From Christian to Atheist: My Deconversion Story (2)

Even though I considered myself a devout follower of Christ, I was never fully comfortable with some of the more controversial aspects of my religion.  For instance, I recall attending a youth revival event at a local affiliate church where the host pastor made a reference to the victims of Hurricane Katrina.  "God judged the people of New Orleans because they have sinned and turned away from the Lord," he said, "will you give your life to the Lord tonight and become a witness to the world?"  As a chorus of "Amen" spread through the congregation in unison, I could not help but pause in shock.  Hadn't Jesus told us to be compassionate and love both our neighbors and enemies?  The correct approach, it seemed, was to first provide humanitarian assistance to the people whose lives had been devastated by the deadly storm.  Surely that would be the more moral approach to evangelism than telling people they deserved to get swept away in a flood!  Noah's flood was repeating itself in modern times.  My maternal grandmother, who was one of the most loving and caring women in the world, was not a Christian when she passed away.  Mom tried to cope with her death, convincing herself that her mother was in heaven because uncle's family had taken her to Catholic Mass (Mom's mistrust of Catholicism seemed to fade away temporarily at this crucial moment) before the final moments.  I wasn't so confident;  did Grandma deserve to burn in hell, too?  

• Tip of the iceberg 

I was still nevertheless strong in my faith despite the occasional episodes of doubt when a life-changing event occurred in the December of 2006.  Sitting in an online literary magazine class in high school and reading through classmates' entries on the computer screen, I suddenly stopped upon finding a particular article.  A girl (let's call her K) in my class had recently lost her father after years of illness and was apparently trying to find ways to cope with his death.  Even though she had grown up a nonbeliever, she wrote, a part of her deeply wanted to believe in some sort of afterlife and find solace.  She reached out in desperation through her writing and asked if anyone would be willing to share their spiritual perspectives.  I felt a jolt of compassion and felt the Holy Spirit speaking to me.  "Witness to this girl," the internal voice in my head said, "and bring her peace."  Here are excerpts from an email correspondence between K and me:


K:  I have a quote from a book that I like and it's "Everyone half hopes that there's a Heaven so that they don't have to be scared of Hell." I want to believe that it's out there. I just don't know what to do to convince myself. Dying right now and seeing [first]hand isn't really an option and I don't want to think about my dad suffering through [eternal] damnation. I don't think anyone ever wants to really think about that.

I guess what I really [am] trying to say is this is a case of a nonbeliever trying to find reason to believe. I'm not a nonbeliever by choice; I was, well, born into it. I just flat out don't know where to start.   

Me:  ...I can relate with the quote that you mentioned.  I've heard from somewhere that "There aren't any nonbelievers in the trenches where bullets are flying over your head...Everyone prays to a 'god'...

John 3:16 says that "God so loved the world that He gave His one and only son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life." God loved you and me enough to send His son to pay the ultimate price for our sins: The death on the cross...

Christianity preaches that people need Jesus because men do not stand a chance to attain salvation on their own.  Many religions are men's attempts to "reach God." Muslims trim their beards to a certain length and pray dutifully each day.  Hindus need to do good things so that karma doesn't come back to haunt them. People do these things so that they might somehow be at a better position for a better end.  But Christianity is different in that "God is reaching to Man" to give him salvation.  Though I grew up reading the Bible and listening to sermons about Jesus, I tried so hard to be "good."  I wanted to feel "good" by being kind; I tried to be loving to those who tried my patience; I volunteered for different church activities; I imposed on myself a set of "Do's and Don't's."   But something was missing.  After much struggle, God granted me a divine epiphany.  It was not about doing the "good" things to be saved; I was, am, and will be, never good enough.  Jesus died on the cross so that I didn't have to do all those things.  The penalties for all the evil that I would do had already been paid for by the blood of Christ.  Only by surrendering myself completely to the power of the cross could I finally find peace within.  C.S. Lewis sums it up perfectly:  "We do good things because we are saved, not in order to be saved."

Ultimately, God did all that He did because He loves you that much.  You are God's precious child who is worth getting nailed onto two pieces of wood that was designed to punish criminals.  You might not be able to fully comprehend His love for you at this moment but He will continue to run after you.  I am writing this email right now because I believe that God is calling me to share His love with you.  He is waiting for you with open arms.  As the cliched saying goes, "I can show you the door, but you have to walk through it."  I am only obeying God's command to share the wonderful news that He has given me with you.  I have no idea whether you will accept Christ or not.  Perhaps it'll take a few months.  Maybe it'll take a few years.  I have no clue.  But I'm just letting you know that the offer is out there.  It's up to you to accept or decline.  But He is patient.  Therefore, I will also be patient.   

Reading my own words in 2011, I am quite embarrassed by my naivete.  But one thing I can say without shame is that everything I said genuinely came from the heart.  I felt that I had done the right thing and prayed that the Holy Spirit would speak to K.  Unfortunately, I would be profoundly disappointed:  

K:  Before I go any further I want to make sure that you understand I am not condemning your faith or in any way meaning to discount it. Everything you've said has been very respectful and I just want you to know that I do respect you and what you believe.

These are the same things that I have been told my entire life and frankly, they aren't good enough. "God said so" got me thrown out of church when I was little. It just wasn't the answer I wanted. I'm not looking for a reason to not believe. I'm [desperately] searching for just the opposite.

I just want to know what's out there.     

Confusion took over.  She had declined so decisively without hesitation.  What else can I---or should I--- do in this situation?  Do I press further?  Or would that be too much for someone in K's situation?  I became desperate:  


Me:  Would it help if we were to discuss God objectively?  Maybe the problem is that I'm trying to use the "God said so" approach when the Bible has no authority for those who don't believe (e.g. I can try to argue with a nonbeliever using the Bible as my source but it'd be useless because the Bible is not a reliable source for him).  I think that talking about the issue of God while assuming a neutral stance (non-christian) might be a better approach in this case.  Would you like to continue that way?       

K:  I don't know Mike. I know this must be frustrating for you. And I thank you for your patience. I just don't know. I'm willing to try most anything.

I didn't know what to do.  While I had been reading a book by an "atheist-turned-Christian" author Lee Strobel, who attempts to establish the historicity of the Bible, I knew I was still relatively unfamiliar with the matter and not confident in my ability to argue logically and philosophically from a secular point of view.  Furthermore, I wasn't even sure whether engaging in such a debate-like conversation would even be contextually appropriate given K's situation.  I promised to get back to her after taking some time to sort out my thoughts during the Christmas season.

More to come in the next entry...

P.S.  I recently got back in touch with K and asked her where she is in her life now.  Ironically enough, she continued soul searching after our correspondence in 2006 and actually ended up embracing her own interpretation of the Christian faith in the October of 2008 (I went in the opposite direction and ended up becoming an agnostic atheist a few months before).  In her words:  

K:  To reconcile my father's struggles in his life and how they affected mine, I've adopted a much older view of heaven, hell, and the "hierarchy of goodness" that the world seem to want to impose. I believe in Lucifer, but that he is a fallen angel who was not banished to the underworld, but resigned to the lower tiers of Heaven, and turned away from the face of God. I do not believe my father to be bound to the same fate but is somewhere in the middle having struggled, but believed all along. I believe that all faiths are struggling towards the same understanding, the same God. This is why I generally speak of "god, with a lower case g" because I do not purport to believe that my understanding is better than yours or anyone else's. 

I'm proud of the person I am, the faith I've embraced, and the fact that I have no regrets about any of it.      

She no longer attends the church that she used to go to---because of certain differences in spiritual viewpoint---but it seems that she has found some sort of closure and meaning, even if what she believes in does not necessarily line up neatly with the views of mainstream Christianity.  I am glad she found an answer for herself.  Though I do not agree with her views, I respect the fact that she has reached a conclusion after careful contemplation, not as a result of blind faith.  

From Christian to Atheist: My Deconversion Story (1)

As I stare into the blank white space on my screen and gather my thoughts, I picture in my mind the image of a faithful worshipper.  A reminiscent Jew praying beside the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem; a Christian raising her arms to the heavens in euphoric ecstasy as she sings along with the worship band; a Muslim climbing the heights of a minaret to announce his call to prayer; each of these people seem to find tremendous meaning and purpose in their faith.

It therefore seems utterly ludicrous to think that some people voluntarily choose to leave behind their secure inner sanctuary.  Why would anyone forsake such a fundamental aspect of one's constitution?  The outside world is already a challenging and intimidating place as it is.  Yet, this was precisely the type of crucial decision that I, a former Christian of 18 years, made after encountering an insurmountable Gordian Knot.

I usually follow the cardinal rule of thumb that prescribes refrain from speaking about sex, politics, and of course, religion.  All three topics invite ample amounts of controversy and people often find themselves exchanging anything from heated shouting matches, hook punches, to even ballistic missiles as a result.  But recent experiences, such as hassling visits from the Jehovah's Witnesses and the observation of religion-inspired terrorism (which isn't reserved just for Muslims, by the way), have compelled me to go off on a rant about religion.  So if street smarts aren't really up my alley I might as well go all out, right?

No matter how intricately I try to portray the mind of an ex-Christian gone nonbeliever, I speculate that most of the religious will say or think something like, "I'll pray for you" or "The Lord is like a shepherd who secured ninety nine sheep yet goes looking for the hundredth lost one."  But I'll nevertheless try and persuade the believer why I don't think intercessory prayer is necessary or why I don't think I am "lost."  So if you have some time to kill, sit down and enjoy the show.

• Once upon a time, there was a happy Christian boy...

As far bak as I can remember, church had always been an integral aspect of my life.  My mom had converted to Christianity (Presbyterianism, to be specific) during her youth after following a friend to church and virtually raised me in the church after marrying my dad.  I still have fond childhood memories of going on Easter egg hunts and performing plays about Jesus' birth on Christmas.  I even remember getting upset when a girl told her younger brother to throw away a Bible passage pamphlet that I had handed out because their mom taught them not to accept "propaganda material."  Even though Sunday morning cartoons on TV were really hard to resist, I nevertheless obediently followed my mom to service because I had a strong feeling that it was the right thing to do.

My Christian faith became increasingly important to me in my teenaged years as my understanding of church teachings became more sophisticated.  The story of Jesus Christ's selfless sacrifice on the cross rang true in my heart.  I dedicated my life to the Lord, wishing to bear witness to the world that Jesus welcomes with open arms all who repent and come.  Supportive friends and mentors in the church enriched my perception of life through prayer and discipleship and their companionship helped me cope with bumps along the road.  And when I discovered my musical talent, I joined my youth group's worship band as a vocalist and rhythm acoustic guitarist.  There was no other experience quite like singing on stage for God and leading a congregation of fellow worshippers.

• Am I different or am I fooling myself?

However, my increased maturity and heightened awareness of the Bible and its corresponding Christian doctrines began to show a few side effects.  For instance, I had trouble reconciling the disparity between Yahweh's brutality in the Old Testament and Jesus' compassionate nature in the New Testament.  "How can the same God act so differently?" I wondered.  It seemed almost immoral to wipe out entire ethnic groups simply because its members didn't worship Yahweh.  Where was the forgiveness and compassion?  Is it ok to kill and take people's land and women because they are nonbelievers?  But these questions didn't turn me away from God per se at the time.  It was, after all, psychologically easier to reconcile that "things were different" back in Old Testament times and that Jesus had come to earth to show us a new way of living.  Such quick mental fixes helped me proceed smoothly with my faith in the short term.

But things began to take a turn for the worse.  Call me condescending but I began noticing some time in high school that I was different.  I had always been troubled by the fact that church seemed to be more of a social event for many kids at my church than a place to glorify God.  When I led worship,  I sometimes wanted to scream from the stage when I saw youth group members folding paper airplanes out of bulletins and goofing around in the back row thinking that they were unseen.  The aforementioned questioning of the Bible didn't stop either; whereas most kids seemed to have no problem "just believing as told," I found myself digging deeper and deeper.  "Why does Cain fear murder when he's banished from the garden?" I asked, "I thought only Adam, Eve, and Abel existed?"   I felt guilty and confused for judging others and having doubts.  Surely I was being self-righteous in my zeal and devotion!  I also remembered that Jesus chastised Thomas for not believing in His resurrection without touching His wounds first.  I tried to find comfort in close companions, like the ones in the worship band, who seemed to share my passion.  I prayed for wisdom when I found myself questioning and asked the Lord to show me the way.  Unfortunately, I would soon find that the tipping point was just around the corner...

More to come in Part 2...

Should we kick out all the Mexicans? (Conclusion)

As I mentioned in the first entry to this series, many in the right wing would think it ridiculous to even talk about "fair wages" and other legal rights for people who broke the law in entering this country.  Anti-immigrant legislation in states like Arizona have clearly demonstrated that far-right conservatives are willing to create an environment of fear and hostility in hopes that undocumented immigrants will leave this country voluntarily.  However, I believe that an enforcement-only approach to this social issue is not only inadequate but also impractical.

The Department of Homeland Security has steadily increased its watchfulness along the southern border over the last decade using armed Customs & Border agents, fences, and various mechanized detection technologies.  However, we see no end to illegal immigration.  Undocumented immigrants used to cross the border independently; but now, they are paying "professional" transporters called coyotes---who often have links to criminal organizations in Mexico---thousands of dollars to bypass the increased militarization on the American side.  American agents, undocumented civilian immigrants, and coyotes have all suffered casualties as a result of armed conflicts and harsh natural conditions in the deserts.

Furthermore, research from organizations like the Migration Policy Institute has shown that many Mexicans who seasonally crossed back and forth along the border are now staying put in the U.S.  This phenomenon implies that, if the level of illicit entry remains constant, there will be a continuous rise in the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States.

So what should policy makers in Washington do?  While there probably isn't a neat, cookie cutter solution to this social problem, I think that we can start by doing the following:

• Amnesty with built-in penalties and conditional incorporation 

I recognize the fact that amnesty is at best a symptomatic treatment.  It does not address the real incentives behind undocumented immigration and might even create some motivation for those south of the border to risk entering the U.S. illicitly in expectation of eventual forgiveness.  But something must be done in the short term to address the existence of some 12 million individuals living in the shadows.

I think it's fair to say that it is both immoral and impractical to allow prejudiced Americans to grab a shotgun and shoot every Latino they see.  Furthermore, even a federally directed mass deportation would be extremely costly and cause unwanted instability in the U.S. economy.  A much better alternative would be to bring people out of the shadows and incorporate them into the legitimate labor market.  This would also help boost the government's tax intake.

To address the fact that federal immigration laws have been broken, possible remedies include taxing amnesty recipients at a higher rate for a given period of time or imposing a one-time financial penalty.  The government can also implement a temporary residence phase that eventually converts into a permanent status contingent upon good behavior.

• Expansion of the Guest Worker Program 

Given that there is a strong demand for unskilled labor, an expansion of the current Guest Worker Program would represent another partial solution.  Guest workers should have access to legal remedies against unscrupulous American employers so that both unskilled Americans and foreign nationals are not victimized; otherwise, the current trend of below-minimum wage compensation will continue.

• U.S. investment and diplomatic foreign policy in Latin America 

This might sound a bit strange at first but I believe that the key to solving the undocumented immigration puzzle lies not in immigration policy but economic and foreign policy.  People from developing nations immigrate to the U.S. because life is hard back home.  Even a casual study of migration trends reveals that countries like South Korea send fewer of their citizens to the U.S. as economic situations improve domestically.

As much as globalization receives ample criticism from those who feel uncomfortable about developed nations' exploitative behavior in less wealthy regions of the world, foreign direct investment is a crucial factor in delivering poor countries from poverty.  Rich nations outsource jobs and provide financial capital in return for poor nations' cheap labor and manufacturing costs.  As developing countries experience an increase in GDP and conduct large scale industrialization, living conditions steadily improve and emigration rates fall.  Yes, American investment in places like Mexico will certainly lead to certain abuses in the short term.  But if Latin Americans carefully manage their debt and foreign currency reserve levels (to prevent a destabilizing currency speculation) while Americans lend wisely, I daresay the future looks brighter.

But in order for investors to invest confidently, America must seriously scale back its imperialist military actions abroad.  Hidden from the American public's scrutiny, the Pentagon and the CIA propped up oppressive dictatorial regimes throughout Latin America and trained foreign death squads in American military installations.  Firm and confident diplomacy should replace unnecessarily aggressive and destabilizing military tactics.  A United States that strives to become a cooperative neighbor will be a prime ingredient in global development and stability.                  

Should we kick out all the Mexicans? (Part 3)

Here is another common argument against undocumented immigrants.

• "They should have waited in line just like all the other legal immigrants."  

Upon casual glance, nothing seems wrong with this argument.  Some liberals try to weasel their way out of this one and instead attempt to redirect focus onto the humanitarian problems associated with hunting down and deporting undocumented immigrants; however, I acknowledge that a person is in violation of federal immigration laws if he or she enters the U.S. without a visa.
  
Having said that, however, I will base my rebuttal on a policy-oriented view.  As it currently stands, there are two primary methods of immigrating to the United States:

• Family-based (~70%):  A direct or extended family member sponsors a foreign national.

• Employment-based (~30%):  An employer in the U.S. sponsors a foreign national because he or she has particular skill sets or provides certain services not found among the domestic population.    

Every year, Congress sets a quota on the number of visas that will be issued through the Department of State.  The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (i.e. USCIS, formerly known as the INS) is then supposed to process various paperwork and make sure that foreign nationals receive their visas in an orderly fashion from the DOS.  There are also temporary channels through which foreign nationals can enter, such as travel visas and guest worker programs.     

The last time I checked, it takes about 7-10 years or more for Chinese, Filipino, Indian, and Mexican nationals to enter the U.S. through family-based immigration.  Furthermore, officials from renown companies such as Google and Microsoft have complained during Congressional hearings because it takes approximately 2-5 years for a highly skilled immigrant (e.g. mathematicians, professors, software engineers, etc.) to receive his or her green card through employment-based immigration.     

Cost is another huge issue.  Because USCIS receives no appropriation from the federal budget, it funds its entire operation using the fees collected from immigrants.  There are also additional costs associated with employing an immigration attorney.  In my family's case---we're going through the employment-based immigration process---we've probably spent at least $10,000 hiring an attorney, getting our biometric data taken, and filing numerous paperwork.  I would be less annoyed if we actually received good customer service from the USCIS (we've been waiting for close to 4 years now); unfortunately, the agency seems overloaded.  The problem with bureaucracy is further compounded by the fact that multiple government organizations---including the Department of Labor, FBI, and Social Security Administration---must work together to process a given case.         

The factors outlined above, along with Mexico's geographic proximity to the U.S., poverty and unrest south of the border, and the abundance of American employers willing to hire undocumented workers in the black market, all imply that illegal immigration will not simply stop through enforcement measures alone.  

Most Americans simply have no clue how the current federal immigration system works because they were lucky and blessed enough to be born in the most prosperous nation in the world.  Some chauvinist Americans might retort that this is what it takes to live in America; however, they should not forget that the original purpose of the immigration system was to, first and foremost, benefit the U.S. (i.e. promote family values and enhance economic growth).

I sincerely hope that people will consider all angles before placing all the blame on the Latino community.  They are but one piece to a gigantic puzzle.  This is not a simple policy challenge that can be solved through the currently inadequate "catch and deport" strategy.

So what do we do?  I'll give some suggestions in a final entry to come...

Should we kick out all the Mexicans? (Part 2)

Let us continue addressing additional conservative criticisms to undocumented immigration.

• "Illegal immigrants are a net deficit to the American budget because they use our social services without contributing anything."  

This view suggests that Latinos are something akin to a parasitic organism that feeds voraciously upon the American taxpayer.  "Those evil Mexican bloodsuckers!" they scream.  But this argument, I believe, is also fallacious for the following reasons.

First of all, contrary to common misperception, undocumented immigrants do pay taxes.  Surely these people buy things while in the U.S.!  Everyone needs food and a roof over his or her head, for instance.  Let's not conveniently forget that sales tax applies regardless of the form of payment used.  And recent research has shown that many undocumented workers even pay income, Social Security, and Medicare taxes.

Conservative accusations about undocumented immigrants benefiting unduly from American social services, on the other hand, appear dubious.  The only areas where I see them consuming are public education and the occassional emergency room service.  But because undocumented immigrants have no choice but to use fake ID numbers to pay taxes, they do not have access to Social Security or Medicare.  And it is no secret that the Latino community is extremely reluctant to utilize public law enforcement.  Oh, and with all the ongoing talk about cutting teachers' benefits, I'm not even sure whether they would strain the public education budget, if they ever did in the first place.  

It's hard to determine exact numbers since research results are all over the place depending on think tanks' political leaning.  But the observations outlined above strongly suggest that undocumented immigrants are a net surplus (or a break-even, at worst), not a deficit, to the national budget.

• "Illegal immigrants do not learn English and dilute American culture." 

This argument just gets on my nerves because it brings out the ugliest side of prejudiced native-born Americans.  Often uttered by a particular demographic that populates areas like Texas and the Southeast in massive numbers, this criticism paints Latinos as some sort of Spanish-speaking demon spies that covertly attempt to destroy America.

But let us take a moment and picture America in our heads.  The U.S. constitution is based on the ideas of John Locke, an English philosopher.  Spaghetti and pizza are from Italy.  Blues, jazz, and rock 'n' roll all trace their roots to West African musical heritage.  There are plenty more examples.  Need I say more?

The type of people who accuse Latinos of being un-American love dining at Mexican restaurants and dancing to salsa music.  But start talking about diversity and foreign language education and they act like their neuron-deprived heads are about to explode out of their skulls.

In regards to English proficiency, 1st generation immigrants from non-English speaking countries---including places like Germany where the ancestors of those in Texas and the Southeast came from---usually have trouble because they are too busy providing for their families. They often do not have the luxury of attending formal ESL classes, not to mention how learning a new language as an adult is extremely difficult whether you're illegal or not.  But there's hope for the xenophobes.  Research has shown that from the 2nd generation onward, descendants of immigrants speak English perfectly and assimilate fully into mainstream America.

Let me use myself as a direct example.  I noticed that I have a superior command over the English language---both written and spoken---than the vast majority of native-born Americans even though I wasn't born in the U.S.  Call me arrogant, if you will.  But just look at the comment section on websites like YouTube and you'll see what I mean if you're literate.

More to come in the next entry...

Should we kick out all the Mexicans?

In light of the ongoing debate about HB 87, Georgia's knockoff version of the Arizona anti-immigrant legislation, I think that a carefully contemplated rebuttal to the short-sighted reasoning of the conservative argument is well warranted.  The Republicans in this state seem to believe that an enforcement-only approach---that is, catching and kicking out Mexicans and other Latinos---will somehow be the silver bullet that magically solves the immigration problem in this country.  "Pull them over, ask for their papers, and deport them!" they say.  It all sounds simple enough.  But is it really a good idea?  Let's consider some common conservative arguments:

• "Illegal immigrants take jobs away from Americans."    

In an effort to be as unbiased and objective as possible, I am going to diverge slightly from the most extreme liberal defense to this criticism and acknowledge that undocumented immigrants probably do compete unfairly with U.S. citizens in unskilled sectors to a certain degree.  We all know that undocumented immigrants mow our lawns, clean our houses, work in dry cleaners, and perform construction work; they simply do not have the necessary background or credential to work as sophisticated software engineers or doctors.  And yes, they usually get paid in cash under the table and earn below minimum wage.  

However, I would counter that the crux of the problem does not lie with the undocumented immigrant.  A Mexican understands incentives just as well as anyone else and would much rather make more money for his or her services.  But imagine the following conversation taking place:

American Employer:  Jose, I'm gonna have to ask you to work overtime tonight.

Mexican Worker:  Will you pay me extra or at least give me minimum wage? 

American Employer:  Nope, because I can get away with it.  And if you cause trouble, I'll call the authorities and have you deported. 

Mexican Worker:  (Thinking) Wow, really?

One needs to understand that the Mexican worker isn't the one harboring direct malicious intent to screw American workers out of the labor market.  Jose would opt for minimum wage any time if it were offered to him; but the American boss will simply not do so because he has leverage over Jose.  And we all know why Jose is not going to call the cops about this.   

Furthermore, nobody talks about the problems associated with the unskilled American who is competing against someone like our fictional Jose.  It may be harsh but a blogger who goes by the pseudonym "The Korean" phrased it well:

"Even if we were speaking on the low-paying and volatile jobs that illegal immigrants generally take, have you considered, you know, studying hard during school so that you won't have to take those jobs? Or working harder than the guy next to you at your job? Surely, you are not saying you are in a worse position to compete with an illegal immigrant, who is faced with language barrier, cultural gap, poverty and constant persecution from immigration authorities? Even with all that, illegal immigrants apparently find jobs. What's your excuse?"

"Seriously, what entitles you to a job? Don't you generally belong to the political party that does not believe in giving free handouts to people?"

Based on anecdotes, I know that many Korean business owners---who usually run construction companies, dry cleaners, restaurants, etc.---simply refuse to hire American-born workers because they have a bad attitude, perform poorly, and inevitably ask for more pay.  They hire Mexicans because they get the job done.  I do not justify any Korean business owner paying Mexican workers below minimum wage; however, I do think that most business owners would still hire Mexicans immigrants over native-born Americans even if the former group had legal status and demanded a fair wage. 

And let's face it.  More "refined" Americans love having Latinos mow their lawns and clean their homes for a bargain cost.  Also, for example, just look at how this country has enjoyed relatively cheap real estate for a while because Latino construction workers did not receive fair compensation.  Unfortunately, Wall Street decided to gamble with mortgage-backed securities and screwed us all.

At this point, I can just picture a conservative asking, "But all you're doing here is blaming Americans.  Isn't it nonsensical to talk about fair wages for illegals?  They shouldn't even be here in the first place."

Since this entry is getting a bit lengthy, I'll have more in a follow-up...

Why we're still screwed

1.  The Twin Towers and the Pentagon building are destroyed in 9/11.  
2.  Americans get pissed off and bomb the shit out of every brown person they see.
3.  Navy SEALs take out Osama Bin Laden 10 years later.
4.  Americans celebrate.
5.  Extremist brown people get pissed off and plan another terrorist attack.
6.  Something else gets blown up in America.
7.  Extremist brown people celebrate.  
8.  Americans get pissed off and bomb the shit out of every brown person they see.
9.  The cycle continues.

So...  Why are we celebrating again?

Do black people play the race card too much?

Did you click on this entry because you think I'm a racist?  Well, read on. 

I had an unpleasant but nevertheless interesting experience today as I rode home the Athens Transit bus after class.  Everything was normal during the first 10 minutes or so of the ride.  But then, it happened.

A young black guy, who I assume is a local resident, began playing a first person shooting game on his cellphone.  This alone would've been fine had it not been for the fact that he had the volume all the way up to maximum on speakerphone and was bothering those around him with bangs of simulated gunfire.  Eventually, people started glancing in his direction hoping that he would get the message.

But this man evidently did not understand the concept of public courtesy.  Bang!  Bang!  Bang!  My ears began to hurt.  So being the blunt person that I am, I prepared to call him out publicly since I was "conveniently" sitting next to him anyway.  After all, no one else seemed to have the balls to confront a 6+ foot tall black man with dreads.

Just as I was about to spit the truth on behalf of the other riders, I was surprised to hear a white female UGA student---who was barely 5 foot 3 at best---beat me to the punch: 

"Excuse me, but can you mute that?" she asked courteously but firmly.  "What?" the man responded, pretending like he didn't hear.  But man, this girl was feisty!  Showing no signs of backing down, she repeated, "Can you mute your phone?  The noise is really annoying and I'm sure everyone here agrees."

Unfortunately, he wasn't in the mood to cooperate.  "Man, I ain't botherin' no one," he retorted apathetically.  My low BS tolerance level kicked into overdrive.  "Actually, I agree with her," I responded staring into his eyes.  For a few seconds, the bus fell silent.     

But I guess he didn't like getting ganged up on because he belligerently pulled out the race card.  "What, I ain't doin' nuttin'," he grunted, "y'all think you's better 'cuz you go to college or some shit?"  He continued pressing the buttons on his phone like a large but rebellious child and muttered expletives under his breath as his girlfriend laughed mockingly next to him.  Upon hearing this, I smirked with a foul taste in my mouth.  The white girl looked like she was getting angry and tried to dissuade him again.  "Don't bother," I said, "he's not gonna listen to you."

When I got home, however, a controversial question arose in my mind.  "Why are blacks so quick to play the race card?" I wondered.  Yes, racism still exists in America.  Yes, sometimes the game seems to be rigged.  And yes, other races---even whites from time to time---also play the race card.  But is there more to this than what meets the eye?

I might be oversimplifying the issue but I think one of the main reasons why this social problem exists is because an alarming number of people in the black community have simply given up.  Crime, drugs, gunshots, and single-parent households have become a norm instead of an anomaly.  "What's the point of trying?" young blacks might ask, "no matter how hard I try, the white man's running the show."    

But the black community must not give up.  Yes, slavery and segregation set off a vicious cycle of ignorance, poverty, and violence.  Yes, racism still exists in America.  But look at some of the changes that have taken place.  Who would've thought 100 years ago that black students would attend UGA?  Who would've thought that we would have a black president?  These transformations happened because people kept fighting.  I believe that inspirational leaders like Martin Luther King Jr. understood that disillusionment leads to certain defeat.

Life is not a fairy tale.  But we nevertheless must strive to make it so.

How much is a UGA diploma worth?

As I proceed with my final semester at the University of Georgia, I have been reflecting more and more on the overall quality of my intellectual experience in the Classic City.  As one of the oldest institutions of higher learning, UGA presents itself as a school with ample educational tradition and holds much pride in being recognized as a premier state university in the South.  Having said that, however, can one legitimately claim, "I'm proud to be a Georgia Bulldog?"

It pains me to say this, but I must dedicate this entry to trash-talking about my soon-to-be alma mater.  Upon initial glance, the Athens campus looks phenomenal.  It is spacious and beautifully landscaped.  The aging buildings appear to be bastions of wisdom and intellect.  A visitor taking a casual glance around Tate Center during peak late morning class hours will witness a sea of students carrying backpacks and navigating their ways to various lecture halls.  But first impressions can be deceiving---and UGA is rather good at making first impressions.

A few months back, I read an opinion column in the Red & Black written by a man who had returned to the university for a second degree after finishing his initial undergraduate studies.  Having graduated once already, he was no longer a beneficiary of Georgia's HOPE Scholarship and was thus paying out-of-pocket to further his intellectual interests.  He recalled an incident in which he stopped a professor from ending class early and reminded him how many minutes were left on the clock.  As would be expected, his remark was met with various grunts and complaints from his fellow classmates.  If I recall correctly, one girl even decided to give him a nasty word about it.  Outraged by such reactions, the man questioned whether his peers even valued their education at all.  

I'm not sure whether I would've done the same thing in that particular situation (it just seems a bit prudish to me) but I nevertheless think he has a legitimate point.  The problem is that---at least based on my experience---the word "intellectualism" is a foreign term to the majority of UGA's undergraduate population.  Allow me to stereotype a bit here, but a significant portion of these people appear to be complacent students from upper middle class suburbia (e.g. Alpharetta, Marietta, Peachtree City, etc.) with Daddy's money to burn.  Let me vivify this profile with pictures of a blonde girl who got a candy-red Jeep Wrangler for her Sweet 16 and an All-American jock from a bad Disney movie with ample cash to buy endless rounds of liquor at one of the many bars downtown for his frat brothers.  I speculate their favorite activities consist of:  1) Losing track of how many cans of beer they've consumed during a tailgate before vomiting, 2) screaming, "Go Dawgs!" between the hedges and not remembering what the final score was the next day, and 3) watching Jersey Shore when it airs on MTV.  These are the people who go to office hours to dispute a test grade when they haven't even opened the textbook (or as an upgrade, they didn't buy or rent it in the first place).  Who has money for books when Call of Duty: Black Ops is coming out?  

Such a social phenomenon is discouraging and encouraging at the same time.  On the downside, it is sad to see people who are completely happy taking meaningless multiple choice tests (uncommon entities in real life) and plugging in numbers to formulas they don't understand.  I say this is sad because, as nerdy as this sounds, I have experienced bouts of excitement and passion when I finally understood the logic behind a philosophical argument or discovered the extent of controversial U.S. covert operations in various parts of the world.  Our inquisitive minds and the constant act of curious questioning are what enhance our understanding of the world we occupy.  But maybe it's not too bad that mindless people don't find any of this "fun."  This means that  "loser Myers kids" like me can easily manipulate them to serve our best interests (wow, am I a condescending prick or what?).  On a more serious note though, a college diploma ought not be a wasted piece of paper that simply warrants that one woke up in the morning just to sleep again in the lecture hall with intermittent Facebook sessions.  There is so much to learn and so much to discover, yet barely enough time in our lifespan to barely scratch at the surface.  

I wonder if things would be just a little better if we dismantled the UGA Athletic Association.  But I should not entertain such psychotic thoughts.  It would be bad for my health.