Grant me the serenity!

This is a lengthy article that appears to "gloss over" the friend's far more important transformation. While I know how the friend described it as "making peace with your dark side", this implies that there is a light side to offer as an alternative. If all we had to manage was the dark, then the world would be nothing but shades of black – which in essence is black.

Clearly then, there is a logical necessity for "God, the light, purity, la-la".

What the friend, though, is describing is a typical 12-step program that teaches one how to deal with life's experience on life's terms. A big part of any 12-step program is admitting that you're powerless over a particular "thing" and then turning your will over to a Higher Power, as you understand it to be. Therefore, a 12-step program is very much about the spiritual, as the friend credited the reason for her own transformation – spiritual guidance.

Where the article digresses is that it lays claim to another person's moral inventory when it should be focused on it own. And another person's inventory is a region that we have no basis to claim – let alone control.

As part of a 12-step program, there's usually two guiding principles. One – always check your motives for why you are acting and/or responding in a particular manner (i.e., have I addressed legitimately "my side of the street" on the issue?), and two – emphasize your acceptance of an issue over your expectation(s) associated with the issue. You can only control that which you have control over, which is limited (fortunately for some and I think unfortunately for the great majority) to yourself.

Once you practice these two principles, the rest is cream cheese. The Serenity Prayer summarizes this approach nicely:

"God, grant me the serenity
To accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference."

Now, if you take this approach and apply it to the article and its assertions – many that they are (i.e., one page spiritual, four pages condemnation), the article appears to be just as guilty as the religious people it castigates.

Who then, if any, is the better? I think it's the friend; she seems to "get" it.

by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 3 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1541 comments) on Tuesday, December 4, 2007 at 3:35:42 PM
 

Spirituality

The spirituality that Ms. Smith is referring to derives from the Enneagram, which posits that there are 9 ways in which human beings learn to comprehend the world around them when they are children.  As the people mature, these nine points become firmer, and contain both light and dark.  There are many excellent books explaining the Enneagram, so it would be pointless to attempt to do so in a limited space.  But for every dark side in a persons psche, there is also a light side.  Let me use for example a person who appears as a Five.  This person can disassociate from the turmoil that is going on around them and make objective, rather than purely emotional, judgements.  That is the 'light' side.  The dark side is that a Five doesn't want to become a 'part of the main', preferring to remain in the background, and not 'become involved' in others lives or activities.  This is, of course, an extreme oversimplification.  Further, one cannot tell another what that person's position is on the Enneagam.  Every person must discern this for him or herself.

Fundamentalism of any religion or political position, if carried to the extreme, is giving into the of the Dark Side.  'It was interesting that Dick Cheney used the term when he explained how we need to fight terrorism  - by going to the dark side.  Rather frightening, to say the least.

by Shirley Bianchi (9 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 90 comments) on Tuesday, December 4, 2007 at 4:16:19 PM
 

Crediting or discrediting the progressive movement:

Hello friends

Having written about how compassion can probably soften the vicious retaliation from our power-greedy politicians to our truth-telling  , and that heart-level connections will always trump written laws, I must say that because I hate fakeness and two-facedness more than anything in this world, i don't pretend to have it mastered, myself. I confess that I am indeed so angry and so stirred by what is going on politically, that I know for a fact that I am not emotionally capable of being cool in my verbal approach where post911 politics and legislation are concerned. And that is a fact which I work with ,not through, at this point: That's why I write instead of speak. So to all others who are similarly emotionally affected, I don't blame them one bit.

That said, and based on experience, I think it is vitally important to the credibility of the progressive movement that we learn how to be compassionate and soft in our approach, even when the things we are talking about are heinous. Teddy Roosevelt said it very well: "Speak softly but carry a big stick".

So perhaps buying a copy of Thom Hartman's "Cracking the Code" would be the most strategically important thing any of us on this forum can do, for the sake of the causes at stake. America as the Land of the Free has all but gone down the tubes, and the rescue operation must be very skilfully done if there is any hope of it being successful.

I am concerned that many of our rude postings and emotional rants will only discredit our movement, thereby undermining the cause. And with all that is at stake, we simply can't afford to let that happen.

In this Season of Giving I hope that readers on this forum will help OpEdNews, a treasured resource in fighting the war for America as the Land of the Free, by purchasing a copy of Cracking the Code. Let's kill two birds with one stone: Help OpEdNews to continue its vitally important work while also furthering the pivotally important advancement of our own cause.

THank you all for all you do and for your caring and concern!

by Kathryn Smith (87 articles, 2 quicklinks, 35 diaries, 335 comments) on Tuesday, December 4, 2007 at 3:41:04 PM
 

An oversight which I wish to qualify:

Hello friends

 YOu are right to point out to me something which I missed in this article: The reality of the light in each person.

That was an oversight but not an intended aim of this article. Sorry for any implied under-estimating of our human race:

In fact, I believe not just with my head, but truly with my gut, that every one of us is light in our cores. We all are motivated by truth and love. It is the harsh realities of life, and the tweaked expressions of that love and that truth, which end up being dark, ie going haywire.

I believe every one of us is born beautiful from within, and that light is available from within at all times. Things we do and beliefs we form may mask that light from ourselves, the world, or both. But since it is who we are, at our core, it also is always there, even if covered or dormant in some people.

And I agree that light is an important matter to emphasize, especially when transmuting the dark. It is only when that light goes out of balance, ie we deny our shadow and/or judge it, that at that point it becomes "la-la" and can result in the "morality" we see running roughshod over our country, at this point.

THank you for pointing out this oversight, and for your comments. And please know that I agree with you. Best wishes, Kathryn

by Kathryn Smith (87 articles, 2 quicklinks, 35 diaries, 335 comments) on Wednesday, December 5, 2007 at 12:57:07 AM