My granddaughter is on the high school softball team. They had a terrible season last year, but there's a new coach staff this year and the girls are more excited this year.
At her school, all of the sports teams, including gymnastics, all have a separate class hour...except for softball. Plus, they have to wait until the boys, whatever sport it may be, is done practicing before they can have the field house for practice.
This year it seems the school doesn't even care enough to make sure there is a person to run the scoreboard. It's kind of bad that players have to take turns in the booth and it delays the game to change players, if the player is in the broadcast booth.
The games are played at the city sportsplex, which is a very nice facility with several ball diamonds and soccer fields. It's probably a mile from the school, yet the school doesn't provide transportation to the field on game days. Most of these kids don't drive yet, or have a restricted license that only allows them to transport family members. I don't know if the boys baseball team is transported, but it wouldn't surprise me if it is.
Why, in this day and age, is there still discrimination between boys and girls sports? I thought that if a school took federal money for sports girls sports were to receive the same amount of funding as boys and were supposed to get the same treatment. Maybe I was wrong. But it seems to me, if a school is going to promote a sport, it should be supported by the school.
Tuesday, March 17, 2015
Sunday, March 8, 2015
Anniversaries
This week-end we watched as the march from Selma to Montgomery was symbolically re-walked for the 50th anniversary of the first attempt. This was a huge turning point in the civil rights movement. I get that.
But, today, Sunday, March 8, was also the 50th anniversary of our marines arriving in Viet Nam. And not one news report that I saw, not a single one, even mentioned that fact. Granted I have not watched every newscast on every network. But, I did watch local news, and national news this evening, and it was not mentioned. I saw it mentioned on Facebook of all places.
This event was also a huge turning point in our history and should have been commemorated. More than 58,000 young men and women lost their lives. Many more were wounded and scarred for life and came home changed forever.
I was a tween/teenager during this period. I remember the feeling of relief when it was announced in 1973 that all of our troops were coming home, mainly because I was engaged to marry an airman. The last troops left in March of 1973 and we were married in April.
My current husband served, in the marines, during those early days, when we were not officially in the country. He doesn't talk about it much and I don't push it.
So, on this 50th anniversary, I would like to thank my husband, Bill Haven for serving. I would like to thank my childhood neighbor, Lester Winslow, who came home a different man, and I would like to thank and remember another childhood friend, Kenny Walls, who didn't come home. And, for all of the other brave men and women who served in a war we could not win, thank you for your service.
But, today, Sunday, March 8, was also the 50th anniversary of our marines arriving in Viet Nam. And not one news report that I saw, not a single one, even mentioned that fact. Granted I have not watched every newscast on every network. But, I did watch local news, and national news this evening, and it was not mentioned. I saw it mentioned on Facebook of all places.
This event was also a huge turning point in our history and should have been commemorated. More than 58,000 young men and women lost their lives. Many more were wounded and scarred for life and came home changed forever.
I was a tween/teenager during this period. I remember the feeling of relief when it was announced in 1973 that all of our troops were coming home, mainly because I was engaged to marry an airman. The last troops left in March of 1973 and we were married in April.
My current husband served, in the marines, during those early days, when we were not officially in the country. He doesn't talk about it much and I don't push it.
So, on this 50th anniversary, I would like to thank my husband, Bill Haven for serving. I would like to thank my childhood neighbor, Lester Winslow, who came home a different man, and I would like to thank and remember another childhood friend, Kenny Walls, who didn't come home. And, for all of the other brave men and women who served in a war we could not win, thank you for your service.
Wednesday, January 28, 2015
Religion
A couple of days ago I wrote a post about politics, so today I'm going to write about the other forbidden subject...religion. It's not going to be a long post because I haven't thought a lot about it, but the following thoughts came to be today as I was drying my hair, of all things.
My family, meaning Bill, myself, and my children, are all different religions. Bill is a Baptist, my children and their children are Pentecostals, and I'm a Quaker. Now Pentecostals and Quakers are on each end of the spectrum, about as far apart as you can get, as far as style of worship goes. Baptists kind of fall in the middle of the two but is closer to Quaker than Pentecostals. Since there are no Quaker meetings where we live, I attend a Baptist church with Bill. We have also attended the Assembly of God church that my children attend on occasion.
Yet, we all worship the same God, we all read the same Bible, we all believe that you must accept Jesus as your personal Savior to be saved. The main difference is the Quakers don't believe you must have a water baptism for the salvation to "take".
This isn't to say that I don't approve of baptisms, far from it. I have seen 2 grandchildren and my son baptized and cried with the rest of them. I've seen people baptized at our church, and felt very blessed. I know that this act means something to each of the ones baptized and I wouldn't take that away from them for anything.
I had a very dear friend who was very concerned that I wasn't baptized. She asked me one day if I would do it for the members of the church. I told her that to me that would be very hypocritical. Yes, the other members of the church would be happy, but why should I do something that meant absolutely nothing to me. That seemed like it would take away the meaning for those who did believe in baptism.
Each denomination has a different style of worship. Some of them are not based biblically and I don't believe that it could be a true religion. But, as long as it is a true Bible based church, with true believers in Jesus as their personal savior, I say let people worship how they want. What is more important, salvation and eternal life or church membership and following the ordinances of a church? To me, I'll take salvation and eternal life every time!
Made this longer than I had planned, but the words just started to flow.
My family, meaning Bill, myself, and my children, are all different religions. Bill is a Baptist, my children and their children are Pentecostals, and I'm a Quaker. Now Pentecostals and Quakers are on each end of the spectrum, about as far apart as you can get, as far as style of worship goes. Baptists kind of fall in the middle of the two but is closer to Quaker than Pentecostals. Since there are no Quaker meetings where we live, I attend a Baptist church with Bill. We have also attended the Assembly of God church that my children attend on occasion.
Yet, we all worship the same God, we all read the same Bible, we all believe that you must accept Jesus as your personal Savior to be saved. The main difference is the Quakers don't believe you must have a water baptism for the salvation to "take".
This isn't to say that I don't approve of baptisms, far from it. I have seen 2 grandchildren and my son baptized and cried with the rest of them. I've seen people baptized at our church, and felt very blessed. I know that this act means something to each of the ones baptized and I wouldn't take that away from them for anything.
I had a very dear friend who was very concerned that I wasn't baptized. She asked me one day if I would do it for the members of the church. I told her that to me that would be very hypocritical. Yes, the other members of the church would be happy, but why should I do something that meant absolutely nothing to me. That seemed like it would take away the meaning for those who did believe in baptism.
Each denomination has a different style of worship. Some of them are not based biblically and I don't believe that it could be a true religion. But, as long as it is a true Bible based church, with true believers in Jesus as their personal savior, I say let people worship how they want. What is more important, salvation and eternal life or church membership and following the ordinances of a church? To me, I'll take salvation and eternal life every time!
Made this longer than I had planned, but the words just started to flow.
Monday, January 26, 2015
Politics
Politics...that forbidden topic of conversation. The mid-term elections are barely over, the new congress has only been in session for about 3 weeks and already the candidates are lining up for 2016.
As I watched the news and saw who was at the republican event in Iowa, I told my husband that most of the names scared me. I also said I was going to have to do some research on some of them, because I wasn't really familiar with them. Maybe it's going to take the full 2 years to figure out who is who and what they stand for. Hopefully, both parties will have learned something from the last 2 elections, but I'm doubtful.
The democrats don't seem to be lining up as much as the republicans. I think they are all waiting to see if Hillary Clinton will run. To watch the news, it's a done deal and she's the democratic candidate. I think it would be a mistake for her to run. I think they country is tired of the Clintons. At the same time, even though I have liked Jeb Bush, I think the country is also tired of the Bushes. I think it would be a mistake for Mitt Romney to run again. Contrary to many, I don't think he connects with "normal" people. He's been too elite for too long and hasn't experienced many of the hardships many in the middle class have.
Sarah Palin really scares me. I don't know why anyone would vote for her. She couldn't even finish one term as governor and I remember her saying that she was resigning because there were other things she wanted to do. Seems like all she's done is travel the country, bringing in big speaking fees, and bad-mouthing the president and all democrats. I guess she wasn't taught that if you can't say something nice you shouldn't say anything at all.
Those are just a few of my thoughts as this election season gears up. Like I said, I'm going to have to do some research on the hopefuls before I can make a really informed decision. If anyone is reading this and wants to chime in, feel free.
As I watched the news and saw who was at the republican event in Iowa, I told my husband that most of the names scared me. I also said I was going to have to do some research on some of them, because I wasn't really familiar with them. Maybe it's going to take the full 2 years to figure out who is who and what they stand for. Hopefully, both parties will have learned something from the last 2 elections, but I'm doubtful.
The democrats don't seem to be lining up as much as the republicans. I think they are all waiting to see if Hillary Clinton will run. To watch the news, it's a done deal and she's the democratic candidate. I think it would be a mistake for her to run. I think they country is tired of the Clintons. At the same time, even though I have liked Jeb Bush, I think the country is also tired of the Bushes. I think it would be a mistake for Mitt Romney to run again. Contrary to many, I don't think he connects with "normal" people. He's been too elite for too long and hasn't experienced many of the hardships many in the middle class have.
Sarah Palin really scares me. I don't know why anyone would vote for her. She couldn't even finish one term as governor and I remember her saying that she was resigning because there were other things she wanted to do. Seems like all she's done is travel the country, bringing in big speaking fees, and bad-mouthing the president and all democrats. I guess she wasn't taught that if you can't say something nice you shouldn't say anything at all.
Those are just a few of my thoughts as this election season gears up. Like I said, I'm going to have to do some research on the hopefuls before I can make a really informed decision. If anyone is reading this and wants to chime in, feel free.
Monday, January 12, 2015
Living in No-Man's Land
I live in Northeast Arkansas, 5 miles south of the Missouri state line, 9 miles inland from the Mississippi River, 70 miles north of Memphis, Tennessee. Our town is rather small, 15,000 people, maybe. We don't have a TV station here. The closest ones are in Memphis (70 miles away) or Jonesboro, Arkansas (50 miles west).
We have DirectTV for our provider and our local stations are the stations from Memphis. We get them all so there is a variety. However, we get mostly Tennessee or Mississippi news and weather. The only Arkansas news we get is if something happens in West Memphis which, as the name implies, is directly across the river from Memphis.
I asked DirectTV if we could get the local Jonesboro station so that we could get local news and weather. The reply I got was that the Nielson company decided the viewing areas. Nielson apparently can't be contacted unless I'm a business that would like to use their service for marketing. I also remember many years ago the Jonesboro station saying that our area was considered the Memphis area.
But, the local cable company, Ritter Communications, does carry the Jonesboro station, IN ADDITION to the Memphis stations. So, if the cable company can offer the Jonesboro station, why can't the satellite company?
It's gotten so the Memphis stations barely cover north of Memphis for weather. There was 1 weatherman who stated during a tornadic event that the Jonesboro station would take care of the "most northern parts of the viewing area". Yeah, right, only if you have cable and not satellite. And since we live in a basically rural area, there are more satellite viewers than cable.
So, we are in No-Man's Land. The Memphis stations don't seem to want to cover our area, nor does Jonesboro, unless we use certain providers. Maybe I'll just move to a cave where there is no coverage at all and just stick my head out to check the weather, won't vote because I won't know who the candidates are, and won't have to see another murder taking place in Memphis.
OK, rant over. If anyone knows how this can be changed, aside from switching to cable, let me know.
We have DirectTV for our provider and our local stations are the stations from Memphis. We get them all so there is a variety. However, we get mostly Tennessee or Mississippi news and weather. The only Arkansas news we get is if something happens in West Memphis which, as the name implies, is directly across the river from Memphis.
I asked DirectTV if we could get the local Jonesboro station so that we could get local news and weather. The reply I got was that the Nielson company decided the viewing areas. Nielson apparently can't be contacted unless I'm a business that would like to use their service for marketing. I also remember many years ago the Jonesboro station saying that our area was considered the Memphis area.
But, the local cable company, Ritter Communications, does carry the Jonesboro station, IN ADDITION to the Memphis stations. So, if the cable company can offer the Jonesboro station, why can't the satellite company?
It's gotten so the Memphis stations barely cover north of Memphis for weather. There was 1 weatherman who stated during a tornadic event that the Jonesboro station would take care of the "most northern parts of the viewing area". Yeah, right, only if you have cable and not satellite. And since we live in a basically rural area, there are more satellite viewers than cable.
So, we are in No-Man's Land. The Memphis stations don't seem to want to cover our area, nor does Jonesboro, unless we use certain providers. Maybe I'll just move to a cave where there is no coverage at all and just stick my head out to check the weather, won't vote because I won't know who the candidates are, and won't have to see another murder taking place in Memphis.
OK, rant over. If anyone knows how this can be changed, aside from switching to cable, let me know.
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Rain
I've been listening to the sound of a gentle rain this morning, not the hard rain we've been having, not the overflow the gutter, can't see across the street, rain, just a gentle soft rain.
I'm very tired today and have absolutely no energy. Maybe it's the rain and the weather front wreaking havoc with my allergies. Could be a reaction of the flu and pneumonia shots I got yesterday, or the sleepless night. But I can tell nothing major, like laundry, is going to get done today. I looked at the sink full of dishes a few minutes ago and decided that emptying/loading the dishwasher would take too much energy. All I want to do on this lovely, rainy day is sleep.
I also have a lot on my mind, family issues, the political climate (I'll be so glad when Nov.5 gets here). And yes, I said the 5th. That will mean that the election is over and all of the political ads on TV, flyers in the mail (I imagine the postman will be too), robocalls and political surveys will finally stop, at least for a little bit.
So I think I'll just sit here and listen to the rain.
I'm very tired today and have absolutely no energy. Maybe it's the rain and the weather front wreaking havoc with my allergies. Could be a reaction of the flu and pneumonia shots I got yesterday, or the sleepless night. But I can tell nothing major, like laundry, is going to get done today. I looked at the sink full of dishes a few minutes ago and decided that emptying/loading the dishwasher would take too much energy. All I want to do on this lovely, rainy day is sleep.
I also have a lot on my mind, family issues, the political climate (I'll be so glad when Nov.5 gets here). And yes, I said the 5th. That will mean that the election is over and all of the political ads on TV, flyers in the mail (I imagine the postman will be too), robocalls and political surveys will finally stop, at least for a little bit.
So I think I'll just sit here and listen to the rain.
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
This and That
I'm troubled and confused again, but maybe I'm confused all the time! I've been seeing some things online about how we just need to put a bullet in the heads of Muslims. Normally I would just pass this by, but, when I see agreeing comments, from Christian pastors, it bothers me. That seems to directly contradict the commandment of "Thou shalt not kill". Others may argue "an eye for an eye" would allow it. That's what is troubling and confusing. If we try to exterminate, for lack of a better word or term, all Muslims, doesn't this make us just as bad as they are? I'm afraid that the radical arm of Christians will become just as violent as the radical arm of the Muslims. Something to dwell on and pray about
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I was filling our medicine containers the other day, I noticed how colorful my medications are. In my morning slot I have a peach colored one, a blue one, a white one, a pink one, and a purple one. In my night slot I have a peach colored one, a white one, a blue one, 2 pink ones, and a red one. Bill's meds are not as colorful. His are mostly beige and muted peach and purple, with one exception, a bright orange one. At least I can tell by color what each of them is for.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will be very glad when the election is over next month. I recently had a phone call asking if the incumbent senator's and a candidate for governor stance on the healthcare act has affected my opinion of the 2 candidates. Both of these candidates are for the healthcare act. Since I haven't been adversely affected by the new healthcare, and I have followed one of these candidates for several years, I answered honestly that their stance has not affected my opinion of them. The questioner then stated that I was still going to vote for them in that case. How could she assume that? The question posed was "Has the fact that Sen. ____________and ___________ support of Obamacare affected your opinion of them?" That answer was no, and there was no follow-up question concerning my vote for/against them. My answer could have easily meant that I already knew their stance and was not going to vote for them anyway. Just proves that statistics can be skewed to prove your point.
Since the healthcare act was passed, many are saying that it should be repealed and they have some ideas of how healthcare should be handled. But, when pressed, won't tell us how they think it should work. Which is worse, wanting to get rid of something just because you don't like it, or telling people you have a plan but won't elaborate on it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Had a debate online last night with a young man who is very opposed to anything government run. He stated that the problems with Medicare were a direct result of the healthcare act. When I pointed out that the 2 insurances my husband has paid for about all of his $2 million in medical bills except for about $5000, and that of the $900/month in medications, we only pay about $40, all he could say was that he was glad it worked out for us but didn't for others. He could supply no facts to support his statements. While he is entitled to his opinion, if something is going to be stated as fact, shouldn't you be able to provide the facts proving your point? Seems to be that's what's wrong with many today. They state their opinion, but then get angry if you ask for proof, and when given proof for the opposing view, start name-calling and get even angrier. Americans are very angry, but are we angry at the right people or situation, or are we angry because we believe in opinions of others that have nothing to substantiate the opinion?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are just some of thoughts going through my head this morning.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I was filling our medicine containers the other day, I noticed how colorful my medications are. In my morning slot I have a peach colored one, a blue one, a white one, a pink one, and a purple one. In my night slot I have a peach colored one, a white one, a blue one, 2 pink ones, and a red one. Bill's meds are not as colorful. His are mostly beige and muted peach and purple, with one exception, a bright orange one. At least I can tell by color what each of them is for.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will be very glad when the election is over next month. I recently had a phone call asking if the incumbent senator's and a candidate for governor stance on the healthcare act has affected my opinion of the 2 candidates. Both of these candidates are for the healthcare act. Since I haven't been adversely affected by the new healthcare, and I have followed one of these candidates for several years, I answered honestly that their stance has not affected my opinion of them. The questioner then stated that I was still going to vote for them in that case. How could she assume that? The question posed was "Has the fact that Sen. ____________and ___________ support of Obamacare affected your opinion of them?" That answer was no, and there was no follow-up question concerning my vote for/against them. My answer could have easily meant that I already knew their stance and was not going to vote for them anyway. Just proves that statistics can be skewed to prove your point.
Since the healthcare act was passed, many are saying that it should be repealed and they have some ideas of how healthcare should be handled. But, when pressed, won't tell us how they think it should work. Which is worse, wanting to get rid of something just because you don't like it, or telling people you have a plan but won't elaborate on it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Had a debate online last night with a young man who is very opposed to anything government run. He stated that the problems with Medicare were a direct result of the healthcare act. When I pointed out that the 2 insurances my husband has paid for about all of his $2 million in medical bills except for about $5000, and that of the $900/month in medications, we only pay about $40, all he could say was that he was glad it worked out for us but didn't for others. He could supply no facts to support his statements. While he is entitled to his opinion, if something is going to be stated as fact, shouldn't you be able to provide the facts proving your point? Seems to be that's what's wrong with many today. They state their opinion, but then get angry if you ask for proof, and when given proof for the opposing view, start name-calling and get even angrier. Americans are very angry, but are we angry at the right people or situation, or are we angry because we believe in opinions of others that have nothing to substantiate the opinion?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are just some of thoughts going through my head this morning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)