Dear Man/Dear Woman: A Noteworthy Conversation … March 12th, 2016

 Jonathots Daily Blog

(2871)

Dear Man: I hope you don’t mind me sending along my ideas and feelings in the form of this note. I just didn’t want to sit down and have a face-to-face discussion, get interrupted and lose my train of thought.

Even though I see us making gradual progress to understand one another, I feel there is one large hurdle that we just can’t seem to get over.

You think I’m weak.

It’s not your fault. You were taught to do it. All the television shows portray women as having great intelligence, but falling apart under pressure.

You and I were born practically equal.

For the first ten years of our lives, our bodies were almost the same. I ran as fast as you, and you cried like a girl when you fell down and skinned your knee. Then the natural order–Mother Nature–came along and changed things to make sure that our species would be able to have a mother and a father to push the plan ahead.

I got estrogen, which gave me breasts, a period and hormones of sensitivity. You got testosterone, which gave you balls and a single-mindedness toward single-handedly procreating the species.

I no longer could run as fast as you could.

I couldn’t lift as much weight.

A few days every month, I found myself nearly out of commission due to my menstrual cycle.

At that point, you looked upon me as weaker.

It infuriated me. I could still think, feel and react with as much smarts as you, but because of my lesser muscle mass and need to mother children, I felt that I lost respect in your eyes.

I hate that.

It seems ridiculous to me that we view one another based upon the conditions of our genetic responsibility instead of realizing that we are both human beings and share almost everything in common.

I am tired of being the weakling–but I’m also tired of apologizing for having an emotional side which you may or may not understand.

So you try to be sensitive to my lack. That can make you consider me the weaker sex, which can end up with me being nothing more than “the little woman.”

Do you understand? I can’t be just “the little woman” and stay sane. I have to be more than a birthing chamber that ovulates three or four days a month.

I yearn for the time when we were children and had a childlike appreciation for each other. There were no “girl baseball teams” and “boy baseball teams.” We played all the games together.

I don’t want to be your weakling.

I don’t want to struggle to get respect because I’m seen as inferior. I don’t want to be viewed as bitchy and pushy.

Do you understand what I’m saying? Can you fathom how horrible you would feel if you were deemed second-rate? Why would it feel any different for me?

I thank you for reading this.

I’m not trying to blame you–I’m just curious if you can comprehend my heart.

Can we escape the futility of separating the sexes into Mommy and Daddy?

You don’t need to respond, but if you do, be candid and not afraid to share you heart.

I was thinking of you.

Woman

The producers of jonathots would humbly request a yearly subscription donation of $10 for this wonderful, inspirational opportunity

 

 

5ive … March 17, 2012

(1,456) 

Barack, Mitt, Newt, Rick and Ron (alphabetical order)–the five left standing, as it were, desiring the post of President of the United States.

The United Church of Christ, Mormon, two Catholics and a Baptist, respectively, are their religious affiliations. They all love to talk about God. I do not know when, in our body politic, that the pursuit and discussion of the Divine gained such prominence, but now it seems the main arm wrestling occurring over issues is being decided by who, presumably, God likes the best.

Is God a Republican or a Democrat? Since these five individuals are so intent on invoking the name of the Most High, I just wondered whether they would be willing to run on God’s platform, based upon what we know about His character and concerns. Yes, would Barack, Mitt, Newt, Rick and Ron have the intestinal fortitude to abandon previous stances in favor of the universal mindset of the Almighty? Because as I see it, God’s political position would be in four parts:

1. God is no respecter of persons. That means He wouldn’t play one race or group of people against another to gain support, but rather, would promote the notion that no one is better than anyone else, and that the human race is born with complete equality of possibility. Granted, some people choose to use their birthright as emotional toilet paper, to degrade themselves instead of uplifting their situation, but that has nothing to do with the fact that God placed within all of us the ability to overcome our weaknesses, and to temper our strengths, to keep us from feeling dominant by circumstance of birth. Yes, I wonder what these five candidates would think about running on a platform of NO PREJUDICE—not in theory but in practice.  It would mean we would have to take Iran seriously as a sovereign nation and therefore negotiate with them instead of threatening them.

2.  Where the Spirit of God is, there is liberty. How popular would it be to run a campaign with a plank in the platform that proclaims there will be no limits placed on liberty. In other words, anything that inhibits the rights of an individual in our country to express him or herself equally with anyone else would be anti-God. Such a concept would be considered pure idealism and debunked as impossible because we extol our particular rules and regulations, while eschewing the restrictions of our opponent.

3. God is love, and perfect love casts out fear. Would it be possible to be President of the United States if you weren’t able to scare the voters into selecting you as their savior from terror? If you removed apprehension and worry from the equation and had to run a race for the White House based upon NO FEAR, would you be able to do it and still gain enough attention from the electorate to get them to the polls to choose you? Certainly some great men in history have said, “We have nothing to fear but fear itself,” but we have not heard much affirmation of that concept of late. After all, frightening the peasants is a great way to get the serfs to pay taxes to the castle. It is rather doubtful that any of these five individuals would want to renounce that practice in entirety.

4. And finally, God is light and in Him is no darkness. Would Republican or Democrat be willing to present himself to the American public based solely upon his ideas or aspirations, without trying to attack his adversary? And that would include, of course, allowing their names to be sold off to Super Pacs, running negative ads against any competitor who dared to surface. Could we actually have a political climate that was free of darkness, free of deception, free of lying–in other words, transparent as much as human beings are able to become? Would this quintet of wannabes be willing to remove darkness from the table and enlighten us?

So let’s take another look at a platform that really would represent the spirit of God rather than invoking His name to evoke controversy.

• No prejudice. That means gays, women, Iranians, Jews and immigrants.
• No limit on liberty. That means gays, women, Iranians, Jews, immigrants–and you and me.
• No fear–skipping the step of terrifying people, but instead, informing us on the legitimate information available to make an intelligent decision.
• No darkness–precluding the instinct to exterminate our opponent with vile threats and less-than-truthful assertions. Are we prepared to speak the truth in love and let it make us free?

So in the midst of all this discussion, where the political parties think that God is more concerned about a woman’s menstrual cycle than He is her personal freedom, we might want to stop for a second and consider what our government would become if it really was one nation under God, indivisible. Are we ready for such a step? Or is there still enough carnality left in us that a spirit-led administration, inclusive of everyone, would fall flat on its face and be deemed impractical?

So I don’t mind you Republicans being conservative. And you Democrats, feel free to pontificate on your issues with great aplomb. I would just request that you both be a little bit more careful in assuming that the Father in heaven has signed up as an advocate for your particular side.

Because He would lobby for no prejudice, no limit to liberty, no fear and no darkness.

**************

Below is the first chapter of Jonathan Richard Cring’s stunning novel entitled Preparing a Place for Myself—the story of a journey after death. It is a delicious blend of theology and science fiction that will inspire and entertain. I thought you might enjoy reading it. After you do, if you would like to read the book in its entirety, please click on the link below and go to our tour store. The book is being offered at the special price of $4.99 plus $3.99 shipping–a total of $8.98. Enjoy.

http://www.janethan.com/tour_store.htm

Sitting One

 I died today. 

I didn’t expect it to happen.  Then again, I did—well, not really.

No, I certainly didn’t expect it.

I’ve had moments of clarity in my life.  Amazingly enough, many of them were in the midst of a dream. For a brief second I would know the meaning of life or the missing treatment to cure cancer.  And then as quickly as it popped into my mind it was gone. I really don’t recollect dying.  Just this unbelievable sense of clear headedness—like walking into a room newly painted and knowing by the odor and brightness that the color on the wall is so splattering new that you should be careful not to touch it for fear of smearing the design. The greatest revelation of all? 

Twenty-five miles in the sky time ceases to exist.

The planet Pluto takes two hundred and forty-eight years to circle the sun. It doesn’t give a damn. 

The day of my death was the day I became free of the only burden I really ever had.  TIME.

Useless.

Time is fussy.  Time is worry. 

Time is fear.  Time is the culprit causing human-types to recoil from pending generosity. 

There just was never enough time. 

Time would not allow it.  Remember—“if time permits …”

Why if time permits?  Why not if I permit?  Why not if I dream?  Why not if I want?  Why does time get to dictate to me my passage? 

It was time that robbed me of my soulful nature.    It was time that convinced me that my selfishness was needed. 

I didn’t die. The clock in me died, leaving spirit to tick on.  

So why don’t we see the farce of time?  Why do we allow ourselves to fall under the power of the cruel despot?  Yes, time is a relentless master—very little wage for much demand.

I died today. 

Actually … a piece of time named after me was cast away.