Baby steps to getting green II

It’s time for yet another installment of my monthly series: Baby steps to getting green.

This month’s change wasn’t a very conscious one, so it’s shouldn’t be too hard to adopt.

I’m a neat-freak so it isn’t a surprise that this post will address cleaning or more expressly laundry.

I’ve changed my brand of detergent to Arm & Hammer Essentials. It’s a supposedly green version of the Arm & Hammer brand that I have been using for years. I said the change was an unconscious one because I bought the detergent because it was on sale, I only noticed it was green after I got it home.

I did some research (by research, I mean Googled it) and found that it is actually Phosphate-free and plant-derived, in the good way, not just for marketing reasons. It’s also double concentrated, so there is more product with less packaging. And they make a dye/scent-free version, for those who are sensitive to that…I found a lot of eco-freaks were really sensitive to dye/fragrances (wussies).

And to answer the common question, “Yeah, it’s green, but is it AS good?”

I can assure you that it is.

And here’s the kicker, it even works well in cold water. Which is the bigger change I have made with regards to laundry. I have quit using hot or even warm water, short of 1-2 loads a month (when using bleach on whites).

Something like 90% of the energy consumed by washing clothes is used in heating the water. I’ve been “going cold” for the past couple months and see no difference in the cleanliness of my clothes. So it makes no practical sense to use the heated water.

Again, I am not going to save the world by myself or by making these small steps. But every little bit helps, especially if we all begin making these changes.

*In that vein, I want to give a shout-out to one of my readers, who actually went out and bought a recycle mug after my last “baby steps” post. Thanks for reading and making the world a lil better place.

As always if you have any ideas or stories to share, please feel free to leave a comment.

Here’s a link of 10 Free Ways to Save Energy on Laundry.

Dogma had alot of stuff right.

This was going to be one of my patented rants about so-called “Bible Thumpers.” You know who they are: The Jesus-fish bumper-sticker having, “God Bless You” phone call ending, uber-judgmental types, who “really figured life out” once they started going to church…

But I am not gonna do it.

If someone has found a place in life that they are ok with their relationship with whatever God they believe in, I am not going to knock it. I will just say, “Good for you…but it ain’t for me.”

What I am gonna do is explain why I’ll never be one of them.

For the most part, I am not a fan of organized religion. I love the idea, but I think on the whole it is too easily corrupted by human influence.

Chris Rock, playing the 13th Apostle Rufus, had a line in the movie Dogma that really illustrates my point:

“He (referring to Jesus Christ) still digs humanity, but it bothers Him to see the shit that gets carried out in His name - wars, bigotry, but especially the factioning of all the religions. He said humanity took a good idea and, like always, built a belief structure on it…I think it's better to have ideas. You can change an idea. Changing a belief is trickier. Life should malleable and progressive; working from idea to idea permits that. Beliefs anchor you to certain points and limit growth; new ideas can't generate. Life becomes stagnant.”

I have always thought of religion as a just-in-case scenario. I’d have to classify myself as an Pseudo-Agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God…to that end, I also believe it is impossible to know that there isn’t a God.

So, just-in-case God exists, I better get on-board with this religion thing.

My first memories of church where like many others, unquestionably believing whatever was told to me a Sunday School or in the parts of sermons I wasn’t sleeping through. I then attended college where I stopped attending church and came to my Agnostic realization. But since graduating and dealing with the real world, I have moved away from my Agnostic stance and back to Christianity. There is simply too much amazing stuff in this world for everything to be hap-hazard and random. And really, if you live your life by the standards laid-out by Christianity (or any other major religion) you end-up living life as a pretty alright guy.

Really there's nothing to lose. Not a bad situation.

My background explained, I’ll get into my concept of religion and why organized religion is not for me.

I see religion as a very individualistic situation. It’s your mind, your soul, your decisions. So what does meeting with people once a week for an hour really do for you?

I understand the sharing of ideas and attempting to gain a greater understanding of whatever religion/religious text, but when it comes down to it, when you die and face judgment, You are all-by-your-lonesome.

No Pastor to back you up, no Mom to take blame, no church members to share burden.

That being said, I think it’s important to ponder religion. Religion came about as an attempt by man to explain: The “hows” and “whys” of the world.

I am not advocating living willy-nilly and throwing religion and morals to the wind. I am just not sure that paying tithes and being preached-at for an hour a week makes you a better candidate for the afterlife.

It’s what you do that really matters.

For most people church is misunderstood. Going to church regularly doesn’t automatically make you a good person. Being a good person does. And it is possible to be a good person without ever having heard of Jesus, Abraham or Mohammed. Religion is an active, not passive endeavor. It requires research, thought and contemplation...please note that nowhere listed there was the word judgment.

My issue with church comes from those church-goers who think they have accomplished something special by going to church. The air-of-superiority that comes along with being “saved,” is my biggest gripe with organized religion. Being judgmental is so counter to the major tenets of Christianity that is amazes me people don’t see their hypocrisy.

I was raised in the church, and am a better person for it. But when I strayed away from the church, I luckily ended-up surrounded by good people who were educated and religious. We ended-up sharing/debating our ideals, in much the same way a Pastor would sermonize their beliefs.

What I came away with was a better understanding of religion and myself. The overwhelming concept that I garnered from these conversations was that “no one has it figured-out.” That realization really wrecked the house of cards that had been built around religion for me. My Pastor, although very smart and learned in religion, was still just a man, like me, and therefore was fallible. He was the exception to the rule in that he never purported himself to be anything more that a man who was called to God, who was trying to figure the world out just like everyone else.

Which is really what it is all about.

Being religious isn’t about tithing more, or baking the most cookies for the bake sale so that you can note the good deed in the yearly Christmas letter, while noting how good God was to you this year as a(n implied) result.

It’s about living a good, honest, pious life. Religion can offer a roadmap of how to get there, but the onus is on you to make the journey. One great thing is that there is assistance along the way, (churches, books, people) but it’s important to remember these can be distractions as much as aid.

All-in-all the journey is yours alone and no one but God can meet you at the goal.

The Fuddy-duddy effect

I came across a piece last week by syndicated columnist George F. Will that got me a little riled-up.

Here’s a link: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/373230_will03.html

While Will does raise a couple of good points, I think this piece exemplifies why so many older folks are uncomfortable with the idea of electing Barack Obama.

I remember having a discussion with a Hilary Clinton supporter debating the merits of each candidate. And the discussion about Obama kept coming back to one question: “Change, just what does that mean?”

At the time, I couldn’t answer that question to either the Clinton-supporter’s or my satisfaction.

After a bit of reflection I am still trying to come-up with a solid definition, but here’s my working definition.

Change:
- In politics as usual.
- In how America, views/interacts with the rest of the world.
- In what Americans expect from their government.
- Anything but George Bush.

Thank goodness for term limits, the rule hosed us by forcing Clinton from office, but we all win this time around when Bush gets sent packing.

My definition of change seems to really scare older, I mean, more experienced-voters. As evidenced by this snip-it from Will’s column: ”Swift and sweeping changes are almost always calamitous consequences of calamities,”

Change is scary, so I understand the knee-jerk “sky-is-falling” reaction to anything new. But I cannot comprehend how someone as intelligent as Will can insinuate that an Obama presidency will be a “calamitous consequences of calamities” when you look at the last eight years and consider his predecessor.

The sentiment is that with anyone but Obama, you are getting a known quantity, which I am willing to concede. John McCain, once the maverick of the Senate, has now fallen into line with the status-quo republican election machine and now looks to be G.W. 2.0. What’s really scary about this new McCain is that he seems to have a bit of a Napoleon Complex. As in, he needs to prove that he is not just a replacement for G.W., but that he’s even tougher on terrorism. I am absolutely terrified to see what “calamity” will come from that.

America has never had its hands clean when it comes to foreign policy. As I’ve noted before, America has been bully to the world. And regardless of the President, democrat or republican, has steadfastly acted in ways that bettered American interests abroad regardless of consequences.

The time has come for that to change.

This is an example of the change that Obama supporters like me are talking about. Obama is willing to talk with other countries. I am encouraged by that. My foreign policy experience is a bit thin, but last time I checked, it’s hard to negotiate when one party has the barrel of a gun in their mouth.

Who knows what will happen if Obama and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Hugo Chavez sit-down for brandy and cigars at Camp David. But I am worried where we’ll end-up if they don’t. Just the idea that some of these politically marginalized countries may have a seat at the table will be enough to ease tensions and start a dialogue that will lead away from worrisome rhetoric and possible military action.

Will’s argument seems to be based on the sentiment that the world is too big and one man is too insignificant to make any real change. Perhaps that is experience speaking to my youthful ambition. Or perhaps that is just the cynicism of the elderly looking back on their own wasted life.

Just because you’ve been there and done that, doesn’t mean it’s the only way it can be done. America can elect its oldest President ever and maintain the status quo. Or America can roll the dice on change and elect Obama.

Honestly, I can’t see anyone doing worse than the guy who’d been in office the past eight years. But I’d hate to give McCain a chance to surprise me…

Baby steps to getting green

I normally post some long-winded rant or frilly epiphany that I have come to recently.

This is not going to be one of those posts.

I am going to start a monthly series: Baby Steps to getting green.

It's pretty simple.

I post (at least) one change I've made this month in an effort to be a little greener.

Hopefully you'll join me and post your changes as comments so that we can all encourage/educate each other in an effort to lessen all of our foot prints.

I wrote a previous post in this vein, but seeing as there is always room for improvement, I thought this would be a beneficial exercise.

This months "geenery" is: Buying a reusable travel coffee cup.

I go to Starbucks everyday for lunch. Using a paper cup, one of those "don't-burn-your-hand" sleeves and a plastic top. Seeing as I eat lunch 5 days a week, that equates to alot of paper cups, save-the-hand sleeves and plastic lids that go straight into the trash.

Buying this reusable cup will lessen my lunch-associated waste to nearly zero. Which is pretty cool. And a darn good return on my $10 investment.

See, it doesn't have to be anything too big, but every little bit helps.

Please pass along your ideas. Let's keep this going!

Tis the season.

Seeing as we are in the throes of yet another summer wedding season, I have been pondering just that issue: Marriage.
*Not that it’s even a remote possibility for me at the moment. But heading to a wedding every other week, tends to get a dude to thinking.

In my first draft, I tome’d about how I find marriage to be an illogical decision and a poor financial move on top of that. I also questioned why people needed a stamp from the government, their religion and/or their friends for their relationship to be recognized.

Surprisingly these weren’t simply the rants of a perpetually-single, seemingly-chauvinist guy like myself, but sentiments shared by my married/co-habitating friends both male and female.

Then, this past weekend, I actually headed to my first wedding of the season. And I remembered why marriage is such a big deal.

So here’s my newly amended take on Weddings/Marriage:

The wedding is a chance for two people to share their relationship with those they care about. It’s a chance to peek into a one-on-one relationship and see just why each party is so gonzo for each other.

The marriage, while a one-on-one commitment, does take maintenance and having a few folks around to remind the wedded parties why they tied-the-knot in the first place is never a bad thing.

I don’t discount marriage, it’s a great, if not antiquainted, institution. But logical, it isn’t.

That logic point was big hurdle in my mind. But what this weekend hammered home for me was that logic doesn’t always reign supreme. Logic may always be right…but that doesn’t always equate to fun.

For example, logic (my train of thought) would note that marriage is a 50/50 proposition at best which are not very good odds. And the cynic (being me) would note that American society does not foster an environment that rewards long-term commitments of any sort.

Sadly, in this society, marriage is about like buying a car: Enjoyed at first, but easily traded-in once the initial euphoria has worn-off and real costs of the investment are realized.

Despite all of the above, people still get married. And with that there is hope. There are many an upside to tying-the-knot. In marriage, a person is banking-on the best in their partner.

I don’t want to live in an unfeeling world governed by logic. Logic can mitigate risk, but without risk there are no rewards. I had forgotten that.

The wedding this weekend was a much appreciated eye-opener.

So to those of you newly- or soon-to-be weds, I say “Thanks for the invite and Good Luck.”