Post 155--Love and Money

Financial arguments can challenge a relationship. Here’s how to turn those problems into stronger love and more money.

BY SAM SEIDENI don't know Sam Seiden, but I suspect he is on the payroll of an outfit called "online trading academy."  At least, the article below is written by him and published by that academy. the end of the article--i cut it off--encourages you to enroll in a course on this subject. So, the article has some ulterior motives. I realized that when I first read it, but I thought and still think it a good article with lots of good and common money sense that I decided to share it with you.  I am 79 and it surely resonates with me. I hope the same is true if you're in a younger age bracket.  So, here goes:February is the most romantic month of the year. Valentine’s Day ranks as the second-most popular day for engagements (behind Christmas), according to WeddingWire.com. Celebrating a relationship is fun, but a great relationship takes work.

On Valentine’s Day, most couples don’t talk money and finances. Maybe that’s because no other topic causes more arguments. In fact, finances are the leading cause of stress in relationships, according to a SunTrust Bank survey.

Now is the time to change the conversation. And we have good news: With the proper approach, financial conversations that typically challenge relationships can actually help strengthen them. Those talks will differ at various stages in the life of a couple (see below), but it’s always critical to have them the right way. Here’s how to do it.

Honest Conversations

Far too many couples don’t have that honest conversation…ever. They talk about needing to have the conversation, but they never do. They might put it off so many times because, let’s face it, it’s difficult. Even when they do talk, many wait until it’s too late and their financial situation is beyond repair. All they are left with is resentment and regret.

Alternatively, starting to have honest conversations about money early in a relationship — like when you first become “serious” — has multiple benefits that can strengthen the relationship and boost the balance in each partner’s bank account. Talking openly and freely about money helps couples unlock the opportunity to combine the financial benefits of two distinctly different brains. Just as two people bringing their strengths and weaknesses to the table can make a relationship better, their different views of money and finances can benefit them. The key is communicating so the couple can leverage their differences to create a successful partnership.

While stereotypes don’t apply to everyone, we’ve observed gender and personality differences in our students. Often, one partner comes in thinking he or she is already a financial guru, so they may make mistakes because of misplaced confidence. In others, we see more thoughtful tendencies and careful investment philosophies.

Of course, this isn’t always the case, and sometimes the stereotypes are reversed. But combining these two very different brains into one approach can have lasting and positive effects on a couple — and their financial future. That honest conversation is important no matter what stage of the relationship, but the topics to focus on should be different depending on age. Here is how and, most importantly, why:

Young Couples Just Wanna Have Fun…For a While

At the beginning of a relationship, everything is fun. When Sinatra created the album “Songs for Swingin’ Lovers,” he didn’t call one of the songs, “You Make Me Feel So Old.” But at a certain point, fun turns into a bigger word: commitment. Once a couple commits to each other, their responsibilities to one another increase exponentially — with money often at the center. Because the foundation for the relationship hasn’t been built, sometimes money and finance issues can spell doom for a couple long before a split is warranted.

It doesn't have to be this way. If young couples make it a point to talk early about how they will ideally work together, they can begin to understand how differently (or similarly) they view money. These hypothetical discussions can actually be enjoyable. Hint: It’s okay to not be perfect and it’s alright to not have a lot of money; most people don’t. It’s even okay to have debt; most people do.

From early on, both partners can take advantage of the strengths and weaknesses of their respective brains. Being able to match one person’s positives with the other person’s negatives can build trust.

In the long run, that discussion can help grow income and total net worth, and set up a couple to achieve the life they choose to live and how to change their path if they desire.

Tons of Money, Tons of Bills

Couples in their mid-30s to mid-50s usually have a lot on their plate. Paying for children’s needs, saving for college, funding a college student, saving for retirement — this is when money is often tightest. Yes, income is as high as it will ever be, but because of the bills, it’s critical to make smart spending, investing and saving choices.

The most common problem for these couples is that one partner doesn’t have a good sense about the family’s financial situation. This leads to fear and a lack of trust, which can cause lasting damage to a relationship. Overspending is often a problem because the partner who doesn’t understand the finances has no idea of the income-to-expense ratio. Here again we usually see a couple periodically bring up the notion of getting on the same page, but they don’t actually talk until it’s too late.

It doesn’t have to be this way. Couples at this stage must come to a mutual understanding of their financial needs, and do so with input from both sides. A basic understanding of how much income is coming in versus how much is being spent is a great foundation on which to build the conversation. Getting a handle on the plans behind checking, savings and investment accounts, retirement savings, life insurance and other important financial products is an essential next step. It all starts with listing these accounts on a spreadsheet or just on paper. From our experience, the more couples do this together, the greater the trust and the better the outcome.

Many couples in this stage include one (or both) partners with a previous divorce. One extra piece of advice for them is to get rid of the “Uh oh, how is this going to work?” mindset and replace it with real honesty. Admit you’ve made some really good choices and some bad ones, and focus on the good choices. Figure out how you can make more of them together.

It’s Never Too Late

For Baby Boomer couples, the conversations become trickier. It’s a simple fact that most women will outlive men but this is true in all relationships. In older couples, one partner often knows very little about family finances. When one partner dies, the other asks, “What do I do?” and this lack of knowledge breeds a lack of confidence. For example, a widow may be incredibly financially conservative, as much as three times more than the average investor. This can hinder her income at a time when she most needs it.

Older couples should share all basic financial information — a list of financial institutions, account numbers and balances. They also need wills and any necessary trusts to determine what they want their money to do now and where it will go when they pass on. When a loved one dies, the last thing the surviving partner wants to untangle is a complicated financial situation. Building this plan together early on can alleviate that necessity and strengthen the relationship.

For these couples, understanding is the most important element. The conversation should begin, continue and end with understanding. After all, you’re two unique people who have been one for so long, and your financial situation should reflect that.

Final Thoughts

There is an old adage that talking about and making financial decisions together hurts relationships. It is a hard one to debunk, because many people feel pain and negativity when they talk about these issues. But for couples who have the money conversation the right way, the relationship gets stronger – and so do the bank accounts.

When we observe couples who take Online Trading Academy courses together, we don’t see people fighting all the time. In fact, it's the opposite. These couples respect one another as they build something together and work toward shared goals. Most important, they get the chance to spend more time together. As a bonus, they get to do what they want with their time because making the right financial decisions together leads to a life full of choices.

Sometimes we like to say that it all starts with a plan. But it truly all starts with simply having the right, honest conversation. When you have honest money discussions early, smart choices typically follow that lead to a life that you as a couple chose to live.

When you don’t, the financial system makes those choices for you. That’s not living life on your terms. This February, get together with your significant other and start the conversation. See how financially powerful you can be when you combine your strengths. A wise, Grammy winning singer/songwriter named Jason Isbell says it best: “Are you living the life you chose? Or are you living the life that chose you?” Start living the life together that you as a couple chose to live.

Post 154— A life of madness, pain and words

It was back in 1954. I was 16 years of age and working in the sawmills of Port Alberni on Vancouver Island. Not too many young teens volunteer to work in sawmills these days, but 1954 was a different age. I was part of a large immigrant family of 10 children. So, pretty poor pickins at home as you can imagine, especially since in those days immigrants were on their own; no pampering from any nanny state or  government at any level at the time. My Dad and I had agreed that as soon as I turned 16, he would try to get a job for me at one of the local sawmills, where just about everybody in the town worked, including my Dad. Good pay, by the way. The town had the highest per capita income in all of Canada in those days, thanks to the International Woodworkers of America (IWA) and even more so to MacMillan & Bloedel.The idea for this arrangement was that I and two older sisters,  would help bring home the money to pay off the mortgage for a fairly large house that cost all of $5500. 

However, I loved school and had my eyes on UBC to study accounting. In order to achieve that goal, I enrolled in the High School Correspondence School of the British Columbia Government in Victoria. So, while holding a full time mill job, I took my high school in my spare time. I did grades 10-12 in four and a half years, after which I went off to college. I never made it to UBC or into accounting, but that’s another story. However, the arrangement turned successful; I now hold a doctorate from a European university and have authored many books. Go check that out on my website < www.SocialTheology.com >

I had a friend by the name of Ben Wisselink, also a young immigrant who came from The Netherlands all on his own. Of course, he also worked on the mills, but, like me, had academic ambitions and before long enrolled at UBC to study forestry. For Christmas 1956, he gave me a book with the title Roget’s Thesaurus. Not many people in a mill town like Port Alberni would be interested in such a book, but for me it became a real treasure that I have used regularly throughout the years until early 2017, when I dumped it and bought an updated thesaurus by Webster. Oh, yes, from a thrift store for $1.50. 

But you have no idea how difficult it was for me to dump that old one. It was worn and held together with black electrical tape, but to me it had been a precious friend for over 60 years!  I always consulted it whenever I was writing speeches, lectures, articles or books. It felt like a betrayal to both the book and my friend Ben.  Today, March 7, 2017, I still kind of mourn its loss, even though the newer Webster version seems like it will serve me well. I also had occasion to mourn the loss of Ben due to death during his UBC years. By that time I had enrolled at Calvin College at Grand Rapids MI. With the dumping of his gift, I cut the final tie to him apart from only my memory and a few photographs.

While I used that Thesaurus faithfully, I often wondered what kind of person would create such a wonderful list of words.  Who was this Roget? Where and when did he live?  What did it take to spend so much time on word lists?  I have deeply appreciated his effort and used it much, but I could not imagine spending so much time, effort and money on word lists!  Curious though I have been, it was not enough for me to turn to the internet and find out; I had other things to do.  But then I came across its story in a newspaper article I had filed away almost a decade ago and forgot about. Probably, I had read it before and filed it with the expectation I would use it some day. Well, that day has arrived. Today is that day and here is that article:

                   

A life of madness, pain and words

Roget: New book looks at the man who created the first thesaurus

By Arthur Spiegelman

The Province, March 30, 2008

His mother suffered dark depressions and tried to dominate his life. His sister and daughter had severe mental problems, his father and wife died young and a beloved uncle committed suicide in his arms.

So what did Peter Mark Roget, the creator of Roget’s Thesaurus, do to handle all the pain, grief, sorrow, affliction, woe, bitterness, unhappiness and misery in a life that lasted more than 90 years?

He made lists.

The 19^th century British scientist made lists of words, creating synonyms for all occasions that ultimately helped make life easier for term paper writers, crossword puzzle lovers and anyone looking for the answer to the age-old question: “What’s another word for …”

And according to a new biography, making his lists saved Roget’s life and by keeping him from succumbing to the depression and misery of those around him.

“As a boy he stumbled upon a remarkable discovery – that compiling lists of words could provide solace, no matter what misfortunes may befall him,” says Joshua Kendall, author of the just-published The Man Who Made Lists, a study of Roget’s life (1779-1869) based on diaries, letters and even an autobiography composed of lists.

Kendall, in a recent interview, said Roget cared more for words than people and that making lists on the scale that he did was obsessive-compulsive behavior that helped him fend off the demons that terrorized his distinguished British family.

Madness was a regular guest in Roget’s home, Kendall said. One of his grandmothers either had schizophrenia or severe depression, and Roget’s mother lapsed into paranoia, often accusing the servants of plotting against her. Both his sister and his daughter suffered depression and mental problems.

Then there was the case of Roget’s uncle, British member of Parliament Sir Samuel Romilly, known for his opposition to the slave trade and for his support of civil liberties. He slit his own throat while Roget tried to get the razor out of his hands.

Unlike a thesaurus, no one understood Uncle Sam’s last words: “My dear … I wish …”

Indeed, to quote most of the Thesaurus listing for pain, Roget’s was a life filled with grief, pain, suffering, distress, affliction, woe, bitterness, heartache, unhappiness, infelicity and misery.

Kendall said, “The lists gave him an alternative world to which to repair.” Many writers have declared their debt to Roget, including Peter Pan’s creator, J.M. Barrie. In homage, he put a copy of the Thesaurus in Captain Hook’s cabin so he could declare: “The man is not wholly evil – he has a Thesaurus in his cabin.”

The 20^th century poet Sylvia Plath called herself “Roget’s Strumpet” to pay respects for all the word choices he gave her.

But the British journalist Simon Winchester holds Roget responsible for helping to dumb down Western culture because his work allows a writer to look it up rather than think it out.

Roget made his first attempt at a thesaurus at age 26 but put aside the effort and did not publish his book until 1852, when he was in his 70s and retired. He then kept busy with it for the rest of his life.

It became an instant hit in Britain but did not sell that well when an American edition was published two years later. But when Americans went crazy for crossword puzzles in the 1920s, the Thesaurus assumed its place on reference shelves.

Kendall’s book is written in a style that he calls “narrative non-fiction,” which contains a lot of dialogue and descriptions of how Roget and his friends feel and think, all, he says, based on source material.

“I did a lot of work to stitch together a narrative,” he said, adding that all the scenes in the book are based on actual events.

Here’s a website with a similar story, including info about Thesaurus Day of January 18 in the UK:

http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/18/thesaurus-day-how-peter-mark-roget-made-lists-to-tackle-his-depression-6386699/

Post 153—Ash Wednesday Posted…. This Wednesday (2 days ago) was called “Ash Wednesday.” The following is the introduction to the liturgy of Ash Wednesday observed this week in the First Baptist Church of Vancouver, BC, where my wife and I frequently worship. The service itself consists of Scripture readings, prayers, meditations and the singing of hymns. Somewhere during the liturgy, all came forward in order to receive in the form of ashes the sign of the cross on our foreheads. Two days later, right now, in fact, the cross has blurred, but the black ashes are still there to remind me and everyone else I meet this week. Here, then, the introduction, which was followed up with a reading of Psalm 103, which is reproduced below. Since the beginning of the Church, Christians have observed the days of our Lord’s passion and resurrection with great devotion. It became one of the greatest traditions of the Church to prepare for these events through serious examination of our spiritual lives. The passion of Lent is a time of penitence, discipline and renewal. In the Ash Wednesday service, we are reminded of our mortality, we confess our sins, and we experience forgiveness through Christ’s death and resurrection. The “imposition of ashes” is a central part of the service. You are invited to come forward to

Post 153—Ash Wednesday                                                     

This Wednesday (2 days ago) was called “Ash Wednesday.” The following is the introduction to the liturgy of Ash Wednesday observed this week in the First Baptist Church of Vancouver, BC, where my wife and I frequently worship. The service itself consists of Scripture readings, prayers, meditations and the singing of hymns. Somewhere during the liturgy, all came forward in order to receive in the form of ashes the sign of the cross on our foreheads.  Two days later, right now, in fact, the cross has blurred, but the black ashes are still there to remind me and everyone else I meet this week. Here, then, the introduction, which was followed up with a reading of Psalm 103, which is reproduced below.  

Since the beginning of the Church, Christians have observed the days of our Lord’s passion and resurrection with great devotion. It became one of the greatest traditions of the Church to prepare for these events through serious examination of our spiritual lives.

The passion of Lent is a time of penitence, discipline and renewal. In the Ash Wednesday service, we are reminded of our mortality, we confess our sins, and we experience forgiveness through Christ’s death and resurrection.

The “imposition of ashes” is a central part of the service. You are invited to come forward to receive the ashes on your forehead in the form of a cross. In Scripture, ashes serve both as a symbol of mortality and as a sign of mourning and repentance.

But neither sin nor death are the final word. We leave the service in confidence and gratitude, for Christ has conquered death, and nothing can separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus, our Lord.

Here are the words of Psalm 103. Read it through slowly and thoughtfully. Allow it to enter your heart and into your soul. Let it speak to you and ponder….

Praise the Lord, my soul;
    all my inmost being, praise his holy name.
² Praise the Lord, my soul,
    and forget not all his benefits—
³ who forgives all your sins
    and heals all your diseases,
⁴ who redeems your life from the pit
    and crowns you with love and compassion,
⁵ who satisfies your desires with good things
    so that your youth is renewed like the eagle’s.

⁶ The Lord works righteousness
    and justice for all the oppressed.

⁷ He made known his ways to Moses,
    his deeds to the people of Israel:
⁸ The Lord is compassionate and gracious,
    slow to anger, abounding in love.
⁹ He will not always accuse,
    nor will he harbor his anger forever;
¹⁰ he does not treat us as our sins deserve
    or repay us according to our iniquities.
¹¹ For as high as the heavens are above the earth,
    so great is his love for those who fear him;
¹² as far as the east is from the west,
    so far has he removed our transgressions from us.

¹³ As a father has compassion on his children,
    so the Lord has compassion on those who fear him;
¹⁴ for he knows how we are formed,
    he remembers that we are dust.
¹⁵ The life of mortals is like grass,
    they flourish like a flower of the field;
¹⁶ the wind blows over it and it is gone,
    and its place remembers it no more.
¹⁷ But from everlasting to everlasting
    the Lord’s love is with those who fear him,
    and his righteousness with their children’s children—
¹⁸ with those who keep his covenant
    and remember to obey his precepts.

¹⁹ The Lord has established his throne in heaven,
    and his kingdom rules over all.

²⁰ Praise the Lord, you his angels,
    you mighty ones who do his bidding,
    who obey his word.
²¹ Praise the Lord, all his heavenly hosts,
    you his servants who do his will.
²² Praise the Lord, all his works
    everywhere in his dominion.

Praise the Lord, my soul.

For those not used to the language of the Bible, perhaps the version called “The Message” is more easily understood, since it says the same time in more ordinary language, less formal but still beautiful to hear a and meditate upon:

A David Psalm

103 ^1-2 O my soul, bless God.
    From head to toe, I’ll bless his holy name!
O my soul, bless God,
    don’t forget a single blessing!

^3-5 He forgives your sins—every one.
    He heals your diseases—every one.
    He redeems you from hell—saves your life!
    He crowns you with love and mercy—a paradise crown.
    He wraps you in goodness—beauty eternal.
    He renews your youth—you’re always young in his presence.

^6-18 God makes everything come out right;
    he puts victims back on their feet.
He showed Moses how he went about his work,
    opened up his plans to all Israel.
God is sheer mercy and grace;
    not easily angered, he’s rich in love.
He doesn’t endlessly nag and scold,
    nor hold grudges forever.
He doesn’t treat us as our sins deserve,
    nor pay us back in full for our wrongs.
As high as heaven is over the earth,
    so strong is his love to those who fear him.
And as far as sunrise is from sunset,
    he has separated us from our sins.
As parents feel for their children,
    God feels for those who fear him.
He knows us inside and out,
    keeps in mind that we’re made of mud.
Men and women don’t live very long;
    like wildflowers they spring up and blossom,
But a storm snuffs them out just as quickly,
    leaving nothing to show they were here.
God’s love, though, is ever and always,
    eternally present to all who fear him,
Making everything right for them and their children
    as they follow his Covenant ways
    and remember to do whatever he said.

^19-22 God has set his throne in heaven;
    he rules over us all. He’s the King!
So bless God, you angels,
    ready and able to fly at his bidding,
    quick to hear and do what he says.
Bless God, all you armies of angels,
    alert to respond to whatever he wills.
Bless God, all creatures, wherever you are—
    everything and everyone made by God.

And you, O my soul, bless God!

Post 152—A Place for Spanking

I hope you don’t get tired of my apologies and my changes in direction or even promises not kept—which is not the same in my mind about breaking promises.  The document that I thought I would discuss in follow up from the last post is not what I expected it to be. So, we will let it go and do something else today. However, in case you’re curious, here’s URL that deals with issues somewhat related to that of Post 151--

               

       https://arpacanada.ca/news/2017/02/14/thoughts-religious-                                           tolerance/#feature

Yes, something else, but not something completely different. While the last post talked about shooting and murdering, this post will talk about spanking. To some people that’s in the same class as shooting and murder—it’s all doing violence to people.  Some time ago a friend of mine, Mark Penninga, the Executive Director of the Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) Canada published an opinion piece in the Vancouver Sun under the title”Time and Place for Spanking.” I’ve written about this issue before, because I believe when a government gets involved in ordinary family affairs, it is intrusive and goes far beyond its legitimate reach.  Government and family exist in different spheres, each of which have their own laws and protocols. Governments may only interfere in families when there is evidence of families being highly dysfunctional. To some people, spanking, any kind of spanking, no matter its severity, becomes the government’s business, for its mandate is to protect its citizens, even infants, from violence, including parental violence.   

Penninga’s main point is that the term spanking covers a broad range of meaning, ranging from the gently corrective to that of the cruel and abusive. Attempts to have government make every form of spanking illegal in order to prevent the cruel type, has the opposite effect.  Then he demonstrates his point at length, all of which you can read yourself by turning to the articles’ URL (see below). One study, for example, that covered 50 years and examined 26 other studies concluded, “Whether physical punishment compared favorably or unfavorably with other tactics depended on the type of physical punishment.” The study looked at what the researchers called an “optimal” type of physical discipline — conditional spanking—and upheld it as legitimate.

Penninga wrote:

Sweden in 1979 became the first nation to outlaw all physical discipline. Since then, criminal charges for physical child abuse by relatives against children under age seven increased by 489 per cent between 1981 and 1994. There was also a shocking 519-per-cent increase in criminal assaults by children under 15 against children aged 7-14. Perhaps most devastating, 46-60 per cent of cases investigated under Sweden’s law result in children being removed from homes. About 22,000 Swedish children were removed from homes in 1981, compared with 1,900 in Germany, 710 in Denmark, 552 in Finland, and 163 in Norway.

Consider the 2010 case of a mother and father from Karlstad, Sweden, jailed for nine months and ordered to pay 25,000 kronor ($11,000) to three of their children who were spanked. More damaging than the jail and fines, all four of their children were removed from their home. Although the court concluded that the parents “had a loving and caring relationship to their children,” apparently spanking is serious enough to merit such an extreme sentence.

And then he concluded,

Parents will have a variety of opinions about the merits of physical discipline. But problems arise when the state assumes the role of parent. The role of the state is limited to preserving an orderly society and punishing wrongdoers (including child There is much that the state can do to promote a society in which children are safe and families can flourish. Banning physical discipline will achieve neither.

Parents will have a variety of opinions about the merits of physical discipline. But problems arise when the state assumes the role of parent. The role of the state is limited to preserving an orderly society and punishing wrongdoers (including child abusers), so that the other institutions of society can flourish. The institution of the family is an independent part of civil society accountable directly to God (although the state increasingly understands itself to be a god it seems). Parents are entrusted with the authority to lovingly raise their children and the state may only interfere in exceptional circumstances, such as real child abuse.

There is much that the state can do to promote a society in which children are safe and families can flourish. Banning physical discipline will achieve neither.  So far my friend Penninga. 

The Vancouver Sun published an editorial supporting Penninga’s main argument, while the highest court of the land agreed as well, but not everyone did, as you can see on the last of the three websites that appear below. As to myself, I am the product of a tradition of occasional reasonable spanking when deserved and emerged a humane, highly educated and successful person from a peasant background without any spanking baggage to sour my life. The same holds true for all 9 of my siblings as well as for the 11 and 9 siblings of my father and mother respectively. As the Bible puts it, “Spare the rod and spoil the child.” That’s ancient wisdom that liberals tend to deny, often having contempt for the past and its ways.

So, here are three URLs for you to check out, with the third one vigorously rejecting the point of this post.

 http://www.vancouversun.com/life/Opinion+Time+place+spanking/11049750/story.html.

See also www.keep43.can for supporting arguments.

            See www.nospank.net for opposing view.

Post 151—“Reportedly”—CBC’s Macdonald’s Rumour Mill

A warning for this post: It’s not for the faint of heart. I’m giving it all I’ve got!

CBC News of January 30, 2017, featured an “opinion column”—that’s how it was classified by CBC—on the January Quebec mosque shooting, an event that generated a lot of news for CBC, “news’ meaning money. The writer is Neil Macdonald, who is an “opinion columnist” for CBC. If you watch CBC news at all, I am sure you’re familiar with him. I got to know him mostly from his Washington DC news—or is his work there more opinion oriented as well? As I read his piece, I was reminded of my friend (somewhat) Ezra Lavant, whom Neil actually sarcastically mentions in his article. Why did he remind me of Ezra? That was before I came across reference to him in the article. Neil reminded me of him because the two are equally sarcastic. But because Ezra directs his blunt sarcasm against the CBC and its cohorts, he is berated by some of his colleagues as a trash journalist. Since Neil uses his sarcasm in the service of the leftist media establishment, his is acceptable.    

The title of Neil’s column is “Simple truth is Canada's mass shooters are usually white and Canadian-born.” It is interesting that the title falls short of the full statement, probably because Neil’s editor wanted to play down Neil’s offensive remark somewhat, by leaving it in the text but omitting it from the title. Probably no one would take offence at this title, but the complete charge is something else. I quote a couple of sentences:  

The suspected shooter is Bissonnette. Not an immigrant. Not a Muslim. Probably a Christian, judging from his name. And, reportedly, a big admirer of Trump.

Just about every single one in our modern history has been a Canadian-born, Canadian citizen, and usually white and Christian.

Judging from his name, Bissonnette is probably a Christian?  Welcome, Macdonald, into the Church, the Body of Christ!  Well, judging from your name, right? I am glad to learn you are a Christian!  We can use some more Christian journalists, but it seems you still have a few things to learn before your faith and profession are integrated. Or are you like so many secularized Christians who separate their faith from their occupation?  I offer to become your mentor!

But Neil, on what basis do you suggest Bissonnette is a Trump admirer?  “Reportedly”—does that mean more than rumour?  Perhaps I don’t know the difference between rumour and opinion. Are they the same? Can you write an opinion in the national news agency, paid for by my dollars, on basis of “reportedly” and nothing more factual?  Hmmm. I learn new things every day. I have yet to meet a Canadian Christian who admires or even just likes Trump. Please introduce me to one….  Of course, I live in Vancouver, which could be different from the rest of the country. Since you’re a Christian, at least by name, you should have easy access to them and ask.

But then that second quote—“usually white and Christian.”  Wow!  What is your definition of a Christian? His name? His great uncle a pastor? In the centuries-old line of the Scottish reformer John Knox?  You saw him once in church attending a wedding or funeral?  Perhaps attending the memorial service for the victims of this Quebec killing?  Well, no, now I’m getting downright silly.

You, my readers, can access the entire article of Neil at: http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/canadian-mass-murders-1.3958772 and read it yourself. The next post will deal further with my “Christian brother’s” (?) “reportedly” allegations.