In order to make a difference you would have to somehow be different.

Since I started doing day shift, I've been needing help keeping myself awake while at work. It's seriously tough since I'm nocturnal, and I still often end up working night shift. Disadvantage of having complete freedom! For quite some time, I've been struggling with uncontrolled sleepiness. Understandably. This leads me to find helpful ways to keep me up and on my toes. My eyes kind of like live on their own, though, and want to drop whenever they feel like.

Playing movies on one corner of my screen has been somewhat helpful. Movies are not my frequent choice, however. Podcasts of Bible preachers and Virtual Bible have been my top preference. But, there are times when even my brain wants to shut off which makes me not understand anything. At certain times, I need something more intense to shake me awake. These are times I'd go for action movies. Or anything suspense. Never horror! Only, they distract me and get me jumping out of my seat every time. My dogs would usually get startled as I scream out of nowhere. Can't imagine how I actually look like reacting to fighting scenes. I should get cctv, maybe, to see myself. Hahaha

Then, I stumbled upon this Christian film, "I'm Not Ashamed". I'd not seen new ones since there aren't many of them until yesterday. I wasn't getting the plot at first since I was focused on what I was doing. So, I had to play it again. Twas the second time that I started understanding what it was presenting. And I'd say it's meaningful. The flick isn't really laudable like the mainstream ones. It does portray realities of this world and of each individuals and the challenges they face, though.

So, it's a story of a Christian teen, Rachel Joy Scott, who went to Columbine High School where she struggled with her faith trying to live in two worlds. She later realized it isn't possible. Indeed, a believer can only serve one master. She had to make a bold and firm choice to live her life for Jesus. It's not been easy for her. And it will never be easy for all those who truly want to serve Christ. There will always be this pull from the world. Humans have this innate need for acknowledgement and for being seen and accepted. To belong somewhere. However, when one chooses Christ, they are to embrace the fact that "they will be hated by the world." They can't be friends of God and friends with the world at the same time. The Bible already stated this truth.

Rachel's life moved me. She allowed God to use her. She didn't completely understand what God's purpose was but she willingly gave her remaining life (she was the first victim of the Columbine High School massacre and went to meet her maker on April 20, 1999) in obedience to Jesus' teachings. She walked the talk. She gave no excuse to herself not to obey what Jesus commanded. Particularly, the subjects of forgiveness and compassion. Her life is truly moving. At such young age (17), and having stayed shortly on Earth, she was able to touch lives. It's been her aim and goal and she fulfilled it. Of course, not without the help of God, I'd say. All she had to do was to obey. To live in step with the Spirit.

Such a worthwhile reminder for me. I still find myself hankering for approval and recognition from time to time. There is still this need shouting from within, "notice me", "appreciate me", "acknowledge me". And so I can undeniably relate to the struggle Rachel faced. To stand up for Christ is not trouble-free. It leads a believer and follower to deep heartache and distress. Not only because people will shut them out and ostracize them, but because a believer also has to do the same to their own selves as Jesus commanded, "deny yourself" (Matthew 16:24-26). If one is to say that they're a disciple of Christ, then they are to constantly counter their impulses. When it's easier to dislike another, a believer and follower has to give the red light to their feeling. They're not anymore living as slaves to the flesh's natural urges (see Galatians 5:17-21). Love and compassion becomes their trademark and moves them to serve others, even those who are unlovable. Especially the unlovable.

Her story could probably be not as inspiring to most except to the lives she touched personally. Those who she moved with her compassion and sincere concern. The society calls what she did martyrdom. Who will still do the same? Who wants to be excluded? To be treated like a nobody? To be taken advantage of and not retaliate? Secretly disliked and mocked? No one except those who Jesus called to Him. People He chose to represent Him to shine His light into this dark world. The world defines such choice (as what Rachel chose) as martyrdom, the Bible defines it as radical love. Unconditional, sacrificial, and selfless love. First for the Lord, and next for the neighbors. Christianity isn't about showing the world that one reads the Bible and speaks loudly about God and Jesus. It is living Jesus' commandments and following His ways. It's a lifestyle of denying self in order to conform to the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles no matter how difficult it gets. Even if it requires them to set their own selves and desires aside. Even if it means being abandoned by the ones we care for and love. Even if it means to be hated by people. Even if it means being enemy of the world.

Through Rachel's example, I am reminded that success and fulfillment can't be attained by being known and popular; or by doing what we love and gaining from it; or by being appreciated and loved by many; or by having more stuff; or by understanding why everything happens the way they do…or by however this world defines success and fulfillment. Living for the purposes of God and how He designed each one is the only way to experience real success and fulfillment without feeling empty and off course eventually. Following the ways of Jesus (and not the world's) is the means to have a meaningful life that never leads to futility. It protects people from disillusionment and disgruntlement by trying to chase after things and whatever in order to be happy. Everywhere we look, we see faces whose lives find no satisfaction even though they already have more than the basics. Even they seem to have it all together. Indeed, godliness with contentment is great gain. And this is attainable only when one receives Christ's peace which transcends all understanding. When one comes to abandonment of self and own understanding to completely trust, depend, and rely solely on the Lord. 

We don't need to be heroes to make a difference and to influence many. Just with the way we live our lives in love and in the ways of God on a daily already is the influence we can begin with to start a ripple effect. Every person around us have needs we can meet if only we give attention and time. One act of kindness can lead to some lasting impact. Don't aim to reach hundreds and thousands. Just reach one lost soul and plant hope in their heart. Trust that each individual reached will pay it forward, thus, keeping the ball running. That's the the only difference Jesus wants us to model.

And I know that each time God brings reminder and enlightenment, He is realigning His child to His methods and plans. What a way to prepare me for the year to come! 

Sharing some of the lines I like from the film (mostly by Rachel). Check them out if you will!

A drug you don't know you're swallowing. Afterwards, you can't tell why you feel or think the way you do.

“No use complaining about the world's freest press 
―we fought for it, we got it, 
now we have to live with the nonsense 
that it spews out.” 

I have a list of topics (in a purple sticky note) I planned to write about since some time before July of this year. There were times I was compelled to type my thoughts out and publish them here, but nothing was compelling enough than after I've followed (not entirely) the Senate hearings earlier this afternoon where they tackled about "fake news". Twas another long-winding chatters mostly digressing from the main subject. Source persons were rather attacked and were schooled as if they're ignorant of the ways of politics and their professions (and apparently, this may not be everyone's general perspective. Just seen hate comments pointing at them on Twitter.). While I won't deny that the issue of freedom of speech (which means: the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint) will really be called for―and I think it best that the council works to draw a line as to where it starts and ends (which may "restrict" FREEDOM)―I would rather just have the committee stick to the issue at hand. Then, perhaps, push with another discourse concerning the rest of arising sub-topics later on.

Evidently, everything has become about clashes between pro and anti-administration. Where will neutrality stand if this be the case? And this is, in fact, where the real issue of "fake news" stems from. Whoever publishes malicious reports have some agenda in mind. Because news are supposed to be PRESENTATION of ready and available facts with strict ACCURACY, and must not be colored with personal opinion, AT ALL. That's the line that divides a blogger from a news presenter. (It should also be taken into consideration the website source of the article in question, by the way.) Fake news can only be referred as such when a news presenter, along with its writers, producers, and staff put out an item that is not based on a given FACT. Anything that they add or subtract from their report can automatically qualify a write up as fake. It, then, is considered a fabricated story. While a blog is nothing but an avenue to express personal thoughts, opinion, ideas without requiring one (a blogger) to have all evidences necessary to validate their standpoint. And I agree to what Mr. RJ Nieto stated that there must be a legislative order to categorize or regulate any writing done on social media, the blogosphere, and other cyber spaces before free thinkers who post their thoughts can even be considered fake news producers. (There must be a law, then, that will require websites to register as news media sites so they will be regulated.)

The main stream media have this what everyone knows as journalism ethics and standards (code of ethics) they ought to follow. They have to be within the bounds of this code. The bloggers aren't considered under this code. No law to abide by for them, sorry to say. Now, anyone who deviates the topic from this irrefutable fact, and then insists on the issue concerning "freedom-of-speech-becoming-limited-when-one-holds-a-government-position", I can't emphasize enough how obviously they're trying to threaten the rights of individuals. This I firmly hold as a valuable principle: not because celebrities are public icons, they're already deprived of their life to live the way they want. They may have such huge influence to the public because they're being looked up to, they're still not anyone's ownership. No one has any right to make anyone conform to what they believe should be "the" way of life (only God has that say). Public figures are not accountable to the decisions of their supporters should the latter choose to have a tattoo or to undergo surgery (unless they convince them to, of course). Same thing as public officials. 

People gotta stop being stylists―they take the role of one that keeps on checking for smeared mascara under another's eyes...fashion someone the way that will satisfy their liking. We don't do that to each other. Live and let live ...because each one of us have the same birthright whether you're a congressman and I am JUST a simple person living like a hermit. If anyone thinks that one's expression or way of life harms another, then, I believe there's proper avenue to address that. 

“Popular culture is a place where pity is called compassion, flattery is called love, propaganda is called knowledge, tension is called peace, gossip is called news, and auto-tune is called singing.”

I personally hold in high regard the President more for the respect he gives to individual rights. He's been disrespected by his co-public servants who hold lower positions (called him names, accuse him of such and such.....) and he simply lets them be because he gives them that right―to express whatever grievances they might have. It could've been easy for him to abuse his power booting out people left and right (worse, erase them from the face of the Earth), and everyone who goes against him. He doesn't. Then, I'll hear some committee members speak manipulatively what bloggers should do or not do all because they say that Nieto and Uson are being paid with people's taxes? Like, the guts?! Nobody can, out of nowhere, by any means...just dictate what is acceptable thing to say, who can say what...!!! Isn't that undemocratic rule?! 

Like seriously?! What compelled me to write this is not to act as if my voice matters. I don't even have that much readers comparatively. But boy if I will be deprived of my right to let the steam out of my chest through this very medium, then I totally will be out of voice! How much more the rest of everyone whose views are only shared in a larger setting through social media?

Certain influencers make use of power and manipulation to destroy and to deceive...............

Imagine how the Marcos family lived their lives in silence. Never given the right to speak the truth out (YET the truth prevailed, anyhow). Nor they'd given themselves their rights to defend themselves. They suffered derision and awful condemnation. Been called names. Think how if you're in their shoes and wherever you go you're called a plunderer. If people decide for your reputation by attaching labels to your name. Isn't that injustice? Especially, considering that none of the 900 plus cases filed against them ever proved them guilty! It's worse than the fate of those who were killed in the streets for having been involved in drugs! Because everyday and everywhere people lambaste you. People murder you over and over and over with their sharp tongues. Verdict has been given without due process. You're deprived of vindication. People who don't even know your story will malign your whole being. And that's all because of FAKE NEWS. Twisted information.

"But the truth won't go away. It will keep surfacing until it is recognized. Truth will outlast any campaigns mounted against it, no matter how mighty, clever, or long. It is invincible."

At times, it's as if silence is the better weapon. Let alone wait whose will be the last laugh. However, when silence will be the sole weapon, then the rest of the next generations will live in lie. Because that'll be the only truth they'll know. Far too many have been living in hate. Hate for something they didn't even experience first hand. They carry feelings and ideas passed on to them. Empathy that is born of  deceit. They grow bitter for some twisted history and they settle with that. Yeah, it's their choice. It's always everyone's choice at the end of each day. Yet, even those choices they make are largely influenced by the lies that have been pushed down their systems. By who?!

Fake news damage society. Causes hate. Blurs sound judgment. Feeds poison. It collects a greater number of people to hate the same person or group of persons or ideology they hate. That's what it does. While expression of opinion helps us understand each other. Opens our minds that even the person closest to you may have an opinion disagreeing to yours. And that's just fine! But to present a report that's distorted in order to influence others to believe something to anyone's advantage, that's foul. If that's what news presenters want to do, then they better resign from their jobs and be bloggers where they have no responsibility to anyone. 

And if I may also add............

Mocha Uson may have a shoddy past. She's made countless unprincipled choices, yes. Did she deny it? Is she hiding skeletons in the closet? She's out. All out. Don't we rather want people who don't pretend to us? Does it not feel rather safe knowing what kind of person you're dealing with than believing someone is prim and proper and yet have the most evil inclination you can ever imagine? I mean, who am I to hurl judgment at anyone who's made bad choices many times in their lives? Who are WE to be too self-righteous to spit on her (or anyone's) face? Who are we to laugh at how she can't speak as intelligently as everyone in the assembly room? Who are we to bash like the person does not deserve respect? Don't we all fight for something, too? Can't we communicate our sentiments with discretion? How are we any different from her who we judge as amoral and behave beyond ethics ourselves?

I neither like nor dislike her. Because I don't know her. What I read and see on television and YouTube aren't enough basis for me to make judgment of the kind of person she is. And neither do my knowledge and judgement of her can be basis whether she "deserves" my respect or not. Though it is my prerogative if I give her respect or not. That won't even reflect who she is but who I am! And neither do anyone of her blog readers and critics have this advantage. If respect is earned, I wonder how many of us deserve it, if truth be told? If people can have a full view of all our activities within 24 hours the entire 365 days, can anyone truly deserve anyone's respect? If respect is earned, no wonder how hard the life of everyone who needs to keep pleasing both their spectators and detractors! Then who would still strive to earn it (given that you can NEVER please everyone)?

What I am sure of is that I am no different from her in that I am also flawed. All people are, no matter how they appear pious. Only some work harder at being good, perhaps. OR, that good in keeping skeletons inside the four corners of their homes! I don't also allow myself to look down on those I disagree with. The hearing only exhibits how we are all different. How we all have our own way of thinking. How we all behave a certain way in situations where we're caught off guard. Yet, we are after the same goal, aren't we? ―to find solutions to pressing matters. So let's deal with the issue without agenda. Hear and listen. Express without reviling. Keep the focus on the problem and assert within the frame of reference and quit crucifying whoever. We are no judges.

 

Can't help but ask why when Senators (like Mr. Trillanes, Mr. Pangilinan and Ms. de Lima...) speak their minds out no matter how disparaging it's just excusable. Freedom of speech/expression warrants them to express whatever they wish. While everyone else must be regulated. How come not all have the same privilege?

Mr. Nieto is someone whose name I heard only today. He speaks his mind. He is as vocal and blunt as the three senators I mentioned. He answered questions with all frankness. Now, he is being bashed. I salute him for being honest-to-goodness. I wish I can say the same for Mr. Trillanes because his courage deserves applause. Even so, that courage is undeniably sketchy. Saying with conviction that someone is "innocent" even that person has already been detained, meaning has been proven guilty (at least went through due process)...while the one not proven guilty of any of his accusations (except in his head he believes so)..........uh...I don't know...

Anyway, they all have their own shares of knockers. Guess it's the price to pay when you have your name in lights. 

 “It all starts with suppression of a few freedoms and before you know it, you can't speak without permission from the authorities. And then finally you wake up and you know what? It is too late.”