“A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices.” – William James

Recently, I participated in an online discussion in the comments of an article written by a prominent friend/adviser to the late Michael Jackson.

Michael Jackson & Jehovah’s Witnesses, by Firpo Carr

The Michael Jackson case and the issue of child abuse are both important to me, but I didn’t really know who Firpo Carr was when I made my first comment. I’d run into his name before, but I was a little under-prepared for his particular style of debate. I felt pretty battered by the end of it, much like what happens when I try to have a political discussion with someone who has already been stirred up by their favorite propaganda machine.

His back and forth with Jerry Bergman is illuminating and true to form.

• “Dr.” Firpo Carr, a Typical Watchtower Apologist vs. Dr. Firpo Carr v. “Dr.” Jerry Bergman

A sampling of Carr’s other L.A. Sentinel articles for you to chew on:

• Gullible Gays in a Scriptural Maze
• God Pays Gays with AIDS?
• Making “Gay” Go Away
• Why Blacks Don’t Like Gays
• Gays in the “Last Days”
• Sistas and Supernatural Sex: What to Do When A Spirit Visits You

One article on money and priorities took an argument that was very familiar to me from JW days, and made it much more compelling and interesting. He’s clearly a smart guy, but something….

I hadn’t really thought about this very much before, but there might be a serious educational problem with a dependence on some forms of long-distance learning, especially at the upper levels in the humanities. Potential scholars may simply lose too much by not participating on-site at their universities. There is a sort of human osmosis effect that can only be learned by being there. It’s important to have both peers that are interacting with you and trustworthy mentors that can call attention to your blind spots without attacking you as a person. It may be more difficult to absorb the values and norms of dialogue and debate if you’re not part of the ebb and flow of discussion.

On campus, you become part of a network of friendship that includes worthy adversaries, and you develop different skills as you learn how to respect people independently of whether or not you have disagreements. Constant exposure to a wide range of scholarship and discussion not only helps the scholar to develop an ethical sense of discernment, but also models the qualities that they admire (or reject!) in a teacher. At its best, university life at the graduate level is amazingly liberating, intellectually stimulating, and fulfilling.

It’s not just the “immorality” (sex, drugs and rock ‘n roll) of university life that JWs object to, it’s the training in strong interpretations and critical thinking, along with the ethics of scholarship, that would be dangerous for them to condone in their followers. Independent thinking is against their religion.

Firpo Carr has written a fair number of books. Good for him for being so prolific! However, some supplemental reading might be helpful. Start with a selection from my page of reading recommendations for former JWs. To that, add:

• The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements – Eric Hoffer
• The Paranoid Style in American Politics – Richard Hofstadter
• Anti-Intellectualism in American Life – Richard Hofstadter
• The Anatomy of Prejudices – Elisabeth Young-Bruehl
• Speaking with the Devil: A Dialogue with Evil – Carl Goldberg

Why? Because this latter list contains non-JW-influenced resources for understanding some aspects of the mindset that can lead people to be manipulated – and possibly continue the chain.

To stick to the topic at hand, though, readers should be aware that child abuse among Jehovah’s Witnesses is a systemic problem, one that is reinforced by setting unreachable standards of perfection, demonizing “worldly authorities,” defending questionable biblical interpretations with out-of-context snippets, defending the two-witness rule for any accusation of foul play, subordinating women, presenting an almost comical style of discourse and argument, hours of weekly meetings for repetition and reinforcement, the paucity of choices for a mate, the fear of disfellowshipping and abandonment by friends and family, the threat of demonic possession, the undermining of kindness, and the almost complete lack of pastoral care.

Firpo Carr can of course believe what he likes and project what he needs to – his path is none of my concern – but it’s a very odd position from which to deny or rationalize child abuse. Even more so now, I wish that I had followed my instincts while Michael was still alive. Michael Jackson describes some of the abuse he and his siblings suffered at the hands of his father in this video.

Watch that, then read our discussion. Remember that Firpo Carr says he was Michael’s friend. I’m sorry, but I have serious doubts that Firpo Carr brought much of spiritual value to the friendship. Now he says that Michael Jackson took him aside and told him that he wished his children to be brought up as Jehovah’s Witnesses – and to have them study with Carr!

I wonder if Michael said that to anyone else, or (shall I be this cynical?) if he said it to anyone at all.

In related news – some new documentation on the Watchtower child sexual abuse settlement. It’s not hearsay – it’s signed, sealed with gag orders, wrapped up in lies, and delivered:

“Documents show that the church knew for years that some prominent members were sexually abusing children and did little.”

The Watchtower PR department issued a statement. “For the sake of the victims in these cases, we are pleased that a settlement has been reached.” Sigh. It’s not for the sake of the victims, or their policies would be different.

This is the way they protect known predators. Imagine how they handle psychological and physical child abuse, and then start Googling for the testimonies…

Here’s a sweet sad Monty Python/Michael Jackson mashup. Maybe it will start to express the inexpressible value of caring and kindness.

For a while, Michael was able to redefine and transform his experience. He created music that brought fun – and even joy – to people all over the world.

I will remember him that way.

It grieves me that it could possibly be necessary to argue to an American – much less an American veteran – that torture undermines everything that we would like to think we stand for…

1992 U.S. Army Interrogation Field Manual 34-52 states: “Experience indicates that the use of prohibited techniques is not necessary to gain the cooperation of interrogation sources. Use of torture and other illegal methods is a poor technique that yields unreliable results, may damage subsequent collection efforts, and can induce the source to say whatever he thinks the interrogator wants to hear.”

In the words of the U.N. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984), “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification for torture.” The United States ratified this convention in 1994.

If anything useful came out these interrogations in Iraq, we would have heard about it. – Alfred McCoy, historian and author of “A Question of Torture: CIA Interrogation, From the Cold War to the War on Terror

History shows — and I know a little about this — that mistreatment of prisoners and torture is not productive. It’s not productive. You don’t get information that’s usable from people under torture, because they just tell you what you want to hear. – Senator John McCain (R-AZ)

Torture anywhere is an affront to human dignity everywhere. We are committed to building a world where human rights are respected and protected by the rule of law. . . . Yet torture continues to be practiced around the world by rogue regimes whose cruel methods match their determination to crush the human spirit. . . . These despicable crimes cannot be tolerated by a world committed to justice. . . . I call on all governments to join with the United States and the community of law-abiding nations in prohibiting, investigating, and prosecuting all acts of torture and in undertaking to prevent other cruel and unusual punishment. – President George W. Bush, Statement on United Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, 6/26/2003

The debate over how terrorist suspects should be held and questioned began shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, when the Bush administration adopted secret detention and coercive interrogation, both practices the United States had previously denounced when used by other countries. It adopted the new measures without public debate or Congressional vote, choosing to rely instead on the confidential legal advice of a handful of appointees….The administration had always asserted that the C.I.A.’s pressure tactics did not amount to torture, which is banned by federal law and international treaty. But officials had privately decided the agency did not have to comply with another provision in the Convention Against Torture — the prohibition on “cruel, inhuman, or degrading” treatment.

First, torture is not necessary. If someone has information, they are just as likely, if not more so, to disclose the information after non-abusive interrogation tactics. Second, many who are interrogated do not have information to give. Third, whether or not a person has information, he or she will likely confess to anything to stop torture; thus the information obtained is never reliable. – statement from the Center for Constitutional Rights

Terrorism requires us to think carefully about who we are as free peoples and what we need to do in order to remain so. When we are confronted with terrorist violence, we cannot allow the claims of national security to trump the claims of liberty, since what we are trying to defend is our continued existence as a free people. Freedom must set a limit to the measures we employ to maintain it. – Michael Ignatieff, The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror, 2004

All men have rights, including the right to a trial–a regular trial! The abuse of prisoners indicates that we don’t think detainees are human. – Lieut. Cmdr. Charles Swift

We were pretty much told that they [prisoners in Afghanistan] were nobodies, that they were just enemy combatants. I think that giving them the distinction of soldier would have changed our attitudes toward them. A lot of it was based on racism, really. We called them hajis, and that psychology was really important. – A member of the 377th Military Police Company, quoted by Douglas Jehl and Andrea Elliott, “Cuba Base Sent Its Interrogators To Iraqi Prison,” NY Times, 5/29/2004

Torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment harms individuals, sends a message of fear and intimidation to prisoners and members of minority political, ethnic, religious and belief groups, and undermines state legitimacy. – U.S. Mission to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), 11/17/1999

How could ordinary American soldiers and civilian contractors inflict such degradation on other human beings? . . . Torture and humiliation is a landscape without boundaries, a terrible slope that even the most practiced interrogators can slide down once they allow themselves to apply the slightest physical or psychological pressure. – James Glanz, “Torture Is Often a Temptation And Almost Never Works,” NY Times, 5/9/2004

According to experts, the preconditions that can lead someone to become a torturer include a fervently held ideology that attributes great evil to some other group and defines the believer as a guardian of the social good, an attitude of unquestioning obedience to authority, and the open or tacit support of the torturer by his peers. – Daniel Goleman, “The Torturer’s Mind: Complex View Emerges,” NY Times, 5/14/1985

The United States helps the advance toward a world free of torture by a number of means, including a $5 million contribution to the UN Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture. In addition we support torture victims’ treatment centers in the U.S. and abroad. . . . We continue to be appalled by the actions of governments that use torture or turn a blind eye to its occurrence. They may try to escape international scrutiny and accountability for their actions, but as long as torturers around the world spread fear and suffering, the United States will not waver in its commitment to eliminate torture. – U.S. Department of State, 6/26/2003

We have brought torture, cluster bombs, depleted uranium, innumerable acts of random murder, misery, degradation and death to the Iraqi people and call it “bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East. How many people do you have to kill before you qualify to be described as a mass murderer and a war criminal? One hundred thousand? More than enough, I would have thought. Therefore it is just that Bush and Blair be arraigned before the International Criminal Court of Justice. But Bush has been clever. He has not ratified the International Criminal Court of Justice. – Harold Pinter’s Nobel lecture, which the ailing playwright delivered by video from London December 7 2005 to the Swedish Academy in Stockholm.

The right to be free from torture . . . is one of the few absolute standards of international law, a right that exists regardless of the economic or social organization of a society. – Irving R. Kaufman, “A Legal Remedy for International Torture?” NY Times Magazine, 11/9/1980

As early as the 16th century the French thinker Montaigne had registered his distaste for what he regarded as nothing less than state-sponsored sadism. . . His protest was increasingly taken up in the century that followed, and by the 18th century writers such as Voltaire were speaking out scathingly against the barbarity of torture. – Michael Kerrigan, The Instruments of Torture, 2001

American interrogators working in Iraq have obtained as much as 50 percent more high-value intelligence since a series of coercive practices . . . were banned [in May]. . . . Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller, the American commander in charge of detentions and interrogations, said that . . . “a rapport-based interrogation that recognizes respect and dignity, and having very well-trained interrogators, is the basis by which you develop intelligence rapidly and increase the validity of that intelligence.” – Dexter Filkins, “General Says Less Coercion of Captives Yields Better Data,” NY Times, 9/7/2004

CIA veteran Bob Baer says torture was forbidden when he worked for the agency. “Now contractors are sent out to torture people to death and then hide it.” And now the Americans — at least in the minds of Iraqis and many others in the Middle East — are no better than Saddam? That’s right. The U.S. was going to go in and win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, and instead we take over Abu Ghraib when we should have torn it down. It’s just enormously symbolic. It’s sort of like going into Baghdad and tearing down the central mosque and building a synagogue in its place. I don’t think [U.S. policymakers] really get the full picture of this. – “The Place is Broken“

How are the torturers justified? It is sometimes said that it is right to torture a man if his confession can save a hundred lives. This is nice hypocrisy. . . . Arrests are made at random. Every Arab can be “questioned” at will. The majority of the tortured say nothing because they have nothing to say unless, to avoid torture, they agree to bear false witness or confess to a crime they have not committed. – Jean-Paul Sartre, Introduction to Henri Alleg, The Question, 1958

States which practice torture also resort to legal fictions and conveniences, the by now customary “emergency” statutes, which suspend constitutional rights, including the writ of habeas corpus, and facilitate arrest, detention, and interrogation. – Kate Millett, The Politics of Cruelty, 1994

A nationalist is someone who not only overlooks atrocities committed by his own side. He has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them. – George Orwell

We discovered a prison for children – all aimed at — for Saddam Hussein to intimidate the people of Iraq. – President George W. Bush, July 10, 2003

An Iraqi TV reporter Suhaib Badr-Addin al-Baz saw the Abu Ghraib children’s wing when he was arrested by Americans. He related how he himself was arrested arbitrarily by the Americans while shooting film and spent 74 days in Abu Ghraib. “I saw a camp for children there,” he said. “Boys, under the age of puberty. There were certainly hundreds of children in this camp.” Al-Baz said he heard a 12-year-old girl crying. Her brother was also held in the jail. One night guards came into her cell. “She was beaten,” said al-Baz. “I heard her call out, ‘They have undressed me. They have poured water over me.’” He says he heard her cries and whimpering daily – this, in turn, caused other prisoners to cry as they listened to her. Al-Baz also told of an ill 15-year-old boy who was soaked repeatedly with hoses until he collapsed. Guards then brought in the child’s father with a hood over his head. The boy collapsed again. UNICEF has confirmed that Iraqi children have been imprisoned in Iraq.

Torture has a way of undermining the forces using it, as it did with the French Army in Algeria. . . . By using torture, we Americans transform ourselves into the very caricature our enemies have sought to make of us. . . . [It] is self-defeating; for a strong country it is in the end a strategy of weakness. . . . the road back — to justice, order and propriety — will be very long. Torture will belong to us all. – Mark Danner, “We Are All Torturers Now,” NY Times Op Ed, 1/6/2005

Any government that commits, condones, promotes or fosters torture is a malignant force in the world. And those who refuse to raise their voices against something as clearly evil as torture are enablers, if not collaborators. . . . Jettisoning the rule of law to permit . . . torture is not a defensible policy for a civilized nation. It’s wrong. And nothing good can come from it. – Bob Herbert, “Torture, American Style,” NY Times Op Ed, 2/11/2005

They continued asking me questions, constantly the same ones: accomplices, addresses, meeting places. . . . . What they wanted to hear from me in Breendonk, I simply did not know myself. If instead of the aliases I had been able to name the real names . . . probably . . . I would be standing here now as the weakling I most likely am, and as the traitor I potentially already was. Yet . . . I talked. I accused myself of invented absurd political crimes, and even now I don’t know at all how they could have occurred to me. – Jean Améry, At the Mind’s Limits: Contemplations by a Survivor on Auschwitz and Its Realities, 1966

Once you open the door to torture, once you start legitimizing it in any way, you have broken the absolute taboo. President Bush had it right in his State of the Union address when he was describing various forms of torture by Saddam Hussein and he said, “If this isn’t evil, then evil has no meaning.” – Ken Roth, Executive Director, Human Rights Watch, CNN broadcast with Wolf Blitzer and Alan Dershowitz, 3/4/2003

In 1951, as a young paramilitary officer trainee in the C.I.A., I heard my instructors say that to win the cold war, “fighting fire with fire” would be required. I remember asking, how, if we did that, we could maintain any distinction between what we stood for, and what our communist opponents represented. I was told to sit down and shut up. – Donald P. Gregg, “Fight Fire With Compassion,” NY Times Op Ed, 6/10/2004

Torture destroys the soul of the torturer even as it destroys the body of his victim. The boundary between humane treatment of prisoners and torture is perhaps the clearest boundary in existence between civilization and barbarism. – Jonathan Schell, “What Is Wrong With Torture,” The Nation, 2/7/2005

Societies that do not recognize the dignity of the human person, or profess to recognize it and fail to do so in practice, or recognize it only in highly selective circumstances, become, not simply societies with torture, but societies in which the presence of torture transforms human dignity itself, and therefore all individual and social life. – Edward Peters, Torture, 1985

Meeting for the first time since the 1940s, World War II veterans who had been charged with top-secret interrogations of Nazi prisoners of war lamented “the chasm between the way they conducted interrogation during the war and the harsh measures used today in questioning terrorism suspects.” … Another World War II veteran–one of the few who interrogated the early 4000 prisoners of war, most of them German scientists and submariners, who were brought in to Fort Hunt, Virginia for questioning for days and weeks–spoke of how “during the many interrogations, I never laid hands on anyone. We extracted information in a battle of the wits.” He added that he was proud that he “never compromised my humanity.” Henry Kolm, 90, an MIT physicist, told the Post, “We got more information out of a German general with a game of chess or ping pong than they do today, with their torture.” Several of the veterans used the occasion, upon receiving honors from the Army’s Freedom Team Salute, to state their opposition to the war in Iraq and methods used at Guantanamo Bay…. But what the Veterans’ revealed so strikingly was the disgust these former interrogators– in a war that posed a greater threat to America’s survival than the so-called “war on terror”–have for the cruel, inhuman, degrading and illegal techniques called for –and condoned– by the Bush Administration.

“The indisputable evidence disclosed today that the US government, with the assistance of psychologists, was engaged in psychological torture tactics for the CIA is as morally reprehensible as Tuskegee and the MK-Ultra program of the 1950’s and 60’s.” – Leonard S. Rubenstein, Executive Director of Physicians for Human Rights

Torture is a sign that a government either does not enjoy the trust of the people it governs or cannot recruit informers for a surveillance system. In both cases, torture to obtain information is a sign of institutional decay and desperation, and torture accelerates this process, destroying the bonds of loyalty, respect and trust that keep information flowing. As any remaining sources of intelligence dry up, governments have to torture even more. Torture also gives a fake sensation of power to the executioner a fact that has a positive feedback that further fuels more violence. Psychological torture has persisted not because it necessarily works, but because of an institutional history of the practice. The interrogators themselves tend to believe in its efficacy, and no matter what you do, you can’t stop them once they start. – Darius Rejali

Frank Anderson, former chief of the CIA’s Near East and South East Asia division, talked about reform but reminded the audience that “reformers are no smarter than the people who need to be reformed.” He believed that there is a natural tendency for organizations to resist change. Discussing the use of torture as an intelligence strategy, Anderson said, “[the] problem with torture is what it does to us… I will rebel against anyone who wants my son to torture — those are wounds that never heal.” He voiced support for Senator John McCain’s proposal that would ban the use of inhumane treatment against anyone in US government custody. With such reassurance, Anderson believed America can regain some of its lost global legitimacy and the intelligence community can concentrate on more effective means of obtaining information.

Documents Tell of Brutal Improvisation by GIs

“You would be surprised at how far a can of orange soda would go,” said Lt. Col. Mark Costello, who oversees interrogations at Abu Ghraib. – Norimitsu Onishi, “Transforming a Prison, With U.S. Image in Mind,” NY Times, 9/16/2004

Resources:

• CIA Veterans Condemn Torture
• Veterans for Common Sense
• Iraq Veterans Against the War
• Veterans for Peace
• Center for Constitutional Rights
• Physicians for Human Rights
• 911 Truth
• Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

What question would you like to ask the top three Democratic candidates?

On June 4, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, and Barack Obama will join Rev. Jim Wallis of Sojourners live on CNN for a conversation about faith, values, and poverty — and they’re asking supporters to vote for their favorite question to ask in front of a national television audience.

The presidential candidates forum will be a unique opportunity to shape the national debate over faith and values — and to put poverty on the national agenda. Be sure to tune into the forum on Monday, June 4, at 7 p.m. Eastern Time to see which question is asked — and how the candidates respond.

The questions were submitted by Sojourners supporters.

I’ve just cast my vote for my favorite question (of the very few questions given):

Executive salaries have increased by almost 300% in recent years, while wages for ordinary workers have remained stagnant. What specific policies would you endorse to address the growing gap of “Haves” and “Have-nots” in our nation? – Submitted by Randy from Deer Park, TX

Cast your vote here.

This is the first chance I’ve had to tell about last weekend, when we drove down to Tallahassee, then to Pebble Hill Plantation for my nephew’s wedding. My hubby in his infinite wisdom had selected the hotel nearest Starbucks for our stay. Unfortunately, it was an Econolodge. His two brothers (Steve and Tom) and their wives (Pat and Pam, respectively) were there too. That made it quite tolerable despite the lowish quality of the rooms because we were able to have a few long talks together in the picnic area. One aspect of the conversation that I particularly enjoyed involved Steve’s work in forensics. His office, it seems, is not quite identical to those we know from television and movie versions of crime scene investigations. The actual procedures and methods and strategies they use were fascinating to me. It’s clear that he loves his job and that he’s very very good at it. We all shared various anecdotes and memories with one another and, for me, it was one of the highlights of the trip.

The first night, we all met for dinner. We spent some time with the remaining sibling (my sister-in-law) Laura and John (who had dropped a good bit of weight since the last time I saw him). We also got to spend a little time with (my brother-in-law’s sister) Marsha and Randy. I remember them quite fondly, especially because of a rollicking dinner we had once at their place. Randy has a twirly waxed mustache, and Marsha has a beautiful warm face, and they are both wonderful charming people. She works for the Forestry Service, and is especially charged when things actually get accomplished there despite whatever political agendas happen to be on the table. It’s always a good time when they are involved.

We had a drink or two while waiting for the table. From the balcony where we finally settled in we could hear some kind of jazz performance taking place in downtown (or is it uptown?) Tallahassee. The atmosphere was invigorating, carefree.

We arrived at the wedding rehearsal the next afternoon a few minutes late. Feeling foolish, we anxiously wandered all over the grounds looking for where it was supposed to take place. Finally we ran into Laura and she didn’t know where it was either! Finally we met up with the others and convened under a huge live oak – rehearsal went well and the bride-to-be was incredibly poised – and on high heels! Ben solemnly practiced his ringbearing duties. As we were leaving, people were getting set up in the next field to watch Glenn Campbell play. Yes. Glenn Campbell. Just as we were passing a man that Laura thought might actually have been him, I happened to be saying, “Well, he’s no Johnny Cash, but…” Faux pas of the day, my turn.

I got a chance there to talk a little bit with Lance, my other nephew and the younger brother of the groom. I’ve had a soft spot for him since we first met, because I was charmed by his desire to sing (and play his guitar) and the way that longing was tempered by a very real shyness. The result was that he sang Eric Clapton songs to me in an almost impossibly soft voice. He’s always been curious about a lot of difficult questions concerning life, the universe, and everything. I suppose I shouldn’t have been so taken aback to hear that he has become religious. He’s become part of a fellowship that meets in homes – pentacostal, healing, anti-trinitarian. We traded some bible verses and doctrinal perspectives. His eyes were bright with the unmistakable spirit of the newly converted. I tried to ascertain where along the spectrum (from “compassionate believers gathered in a spirit of love” to “time to drink the Cool-aid”) this group might fall. He had personally invested in boxes of bibles to send to New Orleans – no fundraiser, no distribution network. He also mentioned that he dropped a course in New Testament when the professor introduced the “Q source” (within the realm of possible biblical scholarship, a fairly innocuous bit of critical text research) that he felt was too challenging to his faith. There were a couple of other red flags for me as well, but I was very comfortable talking to him and look forward to some deeper, more lengthy discussion. I care about him, and I hope it will all turn out all right.

On the day of the wedding, I looked fabulous, even if I do say so myself. John had gotten me a gorgeous burgundy floor-length dress and I felt smashing. I think he had become nervous in reaction to my joking comment that I was planning to attend the plantation wedding in a hooped flowered dress and a hat.

It was my job to pin the flowers on all the guys, including the groom. I managed to do it without puncturing their chests or my fingers and none of the flowers stuck out funny or fell off. Accomplishment!

I did have a weird moment of cognitive dissonance when JT’s (black) professional colleague arrived with his (also black) wife. They were “ooh-ing” and “aah-ing” about how gorgeous the plantation was. Um. Well. Suddenly I felt so strange to be walking around on the grounds of a plantation. It’s a historial site. It’s quite beautiful. Still, for a moment, I was in the twilight zone.

JT and Tonya had a sweet ceremony under the oak tree. It was a little full of talk about God’s will, but that’s probably just my JW scar tissue talking. They had written secret letters to one another, which were read by the best man and the maid of honor (matron, really, but she still looked like a maid). There were moments here and there when they each had suspiciously glistening eyes, and I lost it for a moment myself. Ben was given a little bird’s nest for carrying the rings (excellent idea!), which I’m saving to give back on their tenth anniversary.

After the ceremony, we all walked over to the courtyard at the stables, where a band had already set up, and drinks were served. Ben (age 5) garnered an admirer named Elizabeth (age 6), who wanted him to dance with her and visit with the Clysdale horses (My stepson Evan claimed that he – himself, not Ben- had actually hopped the fence and rode one of them). Ben and Elizabeth spent much of the night running around the place together. They taught each other their best dance moves. She had the biggest, most adoring brown eyes I have ever seen. It was outstandingly cute.

I shared some back and forth banter with my beloved “political nemesis” brother-in-law John. He didn’t call me a feminazi this time.. only a socialist. He informed me that not only did I take myself too seriously, but that I was on the wrong side of history. In his opinion, what we really need in this country is a dictator. Sure, and that’s an American value. A benevolent reading would be that sometimes he exaggerates to push my buttons. We’re never going to agree on anything political, but I told him I loved him anyway (“not fair!” he charged as he wagged his finger at me). I can’t help it. As frustrating and unreachable as he is, I think he is an interesting guy. I’m always trying to figure out how this could have happened to him. He says his alliance was formed when JFK was shot, but that doesn’t make any sense to me. He is someone that really ought to be able to connect the dots to understand the ways in which he and his family (not to mention countless others) have been shafted by the right. But he doesn’t see it. He’s too invested in counting himself in with what he perceives to be the “winning side,” whether or not he is actually the sort of person in whose interests the “winners” ever act. Anyway, I think he’s one of the very few far far right wing people that I actually care about and with whom I can converse – and who tolerates me (to varying degrees) as well.

JT wrote and performed a song to his bride. How many weddings have you gone to where the groom pulls out an electric guitar and performs for the first time in public?

We all danced. The band introduced “I Will Survive” as a song for the WOMEN! That made me laugh because my associations have more to do with gay parades I’ve walked in, but I guess that’s what you say that close to “Jeb country.” Why would you play a song about continuing on after a bad breakup at a wedding reception anyway? At least they didn’t play “Paradise By the Dashboard Light.”

It ended with a loud hoot ‘n holler parade around the courtyard – a New Orleans style send-off. They had gotten engaged in New Orleans, and had recently provided a place to stay for friends of theirs who lost everything there. New Orleans is a special place to the bride and groom for a number of reasons, and somehow that seemed exactly the right kind of conclusion.

We wish them a life together of laughter and love.

(Oh, for my friends at Blogazoo, here’s a gAzoo)