Unwitting Capitulation to the Radicalism of Feminazism--"Seated-Male-Urination"

There have been several beliefs and convictions that I have held that I had no idea were radical until I bumped up, unwittingly, against the informative masses of recent times. Examples are: concern for the environment, admiration for higher education, respect for teachers and law enforcement, showering after gym class, cleaning up after oneself and paying taxes.

While listening to a book review on NPR today, I learned that "seated-male-urination" is apparently a radical feminist imposition. I realize that this subject may not be in good taste, but I have been an adherent to this practice instituted by feminazis for years. Who would have known? I swear on a stack of all things manly, including my father's jock strap and Mennen's deodorant, that no woman forced me to adopt this apparently anti-masculine practice. I just started this technique and habit when I became aware that neither I, nor many other males, were talented enough, nor were urine-receptacle (formally known as the john, wc, toilett, etc.) designs advanced enough, nor were "exit points" close enough to the collecting surface to ensure, without fail, that we could to live up to the not-a-drop-outside the catch basin rule.

Yet, I suspect that, if for whatever reason, urine-receptacle design or voiding method, caused females to pee all over the floor and that could be remedied by a adjustment in voiding methods or techniques, it would not be deemed by males or females to be a "male-ist" imposition on females to adopt the technique.

So, in conclusion, I would think that generally it's not too much to ask, that whatever your method, position, flow volume, flow speed, basin-to-exit-point-distance is, just make sure that your body's "exhaust" finds its way to where it should go. Then if, for whatever reason, you don't accomplish this goal and you refuse to make the adjustment to a seated position out of fear someone may peek in at you and think you've caved into feminazism and you have a penchant for drenching, dousing, spraying, misting or even lightly spritzing areas outside the catch basin with your effluent, do what any modern civilized person would, male or female--quickly and quietly make a bee line out of there so no-one knows you're a klutz or a dolt.

Or, maybe, just maybe, do the right thing and take a little tissue and get rid of the evidence (and then please, wash your hands) and next time adjust to seated-male-urination. It has not ruined females and will not ruin you.

Loren M. Lambert
Sept. 1, 2014 ©

The Value of Dialogue

"What good fortune for the talk show hosts it is that people that love us do not think." -Sean Hannity.

(not really)...........But I tell you I'm sorry, I try to listen to these conservative talk show hosts while driving (Sean, Rod Arquette, Rush today) to see what I can learn. More often than not there is almost no substance at all. Opinion x whatever - 10, 100, 100,000, 1,000,000 does not = reality or fact. Probably Doug Wright of KSL is the only talk show host who actually discusses the basis for his opinions and explores the basis for opinions of his listeners and guests. Even if you don't agree with him, he should at least get your respect for guiding a dialogue that has real substance.

It is not important to me that so many people believe this or that because their beliefs and opinions do not equal reality, truth or fact. I want to know what the foundation of their opinion or belief is.

There is no virtue or value in claiming or knowing that 49% of America believes that their liberty is being eroded by government. The real question is what is the specific governmental action, law, etc that you find objectionable and why.

There is no value in hearing a general rant regarding taxes, user fees, or licensing fees are too high. There is value is discussing what is the specific fee or tax, what is it being used for, does it provide value, should it be imposed and if so, is it too much and why?

What's wrong with a dialogue?
Loren M. Lambert, © September 22, 2015.

Seeing God

Many times a year as the sun rises or dips at the horizons, splashes of reds, pinks, yellows, oranges, blues and purples will color the clouds and thereby enrich every watchful eye.

The moon fully waxes and wanes a little more than 12 times a year and on several of those occasions, when it is near full, I spy it huge and beaming, surging over the mountains or plunging into the waters and hills of the Great Salt Lake.

The skies darken with storms and often in the midst of turbulence, the clouds will part and a beam of sunlight will grace a mountain or highlight a quaint or statuesque building, the moon will peek out like the luminescent eye of a beast, or a rainbow will span the horizon.

While walking in a quiet, wild wood some creature rarely seen and, almost having slipped out of memory, will blunder into view, then casting a quick, furtive glance, will lock eyes with me for a moment and reveal a window into the universe before vanishing back into the void.

A few times a year I will have the privilege of catching a boundless child’s smile, of witnessing a captivating dance sequence, of hearing an enrapturing voice or musical arrangement, or of seeing a spontaneous and unanticipated act of kindness.

I experience them all, and yet each time seems as if I am witnessing their awe for the first time and therein rediscovering God again and again.

But most of all, at all times of the year, I see and feel God in you. And it is under the weight of this wonder that I am compelled by the beauty to my knees, as if without a choice, with the truest of payers upon my lips. Loren M. Lambert, © September 25, 2015.

The Difficult, Dangerous and Important Job of Truth Seekers

The problem is, most politicians tell you what you want to hear, not what you need to know; and the talk show hosts who support them do the same. They both have the same motive: money, fame and power.

The second problem is that most of us only want to hear what we think we already know and not what we need to know because it might challenge our views or cause us to change our minds; and the talk show hosts we choose to listen to are chosen by us merely to confirm our positions. In selecting both, we have the same motive: consistency for its own sake and confirmation.

Rare is the politician or talk show host that is willing to tell their constituents what they need to know. And rarer still is the human being who seeks out contrary viewpoints to determine what they need to know and have not considered.

This makes the job of those with knowledge exponentially difficult, sometimes even dangerous, and of the utmost importance.

© Loren M. Lambert September 25, 2015

The Art of Legal Poetic License & Deseret Mutual (DM) Owned By "The Church"

I've represented several individuals who have worked for "The Church" (short for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) here in Utah when they've had a dust up with Deseret Mutual for their benefits. Inevitably, since it's owned by the "The Church," they approach Deseret Mutual like it's a charitable institution. They think that with a simple "howdy," a wink, a handshake, a showing of church credentials and a hard luck story it won't operate like all such businesses- acting and interpreting everything to maximize profits.

"The Church," somewhat encourages this avuncular, charitable myth by stating on its website that, "Deseret Mutual is not an insurance company. Rather, it’s a non-profit trust ... [O]ur mission ... is to improve our members’ health and financial security. [and to] administer the generous benefits sponsored by our participating employers..." (https://www.dmba.com/nsc/dmba/History.aspx)

As a consequence, many church employees are naive and get taken to the cleaners because they don't do what is necessary to establish their claim. In the case of a dispute, they often have not put forth their strongest position so that they can win when legally they should. They are thereby taken advantage of. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying DM is evil or violating any law or necessarily even recognizing it is engaging in convenient self-serving interpretations of their own policies or plans. What, I am saying is it's a business, like any other, and the naive shouldn't expect anything different.

In a current case, DM is denying benefits under a 24 month limitation for disability benefits for "fatigued-based illness." It does not specifically define what it means by "fatigued-based illness," but in general requires that the employee and doctors are still trying to determine the cause of the fatigue during the limitation period.

My client has a specific, objectively determined diagnosis that causes his fatigue and the limitation doesn't apply nor does any exclusion. He should have gotten his benefits. Yet DM has engaged in a result-oriented analysis to deny benefits. I suspect this is because the diagnosis is an unusual but severe disease process. However, if "The Church's" analysis is correct (which it's not) heart failure, lung disease, circulatory diseases, and so on and so forth, would be considered "fatigued-based" illnesses.

The upshot is that since my client didn't have early help, he now has to litigate and is at a higher risk of loss since his claim wasn't set up well at the onset. I'm still confident we will prevail. The take away is that when you work with any organization on the business side of things, don't be naive. Get guidance early--they are not going to cut you any slack and they only see things one way- their way.

©Loren M. Lambert September 4, 2015

Do Not Go Quietly Into That Dark Night

Just as men are biologically compelled toward attractive, fertile-looking, well-endowed women; women are compelled toward economically well-endowed men; and blow flies are compelled toward microbially well-decayed carcasses, youth are repelled by the aging.

Youth have a biological and a cultural bias against the aging. Youth is repelled by the old because it wants renewal and change regardless of its merit. Youth rejects the aging because culturally we are taught that innovation and progress is the purview of only the youth. Youth also rejects the aging because to engage with and embrace aging is to be reminded of their own immortality. They fear, like we once feared, our coming declining health, our loss of spirit, our inevitable death and irrelevance.

Therefore, we are supposed to go quietly. We are supposed to fade into the background, to wear blase, amorphous clothing, to hide in our abodes and let our figures, intellect, desire and hair go to seed. We are supposed to assume our roles as caretakers and house-sitters and to be exclusively admired for reading bedtime stories to our grandchildren.

I reject this. As I advance into history, I refuse to go quietly. While many human endeavors can only be realized in the bloom of youth, there is much that can be achieved late in life and the only reason it is not realized is because we are content to be relegated to a role as second-class citizens. I will not be content. I will strive to realize every dream that is within the capacity of whatever I can retain of my body, mind and spirit.

I say, let us take an unflagging grasp upon our rebelliousness, our authenticity, and our ambition. Let us determine to agitate, to be heard, to create and to be a force to be reckoned with to make a better world for all.

Let us all- the young, the older, and the aging determine to engage and embrace all human potential, all contributions and to never prejudge or be biased against innovations regardless of where they originate. Judge them on their merits alone.

And when their merits fall short, do not pity them nor be repelled by them because they remind you of your own mortality, but admire them for the joy they remind us we all have by engaging fully in the journey and not in bemoaning the end and inevitable destination of us all.

©Loren M. Lambert September 6, 2015

Pro and Against

I am pro police officer, against police officer brutality.
I am pro preservation of our resources and pro business.
I am pro protecting wildlife and enforcing laws thereon, and against threatening Mr. Dentist with death, but I am also pro emphasizing the importance of this issue.
I am pro U of U, and pro BYU.
I am pro US soldiers and against stupid wars.
I am pro guns and pro gun limitations.
And most importantly, I am pro deodorant but anti-antiperspirant.
Yes I can balance all these competing interests and not polarize the discussion for the sake of my ratings, because I am rating free.
©Loren M. Lambert September 7, 2015

On The Political Decision to Disobey the Law

Here's a question my friend Barbara Jolley Mumm asked me recently:

"If the law clerk in Kentucky is sitting in jail for not abiding by the law, why aren't those in sanctuary cities doing the same? Are they both in violation of the federal law? If not, why? Just curious as to why one is more important than the other.

Here's my answer:

All governments- local, state, and federal have many laws they do not enforce due to economics, politics and other concerns. In this case, instead of a government using tax dollars and political capital to pursue prosecution, a private citizen is using private money--capitalism at its finest--to advance the cause of civil rights.

Granted, tax money is later used, but locking up one recalcitrant government employee which resolves the problem pretty quickly (as today it has) whereas deporting--what is it?--12 to 30 million people who are undocumented would bankrupt ICE and the entire federal court system. To understand this times 30 million by $20,000 to get a good guess on the expense of locating, incarcerating, processing and then deporting them.

I think I know your views on both these issues but one thing you may not appreciate is that millions of dollars are saved by many US businesses that get cheap labor due to illegal immigration and they keep mum about it for political reasons because they want on the one hand to support conservative causes but on the other hand they want cheap labor and cheap foreign goods which in the long run hurts us as a country.

As to the clerk, you have to keep in mind that the consequences are more politically visible. The executive branch of local and federal governments decide what to prosecute. As you know and disagree with, although by the numbers, President Obama's administration has deported more people than the prior administration, he along with his law enforcement agencies still decides what to prosecute and congress decides how much money there is to do it.

© Loren M. Lambert, September 8, 2015

The Keys to A Healthy Person and a Nation - Balance and Unburdening - Neither Extreme Capitalism Nor Socialism

Three merchant ships set sail from a foreign land on a long distance journey for home. All three ships have three captains, a full crew and a similar contingency of passengers. All three ships are heavy laden with gold and trade goods belonging to the ship owners and officers. They also carry a large number of crew and passengers and their property.

Midway through their journey, the three were beset by a small storm that separated them by a few leagues. When the storm had passed, all three were within sight of each other and all on course, but were too far apart for mutual assistance should any run into trouble, but trouble was on the way. Riding the tall wind of the storm, they were beset upon by pirates, in sleeker, faster corsairs. Based upon the factors of wind, speed, current and craft, the ships would be over taken by the pirates within a few hours and could not regroup to form a collective defense. Woefully outgunned and under-fitted for defense, the three ships' only hope is to run for it.

As each captain, assessed their situation, each realized that to live another day, to make most use of the wind, they would have to both lighten their loads and balance their ships.

The Captain of Ship 1 decided to start with what he valued the least and ordered all the crew and passengers to push their property overboard. Then, if needed, he would push the property of the owners and officers’ overboard.

The Captain of Ship 2 brought everyone together and explained that God would spare them if they found the unbelievers among them and set them, their families and their property into the life boats and to fend for themselves.

In the third ship, the last Captain took his earnings in gold, called the crew and passengers together, and in view of all dropped his gold overboard and then asked everyone, including the crew, who had more than they needed to survive, to immediately throw theirs overboard. He also indicated that everyone's lives were equally important and that all would make sacrifices proportionate to their capacity to do so. He said that it didn’t matter how the ship became unbalanced, but that they would do what was necessary to balance it without concerning themselves with how it got that way.

So who survived?

Here’s the truth, in any decent, democratic community or nation–the push and pull of politics, the disparity of providence, the ability of those who acquire power and are entrusted with power to accumulate wealth, the ability of the masses to exert their will- will always create imbalances and burdens that will sometimes be too great to bear in times of crisis or are too inequitable. Furthermore, in a civil, moderate, sensible, democratic manner those imbalances and burdens will at times need to be readjusted and lightened. This process must be equitable and must necessarily be borne by those who can do so and done in proportion to their capacity, without anguishing over what caused the crisis in the first place or how the ship of the nation became so dangerously unbalanced or so precariously under siege. More on the history of the three merchant vessels.

© Loren M. Lambert, September 17, 2015.

Why Does Horseshit Smell Like Roses When Vomited From The Right Mouth?

What do the following statements or beliefs all have in common and why does one smell like a fragrant rose?:

The Ayatollah believes that no Christian should ever rule over Iran.

The King of Saudi Arabia believes that no male member outside his family and no female should ever rule over Saudi Arabia.

A Pope, centuries ago said no one but a Catholic should ever rule over Spain.

China's Communist Party has decreed that no one should rule over China who is not a member of their communist party.

A politician stated that John F. Kennedy should not serve as president of the United States because he was a Catholic.

Many US politicians have stated and believed that African-Americans should be enslaved, then not allowed to vote, and then should not be elected to any governmental office.

Presidential candidate Ben Carson says a Muslim should not be President of the United States.

Answer: It's all anti-US-Constitutional horseshit, yet Ben Carson's horseshit smells so nice because it assuages our fears, comports with our biases and reveals our inability to understand that universal principles and immutable rights should be championed, revered and implemented by all people-even us. And I might add- it seems innocuous when stated by a soft-spoken neurosurgeon, whom I was beginning to appreciate for his civil presentation skills and intelligence, and therefore it must be okay. It is, in fact, as vile as the statements uttered by some of our own past leaders and other bigoted leaders worldwide.

Now, a US citizen is well within his or her rights to decide that they would prefer having a “Christian,” as their president because a Christian does in fact believe and exemplify in their life some of the values of Christianity that the voter feels would make that person a better president. It is a totally different matter when an individual is running for president and they reveal by their statements that they do not understand our Constitution, the same Constitution that they will be swearing an oath to follow and uphold.

© Loren M. Lambert September 20, 2015.

Living In The Valleys Of Our Egos

Buddha taught that we must strive to obtain a level of consciousness where ego surrenders and we become fully awake.
Even though thinking of the reward for such an accomplishment is actually antithetical to its attainment, it is this: you cannot suffer when you are not thinking of yourself.

Now, that is the loftiest of peaks that will not be easily conquered, and is not graced when the objective is merely to place your heart’s flag upon it, as a lonely, effete monument of your effort, only to turn your back against it and descend back into the valley of your ego. Yet who can long survive making a home in such a rarified atmosphere?
Loren M. Lambert © Sept. 19, 2015.

Field Justice -- A Green Light to Vigilantism or Police Brutality?

For those who understand people who are governed by the rule of law, justice, equity and due process, you will understand that a person can be both a criminal, even a vile criminal, and also be a victim of police or vigilante brutality. They are not mutually exclusive nor incompatible. Would you have it otherwise?

Is it the responsibility of the police officer to inflict punishment based upon what the officer thinks the alleged suspect has perpetrated?

Likewise, a police officer can be responding to a legitimate criminal event and both act within the scope of his or her authority and at the same time exceed the scope of the requisite police response. Every such situation must be evaluated in isolation in its entirety before it can be determined to fit a pattern or tell us whether we have a rogue cop or a system-wide problem.

© Loren M. Lambert, September 21, 2015

True Faith - An Abiding Belief That All Things Are Possible

An abiding and true faith knows that we are capable of great majesty. We are capable of rising above our greed, our petty need to dominate, and of organizing our societies so that all mankind and living things have a place therein.

Yet this potential, this unbounded capacity, is ironically circumvented by those of alleged faith who have no vision, no foresight and believe that paradise can only be realized in depletion and death.

True faith rejects this misanthropy. True faith, while not without sacrifice, (if it is a sacrifice to do the right thing) holds that all things are possible and within our potential and that paradise will only be realized by those who are willing to champion it here and now.

© Loren M. Lambert, September 11, 2015

Oklahoma–The Musical That Should Be Retired

Disclaimer: this is satire and over the top hyperbole--

yet there is often true sentiment expressed in satire

I got to see “Oklahoma,” at the Hale Theater. They did a great job. The middle dream sequence vocals and dancing were exquisitely beautiful. The leads were supurb. The actress who played Ado Annie could carry the show by herself. The actors had amazing voices and were all talented dancers. The energy was captivating. Yet this play has always bugged me. It should be retired or gussied up a bit, and not just because I have “Oh the cowboy and farmer should be friends,” stuck in my head on repeat. Let me explain why through the use of its iconic song, Oklahoma:

There's never been a better time to start in life-
If you aint’ too dark and you are completely white!
Starting as a farmer with the purchase of a wife-
Soon be livin' in a brand new state!
Brand new state - where there’s nothing to debate!
Gonna bring one dimensional characters,
Jokes for your bias, spite and tormentors,
A few tales of whoring where the cowboys zoom,
Plen'y of meanness, plen'y of room,
Plen'y of room to swing a rope!
Big fat noose its kinda just dope.

OOOOk-lahoma, where the dance and vocals hide the pain,
Where a cowboy’s whore lives next door,
and the stereotypes are really quite inane

OOOOk-lahoma, where a Persian man and a hired hand
are there to be mocked by the cowboy jock,
makin nooses for his petty plan.

We know we belong to the “man” (yo-ho)
And the women we purchase are grand!
And when we say
Yeeow! Aye-yip-aye-yo-ee-ay!
We're only sayin'
You're doin' fine, Oklahoma!
Oklahoma KO!

Repeat.

Loren M. Lambert © Sept. 14, 2015

Marines and Workplace Civility-Lessons To Be Learned

Most people don't realize that there is no legally imposed civility code that governs employment, nor legally delineated work schedule.

Generally, bosses and supervisors when interacting with their workforce can engage in yelling, screaming, psychological abuse, cussing, demeaning, belittling, indirect violence against their own equipment, temper tantrums, etc. and can work people to exhaustion so long as it isn't combined with targeting a protected status and so long as safety laws are followed and workers are paid overtime and worker's comp benefits when over worked.

In other words, they can yell at you and call you a dumb person, scream that if you don't pick up the pace you'll be fired and make you work through your breaks and overtime so long as they pay you equal to others doing the same work, abide by minimum wage and over time requirements and don't call you a dumb Mormon (or a dumb Jew, black, Chinese, bitch, faggot, cripple, blind, or old person).

When their bad behavior implicates your protected status, sometimes you have to complain to get legal protection. So get legal advice before you quit!

Although I don't agree with the games that military drill sergeants play by demeaning and yelling at their troops, sometimes such training teaches you an important lesson. You can think, but not say aloud,"This guy is a lunatic, playing a game. I'll stand here passively and look totally interested in their babble. I won't take it personally, and when he is done I'll go about my business no worse for the wear." Sometimes that's the best approach with bad managers. Well, that and start looking for a new job with a decent boss. 

Loren M. Lambert © Sept. 15, 2015.