 years old. Around when I graduated from high school, I had this vision in my mind about how my life would turn out. I thought that by 31, certainly I would have everything about my life figured out and wouldn't have to worry about making tough decisions or trying to improve my life anymore. But that hasn't been the case, and I'm sure many of you have experienced similar feelings in your life. Many of my prayers have been answered, including finding my wife, which I did three years ago. But as I get older, I'm finding that I have more questions about where my life is going than I did 10-15 years ago.

What I'm finding is that life is a journey. I keep thinking that someday, I'm going to find that final destination that I've been heading towards for many years. But maybe there is no final destination. Maybe I'm supposed to keep getting up every day and just live my life and see what happens next. My whole life I've struggled to look ahead and wonder what was coming next, and too often I've failed to enjoy what's right in front of me.

When my wife and I were dating and seriously thinking about marriage a few years ago, I couldn't wait until we could get married and start our new life together. There were times when I thought that dating was the hard part, especially since we lived an hour away from each other. But I look back fondly on those days now. I learned so much about myself and recognize that I went through some necessary growth.

Maybe that's what I'm doing right now. It's easier said than done. I've had some days lately when I've been very discouraged, but I don't have any choice except to get up tomorrow and keep going. I don't know where this path is leading me, but I have to keep reminding myself that God is in charge. He has a plan that doesn't make perfect sense to me right now, but I'm only looking at this through the lens of one particular moment in time. I need to trust that God's plan is what's best for me and that several years from now, I will look back on these days as an important time in my life.

Brian R. Johnston is the author of the book The Art of Being a Baseball Fan, available now on Amazon. Click here to visit him on Facebook.