It's more fun when the win, but it's always nice to see a tribute to a worthy band.

About a month ago, (e:jim) inspired me to FINALLY seek treatment for ADHD.

I've known I'd had it for years, but never sought help because I didn't really want to be on meds, and I had some pretty good coping skills.

Nonetheless, as my life has gotten more complex in recent years, my disorganization, inattentiveness, and tendency to lose track of things has gotten harder to handle. The promise of a non-stimulant drug to help me out (as shared by (e:jim)), Strattera, inspired me.

The first nomination for an entity to be mad at might be ExpressScripts, my prescription plan. I am upset with them because they would not approve strattera, unless I have hypertension and/or other drugs had been tried and found wanting.

In essence they said, "Try the addictive/potentially harmful stimulants first, if you find yourself addicted, or your heary blows up, than we will give you the other drug." Great Plan.

I can also be upset with my PCP. I don't really want to be upset with them, because they are on the West Side and specialize in caring for poor people and refugees, which is why I went to this doctor. I decided I could put up with a crowded, long, wait, if it helped other people get the care they needed.

What really made me mad about them is that they sent my prescription apporval form to the wrong place, and never followed up (with my medical insurance, who they sent it to, my prescription plan, who they should have sent it to, or me) I had to call them to push them to get anything done, and I was told more than once that the problem was that the medical insurer was the hold-up even AFTER I TOLD THEM TWICE not to talk to BlueCross, but rather to talk to ExpressScripts, and got the special phone number for them.

After staterra was denied, because I don't have any heart problems or addictions yet, I decided that I should go along, and take Ritalin.

Of course, ritalin is a controlled substance. So before I could get this prescription, I had to visit the doctor yet again, so I could pee into a cup, sign a contract, and pick up the script (which is not allowed to be faxed to the pharmacy).

So I can be mad at the people that abused the drug, too, and the government that made rules in reaction to said people.

Additionally, I can be mad at myself. Now, I know myself pretty well. Therefore, when I got the script, I decided to go directly to the pharmacist. No passing go, no collecting $200, gotta get the drugs before I lose the little piece of paper.

Of course, the phone rang, and of course, it was an emergency. A woman in my congregation had died. I wasn't going to tell her family to wait while I went to Rite-Aid, so I changed direction.

After spending time with the family, I went straight to Rite-Aid, but it was too late. The prescription was not to be found. I searched every pocket, my whole truck, every place it might have gone, four and five times over. Gone. (I know. It's funny that I lost the paper that gets me the medicine that stops me from losing things)

I drove back to the doctor's office, and they seemed to say that they could write me another one, but couldn't right away because the doctor was at lunch.

So I went after work, waited 30 minutes again, and then was told that I would have to wait a month, because Ritalin is a controlled substance. They can't undo the old script, they can't write another one.

So I'm stuck. Ugh.

This is a response to (e:libertad) 's question.

Suffering may be accepted as a way, but I must speak carefully. So, some caveats:

1. No way of living should be imposed, but this one definitely should not.

2. Suffering in itself should not be seen as an end, or even a means of repentance, as seen here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redemptive_suffering


Still, Christ said, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. " (Matthew 16:24, please excuse the non-inclusive language). When living differently than the rest of the world, even if it is for the good of the world, one might expect to suffer. Again, this does not mean that suffering should be sought out, but the fact remains that Jesus was executed by the state, as were many of his followers. Christianity, practiced faithfully, is not good for empire.

Instead, we should be living in community with those who are suffering already, and thus, bearing another's burdens. There is already enough suffering in the world that we do not have to seek out/create government persecution, or practice self-mortification. We can enter into the suffering of others.

This, oddly enough, is what compassion means literally. "Passion," as we learned from passion plays and that movie, means suffering, and com- as a prefix means "with." Compassion = suffering with. A way of compassion is a way of suffering.

Christianity works from beneath (or at least it is supposed to) rather than stand on a pedestal or shout from a distance, we are called to enter into the brokenness of the world, as our leader did. Another key bible verse (Philippians 2:5-8):

Let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death- even death on a cross.

As is becoming a habit, this is a post that started as a comment. See for back story.


I am having a hard time talking about "religion" in the abstract, so I will be concrete, specific, and personal. This isn't intended to be a defense of religion, but rather an explanation of why my particular faith is important to me.

It's important to me, because it is a counter-narrative that creates a counter-community in a world that is full of lies.

"Lies?" you say. "Yes--lies."

Advertising tells me that I am not ok the way that I am, but that buying a certain product will make me ok--and it invariably does not.

Government tells me that other people (gays, terrorists, immigrants, stock brokers, religious people) are the source of my problems. Often, the proposed solution is violent defeat. The idea that violence will produce peace is another lie that is common in this world.

Other things promise to give me value, and fail. Sex, popularity, food, power--whatever it is that entices, it mostly does so with lies.

Now, those of you that know me know that there is nothing wrong with any of these things in and of themselves. Some of them (most of them?) I like quite a bit! But they can and do lie to you.

In the person of Jesus, I see one who did not live according to the lies. In fact, he exposed them for what they were, and created a counter-community that loved the enemy, received violence without returning it, and found value not in consuming resources, but in distributing them.

I need these stories, and the experience of the presence/love of God that goes with them to resist becoming a part of the system of lies that I outlined. There may be other ways, and if you are on a different one, that is fine with me, but this is what frames and shapes my life. I don't think I could be who I am without the grace of God in my life, and (for the most part) I like who I am and who I am becoming.

When I think about it, Tiny, you seem to experience science in similar ways. You live differently than others, because you have tested your experience.

I guess what is sad is that too many people live with bad science/religion or no science/religion, and just believe what they are told.

(e:jim), upon further reflection, I think you are on to something--much of religion's problems come because we have refused to respect limits. Now, this is tricky for me, because I don't believe in compartmentalizing my faith to only a part of my life--a hobby that I do sometimes and ignore others--it is a way of life.

But on the other hand, it cannot speak with authority over others not practicing that way. We overstep our limits when we generalize the conclusions that have worked for our community to other individuals/situations. While I may accept suffering as a way for myself, it is quite another thing to impose it on another.

Yet, for me, even staying within limits is a religious value--Jesus never took power "over" another, and encouraged his followers to focus on dealing with their own sin, rather than those of others.

Maybe that's enough for now. Just one postscript:

@(e:paul) I hate being a snotty child, but here's my kid-like remark: (e:heidi) and (e:tinypliny) started it! Seriously though, I thank you for creating this tolerant community, where different ideas can be discussed. I am not sure I would have been able to make friends with so many different people without (e:strip), and I am better for the experience.

. . . candidates get when they lose.

Comments on McCain sparked this, but I also remember watching Dole on Letterman after he was defeated and thinking he may have one if he acted more like that.

Gore got a lot more friendly after he got beat--grew a beard, put on weight, smiled more, and started talking about global warming more.

Maybe the conventional wisdom about how to behave in a campaign isn't so wise!

. . . you can thank/blame the Steelers, for beating the Washington Redskins.

. . . Or McCain, for speaking at halftime with EMPTY SEATS and DISINTERESTED PEOPLE behind him. Hey John--this race is televised!

Did you see this? It's like he wants to lose!

(Sorry I can't share it--ABCnews.com is all messed up.)

A make a daily stop at post-gazette.com Go there today, just to see the ad that jumps at you.

I have never seen an ad like that at that site.



It's interesting that my home state is in play. It has been blue state for the past two elections (at least). For a really good analysis on the crazy electoral dynamics of PA, check out This American Life:

Vote tomorrow. Root for the Stillers tonight.

I told tiny that my comment was too long and became a post, so now I have to back it up.

But I was lying.

The party was fun. Now I have to begin my novel.

I know that some people are coming out against it, but I have to think that in reality, they are not. If you are not in favor of "redistribution of wealth," than why do you work/invest/by/sell/trade? If you hope to receive an inheritance, than you expect your parent's wealth to be redistributed to you. If you have an interest-bearing bank account, then a borrowers' wealth is being redistributed to you. A lottery ticket is redistributing many small pieces of wealth, in the hopes of receiving a large redistribution.

Most people, when they say this, really mean that they prefer a "market-based" redistribution of wealth. Most of the time (because some people enter a market with advantages), in a completely open market, wealth becomes re-distributed by becoming concentrated. A concentration of wealth is the opposite of what is commonly referred to as "spreading the wealth around."

Nobody wants their wealth to be redistributed into somebody else's concentration, but everybody wants their concentration to grow.

If people do not think they will enjoy their wealth, than people will lose the incentive to work. Sometimes, high taxes discourage them from working. Other times, a market out of control discourages people, (as in "I owe my life to the company store.") Both must be checked.

I could go on regarding the different ways that tax policy encourages the re-distribution of wealth in different directions, but that isn't my point right now. My point is: everybody wants wealth redistributed. The only question is, how?