Ego judgment versus righteous judgment
Like Charlie Brown, the Charles Schultz cartoon character, I say, “Good grief. Where did February go?” I’m happy that I stuck with one commitment I made to myself: To find time to write something, however long or short, every day. I have kept that promise. On that odd day when it was not upheld, I made no excuse. I made up for it as soon as I could. That was part of the bargain, as well as letting go of self-judgment.
Spiritual teachings all assure us that judgment is God’s territory. However, if you think about it, there’s sometimes a blurred line between ego’s judgment and what the Bible describes as righteous judgment. We tend to get caught up in vindication
We often feel justified for a sudden outburst of emotional reaction in which unkind words are spoken or misguided actions takes place. Emotional well-being is a state of mental and spiritual peace. This is the time to recognize that you have the emotional strength to deal with whatever crosses your daily path. This will help instill a healthy attitude of self-awareness.
No where is there clearer evidence of our failure to heed the instruction as written in the Book of Matthew 7:20 “Judge not, that ye be not judged,” as soon as politics is under discussion. We seem ill-equipped to cast righteous judgment on the first inkling of a possible difference of opinion. This makes it near impossible to offer sound judgments as to agreeing or compromising on solutions.
Neither do we make any attempt to bring inner wisdom into play. This is called God’s “permissive will.” A rather sneaky way of saying
God would help if only we asked. When we don’t seek wiser assistance, we are prone to hold on to biased viewpoints. No wonder we are advised to keep our hands off judging others. We are too often ill- equipped to navigate such tumultuous waters.
Now is always the right time to turn harsh opinions over to the Spirit of Life. It’s never too late to admit you need guidance and know that you will be lead and protected throughout all your challenges. Judgment’s not your province until you can stop, listen and truly consider what the other side is offering.
February is often referred to as the “Love Month.” Don’t let go of this month until you commit to extending that love throughout each month of this young year and onto all that you say, do and think — including politics. Spirit is waiting on your call.
WASHINGTON >> The House passed legislation Friday that would create about 1.5 million acres of new wilderness and incorporate nearly 1,200 miles of waterways into the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System as Democrats move to protect more public lands — with President Joe Biden’s blessing.
The bill passed by a vote of 227-200. The bill passed mostly along party lines, with eight Republicans joining all but one Democratic lawmaker in voting for the bill.
Biden has set a goal of conserving at least 30% of U.S. lands and ocean by 2030, a move that supporters say will help curb global warming while preserving some of the nation’s most scenic lands for future generations of Americans to enjoy. But like other planks of Biden’s agenda, the bill faces an uncertain future in the 50-50 Senate, where support from at least 10 Republicans would be needed to overcome a filibuster.
GOP opposition
Republicans said the wilderness area designations would restrict use of those lands and make them more susceptible to catastrophic forest fires. Lands designated as wilderness receive the government’s highest level of protection and are generally off-limits to motorized vehicles with allowed activities focused on recreation such as hiking, camping and horseback riding.
The legislation is largely a collection of bills that the
House approved last year on two occasions but did not make it into law. It is one of the largest land protection packages Congress has ever considered and covers almost 3 million acres of public lands, overwhelmingly in Colorado, California, Washington and Arizona.
“Not only will it help protect the air we breathe and the water that we drink, but also the wildlife that call these untouched areas home,” said Rep. Diana DeGette, D- Colo., the bill’s lead sponsor.
One of the provisions in the bill would permanently withdraw more than 1 million acres of federal land north and south of the Grand Canyon National Park from eligibility for any future mining claims, but leaves valid, existing claims intact. Proponents of the withdrawal say uranium deposits in northern Arizona should not be
mined for fear of contaminating the Grand Canyon.
Republican lawmakers portrayed the bill as a job killer in rural communities because the new wilderness restrictions would mean a ban on logging and mining and motorized vehicles. They said that forgoing access to critical minerals makes the U.S. more reliant on other countries such as China to meet its economic and defense needs.
“I would challenge my colleagues to enjoy those scenes and those vistas. I encourage them to take pictures, so they can show their children and grandchildren what they looked like before they locked them away in a wilderness area,” said Rep. Bruce Westerman, R-Ark.
The ideological split over the bill was evident as the congressional delegation from Colorado debated the measure on the House floor.
The legislation encompassed bills from Rep. Joe Neguse and DeGette that would affect more than 1 million acres of public lands in the state.
“At the end of the day, we have an obligation to leave our environment better than we found it. That’s what this bill is all about,” Neguse said.
But Rep. Lauren Boebert, R- Colo., said the bill “targets” her district and was opposed by the Colorado Farm Bureau and numerous local officials “because of the damage they know that it will cause and the activities it will prevent.”
Rep. Doug Lamborn, RColo., said he knew the intent of supporters was to protect the land, but in practice, the wilderness designation is too restrictive, preventing people from even using bicycles or strollers.
“I prefer public lands with many uses,” he said.