Flying through Thanksgiving

Well, with Thanksgiving weekend over, and Black Friday past us, I have a few things to be thankful for.

First, my wife. For everything she does for me, even though I don't deserve it, including the fact that she completed all our Christmas shopping already, allowing us to sit and laugh at the shoppers last Friday from our breakfast across the street at Bob Evans.

Second, my son. Who will be here shortly. Who will be getting his first taste of paintball this Saturday. From the sidelines, of course.

Thirdly, all my bones remained in their original packaging, and their original shape, during our Thanksgiving Day football game. Most of my muscles did as well.

Fourth(ly?), our house, which is large enough to raise a family, yet small enough that a few hours of dedicated work will catch us up on the neglected housework from the past month or so. Which we also did on Friday.

Fifth(ly?), Flying. And Monty Python. And YouTube. You need to watch the whole clip.


wingnut

Empire? Part Three: Your own political Jesus

Judaism, as a belief system, has more in common with what we would call Eastern religions, the more spiritual, or mystic, belief structures common in Hinduism, or Buddhism, or Taoism and the like. To some scholars, Judaism is actually considered an "Eastern" religion. One of the similarities is the fact that knowledge is more holistic in those traditions than in our Western tradition.

We in the western world have "stovepiped" our educational system. We have divided it into different studies, different disciplines. It is entirely possible for a person to know absolutely everything there is to know about economics, and yet fail to understand even the most basic political science ideas. It is possible for a person to be an absolute genius in mathematics, and yet not have any idea why humans think the way they do.

In Judaism, there was an understanding that education was the end-all, be-all way to a better life. The way they approached their religion was the same thing. It wasn't simply something they did on the Sabbath, or just one area of the education that they needed to fulfill the degree requirements. It was their life. There couldn't be any divisions, or "stovepipes" in between the various educational disciplines. Everything affected and influenced everything else. Josephus, a Jewish historian, is quoted as saying that Jews treasured their education "above all else".
There is a sense, in the Jewish tradition, that one could not fully understand the world, could not get fully educated, unless one learned about God. God was the reason for the world, and in order to be fully equipped to understand the world, one must attempt to understand God. The understanding of God is the beginning of wisdom. Sounds familiar, right?
Thus, in Proverbs, it is mentioned three times( 1:7, 9:10, and 15:33), once in Psalms (111:10), once in Ecclesiastes (12:13), and once in Job (28:28).

So in the Christian faith, with Jesus as our Ultimate Teacher, we can view Him as a political teacher, an environmentalist, a social activist, and an economics professor. Not because he put on those different hats, so to speak, but because his message is meant to be holistic in nature. Jesus is teaching us how to be fully human, how to live the way God intended His creation to live. Of course that message will have bearing on politics. Of course that message will have environmental concerns. Of course that message will be a social message.

The political Jesus faces off squarely with the system of Roman oppression of the day, and for the trouble, Jesus gives the ultimate sacrifice. Imagine a world where you were under someone else's control. This person allowed you to worship the way you wanted to, but collected ridiculous taxes for it. There was always the threat of violence. People were imprisoned for the most minor offenses. There were soldiers on every street corner, and they could make you carry their stuff for them. They had nothing to hold them back from their actions. They were free to do what they wanted, take what they wanted, make you do what they wanted. Even though they allowed you to have your temple, they made sure that it never got out of hand. That meant soldiers right down the road, and military parades, and many arrests and beatings, especially during a festival time.

First century Palestine was like this. Indeed, it probably bore more similarities to the Soviet Union, or Iraq under Saddam than to anything else.

This is the world into which Jesus was born. He was intimately familiar with Jewish religion, practice, and education. He was also intimately familiar with the oppression of the Roman Empire. His teachings were not all new, but he taught "like someone with authority", not like the other rabbis of the day.

His teachings served to upset nearly everyone within the establishment. The Temple "mafia", those that controlled and profited from Temple worship, did not like the fact that Jesus said that the Temple was not the point of worshipping God. The affluent citizens of Jerusalem (and Israel as a whole) did not like the fact that their comfortable way of life was characterized as blasphemous. The Roman government overseeing Palestine did not like Jesus because the people kept claiming that He was the true King. Obviously, when you're in charge, and everyone under you keeps saying that this other guy is really in charge, and has more power than you, you don't like it.

It was important to display the power and might of the Roman Empire in the various provinces. When an area was subjected, and after that on roman Festival dates and other important days, the Romans would stage a demonstration. Throughout history, this has been a fairly effective pacification tool for all empires and hegemons. The Roman legion would gather up its best looking uniforms, decorate and shine it's armor, and fly all sorts of various flags. Think of Nuremberg during Nazi Germany, or Soviet Moscow. The power and might of the military was demonstrated for all to see, with the obvious message: We're in charge now, and look at our massive horses and swords.

In Palestine, the important major city was Jerusalem. So the Roman legion would approach Jerusalem from the west, in order to go through the main gate of the city. Along the route that the parade would take, the local citizens were made to come out and line the streets and dance and sing and celebrate. At the head of this procession, the general or leader in charge of the area would be mounted, in all his military glory, on the best looking, strongest warhorse that could be found. As the leader of the parade passed, the crowd was sometimes forced to wave palm branches, or place them in the street so that the Roman Army would not get their sandals dirty. It was also a sign of subjection to the army. Even the trees would bow before the Roman conquerors. Sometimes they would put their cloaks in the road instead of palm branches. After the parade had passed, the citizens were made to follow the procession into the city, in preparation for the victory "celebration". The procession would wind through the city, finally ending up at the seat of provincial power, Fortress Antonia.

Jesus, during his final week of earthly teaching, was making his way back to Jerusalem. In Luke's Gospel especially, it is mentioned many times that Jesus was "on his way to Jerusalem". In Luke's mind, the climax of Jesus' teaching was to happen in Jerusalem, and there was some urgency written into the account. Jesus was compelled to travel to Jerusalem.

He finally makes it. As the stage is set for His last week of teaching, He and his disciples are near the Mount of Olives. Now the main roads leading to Jerusalem entered the city from the west. This was where the main gate was, and the main roads connecting Jerusalem with the other major cities in the area. These main roads and the main gate were the reasons that the Romans entered the city from the west. They wanted the whole city to understand that they were in charge.

Now the Mount of Olives was a favorite spot for Jesus to teach from. We find Him there quite frequently, teaching to the crowds that would gather. So it is no suprise that as Jesus comes back to Jerusalem, He would stop there. If we look on a map of the Jerusalem area, we can see the Mount of Olives, the Valley of Hinnom, and other locations that the Jews of Jesus' day would be familiar with. The Mount of Olives is directly east of Jerusalem. So, in the Triumphal Entry, Jesus' "homecoming" into Jerusalem, and the climax of His earthly ministry, we find Him entering Jerusalem from the east, directly opposite the direction of the imperial power of Rome.

But that did not stop His followers from snapping off palm branches and waving them around as they followed Him into town, or throwing their cloaks on the ground in front of Him.
Another interesting thing is what Jesus rode into town. Instead of a beautiful powerful warhorse, with all the muscles and armor and decoration that went along with it, Jesus rode a donkey. Furthermore, a donkey that had not been ridden before. Ever watched someone try to ride an animal that's never been ridden before? It's not the most glorious experience.

Once Jesus enters the city, with all the commotion and cheering and singing, Roman tradition would indicate that He would enter into the building that held the seat of power. And He does. But it's not Fortress Antonia. It's the Temple.

If Pilate, who was the Roman governor at the time, did not actually witness this triumphal entry, he no doubt had informants that let him know what was going on. And no doubt the full significance of the way Jesus entered the city was apparent to Pilate. Jesus was intentionally demonstrating, by His teaching, and His actions, that the way to live a full life, the true way to be fully and truly human, was anti-imperial. Jesus was forcing, and still today forces, people to choose their way of life.

So what will it be? Will you enter from the west, or the east?


wingnut

Aviation Rants

Please allow me today to be a bit pedantic. As most of you know, I enjoy aviation. I enjoy flying, I enjoy watching airplanes, I enjoy reading about airplanes (and pilots). Every once in a while, I also enjoy working around airplanes.

I was at work the other night, and as is my custom, I brought my paper work to the other facility on my way to top off my fuel truck. While over there, I noticed some pictures on the wall. Now this past summer, we have been going through a rather lengthy remodeling process, updating our FBO facility (finally). So there has been painting, repainting, remodelling of the bathrooms, new furniture, new HD Plasma widescreens (four!), new desks and workstations, and the re-organization of the work areas.

Anyway, these pictures I saw were newly hung in the newly painted and newly carpeted hallway. There were quite a few, chronicling the history of the airport, and local aviation and history. There was a boat on Reeds Lake, for instance, and a photo from the '20s displaying old hangar buildings and a ramp area.

A few of the pictures had airplanes on them, as would be expected. One was of the first furniture delivery by air from Grand Rapids, another one was some local military figures standing next to an airplane, and the third was a gentleman sitting in his aircraft, all smiles for the camera.

The pictures were nicely matted and framed, all in all a wonderful compliment to local aviation, something that should be expected when one enters a facility on an airport. At least in my mind, anyway.

But.

But, and this is a massive but,

The captions were wrong.

I could understand this if this were, say, in a doctor's office. Or perhaps a company that was close to the airport, but not directly involved in aviation, say, the management offices of the Airport Business Park, or something like that. If Applebees opened up a neighborhood grill right next door to the airport, I would expect that the captions might not exactly be 100% correct.

But I work at the airport. My company is in the aviation industry. How did they mess this up?

In the picture of the man sitting in his cockpit, the aircraft is labeled as an Aerocoupe. First off, it's not Aerocoupe, it's Ercoupe. It is a rather unconventional spelling, and I would normally have overlooked this common error, but the name of the aircraft was painted on the side of said aircraft, plainly visible in the picture!
Now, they did get the picture from the Grand Rapids Library picture archives, and it's mislabeled there as well...but still...with all of our combined experience with aviation, there has to be somebody that knows this stuff?? Surely I can't be the only one?? Even if the person doing this project hasn't spent their whole lives around aviation, did they even look at the picture??

The next picture I take issue with for a couple of reasons. First off, consistency. If you are going to specifically name one aircraft, you probably should attempt to specifically name all the aircraft. The caption on this picture read "Miss Grand Rapids". It was billed as the first shipment by air of furniture from Grand Rapids. This picture was also taken from the library archives, although this picture was labeled in more detail in the archives than on the caption. In the archives, it was labeled as a Ford-Stout monoplane. I could have handled that in the caption.

However, in my life-long continuing quest to put too much effort into trivial circumstances, I did a quick Internet search for Ford produced aircraft. It took less than five minutes for me to find the answer I was looking for. William B. Stout designed and built the aircraft in 1924, and called it the 2-AT (it was his second design for Air Transport). The United States Postal Service purchased two of them for airmail routes. Four of them were purchased by the Ford Motor Company for private company use. In 1925, Ford Motor Company purchased Stout's company, and continued to build the aircraft as Ford-Stout 2-AT, which they also called the "Tin Goose", and sometimes "Air Pullman".
The second reason I took issue with this picture is the fact that it is celebrating the cargo in the caption, not the aircraft. I should mention that the cargo and circumstances of the flight are, again, clearly visible on a banner in the foreground of the picture. This is just a minor quibble, and again, I feel like the point of the picture is the airplane, not the cargo. The cargo, and the circumstances, are integral to the moment, and therefore the picture, but give due credit to the reason the picture is important to us at the airport.

The last picture is labeled simply as a "Training Plane". There are two men standing in front of it, in military uniform. This caption I take issue with because, again, it is not consistent. Let's try to properly name all aircraft, not just the one that is grossly misspelled. The aircraft pictured is, in my mind, one of the most important aircraft of the 20th century.
And it's darned close to the number one spot in that list. The aircraft is a Boeing PT-17 Stearman. Again, can we look at the picture? The name is listed right on the aircraft, clearly visible in the picture. And when you take the time to list by name the two majors standing in front of the plane, why not take the time to properly name the aircraft, which is, again, the reason the picture is important (or should be) to us at the airport.

For those of us who work in aviation, it is not simply something that is neat to watch every once in a while. We make our living by aviation. Aviation is the reason that we have jobs, and those jobs are the reason we can afford housing, health care, transportation, and entertainment. For someone to not take even a passing interest in this demeans the whole process.

We say that we strive for perfection in our customer service, in our professionalism, and our work ethic. My company is big into customer service. How professional would it be for one of our customers to walk by those pictures and read the captions, misspellings and omitted details?

My guess is that he would maybe think twice about letting us service his aircraft. If they don't care about those pictures, do they really care about my airplane out on the ramp?

My rant is over. Until someone mentions Hollywood...

Oh, and before I forget, even though they are watermarked, these pictures are property of the Grand Rapids Public Library. Just in case somebody wants to get me in trouble.


wingnut

Empire? Part two: The Empire Strikes Back

Even with all the progress that empires have the power to make, there seems to always be some bad mixed in with the good. All too often, the peace and prosperity of imperial domain are bought with blood, in the barrel of a gun, or the edge of a sword. At their very best, the empires of history have remained a steadying hand on world events, laying the groundwork, the foundation for peace and prosperity. At their worst, sometimes even these same empires have had a direct hand in the bloodshed, warfare, and economic oppression that has plagued mankind since history began. What then shall we do? Are we to accept all the good that empire gives us, overlooking the bad that may or may not happen as a result? Are we to fight against imperial domain, even when that domain has had a positive effect on humanity? Can we even argue that we are better off under the power and influence of empires?

In my last post, I covered a tiny sampling of what could be considered the positive influences of empire. There are many more examples of empires whose power and influence have affected a large number of people, have given them access to world trade, solid economic footing, improved health care and education, and in general an elevated quality of life.

However, as with many things, it seems that the good is followed in very short order by the bad. For every example we can find of an empire using it's influence to improve the quality of life for those under it's power, we can find just as many, and probably more, examples of gross abuses and negligent use of that power. Shortly after I had posted part one, my friend left a comment for me. His question was, "...at what cost?” Far too few people care to ask this question. I do not pretend or claim to have a definitive answer to that question, but I will explore the other side of the argument. Also, as a Christian, it is sometimes not enough to ask the cost of something, but to ask if we are willing and able to accept the cost. I fear that many people, Christians included, do not stop to ask these questions.

As I've said previously, the Roman road system is a marvel of engineering, able to swiftly unite the various provinces economically and militarily in a way never before seen in the world. But one can question whether the Huns, the Goths, and the Visigoths enjoyed the same view of Roman roads. It was these very roads that the Roman legions marched down, bringing nearly unprecedented military strength to bear on these barbarians, forcing them from their land and causing conflict that brought about the end of their way of life.

Pax Romana, the Roman Peace, was supposedly an era of peace and stability created when the Romans finally "ended" the threat of barbarian invasion. But that era was created by massive bloodshed, destruction of much of Europe and it's people groups. Even within the empire itself, the "peace" was not so peaceful, with assassinations and political mutinies being the order of the day. In retrospect, Pax Romana could be considered more a figment of the imagination of those who wished to capitalize on imperial power for their own ends, rather than an actual time of peace.

Great Britain, who established their empire through worldwide trade and naval power, could be considered benevolent in many areas of the world. To be sure, their influence is credited with bringing many tribal and aboriginal peoples into the modern era, with all the benefits of that modern era, such as economic viability, infrastructure creation, education, and protection from vandals.

But even with that empire, the "vandals" being protected against were often displaced landowners and others whose property was taken from them. The education program within the empire was one of the best in the world at the time, but was only open to those with the right connections. The creation of infrastructure was not motivated by any altruistic means, but a greedy economic motivation, that only served to better exploit the natural resources and indigenous population of the territory.

In India, the British East India Company was allowed, through shrewd financial dealings and it's own private army under the protection of the Crown, to manipulate and take advantage of the entire country of India. What started out as simply a trade company grew into it's own imperial domain, wresting control from the Indians from their own country, and finally turning it's power over to the British Crown, in effect making the Indian population not so loyal citizens of the empire.

In China, Great Britain went to war for the right to sell opium, destroying the population of China through attrition and drug abuse, and all the while squeezing the Chinese economy of all it was worth. Jeffrey Sachs, in his book The End of Poverty, compares this action to Columbia declaring war on the United States for the right to sell cocaine. China has only now begun to recover from the turmoil of the colonial and post-colonial era that followed.

If we are to consider America an empire, we must examine the imperial behavior of America. Our history is full of examples of poor stewardship and oppressive foreign policy. During the Cold War, we did everything in our power to destroy communism. Our beliefs and ideals led us to undermine socialist systems in any country we found them, so as to not allow the Soviet Union to gain any advantage over us.

The drama of the Cold War was played out in hundreds of tiny, backwater small conflicts and political dealings, none of which had the best interests of the involved populace in mind.

One can consider our failed attempts to influence the Caribbean, as well as numerous countries in Africa that were used as pawns in the global chess game of the Cold War. In the case of the Congo, and the country of Angola, Western interests led by the CIA assassinated political leaders and fomented and supported insurrection by armed thugs against established governments. These governments were relatively stable and transparent, but ideologically they were socialist, and were receiving aid and advice from the Soviet Union. Therefore, they were the enemy. Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam, and Korea were also battlefronts in the Cold War, infused with American money and influence. After the Cold War, these political pawns across the globe were left to fend for themselves, stripped of nearly all the support we had provided. Of these countries, only Korea survived relatively intact. Vietnam is now making headway against the turmoil of the last sixty years, but we're back with more money and influence in Iraq in Afghanistan, fighting the very people we helped fight Soviet domination just a few decades ago. This present situation we find ourselves in, the Global War on Terror, is seen by many as simply the same old political chess game played during the Cold War. In fact, it is not. I believe there are key differences between our conduct then and our conduct now. But that should be a different post.

This post is under the heading of Bible stuff, and it really doesn't sound like it. But it is. Our church recently did a study in narrative theology. This idea demonstrates the Bible as one huge, overarching story that stems from Creation to the End, showing God's plan throughout human history, and how humanity is growing and progressing within that story with all the little intertwining stories that make up our lives. There were four main points to the story; one could almost call them chapters, or acts. One of these "acts" was titled Egypt. Within this act we get an explanation of our fallen condition, and we see what happens when humans live outside of God's plan. The phrase that Pastor Rob kept using was "Empire is what happens when sin builds up steam." The dominion of sin, the desire of humanity to not follow God's way, will always end up in slavery, oppression, and exploitation.

If we are willing to accept the bad with the good, as sort of a "manifest destiny" of humanity, then we are no better than the ones who are pulling the political strings. We are no better than the assassin, or the secret agent who topples a government to further his country's political agenda.

I think it can be demonstrated that worldly power is too often expressed by oppression and exploitation of others. Imperial power is gained only at the expense of someone or something else.

We cannot accept this as Christians. It is not right.

wingnut

Empire? Our "new" hope?

With my post of October 23rd serving as a very tiny indication of where I might go, I thought I could expand my views and discuss theological issues concerning the idea of Empire. The goal of this blog (all my blogs) is to explore and explain the world around me. Believing, as I do, that God is the center of all things, the Truth of all things, then everything I discuss or talk about will, either explicitly or implicitly, be discussing or talking about God. Or at least attempting to.

Our pastor last year did a speaking tour across the US entitled "Everything is Spiritual". It will be coming out in DVD shortly. In brief, Pastor Rob's teaching explains that we are spiritual creatures in a physical world. Our drives, our desires, our thoughts, our actions, and our words all stem from a deep desire for connection. We were created to live in perfect harmony with God and the rest of Creation. Through the fall of Adam, sin destroyed that harmony, and now, whether we realize it or not, we are driven by the desire to reconnect fully with God, Creation, and ourselves.

Therefore, every decision we make has a bearing on our spirituality. Every action we commit to has a bearing on our spirituality.

When we choose to keep things or give them to charity, it's spiritual. When we choose to speed on the highway, it's spiritual. When we choose to eat more than we have to, it's spiritual. When we choose not to eat enough, it's spiritual. When we choose to buy things we don't need, it's spiritual.

When we choose our politicians and leaders, it's spiritual.

Within that framework, then, is where we must start when thinking politically.

When considering this topic, obviously, one can point out brilliant high points of any empire. The fact that Roman roads are still in use, or at least the routes they took, all over Europe, is testament to the engineering capabilities that probably would have not been possible if not for the military and political power of the Roman Empire.

The education, infrastructure, public health and worldwide trade that came along with the British Empire make a strong case in India, China, the Middle East, and America. Yes, America. The British Empire was perhaps the biggest motivation our politicians and early leaders had to establish the new country as a world power. Would we be the global superpower we are today if not for the constant competition with the British Empire?

Speaking of that, what of the American Empire? We hate to think of ourselves as such, but aren't we? Is there a place on this earth that America cannot influence, if not outright control? Nial Ferguson, in his books, makes the claim that empires can be good. He examines in detail the British Empire, and also what he calls the American Empire, and explains how they have benefitted the world in the past, and how they can continue to influence the world for the better in the future.

Empires can exert their control for the betterment of society, and often do. As I said, the Roman road system was excellent for world trade at the time, allowing various civilizations to contact and trade with one another. Along the way, Greco-Roman thought and ideas were spread far and wide, giving birth to Western culture. Before that, Alexander spread his Greek influence into Africa and all the way to India.

The British Empire, as mentioned above, greatly improved the health of many peoples around the world, bringing them medicine from the West's scientific revolution, bringing them infrastructure, bringing them structured government that was able to keep peace and promote prosperity. Many benefited from the education they received from British-run schools and universities, all things that these different people groups would not have had access to had it not been for the British Empire.

Today, America finds itself in a unique position, without all the physical trappings of an actual empire, but with more influence worldwide than any empire has had in the past. Our governmental model, at least in theory, has proven itself over and over again, and fledgling democracies are taking shape all over. More and more political systems are allowing more and more freedoms to their people, and we would be remiss if we did not consider America at the very least an inspiration for those peoples demanding more freedom.

Our economy, despite what everyone is saying, is strong, able to generate much income that can be used to better the lives of many people, not just in this country, but abroad. The aid we provide to many nations is the only way their governments can retain solvency, while we both work towards propping them up to stand on their own.

This financial power serves another wonderful purpose: We can afford to research and experiment and discover ways to improve the world even more. Science is strong in western civilizations. We have brought ourselves, through a unique combination of private industry, economic power, and political will, from testing the first aircraft to leaders in the space race, in just now one century. If anything can demonstrate the power of scientific advancement, it is the aerospace industry. This scientific knowledge can and does benefit all of humanity, and might not be as powerful or as advanced if it were not for the power of the American Empire. This sort of scientific advancement is happening across the board, in all fields, and can only continue under the good graces of a structure that continues to hold the power and influence that America does.

We find ourselves in a unique position indeed. So is Ferguson right? Is the world better off under the influence of empires?


wingnut

My Wife

Where should I begin, when talking about a person that has become my whole reason for living? A person that has become so important to me, that I sometimes do not know where I end and she begins?

Perhaps I should begin almost a decade ago. Well, I guess not quite. Closer to eight years ago.

I hadn't been putting forth the effort required for college, and decided that perhaps I should focus on getting out of debt. By that, I really mean that I just wanted to have fun. I didn't want to go to class, I just wanted to hang with my friends, drink coffee and smoke cigarettes all night long.

I spent entirely too much time doing that, so much so that my friends and I could run the local Steak n Shake. Seriously. Enough of us worked there, and those that didn't were allowed into the back room anyway. We would always get our own drinks and malts. Sometimes, we even rang up the normal customers. It was almost like a mafia. But without the whole kneecapping thing, and the racketeering.

I was living free and easy, not caring about tomorrow, or even later today. I still lived at home, so I had all sorts of disposable income. I mostly spent it on smokes and food. And tuition for classes that I tried to concentrate on.

One of the people who hung out at Steak n Shake was this girl who talked to me sometimes. She thought I was cute, but also thought that I was a player, and wasn't interested in me.

But one night, she sat and talked to me. She told me that she wasn't going to be all crazy over me like all the other girls were. She made it clear that I wasn't all that. I told her she was right.

We talked some more. We mostly talked about the relationships we had both gotten out of recently. Her boyfriend of a long time was waffling back and forth, would say he wanted her, then decide that he wanted another girl, and then he cheated on her, then wanted her back, it was really dumb. I had just had my heart torn all to pieces by a little pixie punk rocker from Wisconsin, so we had something in common. We would sit and smoke and talk about how we didn't want a relationship, and somehow, we fell into one.

I remember our first kiss. It was outside at Steak n Shake, appropriately enough, and she was leaving for the night. I figured I would too, so I walked her to her car. She said goodnight, and just that quick, kissed me on the lips. I didn't have time to react, so I just said something stupid like, "Oh...okay goodnight..".

Shan doesn't think this was our first kiss. She doesn't count it, because it was just a peck. Which it was, honestly. But I was hooked. According to her, our first kiss was after that, at her apartment.

Somehow or other, we continued in the relationship that was not a relationship, except to everyone else. She told me that she didn't want to date me, but she didn't want me to date anyone else either. That sounded about right to me too, so I said okay.

I knew something changed when I went away for spring break. I called her from Florida, and she told me she loved me. I said I loved her back.

One night, we were driving to East Town to catch a concert by a Calvin Band that my friend Chris liked. On the way there, there was an accident. A van went off the road and rolled over a bunch of times. So I stopped to help.

Shan watched me run down the shoulder of the highway, combat boots wrecking my feet, and wallet chains swinging all over the place, and decided that any person who would run towards a wrecked car spilling gas all over the place was a person that she should not let go.

One year, during the fireworks downtown on the Fourth of July, Shannon told me that she was going to ask me to marry her. She said it loud enough that people around us heard, and they waited for me to say something. I laughed and said something stupid again, probably about how I couldn't believe those people thought we were serious. I thought she was joking, and she thought she was joking.

The next year at Fourth of July, we were again downtown watching the fireworks. As they ended, I got down on my knees and asked Shannon to be my bride. I was serious. I didn't have a ring though, and Shannon thought I was joking. She told me to get up. I said I was serious. Then my friend told her I was serious.

She then pulled me into her arms, and said, "When I get a ring, you'll get your answer." But the way she said it was nice. She was saying yes, and I knew it.

She picked out her ring that fall, and I got my official answer. We started making wedding plans.

On November 1, 2002, we got married. It was a beautiful fall day. The sun was shining, there were a few colorful leaves still on the trees. The church was beautiful, the same church that my parents got married at, the church my grand parents had been attending since who knows when. It was almost like we were supposed to get married there.

Since then, the past five years have been wonderful. The girl that didn't want to date me now sleeps next to me every night. When we talk now, we look back on the time when we were dating, and we cannot believe so much time has gone by. We have done much together. We quite honestly, do almost everything together. I like to joke sometimes that it seems like we've been married forever. But what I mean is that it is hard sometimes to imagine a time that I was without her.

We have experienced quite a bit in our life together. There have been ups and downs. Two major surgeries, the trials of trying to start a family. Buying a house and making it our home. Discovering church, and what it means to let God in to your life. Discovering what exactly we have left when we are at the end of our rope. Now, as we begin our second five years together, we are about to embark on the lifelong journey of parenthood. I can think of no-one better to share that with than my wife.


Sometimes, I let my regrets get to me. I wish I would have done this or that, or wished that this situation would have come out different. Shannon is the first one to tell me that it doesn't matter what happened in the past. She constantly reminds me that we are always able to look forward with hope. She reminds me that I have the world. No matter what happens, I know that she will be there, telling me that I shouldn't worry so much about life. We are together, and we are closer every day. I cannot express the joy that fills me when I realize that my wife will always be there for me.

Every day, she allows me to be more myself than I ever have been. Last year, on our anniversary, I posted some song lyrics that were profound and meaningful to me. They still are.

The chorus of that song has a line in it where the singer says his woman is the other half of his soul. I feel like that is true. My wife allows me to be more fully the person God has made me. I would not be the person I am today if not for my wife. As I said in the beginning, I do not sometimes know just where I end and she begins.

I love you Shannon.

I can't wait for the next five years.


Jason