So, both of my girls got sick recently, and as I was taking care of them I prayed for them to get better. At first it seemed to be working, because Amber didn't puke throughout the rest of the night. Then, I got up, and wrote on my facebook page that the kids were sick, thinking in the back of my head, "Gee, I really hope this isn't like a thing of no faith that will make them sick again." And then, seriously within a minute of writing that Amber was having diarrhea pouring out her diaper and then a few minutes after that throwing up. "Hmm," I thought, "I think I need to change that post." So, I did, I changed it to something like, "I don't like Amber being sick, but I like that she will fall asleep in my arms," trying to be more positive and open a little door for God to work. But the whole thing got me thinking about how many other times I do things thinking that I can kinda make God want to do things on my behalf, or in other words, realized that I try to manipulate God. I think most of the time, although I would never actually think it, I live as though I can twist God's arm into doing things the way I want them to be done. Like, take for example my thinking that if I have Ailsa pray to Jesus for good dreams then there's no way God could dissapoint her; or how about thinking that if I thank Him in hard times then He'll have to give me what I'm asking for because it was hard to be thankful. How silly to think that I can force God into acting the way that I think would work best for me!
So, in light of all of this, I've been thinking about what I do think is our role in partnering with God, because I do think it's a partnership. I think God is like our Husband and like our Father. So, basically, he gets to call the shots. But, there are things we can do to stop His will from being done in our lives, I mean, if we want to; or we can prepare ourselves to go along with His will, slash, we can be willing to go along with His will even if we don't really have a clue what's going on. Like, take for example, my praying that God would stop Amber from throwing up. Let's say God wanted to answer that prayer but I gave her syrup of icka-whatever (you know, that stuff you can take if you NEED to throw up); God could still intervene and stop her from throwing up, but my guess is that He wouldn't, because I would be using the free will He gave me. Or, what if instead, I gave her some water and toast? Giving her water and toast wont MAKE her stop throwing up, or make God heal her; but if that's what God wanted to do I don't think my actions would be standing in His way. Do you see my point now?
I think these kinds of "cause and effects" are pretty clear, but most of the time life is a lot more complicated then that. I'll spare you of trying to come up with more complicated examples, because I'm sure you have plenty of your own life expericance to draw from. But let me just end by saying, (mostly to myself) let's not try and think that by acting a a certain way we can convince God to act on our behaves. God loves us, and wants to bless us. I like when Mike Bickel says that God doesn't just love us, He likes us. He knows what's best for us, He knows how to make us happy, and He wants us to be happy. So lets just go along with what He's doing as best as we can, and let's try to make ourselves ready do receive His blessings by following what the Bible says and by asking for His advice in prayer.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Funny Things
Amber has learned to give kisses, and the "mmm" part of muah, lasts about 3 times as long as the rest of the word, making it more like, mmmmmmmmmmuah. So cute.
Ailsa has started to say "thank yous" during her night time prayer, two of her recent ones were for water and the letter N.
Amber has also learned how to climb the stairs. But more than climbing them she likes to chased. So, most of the time she'll go over there and wait on the first or second step until she's sure we've seen her; then she'll climb as fast as she can to see how far she can get before we grab her.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Nationalized Heath Care
I know this is a touchy subject, but I just can't help myself. I really want to talk about why I am not for this health care bill that is being passed. I'm not trying to convince anybody to think the way I do; I just really want to share my opinions because I feel strongly about them, and the only people that have time to listen to me go on an on about it would have no clue what I'm talking about (my kids, if they're even old enough to be called kids....) So here are my thoughts, just as they come:
-I'm all about more people having health care, but I think it's really important to look at the root of the problem. People not having health care is just a symptom of the root problem which is that heath care is unaffordable for most people.
-The government is less efficient with money than any private business. This is a fact, not an opinion. I can't remember the numbers that have been quoted to me about how much of every dollar in a government is wasted on the needed red tape, but I do remember it was very shocking to me. So, why would I want the government to try and solve a problem that is, at it's core, about health care expense? It doesn't seem wise to me.
-Why is health care so expensive? Well, obviously there are a lot or reasons, but I think the main reason is the liability insurance/injury lawsuits doctors are forced to deal with. Do you think they are paying out of pocket for these things? No, just like any business would do, they are passing the cost along the consumers.
-So, It would make sense to me to first make health care more affordable through "tort reform" (aka making laws that deal with how much money people are able to get from these types of lawsuits. Obviously still leaving enough to pay for needed expenses, but lets not let people get rich off of these types of things.) This would make health care affordable to most of the population without ever needing a national public option. If nothing else we could just reevaluate at that point, right?
-There's the obvious reason that they are changing the law that prohibits federal dollars from being spent on abortion, and even going so far as to give money to private insurance companies that cover abortion.
-Looks at Canada and England who already have this type of government plans, their life expectancies went DOWN not up!
-In the first version (they have changed it so much, I don't know for sure if this part has been changed or not) they were able to deny elderly people and disabled people.
-By interfering into the free market the doctors offices will overwhelmed. Let me say, I am currently on medicaid, so I'm obviously not against government aid at the sate level. But just to give you a glimpse into my world, when I called the dentist due to a tooth ache I was told that the next available appointment was in two months! Now, this is just a tooth, but imagine if it were something more serious, like say a cancer screening test that I had to wait for. This is what we're looking at if we just add on a bunch of people to an already overloaded system.
Are you still with me? I'm almost done...
-So, let's be logical: You have people finding caners and tumors later, overcrowded hospitals, and sick elderly and disabled people suffering. What would be the "compassionate" way to help them? Euthanasia. No, it is never mentioned in the bill, but it would lead us in that direction, and people will feel the need to have it. (Oh, and did I mention that they want elderly people to have a government official to come to their hose and have a mandatory "end of life counseling" session? I don't know about you, but I don't like that...)
-Of course we know that most of the way we live our lives affects our health. What we eat, how much tv we watch vs how much time exercising, and the list goes on and on. With government in charge of paying for our health, they will want to make sure we are living as healthy as we should be. But who sets those standards and who sets the limits as to how far they can reach into our lives? It's just a little too shady of an area for me to like.
Anyways, there are more reasons I could talk about, but I think those are my main issues. I really do want people to be covered. I don't want people to be sick or suffering, I just think there are smarter ways to go about it than what is being discussed right now. I don't like being painted as a meanie because I see things differently than a lot of the newscasters or vocal democrats. Anyways, no need to pout about it, now I'm just rambling. Like I said at the start of this whole thing, I'm really just trying to get off my chest all my views on this thing that I can't see to find the time to talk to anyone about face to face. So that's all...
-I'm all about more people having health care, but I think it's really important to look at the root of the problem. People not having health care is just a symptom of the root problem which is that heath care is unaffordable for most people.
-The government is less efficient with money than any private business. This is a fact, not an opinion. I can't remember the numbers that have been quoted to me about how much of every dollar in a government is wasted on the needed red tape, but I do remember it was very shocking to me. So, why would I want the government to try and solve a problem that is, at it's core, about health care expense? It doesn't seem wise to me.
-Why is health care so expensive? Well, obviously there are a lot or reasons, but I think the main reason is the liability insurance/injury lawsuits doctors are forced to deal with. Do you think they are paying out of pocket for these things? No, just like any business would do, they are passing the cost along the consumers.
-So, It would make sense to me to first make health care more affordable through "tort reform" (aka making laws that deal with how much money people are able to get from these types of lawsuits. Obviously still leaving enough to pay for needed expenses, but lets not let people get rich off of these types of things.) This would make health care affordable to most of the population without ever needing a national public option. If nothing else we could just reevaluate at that point, right?
-There's the obvious reason that they are changing the law that prohibits federal dollars from being spent on abortion, and even going so far as to give money to private insurance companies that cover abortion.
-Looks at Canada and England who already have this type of government plans, their life expectancies went DOWN not up!
-In the first version (they have changed it so much, I don't know for sure if this part has been changed or not) they were able to deny elderly people and disabled people.
-By interfering into the free market the doctors offices will overwhelmed. Let me say, I am currently on medicaid, so I'm obviously not against government aid at the sate level. But just to give you a glimpse into my world, when I called the dentist due to a tooth ache I was told that the next available appointment was in two months! Now, this is just a tooth, but imagine if it were something more serious, like say a cancer screening test that I had to wait for. This is what we're looking at if we just add on a bunch of people to an already overloaded system.
Are you still with me? I'm almost done...
-So, let's be logical: You have people finding caners and tumors later, overcrowded hospitals, and sick elderly and disabled people suffering. What would be the "compassionate" way to help them? Euthanasia. No, it is never mentioned in the bill, but it would lead us in that direction, and people will feel the need to have it. (Oh, and did I mention that they want elderly people to have a government official to come to their hose and have a mandatory "end of life counseling" session? I don't know about you, but I don't like that...)
-Of course we know that most of the way we live our lives affects our health. What we eat, how much tv we watch vs how much time exercising, and the list goes on and on. With government in charge of paying for our health, they will want to make sure we are living as healthy as we should be. But who sets those standards and who sets the limits as to how far they can reach into our lives? It's just a little too shady of an area for me to like.
Anyways, there are more reasons I could talk about, but I think those are my main issues. I really do want people to be covered. I don't want people to be sick or suffering, I just think there are smarter ways to go about it than what is being discussed right now. I don't like being painted as a meanie because I see things differently than a lot of the newscasters or vocal democrats. Anyways, no need to pout about it, now I'm just rambling. Like I said at the start of this whole thing, I'm really just trying to get off my chest all my views on this thing that I can't see to find the time to talk to anyone about face to face. So that's all...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
