A response to "Prophets or Evolution"

As my readers already know, this is not a blog about current events or people. It's a blog about ideas, memories, and aspirations. So, I'm a little hesitant to begin my next post, and you will see why. There is someone out there for whom, I have something to say.


There is a man in Kansas,who claims that Einstein, Darwin, and most every other scientist since the turn of the 19th century, is a fool. This man, of course, is NOT a scientist, himself. He has two degrees: one in mathematics, and the other in accounting; yet, he claims to be an expert in physics, medicine, and the life sciences. In fact, he has even proposed alternative hypotheses to Einstein's theory of general, and special relativity, the origins of and "cure" for cancer, and the unifying theory of life science, evolution. What's more, all of these "theories" work conveniently well with the creationist world view. It would seem that Isaac Newton has been reborn, and brought back "natural theology" to the modern world! But, as you know, looks can be deceiving, and in this case they certainly are.


What we have here is no inspired genius, no scientific revolution, no evidence, no workable, peer reviewed, tested hypothesis for anything useful. No, what we have here is a self-styled "intellectual," who understands just enough about science to be dangerous-- the kind of person you wouldn't want to be chemistry partners with. He knows just enough about science to misconstrue it, and mislead those who know even less than he does. A true quack.

That said, you may ask, "why do I care? I mean, if this guy is just another quack, then he's harmless, right? Let him quack away!" I wish it were that simple. You see, this man, R. Webster Kehr, happens to be a member of my church, and he publishes his works with the line "An LDS Perspective" in the title, as if he speaks not only for the church as a whole, but even to the church as a whole. He's one of those people I spoke about before, who want to draw battle lines between science and religion, even if those lines should put members of his own church on the outside.

I have not read these works in detail, nor do I encourage it. I don't intend to meticulously debunk his "theories," as Ken Miller does the assertions of Intelligent Design in his books. To do so, I would need the experience and resources of a real scientists, which I am not, yet. And I will not pretend that I am, as does this man. But, in my short time as a student of these sciences, I have learned enough about the method employed by scientists, and the scientific community, to know that if it can't be reproduced; if it can't be supported by evidence; if it can't be tested; if it lies in the face of other accepted and supported hypotheses, and makes not attempt to reconcile and explain these disparities, then it is not science: it is speculation. Men are free to speculate, but science is not like politics or religion: science need not give equal time and consideration to the musings and whims of anybody and everybody.

This man claims that the reason why his ideas remain in obscurity, is because the scientific community is biased and narrow-minded, and will not seriously consider his claims. To me, this is like a mediocre high school athlete whining that the NFL or the Olympics won't let him in, because there are 'qualifications' he doesn't meet. How bureaucratic and pedantic of them!

Boo hoo, poor you.


In response to the inclusion if "An LDS Perspective," in the title of his pseudo scientific/theological ramblings, I must exercise a little more self-restraint. Honestly, this infuriates me. I would like tell him many things; however, I do not wish simply to react, but to offer a heart-felt, and measured reply. After all, religion is different from science, as I said before, and the same standards of peer-review and empiricism cannot be applied to it. The realm of religion depends upon the supernatural to provide the truth, in the form of revelation and inspiration. And we are not enemies, but brothers of the same faith, and I have no desire for that to change.

Brother Kehr,

When you imply that as members of the church, we are faced with the ultimatum of choosing between the fruits of human reason, or faith in revealed truth, uttered by modern prophets, I wonder if you have considered the consequences of such a demand, or if you have the power to make it. Our Heavenly Father is not a God of confusion; His mysteries do not hide in the darkness that lies beyond human comprehension, but in the light of understanding. God wants us to understand that light, and He wants us to use all our faculties in doing so. He did not create a universe which "seems" to have had a beginning, or a world which "seems" to have been shaped by eons of natural processes, or life which "seems" to have evolved from a common ancestor. If He did, then it would "seem" that God is trying to pull the wool over our eyes. And that, my brother, is ridiculous.

Ask yourself, "Do I really wish that all the members of the church who believe in evolution [or the other sciences you have attacked] would leave?" Do you expect those of us who have found in science a meaningful, useful, and enlightening world view, to abandon it, because you say so? Or because Heber J. Grant said so 100 years ago (before the modern synthesis I might add)? Or because, occasionally, one of the apostles will make a remark in passing about their own views on the subject? Let me remind you that none of the presidents of the church, have said that the natural sciences are incompatible with the teachings of the Restored Gospel. Believing in evolution and science is not wrong, and is not a sin. We are not asked if we disbelieve Darwin, in order to get a temple recommend or take the sacrament.

Science tells us nothing about morality, and to blame science for immoral behavior is non-sequitur. People justify their actions with faulty reasoning all the time. Almost every decision people make is influenced by their subjective feelings, and not by logic and reason. Evolution has made us that way, and most of the time it works quite well; as evolution selects against making decisions that are bad for the individual and the species. However, I know that when I sin, it is not because I believe in evolution, or disbelieve in the words of the prophets. It is because I am human: weak, selfish, imperfect, mostly irrational, and driven by carnal desire and pride. But that is not all I am.

Evolution has made me this way, but it has also endowed me with the ability to think, to feel, to love, and to learn. All of these things give me an advantage as a human being. It has also given me the ability to contemplate the very existence of God, and my relationship with Him. If you throw out evolution, you had better have some way to account for my motivation, my relative fitness, and "seeming" relatedness to all other life forms on this planet, and it had better be good. More than simply "God made it that way." As we know, an argument that answers everything, answers nothing.

I ask you, please, do not alienate God's children from his family and kingdom over something so trivial as the origin of man, and the universe. Yes, trivial. Trivial because the existence and power of God is in no way related to His direct arbition to their origins. God exists whether or not He personally created the world, or breathed life into a ready-made Adam; whether or not the universe is 10 billion years old, or 7 thousand; whether or not we are apes, or angels incarnate. He has the power to save us whether or not He personally made us. The power and existence of God are not limited by the reach of science, or the extent of natural law over the universe. We who believe in God, need not fear what science can do to Him, or to our faith. Fear is the opposite of faith.

If you really care about my salvation, and that of your brothers and sisters, bring out the things that unite us, and not those that divide us. With charity, love, and the proper priesthood authority, tend to your own family, those under your charge, and if you feel you must address the church as a whole, stick to what you know: faith, repentance, baptism, confirmation, endure to the end... You know, the basics.

And if you really feel that you've got something new to offer the scientific community, then bite the bullet and submit your stuff to some real scientists who can test it, and stop crying about the system being unfair. Who knows? Maybe you'll be vindicated, but I doubt it.

Utopia: the Elusive Ideal

In a previous post I mentioned that I was reading Thomas More's Utopia, and that I would write a review once I had finished. Well, I finished reading it months ago, but it left me with so many questions and new ideas that I simply haven't decided yet what to think of it. I've done a little more research into the history and politics of Utopian experiments and mythology, and-- I hate to say it-- I'm not impressed. The tract record for Utopian experiments is dismal, the mythology is contradictory, and the feasibility... well, there is none.

The modern state of Iran is a great example: during the Revolution in 1979, the Ayatollah and his supporters promised an Islamic, Utopian society. I don't think I need to convince anyone that it didn't work. The Taliban invoked the same ideal in Afghanistan, and the result was even worse! Stalin, Mao Zedong, Castro, Chauchesku, Kim Il Sung... Yup, you guessed it: All failures. Worse than failures-- Monsters! And I didn't even mention the multitudes of religious and cult leaders who have done the same thing through the ages. So how do these men end up at the helm of a populist revolution, and pervert it into pseudo-theocratic dictatorship?

I also recently read Animal Farm, by George Orwell. Okay, Okay, I didn't read it, per se. I listened to an unabridged version of it. That's better than just watching the movie, right? Anyway, it had a real impact on me. Orwell has a way of doing that. I can see why some people refer to him as a "prophet," although he would probably object to being labeled that way, being an atheist and all. It also gave some insight into my question about why utopias fail.

It's discouraging that so many good causes, founded by intelligent and inspirational people who love the human race, have been hijacked by selfish, egotistical, power-hungry, brutal people (mostly men), and turned into a byword and a curse. And I'm convinced that this is the reason why Zion will never exist on earth until there is an immortal, perfected, all-knowing, and ever-compassionate being to oversee it. And if that never happens, I think we can abandon any hope that the ideal society will ever exist. Call me eschatological and fatalistic, but human beings have yet to prove that they can do it on their own very well, or for very long.

The scientist in me says: "We can do it! Science and the scientific method can be applied (already have been in fact) to human behavior, culture, and motivation; to government and society; to agriculture and industry; to energy and the environment; to evolution and the future of mankind! We can take our destiny into our own hands and make it brilliant! We can live peacefully and happily on this planet forever." But then reality sets in, and I remember that over the course of the earth's natural history, there have been half a dozen mass extinctions, and that we are on the brink of another, man-made one. Nothing on this earth, or in this universe, was made to last forever.

It occurs to me-- at times like this-- that most of us really are just doing the best we can, as we always have. It also occurs to me that when a theory, however convincing, takes on a life of its own, and becomes the justification for a mass-societal experiment, that we are on dangerous ground. This is why I am still a conservative, and always will be. I know that life is unfair: that the decisions of a few, powerful, wealthy people affect the lives and livelihoods of billions around the globe, and they (the rich and powerful) give little or no thought to those billions, or the planet they live on. And it infuriates me! But what is the alternative? Socialism, Communism, Anarchy? Thomas Jefferson's "Aristocracy of Everyone?" In theory, it sounds nice. In practice, it's Hell, or it's impossible.

I think about 1984: the scene where Winston is being tortured by O'Brien, and he protests that no matter how tightly the party holds the people in subjection (ie. how hard the boot stomps the human face), eventually the spirit of humanity will triumph over cruelty, and free itself. I know the book didn't end well, neither does Animal Farm, but I don't think Orwell believed that resistance was futile (no reference to "the Borg" intended). It seems to me that, at all times, a system of government should be a skillfully crafted compromise between the people and their leaders, and that it should be a dynamic interaction. I think any theory of government, however well thought-out, must be flexible enough (and humble enough) to admit fault, imperfection, and the need for constant change and adaptation. A system that is absolutely rigid, and assumed to be perfect, can only end badly for the people (like the donkey Benjamin's assertion in Animal Farm, that, "Life will go on as it has always gone on, that is, badly...").

I think reading Orwell, and More's Utopia, has given me an answer to my search for truth, and helped me formulate some sort of political philosophy: that there is no "correct" political philosophy, not yet anyway. There are correct principles: cooperation, compassion, respect for human dignity, respect for the environment, hard/honest work, justice, autonomy, etc. For any government to be effective and praiseworthy, it must honor these principles, and others. As always, the Devil is in the details.

Just as the process of evolution has yet to produce a perfect organic creature, human beings have yet to create an ideal state. But evolution has produced us: a creature intelligent enough to understand the process that created it. We are not perfect, by any means, but we have the necessary tools to survive, thrive, and even be happy on this indifferent world, in this indifferent universe. I think we would do well to be less ideological, and more pragmatic as concerning politics: to have our principles and cater to them, but to remember that we don't have all the answers, and we're in this together. I think I'll give up dreaming about utopia, and start thinking more about my family, and my neighbor.

50 Things I love about Shauni

These are in no particular order, and they don't come near to an exhaustive list of reasons why I love Shauni, but after reading just 50 of them, I'm sure you'll come to love her, too. Or at least think she's awesome, like I do.

1. She's beautiful and elegant


2. She's smart and witty


3. She graduated from college


4. She's a good mom, and loves being one


5. She loves beautiful, inspiring things


6. She's interesting


7. She's fun to talk to


8. She's creative in the kitchen


9. She's warm and loving


10. She likes adventure


11. She also enjoys simple pleasures and simple joys


12. She has good fashion sense


13. She's very practical


14. Her kisses are sweet


15. She likes it when I hug her tightly


16. She listens and empathizes


17. She's very polite


18. She's very loyal


19. She appreciates good counsel and advice


20. She's a good swimmer, and loves the water


21. She is very musical: can play and appreciate it


22. She likes, and is very good with children


23. She's very healthy, and encourages me to be


24. She gets satisfaction and happiness watching our little boy, Jaren, develop


25. She's a hard worker, and very diligent


26. She serves others often


27. She likes cleanliness and order


28. She is a very good, wholesome, and clean person


29. She's into saving money


30. She can balance being frugal, while raising our standard of living at the same time


31. She has strong faith and trust in God


32. She is totally devoted to our marriage and family (no matter what!)


33. She dreams big, but is realistic, too


34. She is patient with me, and Jaren


35. She is helpful


36. She smiles and laughs easily


37. She has a beautiful smile!


38. She compliments frequently and says "Thank you"


39. She expresses gratitude for all good things in our life, and even lots of our challenges


40. She is strong, but sensitive, and very feminine


41. She tells me she loves me often


42. She has high expectations of me, but doesn't nag; she's very encouraging


43. She doesn't yell or get irrational when upset, but works it out with me, and forgives


44. She's quick to say "I'm sorry" when she makes a mistake


45. She's the best wife a man could ask for!


46. She actively tries to look past my faults, and my family's idiosyncrasies, and to love and accept


47. She sees good things in everybody


48. She has an open, inquisitive mind: looks at both sides of everything


49. She stands for the right, always


50. She makes me want to be a better man
    

I love my wife!

"One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism"

So far during my short trial as a blogger, I have tried to avoid topics that I felt were overly controversial, naive, or cliche. I must admit that I do not feel entirely capable of defending my next statement as well as I would like to, especially since this notion has come to be so ridiculed by our progressive, pluralistic culture. I would like to explore the belief in one true religion, and ultimate truth.

I'm sure we've all heard the saying "there are many paths to heaven," or something similar. Newsweek magazine recently featured an article on the subject, titled "We're all Hindus now" (a reference to the core Hindu belief in a multiplicity of paths to salvation), which cited a study the Pew Forum, reporting that a majority of Protestant Americans now believe that people of other faiths can achieve salvation (this group is traditionally the least inclined to believe thus). This pluralistic, and even pantheistic, approach to religion can be attributed to many factors, which I will not attempt to exhaustively categorize here (collective sigh); however, undoubtedly, a few of these factors include society's emphasis on religious/cultural tolerance and relativism, as our society becomes more secular, and I believe it can also be attributed to general spiritual laziness.

Lately I have experienced a "cooling" of my own religious fervor, as most of my time and mental energy has been funneled into work, school, and preparation for my professional and adult life. I have to work weekend nights in order to go to school full-time, and so this leaves me almost comatose on Sunday mornings, when we go to church. Couple this with the tidal wave of secular thought and argument I encounter daily in academia, and it results in a 'perfect storm' of doubt, nearly capsizing my small vessel of faith. As a returned-missionary, I am able to recognize the pattern, even in myself, of a testimony wavering under fire. I am ashamed that I, too, am capable (or incapable, I should say) of such a thing: being tempted, having doubts, second-guessing, and sinking into skepticism.

I like to think that this is just a transitional time in my life-- a time that will redefine me, for the better-- and that these feelings of doubt, and explorations of other possibilities, are healthy (albeit uncomfortable) and necessary phenomena, ultimately leading me to a stronger, more defensible position of faith. I like to think so, but I'm not so sure.

Two of my favorite religious/philosophical authors, C.S. Lewis & Stephen E. Robinson, have written convergently about the level of dedication and faithfulness required for acceptance into the Kingdom of God, based on scripture: that our devotion must be a conscious and complete willingness to accept and keep the covenant He has proposed for our salvation --knowing that we could be wrong, but choosing this course 'come what may.' It is as a marriage, in which we promise to be faithful, no matter what, trusting that God will never abuse us. They argue that this level of faithfulness alone, and nothing less, that will satisfy our end of the covenant.

Extrapolating this into everyday application can be difficult, but a pertinent example for me is this: to make up my mind now that I will always follow the teachings of the gospel, keep the commandments and the covenants I have made, and when I make mistakes or struggle with doubt, that I will do my best to repent and to reconcile myself to the church, and to God. This would require more than simple activity in church meetings and practices, as this can be done by passively 'running through the motions.' This requires an active awareness of to what it is I am promising, and an unwavering commitment henceforth. And what's more, this should not be a burden, but a liberation (or, in other words, I should be happy about it).

Einstein once said: "He who joyfully marches to music rank and file, has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once." And I have heard other important literary figures suggest that some of the greatest tragedies in the world's history were committed by simple people who had committed themselves to some cause or other, in like fashion. By pure irony, terrible wars have been waged, and countless other atrocities committed, which could have been avoided if people had stopped to think for themselves, and question the authority and inspiration of their leaders.

And so, we begin to get a sense of just what God is asking of us: in the face of knowing that we run this risk (of committing ourselves to a cause we cannot be sure of), me must do it, trusting that this one is the real thing-- the one sure hope for salvation. We must use the brain we have been given, all of it, and still decide to follow him, even blindly, if need be. That is a lot to ask, and for me, it requires a level of trust that I am barely capable of, if at all.

I think, as an attempt to reconcile these conflicting points of view, our society is beginning to popularize this new, open-minded approach toward religion, with the hope that this will curb fundamentalism and extremism, foster diversity, and encourage dialogue between old rivals and xenophobes. Unfortunately, there are unforeseen, undesirable consequences to this strategy, or perhaps they are foreseen, in which case we should worry. One of these consequences is the cheapening of the role of religion in our lives and culture: making its various beliefs and practices nothing more than items to select and mismatch, as if at a buffet, literally making morality and faith a matter of taste, persuasion, and opinion.

I am not a conspiracy theorist. I laugh at, and get furious with the likes of Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reily, Rush Limbaugh, etc., when they prey upon the fears of ignorant people, by insisting that there is some secret, secular New World Order who wants to abolish religion and control our lives; however, I am aware that there are many prominent people (writers, journalists, actors, musicians, politicians, corporate executives, etc.) who do want the public interface of society to be atheistic, and who lobby for such an end. But I don't believe they have some unified 'master plan' to take over the world --they enjoy their freedom just as much as we do.

On the issue of the one, real truth, I believe it must exist. Physicists search for their "theory of everything," which encompasses the labyrinth of quantum mechanics, chemistry, and life itself, and explains these in the language of mathematics. This is a noble search: it will bring us closer to understanding the universe, and ourselves, but it will not complete our understanding, it will not bring the self-actualizing singularity promised by post-humanists, or help us to transcend our mortality and our humble place in the universe. For these are metaphysical quests-- these are the reasons why we are spiritual beings. I think those who put their "faith" in science alone, and advocate that all should follow suit, are doing themselves an injustice, and us as well.

To say it plainly, I believe that there is one true God, and one way to Eternal Life. There may be many paths, but there is only one path that is most direct, and there is only one entrance at the final destination. There is only one ultimate truth, and it is true for everyone. I believe this, and I believe that while some people may be fortunate enough to find it in life, those who do not will be given the opportunity after death, or else God would be a partial being: unjust and unmerciful. I feel that we should search for the truth, and not be content until we are confident we have found it. And if one is not sure ones religion or church is true, why continue to follow it? Why give up the search? We had better believe we are near the truth, or I believe we will have to answer for our negligence in searching it out.

Mission Memories (part 4)

This post is about my mission. To see other simillar post, click on the mission tab under "labels."

I arrived in Pato Branco in August, which down there was near the end of winter. Elder Melo and I braved the cold winds and rain with holes in our shoes, and broken umbrellas. It was shortly after arriving in Pato that we were invited by a less-active couple, Irmao Tobias and his very small wife (both of whom had a very interesting story), to come have lunch with them where they lived, in a small town, several miles west of Pato Branco, called Mariopolis. While there, they introduced us to a woman named Rosa, and her daughter. They had been talking to lots of people in the town about the church, including preachers of other faiths, some of whom even came to General Conference with us in October! I guess they were trying to get a group going there so they didn't have to travel so far to go to church.

This woman, Rosa, had already known other sets of missionaries when she and her family had lived in Pato Branco several years past, but they had moved away and lost contact with them, and the church. She was very happy to see us, and invited us to come to her house and teach her whole family. We visited their "house," which was nothing more than a small shanty with some furniture, a stove, and 4 children. I had never seen such poverty. The children worked with their parents as seasonal field-hands, hand-picking beans or grapes on a plantation, for which they earned a small pittance-- barely enough to survive on.

It was shortly after this October General Conference that Elder Melo was transferred to another area, to become a senior companion, and I was asked to be a trainer to a new missionary. His name was Elder I. Sousa, from Rio de Janeiro: a carioca! So, I was going to have a filho, but, once again, he was older than me by a few years. We had a difficult time at first: he had been a paralegal in Rio, living alone, and working in the business district of the city, before he came to the mission. He was very particular about his things, and sometimes, just for fun, I would re-arrange them for him! He would flip whenever I did that. We soon got to be very good friends.

He was very outgoing and friendly with everyone we met and taught. Sometimes this was something of a problem, as our investigators began to see us as just friends, rather than teachers. Several months went by without much success. We were teaching lots of people, including Rosa's family, but were not able to commit any of them to baptism. We began searching out the less active members, teaching them, and asking them to refer us to their friends. One family we found, that of Irmao Jose, lived in a distant neighborhood from the city center where the church was. They began coming back, and they introduced us to a wonderful young couple with two small children, whom we began to teach all together! By doing this, we were able to help re-activate a family, and bring another one with them that already had friends and a support system! That was one of the best experiences of my mission.

It was the week before I left Pato Branco that we finally had baptisms, 5 of them: Irma Rosa, and her 4 children! The Branch was able to help them find a small, but clean and very sturdy house, in Pato Branco, so they could all come to church without much ado. They were very happy to finally be able to become members of the church. Their baptisms were a witness to me of the power of prayer and fasting, and the fulfillment of a promise that I received by the Spirit. By the end of my time in that city I had come to love the members of that Branch so deeply, that I wept to leave it. I had gained the confidence and friendship of Presidente Rufato and his whole family, especially his parents, with whom we had spent Christmas (my only Christmas away from home), and used their phone to talk to our families. I also got to talk to Shauni on the phone that day for a few minutes, because she went over to my parents' house. That was a great surprise!

There are so many other things I can think of, it would take 4 more posts just about Pato Branco to tell them all, but I'll spare you. When, after 7 1/2 months, I was finally transferred, I knew I would never forget the time I spent in the city of White Duck.

Ditat Deus

For those not from Arizona, or not familiar with Latin, that's Arizona's state motto, it means, "God Enriches." That sums up, better than anything, the way I feel right now. I wrote a little earlier that I was feeling a little down, frustrated, and worried about the future. Well, in the past week some exciting, unforeseen things have happened that have helped change that.

I recently had the opportunity to request a transfer for work to a nicer facility, and one nearer my house, and it looks like it's going to happen! I've been there before, and I like the night crew that I'll be working with. It's on the campus of the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, and it lives up to their high standards and reputation. I'm truly excited, even though it's pretty busy at night, and I'll definitely be "earning my keep" by working there. The only down side is, it's full-time or not at all. So, looks like I'll be working full-time and going to school full-time for a while to come. However, I will not be tutoring, so I'll still have two days during the week to do homework, spend time with my family, and relax.

So that's work, now on to school. This will be a busy semester: I'll be taking 3 sciences (Organic Chemistry, Organic Evolution, and Animal Physiology), and I'll be a research assistant to my Physics and Genetics professors, working on a project studying yeast! No really, it's a cool project. I went in to speak to my advisor a few days ago, and she reassured me immensely, and gave me hope and confidence that I'm on the right path towards getting into medical school. If all goes well, I should be able to graduate from ASU in May of 2011, and, hopefully, enter med school that August.

I was thinking that I would either have to find part-time work, or Shauni would have to, this semester in order to make enough to cover our expenses. But just yesterday, my financial aid refund came in the mail, and it was three times as much as I was expecting! It was like pennies from Heaven! Don't get me wrong, I know where it came from, but I had checked my status just a day or two before the dispersal, and there had been no change; then, all-of-a-sudden, and in our hour of need, we got this huge, unexpected help. Once again, our needs have been provided for, and Shauni will still be able to stay home with our boy, like she wants to, and I will be able to focus on 1 job, and on school. I feel very grateful for all these things, excited about this coming semester, and renewed vigor to pursue my dreams.

A Poem

I used to be a pretty avid poet, but I haven't written anything for over a year. The other night I was at work, watching a man with what we call "terminal restlessness," who kept trying to crawl out of bed. I had to hover over him like that because he had already succeeded once, a few days earlier, and nearly broke his neck! His family had expressed how they wished he would just move on, and some of the staff as well. I was thinking about this as I watched him, and these words just sort of came to me. Hope you like it, if not, let me know. Either way, feedback will be appreciated.

Wanderlust

Please, go quietly into your goodnight.
If you've spent it well, or ill, it's spent.
Your youth, your prime, your time is over,
We, the living, though we loved you,
Do not wish to love much longer.

As our patience passes away, you delay.
A moment of concerted effort only
Is all we can spare from our busy day;
For, the present is our master, lonely.

And though we would heal, forgive past offenses,
Make amends, tie-up loose ends,
And part with you on good terms, with sweet tears,
We must content ourselves with the bitter:
There are bills to pay, and appearances to make.

Perhaps there's a reason why old, oriental men
Leave home to wander, beg, pray, and die
Without a ceremony-- To spend their last day
Under the gaze of strangers, or, nobody.

Maybe this is why you are anxious, confused, restless:
Because this is no longer your world?
You belong to the woodlands, to the wilderness,
To the deserted temples and wastelands.
They call to you, to come add your bones to theirs'.

I would let you go, but for my guilt and fear,
And there are laws against that sort of thing here.

So I plead, go quickly, do not tarry;
For, life no longer makes you happy.
When you're gone, we'll think better of you.
Legacy is the key, and it lives after life.