Restraining Restraining Orders: The Foolishness of the State

This is a momentary shift in my usual topic of choice, it was something that was put on my heart to write. Enjoy.

Charles E. Corry, Ph.D (Equal Justice Foundation) proposes that as little as 35% and as much as 80% of the Restraining Orders filed in California, Texas and Colorado fall either under the category of entirely false accusations or pointless and malicious allegations that have little to nothing to do with personal protection and everything to do with personal attack. 

It is posited that these "false" Restraining Orders put a significant strain on both the legal system they are involved in, and the Law Enforcement system that enforces them. This strain prevents protection resulting in, and has been linked to, an incalculable number of fatalities and abuses in legitimate Domestic Abuse cases. 

In more than 70% of divorce cases the use of a Restraining Order was used to prevent "awkward circumstances", in which the prosecuting party was simply too immature to deal with the ramifications of the mutual failings of a bad marriage. Instead of trying to work things out, or attempting to make the best of a bad situation, even greater strain is placed on undeserving parties (including accused husbands and wives, and indirectly the children of the aforementioned) that causes significant psychological and emotional harm. Thus turning the tables back from the original purpose, which was to "prevent psychological, physical or emotional abuse".

Even on the low end of the percentage scale, nearly 250,000 fathers and mothers (statistically more predominant that men are falsely accused) per year have false Restraining Orders filed against them. In terms of Judicial Man power, that is between 5 minutes to 30 minutes spent IN THE CASE ALONE per false case. That estimates to nearly 62,500 excessive state man hours in court alone, not including preparation, paperwork, etc. Those man hours could be instead spent investigating, prosecuting, and otherwise pursing and preventing actual crime and abuse. 

This is all not to say that Restraining Orders are useless, nor is it to say that I disagree with the context of a Restraining Order in its form. The problem is frivolous claims. Yet another hole in the system of our Judiciary that hemorrhages funds AND risks the lives and well being of the citizens it claims to be protecting. Currently, the Judiciary takes a position of "better safe than sorry" on Restraining Orders filed. Nearly 96% of Restraining Orders filed for are fully granted (usually ex parte) by a Judge. The logic there is to say that, at the very least something is being done either way; but that logic excludes the Law of Diminishing Return. At some point the court system and the Law Enforcement system become entirely bogged down by the excess of false claims and then become incapable to answer to legitimate claims.

Where is the boundary on the foolishness of the government playing into the insanity of the populace? At what point does the government cease to listen to the loudest voice, and begin to listen to the clearest? At what point does the government cease to allow itself to be manipulated into a weapon of the opportune, and begin to retain its purpose as the shield of the unprotected? Utter foolishness.

The Thief on the Cross: A True Honor

I don't know about every other Christian, but I think at least 90% the time I don't really feel like Paul the Apostle; and when I do, I later find out that his epistle to Timothy describes me better than him. You know what I mean? Paul the Apostle, remarked as the chief of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15), NEVER seems to live up to his name. I mean, as far as men go (excepting Christ)... Paul seems to be pretty on top of things. Scratch that, how many people have read through Paul's epistles and not thought that he is a total BEAST? 

Like I said, most times I don't feel like Paul the Apostle. If I really had to identify myself with a New Testament character (which I personally believe we always fit in as at least one, if not multiple at a given time) I feel just like the thief on the cross. 

I could be alone on this, but I've felt like I'm pinned to a tree for my sins against man. I am entirely helpless, and entirely unable to bring myself back down off the cross. I have no power to command the people who put me here to take me down, I have no power to do anything. I weep for my helplessness, I fear for my life, and I regret everything I've ever done. Then I look to my side and I see Christ crucified right along with me. I am painfully aware that I am "receiving the due reward of [my] deeds" and I am just as aware that He "has done nothing wrong" (quoted from Luke 23:41).

Along with all of that strength sapping truth, I am given the grace of the energy to turn to Him and ask along with the thief on the cross, "Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom". That is all I can manage. I must say that it can feel a shy shameful for not having the strength for a deep conversational prayer with the Lord, but then I remember an extremely encouraging Truth. The thief on the cross did just the same thing as I do, and praise the Lord He turned to the thief and said, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise".

While yes the ultimate truth is that one man is no greater before God than another man regardless of his perceivable strength, but it doesn't feel like that sometimes. We perceive a difference between ourself and another who has it "together" like we see Paul having it together. Someone who is being "persecuted for righteousness sake" and is not "receiving the due reward of [their] deeds". We can almost envy (a sinful expression of a lack of faith, but the Lord understands) for that person who is leaning on the Lord's strength more faithfully, and it drives us deeper into a form of depression. Regardless of the extent of our personal sanctification (driven and controlled only by the strength and power of the Lord), we are still human and we are still subject to false impressions and feelings at the (accurate) accusation of Satan. 

Encouragingly, it doesn't matter if we can take ourself off the cross (because we can't), or if we're being led to the cross for things that we have actually done (which we usually are) or if we are being persecuted for Christ's sake (while the latter is better in our scope). The only thing that matters is turning to Christ and hearing His loving voice telling us that we will be with Him in paradise. The blameless one. The Holy Son. We can exult in that, we can rest in that, and we can take our deserved earthly punishment in a Godly way because nothing can separate us from Christ's love (if God's grace doesn't include taking you down off the cross, which it doesn't always) "to live is Christ, to die is gain". There is no shame in feeling like the thief on the cross, there is no fear to be had when Christ tells you that you are going to be with Him.

God's Sovereignty and Coincidence: Does coincidence exist?

Today, the term "coincidence" is used to explain away parallel happenings from which we, as fallible humans, have made a conclusion (usually a very fatalistic and obviously fallible one, see the following).

Take into consideration...:

• The guy who has been given two job offers and has felt like he's been "followed around by" one of the two companies; seeing them on billboards and in magazines everywhere he goes.
• The woman who finds herself in possession, without attempt, of a travel brochure to the place she's always wanted to go (look again, now its diamonds; p.s. I'm on a horse)
• The two singles who constantly find themselves saying the same thing at the same time, who run into each other all the time without trying, who find out that they have a lot in common, etc. etc. etc. (we all know the song and dance here, in the unlikely event that you haven't done it, you've seen it)

In the world, it is easy to file these co-transpiring events under "irrelevant to one another", but as a Christian, who believes in the God who is Sovereign over all, what do we make of this? Spurgeon posits that every speck of dust in the air maintains its location and movement by the appointment of God. If this is true, then it would be logical to assume that every action, emotion, event, thought... literally everything, works together in unison to fulfill God's purposes. One unified movement toward completing His will. With that vein of thought it would be just as logical to assume that there really is no such thing as separate events, we classify them all as individual events because that is what we perceive. The "present". Through our perspective we break things down into smaller groups of events, it allows us to wrap our mind around things easier; after all if I say, "explain to me World War II" then we will never understand the full depth and breadth of the event in question, because our grasp and our minds are limited and finite. God, however, sees things that were, are and will be as one event, because He can grasp things at an unlimited level yes, but also because He authored it in the first place. The conclusion here is to say that there is no such thing as a coincidence; every 'event' that occurs IS interconnected, and MUST be integrally related to every future 'event'. The history of the world is really just a series of interconnected 'events'... from the movement of the largest armies known to the planet to the smallest movement of electrons from valence shell to valence shell the uncountable times it has happened; because of their nature as interconnected, it therefore makes the history of the world a single (currently ongoing from our perspective) event.

Taking into account the previous, it is my hypothesis that this is why we humans are so keen to make connections from one 'event' to another (so called, 'coincidences'). We are hard-wired, by nature, to understand that God is, and further to understand that God is sovereign over every event we perceive.

There is another side to this, however. What do we make of it when the two single friends become lovers, only to find a fatal flaw in their attraction? Or when the woman finds it impossible to buy a ticket to her dream vacation despite the many signs that seem to be indicating she should go? or when the man finds out his chosen company has gone bankrupt? Simply stated, we are human. As humans, we are (frequently) wrong. In seeing these events go seemly awry we are not finding out that the previous 'signs' were unrelated. Instead, we are finding out that man cannot play God (shocker). Man does not have the foresight to predict the way that these events will work together, and what result they will produce therein. Man can hardly predict the purpose of two armies meeting in battle, much less two dust motes dancing in the beams of sun in Spurgeon's analysis. The thing we understand best is the present (only marginally better than we understand the others), which is another thing that we are undeniably hard-wired for.

As with most things, there seems to be a dichotomy here. It is my opinion that the greatest wisdom and understanding regarding this comes from marrying the two schools of thought, that only then comes a full understanding of the picture. Everything has a definite purpose, from large to small things, and is being worked together in unison for God's will to come to fruition; however, we as humans do not understand  His will (again, shocker). This phenomenon has even been observed in the field of mathematics, known as Chaos theory.It is my opinion that it is just as important to not place your desires on God's workings as it is to not remove the acknowledgement that they are still God's unified workings. That doesn't mean that God's will isn't for the man to get that job, or for the woman to go on that vacation, or for the two lovers to... excuse me while I say this... "live happily ever after". *English Major armadillo cringes at use of cliche* 

It has happened before that man's intuition proved to be true regarding many of these events, and it will continue to happen; it is just important to not become too attached to your intuitive gatherings either way, because by that vein nothing is coincidence and yet, paradoxically, everything is a 'coincidence'.