Priest, Patriot, Citizen, Activist,...but why am I called a terrorist?

I find myself more and more akin to a political activist than an active citizen. It has thrown me into an internal debate with my ethics of being a politically neutral clergyman. I still hold to my philosophy of peace, yet I yearn for some sort of action beyond yelling to the apathetic crowd of government domesticated cattle. I pray that those who hold office will once again begin upholding to the people of our Nation. I pray that the people will rise up and demand freedom from these constrictions placed upon them and their civil liberties. I pray we once again turn to the needs of our Nation and fix our failing systems in communication, education, our hi-ways, bridges, ports and harbors.
I have been watching and waiting for the accountability of our governmental body to be answered, only to see and find that there is no such belief of our elected officials to be held so accountable for not only their actions, but for the lack of concern for this nation. Each office, each representative, each district, all claim no responsibility yet all call for more, more, more from us citizens to be given, and then blame us when there is no more left to give. And when we, drained of our own personal resources, ask for government assistance, welfare, medicaid, social security, or unemployment, they call us a burden to them, and spend the money overseas, on pet projects or to pay their salaries and personal cabinet budgets.
Enough! I have seen too many good people exploited by them. I have witnessed unchecked and unlawful actions by their privatization of our government system, a system once set as a social democracy for the good of it's people, now stands as a for profit corporation on it's own with it's own agenda.
It sickens me overly, to know that a Nation brought down to it's knees, was done so by our own apathy and our so called representatives. Our voices, so long dormant, now scream for attention, only to be given over to deaf ears. And when they do hear, they respond with arrests of civil disobedience, assaults, and insults to the very people they are supposed to be serving and protecting. This Nation, the one I grew up with so much pride in, was proud to serve and proud to be a part of.
This Nation is no more... it was critically wounded when we gave away the power to print and control our currency. It became crippled when we allowed foreign national and multi national corporations dictate policy on interstate and international trade. It was fatally wounded when our inherent rights of freedom and liberty, was restricted and limited, for our 'own good' of safety and security, by a measured congressional and presidential combination of acts, that effectively would overwrite and render useless our one true governing law, the U S Constitution.
Now, even before that said, I have been placed on a list. A long list of names. Names of people who have spoken out against the government. Names of people who have protested against corporate control, of unlawful bank and mortgage company actions, and worst of all, against our seated government.
 By the newly accepted standards of our government, I am a terrorist.
And that, sickens me most of all.

And one day, after a time...

 Once, in the history of this country, the people addressed the then government of issues and grievances in person and through correspondence. Their words were received, and responded to, with contempt. Their voices fell upon deaf ears, and their persons were labeled as trouble makers, rabble rowers and instigators of unrest. This only accelerated the situations presently in contention, and after a time, these persons instituted a direct action against the then empowered government. Yes, the first hesitant and faulty steps toward revolution and replacement of empowered government with new provisions and government body.

Almost every existing country today can claim that as a beginning of their now embanked government body. And in many places, these scenes are replayed over and over, time and time again, for various reasons with various peoples portrayed as villain and veteran, terrorist and patriot, sinners and saints all. We have so many reasons and excuses to 'go to war', and many were initiated from a 'move for peaceful change'. We take sides based on individual needs and sometimes switch sides for reasons as minor as worried about being on the loosing, or as history usually records it, the 'wrong' side. Petty and impersonal decisions, that fall far from the initial reasoning and desired outcomes.

Always is there a call from the oppressed to be helped, to be aided and uplifted from depression, disease, hunger and lack of shelter. Always there is reason to assist our fellow humans as we ourselves were helped and aided by others. Always is there also a call by the empowered to be served. Where these line vary and cross, we see injustice, unlawfulness, and a reason to be concerned. Our existing government has set guiding laws into place to uphold these less fortunate, to ensure a common defense of all persons. Persons...not corporations, not government employees or elected officials, but persons.

YET WHEN THE PEOPLE SPEAK, THEIR VOICES ARE FALLING ON DEAF EARS. 

Deafened by cash, gifts, entitlements not earned by any other means but to give heedance to those already empowered. 

And the people continue to suffer. But they are not silent.

 Together, they gather and vent their grievances, plan communications with their government, and hold to their promised rights and liberties, all the while being stripped of them and limited by new laws. Until, one day, after a time...

There is honor in holding to truths, honor in defending those who cannot defend themselves. There is honor in demanding justice, and equality, for all under the law; and there is honor in demanding the laws be just and followed by even those who would make the laws.

But there is no honor in war. No glory in battle.

Battle, the acts during a state of war (and in many times during a state of peace) cause harm, destruction, and death. They hold a high price, even unaccountable by some measures, especially when compared to the miniscule cost of a movement toward peace or peaceful change. There is little glory in death, even when defending a purpose or ideal greater than accepted Gods, endangered family, or indebted friends. Death, the final sacrifice that one can give, is a final act of defiance in the face of adversity. You cannot repeat that action once done, nor repeal it's application, but only hope to honor it by following it with changing what has lead up to and caused it's appearance.

Wars are not impersonal, they affect everyone. They affect economics and environments. They affect every species that come close to it's boundaries and actions, and they affect them for far longer than the time it takes to fight, win or loose. We all loose in war. In battle we say we either won or lost, ground, men, ideas... We still loose. In war if we be victorious, we then survey the damages and losses on all sides...We still loose. Those costs are rarely repaid nor reclaimed, and many are uncounted. We loose so much because we, as fickle and impersonal as we have become, do not see that once we begin to attack and engage in battle, one side, or many, will loose the ability to hold to itself and it's goals and will be forced into something it does not belong to nor want. Sometimes that is forever.

We destroy the old and replace it with the new. We loose. We loose bits of identity when cultures are over run and replaced by different alien things. We loose languages, art, cultural histories that once stood out and became unique only to be redefined and judged against the new. We might believe that we have won, but the cost is almost always too high to bear.

I am no lover of war. I, much like most people, prefer peace. I'm not considered a pacifist by my peers, however I hold to debate, legal precedence, and mediation and negotiation of commonality and or compromise. I will defend myself, and those who cannot defend themselves, and that of my property, and my family when necessary. That too being my right. And I will do so by any and every means necessary based on circumstance, and here too ,I hold to peace and peaceful means as long as possible. But even the hardest steel can shatter under extensive pressure.

Change is inevitable, and we are in the constant field to implement and direct it. We are all accountable for it, and it will affect us all, in some manner or another. Our choices are independent and personal, the consequences, however, are another matter all together yet still are shared by all.

And one day, after a time....

Occupy Movement in Idaho

Here is a quick video that has a lot of the information and links to the Idaho Occupy websites. This is not a complete collection of this information, but will be added to as information comes in.
Please share this with everyone.
Occupy Idaho Falls
IF facebook Group and Page
Occupy Pocatello Facebook Group

Please add more in the comments...

Sometimes its hard to be positive...

Sometimes its is hard to be positive...
     I look back, once or twice a year, over just my life and the interactions that I have shared with others (and there are so many others out there) to see just where I have been and where I am going. Every once in a while someone asks me;"Where do you see yourself in 5 years?", and it grates on my grain. I have a talent for seeing things as or before they develop, and I observe the goings on around me acutely, allowing for a perception of future possibilities and probabilities that is fairly accurate. Mix into that a deep understanding of the 'natures of man' and I am allowed a fairly clear vision of up coming events.
     Knowing that we are 'pre-programmed' to be 70% more negative than positive, we tend to look and focus on the 'bad things' in our lives. The outstanding thing is, we strive for positive goals. When looking at this information, are you still curious as to why there are so many cases of manic/depressives out there? They call it 'bi-polar' now, yet we have been predisposed to be that way by how we live, what we learn, what we teach, and that nagging inner voice that screams about 'fairness' in the universe. What a mind f*#k. We are exposed to so many sources in our lives that contradict our desire to simply be happy.
     Our various religions teach of morals and accepted attitudes or actions, yet they add into those the call of duty to follow only certain teachings or worse yet, follow only certain teachers. So much for free will, right? Many of the known practiced religions have been helpful in growing out of the negative world concept, but on the same note, and within those same teachings, is a call of destruction in harmony within our differences. One of the many reasons that I hold little to no stock in religion, at least as far as what we define as religion. That however does not give me reason or purpose to not study these interpretations and transcribed translations of these most sacred of works. I study them in-depth.
     Our sciences of psychology and aptitude of psychiatry has done less good than harm in application. Yes they both have provided guidelines and outlines of 'human nature' and who our minds can bend and warp 'reality' as well as given us many definitions about mental disease... but have you noticed that these definitions change as the generations move forward, and yet they still have no clue as to how to 'normalize' the mind without loading down the 'system' of the functions of the brain with drugs? We do have a better understanding of 'what is wrong with the mind', yet we haven't accepted a recognized treatment that works outside of; "Change your mind and how you think." Then we are left to the questions of; why change our thoughts, who approves our thoughts and where do we go from here?
     Modern science or ancient mysticism has been chasing those questions for centuries. Here we are, 70,000 years into our known understanding of the 'human nature' and we are finding ourselves as infants wondering about the existence of other worldly life while we have yet to understand our own. Are we truly that audacious to believe that we are as intelligent as we surmise? We are barely to the stepping stages in our walk in life, as we only have comparison to gauge and judge things to, for or against, and even there we cannot always agree. We are still arguing over 'authority' and recognition of credentials while giving little credit to experience in actual application. Another mind f*#k.
     Authority,... where does that come from? Who has it, and over what topics or position in life? How did they get it? Why should we accept it? All these come from our teachings and understandings of religion, science, government. Our elders, ancestors, our teachers, our family... There has been an ongoing battle of authority and control, waged continually for centuries either in plain sight or behind the scenes, to be able to control. It is part of the 'human nature', the will to control, to dominate. We, as a species, speak both for and against it in the same breath. Is it audacity? Is it justified?
     We fail to accept our own inner voice that tells us things such as; 'Be cautious, be happy, be productive, be part of thy own tribe and share the grazing lands.' we focus way too much on control, on dominance, that we, as a species, have destroyed land sea and air along with driving to extinction many other species of life just so we, as a species, can prevail even toward our own extinction. A long sentence, a long thought.
So now you see why I started with such a simple, yet deep statement...
Sometimes its hard to be positive...

Change? Yes, change...

 I want to bring about change, as most of us do. And like most of us who want change, I don't know where or how to start. We see so many things wrong, or that can be improved, yet we fail to be able to find the 'starting point' shy of scrapping it all and starting over. And I am being generously vague here, as we all know of hundreds of things we'd like to see changed in our daily lives and in our world. The end though, we perceive as better, or fair, or some other value above and beyond that which we know know life, or our world, to be.

I could say that we should be able to define what is not 'right' in our world much easier than to define that which is 'right'. We can easily point out the negative issues in our lives that we would improve if we could, and we can identify all manner of things that we call 'bad' in our world. But can we, as individuals or as a whole, find how to improve them? Most of the world population is content to point fingers and accuse, place blame and deny any fault, but how is that helping? Another large part of the population is content in their apathy, and would rather not 'rock the boat'. Again, there is no help for change there.

And now we come to the meat of our world and lives that need to be changed...

Where do we start? Personal aptitude, attitude, beliefs, diets,... Is it only us, as individuals, that we need to change? What about our environment? Our industrialized and cyber driven world of work and play? Can we bare to alter the 'instant gratification' that we desire based on the current trends of modernization? That is defanetly a 'cost' that many I know would not happily share or trade. Once we accept a thing for what it is or how it is, should we continue to accept it as such, or should we strive to improve it. I know we accept changes made by others sometimes, and act as if we should accept it regardless of if we agree to the changes, or not. Maybe it is a question of authority...

Authority, that leads me to search out and investigate many things that most people believe is beyond our influence, or has little interest in. Take government, currently most citizens, regardless of country or nation, are active in voting or addressing their governments. Why? Fear for most I would believe; of being arrested or detained, of being targeted for assault or harassment, or worse yet outright assassinated. But governments should work for the people that they draw resources from, thereby working together for common goals of sustainable if not prosperous continuity. But how do we achieve that goal, for just in one area alone, we are out voiced by the myriad issues in government alone.

Nations are built by the people within them, and are either sustained or pulled down by that population, barring invasions. That gives one a lot to think about. Concepts and ideals are given birth by many voices, and many things are planted into the 'soil' of governments. How they grow and evolve is up to those who first planted and all those who continue to tend it's growth. As with any well managed grove, it only takes time and non-action, to turn it into a forest of wild wood.

Beliefs, I have mentioned them here, and in many of my other postings, are of vast importance to me, and millions of other people as well. “Faith can hold a man up when the world is trying to hold him down.”, was taught to me a very long time ago in my life, and I have seen how true those words are. I say faith, as religion (all religions) require some sort or amount of faith. I say faith, as I hold that certain beliefs cannot be shaken nor destroyed. To me, for me, that certain belief, that holds to be true, against time and other truths, that is faith. I do not believe it is a question of faith, nor belief, nor even religion that needs to be put forth, but a question of personal fortitude and inner strength to continue or change our world. To me, any 'faith' will do, as long as there is something that will continue beyond our bonds and limits so that each generation can continue to grow and sustain beyond simple existence or survival.

What can we do? How do we begin? Where do we start?

Make a list. Review everything that you can think of a s 'good', 'bad', or 'room for improvement'. Accept that everything you know, can be changed, eventually. Include yourself in every aspect of what you observe and as only one point in it's existence. Accept that there are others who would agree and disagree in your designations of 'good', 'bad', and can be 'improved'. Then talk to others. From there, I know that we can find some place to begin taking the necessary actions to bring about change.

'Oath of Office'

Is the 'Oath of Office' still important to our Government elected officials and our Military service personnel?

Here are some facts about the various 'Oaths of Office'...

In 1789, the 1st United States Congress created a fourteen-word oath to fulfill the constitutional requirement: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States." 

 Judiciary Act of 1789, which established an additional oath taken by federal judges:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm), that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent on me, according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the Constitution, and laws of the United States. So help me God.

 December 1861, members who believed that the Union had as much to fear from northern traitors as southern soldiers again revised the oath, adding a new first section known as the "Ironclad Test Oath." The war-inspired Test Oath, signed into law on July 2, 1862, required "every person elected or appointed to any office ... under the Government of the United States ... excepting the President of the United States" to swear or affirm that they had never previously engaged in criminal or disloyal conduct. Those government employees who failed to take the 1862 Test Oath would not receive a salary; those who swore falsely would be prosecuted for perjury and forever denied federal employment

 In 1884, a new generation of lawmakers quietly repealed the first section of the Test Oath, leaving intact the current affirmation of constitutional allegiance.

Federal Executive and Legislative Branch Oaths

In the United States, the oath of office for the President is specified in the Constitution (Article II, Section 1):

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

The Constitution (Article VI, clause 3) also specifies:

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

At the start of each new U.S. Congress, in January of every odd-numbered year, newly elected or re-elected Members of Congress – the entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate – must recite an oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[55]

This oath is also taken by the Vice President, members of the Cabinet, federal judges and all other civil and military officers and federal employees other than the President.

Federal Judiciary Oaths

In the United States, federal judges are required to take two oaths. The first oath is this:

I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as (office) under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.[56]

The second is the same oath that members of Congress take:

I, (name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

United States Uniformed Services Oath of Office

All officers of the seven Uniformed services of the United States take swear or affirm an oath of office upon commissioning. It differs slightly from that of the oath of enlistment that enlisted members recite when they enter the service. It is required by statute, the oath being prescribed by Section 3331, Title 5, United States Code.[1] It is traditional for officers to recite the oath upon promotion but as long as the officer's service is continuous this is not actually required.[2] One notable difference between the officer and enlisted oaths is that the oath taken by officers does not include any provision to obey orders; while enlisted personnel are bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice to obey lawful orders, officers in the service of the United States are bound by this oath to disobey any order that violates the Constitution of the United States.[3]

Text of the Oath

I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[1]

Note that the last sentence is not required to be said if the speaker has a personal or moral objection, as is true of all oaths administered by the United States government; Article Six of the United States Constitution requires that there be no religious test for public office.

The oath is for an indeterminate period; no duration is specifically defined.

Officers of the National Guard of the various States, however, take an additional oath:

I, [name], do solemly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State (Commonwealth, District, Territory) of ___ against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of the State (Commonwealth, District, Territory) of ___, that I make this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion, and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the Office of [grade] in the Army/Air National Guard of the State (Commonwealth, District, Territory) of ___ upon which I am about to enter, so help me God.[4]

While all Commissioned Officers are commissioned under the authority of the President of the United States with the advice and consent of the United States Senate, Warrant Officers (WO-1) are given a warrant under the authority of their respective Service Secretary (e.g. Secretary of the Army), National Guard officers are additionally committed to the authority of the governor of their state. They may be activated in the service of their state in time of local or state emergency in addition to Federal activation. Reserve officers may only be activated by the President of the United States.

With this information, my question is; Why are we subject to Congressional and Presidential Acts that directly oppose the Constitutional Rights and Liberties of the U S Citizen? Why are these Acts allowed to be passed through Congress much less even suggested into Bills to be considered?

A Line Drawn in the Sand

     Somewhere, there is a line drawn in the sand. The sand is not owned by someone, the line is not owned by anyone, but it is there. That line, a marker of some inevitable boundary, a symbol of some limit of safe and excess, showing to all who would observe, that 'this is all that can be allowed'. A single and simple thing, a line drawn in the sand, that represents so much to so many, that we can easily be confused on it's original intent or reason for being. And simply looking at this line, we wonder why is it there and not here, how did this become so close to us, and most importantly, who drew it out so?

     We look around and find many things that we think to be normal, to be inevitable, to be okay and accept them without question, … until that is, we see that line in the sand. Some of us see beyond the thin veils of selfishness and illusions of egos. Some see through deception in motion, covering hidden actions against the majority of observers. Those people were targeted first, removed from play in a game so engrossingly enormous that even fewer realize that they play a part in it all. But there it is, still drawing our attention to it, beckoning us to see it and recognize it, that line in the sand. Did we draw it? When did it appear? Why hadn’t we noticed it before?

     Boundaries have always been a part of our world, allowing us to separate land, property, and people. Boundaries show us where it is safe to be, where we are allowed to be, and keep danger and harm safely away. Boundaries allow us to see the group and the individual, selecting for us areas of understanding or understood information and conceptual ideas. These all exist, and have existed, and yet are changed by consensus and definition often. But by who hand did those lines become drawn? And is this just another boundary that can be moved, this line in the sand?

     Maybe ignorance is bliss for it is blind to these things. As the Fool card in the Tarot teaches us, for the Fool walks blindly forward unaware of the dangers, yet not falling to the harm nor heading any perceived warning. Maybe that is why many do not see these things and have grown accustomed to the illusion of safety and secure passage in life. But why do some of us see these things? Are we questioning the realities of our world, do we challenge things that do not make sense to us? Is there some hint at 'wrongness' that awakens our instincts of survival? Maybe. Maybe that is why there is that line drawn in the sand. Maybe that is how it came to be.

     If we ponder too long on the why's and the how's and the who's, we loos sight of the simple fact that it is there, and it represents, if nothing else, a limit, a safe factor, a boundary. We know that we must defend it, for it is the marker of our safety. We come to understand that like so many other lines that have been drawn out, this one too was done as a consensus, and for reason. We know, instinctively, that this limit is ours, of where we must not be pressed beyond, where we would find not just harm, but find damages beyond our own ability to repair. This simple line in the sand.

     So we stand here, claiming all that is on and in our side of that line, and stand, and stand. Yet we have given so much without notice, that once we look down, we see that the line has been pushed to it's extreme elasticity of almost breaking. Now we understand, and are shocked that this has happened, while we were standing guard over it. How could this be? When did this happen? We question and begin anew by observing what we once thought of as clear information, yet now see illusions fade and false pretense fall. This is our line, and it falters, as we stand in it's defense. The pressure pushed into and against that line is great on both sides, yet we can see no relief either way. What happens when it is breached? Who's side will give first?

Somewhere, there is that simple line drawn in the sand, and we are just the grains that give it definition and purpose.

- In Solidarity, Sean Bigham