Fear me

I wasn't aware when I got up this morning that I had become someone for people to fear. The country I served well and faithfully for over twenty years is now poised to add me to watch lists and terrorist alerts should I show too much evidence of being disgruntled. After all, I believe in such heinous things. I believe that Jesus Christ is the one and only Son of God and that He, not Barack Obama, is the only possible savior of the human race and I openly practice behaviors related to this belief and share my belief with others. I believe in the sanctity of life from the moment of conception. I am apprehensive of the intentions of the current administration towards the Second Amendment.

Apparently this makes me a security risk, according to Janet Napolitano. It's strange how such beliefs did not make me unable to hold a high security clearance when I was in the Air Force doing Intelligence work. Maybe it's because I'm too honest.

I tend to speak or write what's on my mind. Maybe I shouldn't tell people I listen to Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Pat Robertson. Maybe I should quit telling folks that I think it's not moral to kill innocent babies in the womb. Maybe I should quit telling people I am a Desert Storm veteran. You know Timothy McVeigh was a Desert Storm veteran and look what he did. This seems to be MS Napolitano's justification for putting veterans under the microscope. One whacko out of how many thousands of Desert Storm vets? But wait, don't forget Lee Harvey Oswald and Charles Whitman! They were veterans, too! I suggest you start watching Senator Kerry, too! Wasn't he a rather famously disgruntled veteran who threw his medals at the White House? Oh, I forgot! Those weren't actually his medals.

I know you supposedly apologized for the language in that report, MS Napolitano. I gave my grandfather an apology like that one once. My dad immediately cracked me across my smart butt and told me I'd better say it like I meant it. Like I said, I only gave Grandpa an apology like that ONCE.

By the way, I was wondering about that report itself. When I was in the Air Force I dealt with a great deal of classified information. If any report I handled which was labeled "For Official Use Only" had made its way onto the internet, the Air Force would have cheerfully presented me with a one-way all expenses paid trip to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas where I would stay in the no luxury accommodations of the federal penitentiary. Are the rules so much different on Capital Hill? (When we get out of the current money mess, I'll start calling it Capitol Hill again.)

So, how about it, MS Napolitano? Am I to understand that any veteran who is critical of the current administration and its policies is to be considered an extremist, a terrorist, a traitor to the country he or she fought for? Are we to be banned from ownership of weapons? We once took up weapons to support and defend that which you now claim we are out to destroy. I weep for what my country has become.

Oh, well! I could be in worse company. I am a veteran like my grandfathers, my uncles, my brother and brother-in-law and my wife. I believe in the right of American citizens to freely bear arms like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. I also recall stories of another man who was considered an extremist, terrorist and a traitor by his country. They nailed Him to a tree, as I recall.

Love, law and reality

I think it has become much too easy to be labeled in our society. People get labeled all the time for a myriad of reasons. Some of the labels are warranted. Some aren't. The problem is that there are some labels that are so potent that they stay with a person for a lifetime, whether they were warranted or not, and these labels can ruin people's lives.

Little boys, as young as six, are being labeled in this way. I remember reading that it happened to a boy of about that age who tried to kiss a little girl he liked. Not so very many years ago, that was considered natural and normal behavior for little boys who were beginning to discover little girls. But I guess that was a different time. It almost seems like it was an alternate reality now; that time in which I was a child. It was expected that little boys and girls were going to begin to explore the mysteries of the attractions between the sexes.

However, this little boy was expelled. He was tried in a court of law. He was labeled a sex offender. His life is ruined forever. Isn't this an excessive punishment for a little boy just beginning to understand that there is a difference between boys and girls?

Then there are the labels that have been used for many, many years. Let me give you a scenario. A boy and girl meet in school and they date for some years. He is a couple of years older. Their attraction for each other takes a natural course and they have intercourse. Should this boy now be labeled a sex offender because of some arbitrary age limit that has nothing to do with the feeling these two young people have for each other?

Do not misunderstand me! I do not advocate sexual assault or statutory rape. I don't even advocate pre-marital sex! I just think that our society should go a little way towards helping our children avoid actions that will ruin their lives. The pressure to engage in sexual activity is bearing down upon children as it never has before. It is in the movies, TV, music, websites and conversations that surround our kids every day.

Have we really become a One-Mistake culture? It doesn't seem so when we deal with celebrities. How many times have some of the more famous celebrity divas been in court over the past five years? Maybe that's more of the message we are sending our children. Backing over a paprazzo's foot is okay if you have plenty of money, but ordinary little boys are banned from a normal life forever for doing something normal.

Now we have a teen celebrity who admits she is dating a man who is twenty. I am not pre-supposing that anything untoward has happened nor that it will. As far as I know, the young lady in this situation is just that, a young lady and a Christian whose values mean a lot to her. However, attraction is attraction and things do happen no matter how fervently couples are committed to waiting. If anything should happen, the current system says that legal action could be taken against this young man, whether the coupling were consensual or not. Why?

We are so messed up as a society when it comes to appropriate ages for certain activities. At 16, a young girl can decide to emancipate herself from her parents, or have an abortion without parental consent, or drive a car that could kill dozens of others if used irresponsibly but she is not empowered to make a decision that will keep a boy she loves from a life that is ruined forever. The boy, for his part, may drive at 16, must register for the Selective Service at 18, can serve in the Armed Forces at 18 but cannot have a beer when he comes home on leave. And God help him if he comes home from the hell of war and makes love to his sweetheart who is still only 17.

It all seems so very cruel and arbitrary. It's a minefield of laws and contradictions that is maiming and crippling the lives of the very children we say we are trying to protect.