Only the Lonely

DISCLAIMER: If you have many friends or even a few close friends, please don't continue reading this post. You will not relate to what I have written. You may be tempted to offer 'suggestions' which might not be well-received. For those who don't have good friends, feel free to read on.

Today is a Lonely Day. For some reason, everything I read or see reminds me of things that I do not have and desperately want. Facebook is an evil creation for me on days like this. I see how some people have celebrated their birthday with a party. Others are out in the glorious weather enjoying the company of their neighbors and family. I see posts from one person to another of how they miss each other, can't wait to see each other, send their love to one another. Blah, blah, blah – good for all of you. It seems like I have already blogged about these feelings and every time I do, I think that deep down, I secretly wish that someone will read my heart wrenching post and want to be my friend. This have, obviously, never happened. Because then there would not be a need to this current post.

I have never had a birthday party (EVER!). Four people (plus my children) have any idea when my birthday occurs. No one ever calls to talk with me on the phone. My students are really the only people who write on my Facebook wall with comments or encouragement. I could move to another planet and no one in my community would even realize I am gone. I literally get covered in hives and while many are aware, 2 people (neither of whom I am related to or go to church with) ask if I am okay in Chat. Are you depressed yet? I really could go on, but it is making ME depressed.

I am seeing that my desire for friendship never goes away. It just cycles through 3 main types of feelings.

1. Anger – I find myself mad at those who have friends, those who don't want to be my friend, and those who are oblivious to it all.
   
2. Sadness – I basically through a pity-party for myself about how I don't have the kinds of friends I crave.
   
3. Apathy – I accept that I have really never had close friends or maintained a close friendship and that is the way it is always going to be. I tell myself that there are other things that need my attention and ignore what is going on.
   

Incredibly (or maybe sadly), I have experienced all of this cycle multiple times today! At other times, the cycle spins more slowly and I live in the "apathy" phase for longer periods of time.

Once upon a time, I was a stay at home mom. There were others, too, and we got together for play dates and sometimes did little activities. We had Pampered Chef parties and Bible Studies. Even then, I never felt a part of the group. If I missed an activity, I was sometimes lucky enough to get an email but never a phone call. And there were never times that I got a phone call from one of these people to chat with me and see how I was doing. Of course, I never did this either, so I suppose I am partly to blame. I am still not really sure how to do any of this. Especially when the few times I have tried it, I have found that the person I was reaching out to already had close friends – they just did not need me at all. I am now working basically full-time and all of my kids are in school. I don't 'fit' into any of the groups to meet new people. I don't have lots of time to figure out where I can develop a friendship.

So for today, I will be busy. I will make some memories with my 2 boys at the Fair and Race. I will enjoy myself watching my favorite sport today and tonight. I will cheer for my alma mater in football and be an outsider in my own community. In all of this, I will remember that Jesus befriended the 'outsiders' of His society and revealed Himself to them in a special way. God has made me unique for His special purpose and that is a glorious thing to remember, even if few people on this Earth care to discover that. I pray that those who DO get to know me are blessed through my talents, gifts, and interests.

Musings Inspired by “Total Truth” by Nancy Pearcey

I finished reading "Total Truth" by Nancy Pearcey a few weeks ago. If you have not read it, I highly recommend the book, as it deals with important issues with depth and great insight. Several items in the book will help me restructure my lecture on the history and philosophy of science in the coming month. This post is not meant to be a review or summary of the book, though. At one point in the book, Pearcey relates her inner struggle with her calling and vocation while expecting her first child. She felt like the Lord was leading her to continue her studies and serve Him with her mind. She states how it seemed unfair that becoming a mother called all of that into question for her more so than it did for her husband, who was about to become a father. I read this section of the book to my husband, because it summarized my feelings over the past few years very well.

Twelve years ago, I completed my Master of Science degree and jumped directly into work on my Ph.D. in Animal Physiology. Soon after that, I found out I was expecting our first child. I was due in the middle of the Spring semester, and my advisor allowed me to work from home (which means there is not much work when you deal with beef cattle) through the summer and still paid me. I had always said that I wanted to stay home with my kids, so in July 2000, I left the academic world and became a full-time stay at home mom. We ended up with 2 babies in less than a year and I honestly don't remember a lot about that time. However, I think my brain was screaming. I was used to thinking, solving problems, reading, writing, organizing. Most friends I associated with for play dates had left careers – mine had not really started. So, I volunteered, I started a business, I had small part time jobs at church – in all of this, I knew I did not want to leave my kids with someone else while I went to work every day. Looking back, I would say that I was restless doing many things but not THE THING that God had called me to do – Teach Animal Science/ Biology.

God dropped an opportunity in my lap in Fall 2005. My children were 5, 4, and ½ years old. I got an email from one of the above mentioned friends – the school she worked at needed a Biology instructor for their night classes that would meet weekly for 5 weeks at a time. She wanted to know if I could give them my name. After consulting with my husband, I said 'yes'. Within hours, I had completed an application and scheduled and interview. I LOVED that job - the students, the adult interaction about something I cared about, teaching - it was a breath of fresh air into the deepest part of my soul - the part that had been cut off when I decided to stay home with my kids.  That job led to where I am now – working about 30 hours a week – teaching and organizing our labs. But I still struggle with the idea of not being there for my kids, as they won't come home immediately after school. I don't think my husband struggles through these ideas the same way I do.

In 4 days, I will start work for the school year. I will work more hours per week than I have since graduate school before my children were born. I have a babysitter for the time before school starts for the kids. I spent an entire day cooking LOTS of meals to put in our freezer in preparation for this time (maybe I'll feel like blogging about that later). I feel very confident that I am where I am supposed to be, but concerned about how I execute my vocational and family calling. I know I need to lean on Jesus – He has called me to these things and I can do them only through Him who strengthens me. But as I look back on my 11+ years of motherhood, I wish there had been someone – a Christian woman who would have helped me view my roles and call in God's kingdom in a different light. My model had been for a woman to sacrifice her career on the altar of her children. While I am not saying that I wish I had made a different choice or that my choice was incorrect, I am seeing now that my THINKING was incorrect. I needed to see that my calling as an intellectual woman in the field of science was just as much of a mission field and calling on my life as the family I am to care for and love.

Loyalty & Sympathy

I have done some soul searching over the past week or so about Loyalty. The events that have brought this up and where they have gone in my head seem completely unrelated. I consider myself a very loyal person and I value this quality as highly as any other. Last Saturday night, we watched the NASCAR race at Daytona. The current 'version' of drafting involves 2 car tandems – basically you pick a partner and off you go. If something happens to your partner, just kiss your chances goodbye. My favorite driver, Dale Earnhardt, Jr. got a gift in the last laps of the race in the form of a Caution Flag. But then his partner pitted and hung him out to dry – or should I say his partner's crew chief did so. I was so mad and fumed for a long time. It did not help that my husband decided to play devil's advocate and ask me WHY was loyalty so important in this race.

All of this emotion brought up more thoughts for me. I love where I work and what I do, but I also want to build a career. I am not sure when that type of opportunity will arise. I was made aware of another career opportunity that seemed perfect for me. Should I apply to this position which might advance my career but would not be a loyal move? Several people I talked to said "Yes! You should apply. Companies are not loyal to their employees, and you should look out for #1." There is a lot I could say about this comment, but I will sum it up that knowing the world works this way really bothers me. I believe it is contrary to God's perfect plan for His world. You don't have to read very far in Scripture to see that God exemplifies Loyalty! I think of the book of Hosea – God's people chase after other lovers and He pursues them. When they showed no loyalty, He showed what loyalty really means, what it looks like. Shouldn't I strive to emulate that kind of loyalty in my own life?

This leads to my next 'word' of the week – Sympathy. As if things could not get more complex, we have had a crazy couple of weeks. The "Old Hill Electric" has shown up in full force which translates into a very tired and frustrated husband. That means I am very isolated and lonely since my husband is really my only good friend. To top it off, I have had an allergic reaction to something which has resulted in hives, swelling, and inflamed lymph nodes. The "Old Hill Electric" takes precedence in this case and I head off to the doctor with 2 boys in tow. Why – you may ask? Because there is no one that I know who will help me out. Several Facebook friends tried but had conflicts with work, but others had less convincing reasons. Sure – they said they were sorry that I was feeling bad and that they could not help, but what good is that type of Sympathy? I would argue that it is useless! Pretty words don't make the hives or swelling recede, and they don't protect my boys who get exposed to lots of potential germs at the doctor's office. I want to post a screaming status on Facebook about how I am so glad that YOU are having a great day, going the beach, or whatever your perfect day is bringing you. The very title on Facebook as my 'friend' makes me want to clear off that list for people who are actually worthy of that title in my life.

It is clear to me that this situation speaks loudly to my particular 'Love Languages'. It is pretty clear that "Quality Time" and/or "Gifts" are a lot higher than "Words of Affirmation". But this just highlights the lonliness of my situation – no one has a clue that I need that. I am trying to make sense of this whole situation, and once again I come to the conclusion that perhaps I am supposed to just depend on God. He certainly got us through this afternoon and the boys acted beautifully. But I know that I am supposed to live in Community with other believers. But what are you supposed to do when no one wants to have that kind of relationship with you? What do you do when you reach out and all you get are the pretty words or excuses? It is hard to react with grace and understanding when you are needy. It is also hard when you see others living in Community – people who are your neighbors and church 'family' – while you are basically excluded.

I am pretty certain that I am not the only one who feels this way, but I am not sure who find themselves in the same situation. So what do you do? Please don't post that I need to 'try harder, be nicer, etc.' If this were an easy fix, surely I would have figured it out by now.

Musings Inspired by “The God Delusion” – part 3

This post will cover the remainder of the book – from chapter 5 through chapter 10.

I will be honest and say that this is where the book was difficult for me to read. (It is hard to read a book when you want to throw it or yell at it.) There are so many things that I could discuss and dissect in this section, and to do so would take a book of my own. I think I can summarize my thoughts on these chapters by saying that:

1. Dawkins has knowledge of the Bible, but no understanding of it. Sadly, his apparent knowledge of Scripture probably is beyond most Americans who profess to be Christians.
   
2. All of the things that Dawkins points to as "bad" about religion are actually sins that Christianity and the Bible would condemn.
   
3. While Dawkins says he is not a fundamentalist on evolution and natural selection, he is certainly a fundamentalist when it comes to naturalism. He simply cannot entertain the notion of something beyond the physical, so no matter what evidence would be presented to him, it would not be sufficient if it were supernatural in nature.
   
4. I agree with Dawkins on many points than I expected to (ie – condemning sin in the world or mental abuse of children), but we don't agree on what should be done about it or its ultimate cause.
   

While the hypothesis that religion and morality are by-products of some trait passed down via natural selection could be viewed as a possibility, it does not seem well-supported to me. This book at least had the educational purpose of introducing me to these ideas, and also the existence of evolutionary psychology.

So, I have completed the book and can say that I am glad that I read it. If you have a question about the book, please feel free to ask.

Musings Inspired by “The God Delusion” – part 2

This post will focus on Chapters 3 – Arguments for God's Existence and 4 – Why There Almost Certainly is No God.

Probability and statistics are a major theme of Dawkins discussion, especially in Chapter 4. He says in multiple places that according to the laws of probability that simple things are more probable to come into existence than complex things. He then argues that a God capable of designing and upholding the universe must be complex. I would not disagree with this assumption, as I don't think I would try to argue that God was simple. Because of this complexity, Dawkins declares the likelihood of this type of complex God is terribly unlikely. But as you read, you see that Dawkins mind is firmly in the natural world. He cannot fathom something that does not follow 'natural laws' of chemistry, biology and physics. If we asserted that the God of the Bible were within that realm, this argument might hold water. But all of the 'things' that Dawkins uses to measure the existence of God are those useful in the natural world only.

In some places, Dawkins seems to define what is true by popular opinion. He spends a good bit of time with statistics on the beliefs of scientists and 'less educated', and then uses the fact that the inverse relationship between education and religious belief as a 'proof' that God does not exist. This also leads him to continue to question statements and beliefs of other scientists. He did this with Gould in Chapter 2, saying that surely he really didn't mean what he wrote. He continues this line of thought by questioning whether certain scientists in history were actually Christian. He has the audacity to say that perhaps these men were 'closet atheists' and just didn't know that they could choose to not believe in God.

Another recurring theme for Dawkins is that a universe with a personal Creator would be a very different universe than one without one. He then says that "our sense of goodness would be the way it is with a God and without a God." These 2 statements seem contradictory to me. Why would our sense of goodness be the same in a completely different universe? And how can you compare these 2 types of universe when you only live in one of them? How do you KNOW which you find yourself in?
The biggest thing that keeps coming into my mind as I contemplate Dawkins arguments is his narrow view of the theoretical. Philosophers of science point out that there are an infinite number of theories that are possible to explain any possible natural phenomena.

I often show this photograph to my class and ask the question "What happened right before this picture was taken?" As you might imagine, there are lots of ideas and many of them seem possible and reasonable. The job of science is to try to eliminate which 'theories' could be correct and which are certainly not correct. And just because you eliminate all of the possibilities on your original list, that does not mean there is not another possible theory that you have not yet thought of and tested. Even then, you have not "proven" your theory – you have either supported the theory or not. It is clear that Dawkins believes there are only 2 options out there for the existence of everything – Darwinism by means of natural selection (he even stretches this to the realm of physics in one example) and a special creation by God. I would have expected Dawkins to be a little more versed in the philosophy of science, because he is totally ignoring other possibilities, not to mention all of the possibilities of the "how" within these 2 theories. Of course the beginning of everything or any natural phenomena (the cause of cancer, the transportation of steroids in the body, etc.) have an answer and it is possible the accurate and real answer is one that has not been thought of yet.

After finishing the last paragraph, I think of a statement I have read and heard from Christians that say that belief in God/ creationism/ etc. leads to intellectual laziness. I think this is a load of trash! A Biblical view of man's purpose in the world is that of steward of creation. This view is easy to fit in a career in the sciences, which is the study of the natural world/ God's creation. How in the world is it consistent with being a good and faithful steward to not seek to learn anything and everything you can about your subject?? Any Christian who would hold this view would either not take God's call on their vocation seriously or would not understand the Bible's teaching on the subject on what we are to be about until His return. This does seem in line with a "God of the Gaps" idea, which was discussed in this section of the book. Here I find another instance where I agree with Dawkins. I agree with both Dawkins and Dietrich Bonhoffer on this point. Holding to such a view might lead to scientific laziness, because if the only place we see God in the natural world is in those things we don't understand, God will disappear when we explain everything.

Taking this idea a bit further, I want to finish this post by sharing a paragraph from Dawkins book that I thought was very interesting. "I am continually astonished by those theists who, far from having their consciousness raised in the way that I propose, seem to rejoice in natural selection as "God's way of achieving his creation". They note that evolution by natural selection would be a very easy and neat way to achieve a world full of life. God wouldn't need to do anything at all! Peter Atkins…takes this line of thoughts to a sensibly godless conclusion when he postulates a hypothetically lazy God who tries to get away with as little as possible in order to make a universe containing life. Atkins's lazy God is even lazier than the deist God of the 18^th century Enlightenment: deus otiosus – literally God at leisure, unoccupied, unemployed, superfluous, useless. Step by step, Atkins success in reducing the amount of work the lazy God has to do until he finally ends up doing mothering at all: high might as well not bother to exist." (pg. 118) Morris and Petcher's book, Science and Grace, does a wonderful job of responding Biblically to the idea of a 'lazy' God by looking at God's relationship to His physical creation. I would highly recommend the book to anyone!

Musings Inspired by Dawkins' "The God Delusion" - Part 1

I started reading Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion today.  It has been on my 'to-read' list for a couple of years now.  I have now completed 3 chapters and have decided that I will blog on my thoughts, especially those that are interesting to me.  This post will focus on my thoughts concerning the first 2 chapters of the book.

Chapter 2 of the book is entitled "The God Hypothesis" and so far Dawkins has talked about polytheism, monotheism, and agnosticism.  He has clearly said that he, as an atheist, ascribes to the only reality is that which is physical.  He states clearly that there is no super-natural being (God) or souls.  He then spends time discussing 'probability' of the existence of a 'God' and lamenting over the fact that scientists are not considered a proper authority for disproving the existence of such a 'God'.  This chapter has much information in it, such as definitions and discussion of certain views.  However, I had to go back through after reading it the first time and try to figure out the 'point' or 'direction' of the chapter.  Even then, I did not find how the content of the chapter really went along with the title of the chapter.

I see a glaring problem with Dawkins main line of thought.  A current definiton of science is simply the study of "natural causes for natural phenomena".  The existence of 'God', who by Dawkins own definition, is a super-natural being would fall completely outside the realm of science.  Science is not equipped to answer such questions, yet Dawkins is spending a lot of time 'mushing' the 2 together.  In addition, Dawkins works to use the Scientific Method as the means by which to study/ investigate and ultimately disprove/ show a miniscule probability for the existence of 'God'.

In the Foreward of the book, Dawkins has already expressed his desire that all readers of his book would convert to atheism after its completion.  From other readings and interviews with Dawkins, it is clear that he believes that the only way to know anything is through science (which is the way we have chosen to learn about the physical world, which is Dawkins view, is all that exists).  So it should not be surprising that this is the vein in which he approaches this subject.  However, it seems that the basis of this argument is NOT sound, therefore the stability of the finished argument is in question.

I have found an area that I tend to agree with Dawkins on (I'm not surprised that there are some, although we part ways rather quickly).  He spends some time discussing NOMA - Non-Overlapping Magisteria.  He does not agree with Stephen Jay Gould's assertion that scientists cannot "affirm or deny" the existence or nature of God.  He spends a few pages talking about how religion and science DO overlap, and why scientists should be able to investigate the existence of God by the Scientific Method in theory - he does admit it would be difficult to do this in practice.  Dawkins might agree with the authors Morris and Petcher of Science and Grace who describe what they call a "peace treaty" between science and faith, that seems nearly identical to NOMA.   This is where the disagreements would begin - I would agree with Morris and Petcher that holding to NOMA may lead to a view inconsistent with Scripture (ie - a 'clock-maker God' similar to one held by a deist).  Dawkins can't decide if Gould really thinks NOMA is the appropriate way to think or if he was just being nice to those he did not agree with.  He wastes no time putting forth the reasons why he believes this is a silly argument, one of which is that the only reason NOMA exists is because there is no evidence to support religious belief. 

Turning to my own thoughts stemming from this reading, I will say that I struggle with my thoughts on the current methodological naturalism.  I have had discussions with several biologists that believe it is absolutely necessary for good science.  But I agree with Blaise Pascal's assertion that reason's last step is the acknowledgement that there are an infinite number of possibilities beyond it.  Regardless, I believe that there must be consistency in how we treat the super-natural within science.  While most scientists will say that science is "natural causes for natural phenomena", they operate in a way that seems to agree more with Richard Dawkins (who clearly is not holding to this idea).  This is one of those areas that I need more time to read and think about my exact view on this issue.

Going forward, I'll be interested to see what Dawkins will accept as 'evidence' as the book progresses.  He does not believe in the existence of anything but the natural world, and has already discounted certain historical writings with no or few reasons why.  The next 2 chapters are supposed to give the reasons for belief and those to not believe (all in the name of disproving the existence of 'God').  As I continue to read, I will post more.  Stay tuned if you are interested.....

Know Your Enemy

I often wish that I did not love my job so much. It is summer and, for the life of me, I CANNOT turn my brain off to stop thinking about my Biology courses in the fall. I am anxious to implement changes to improve student learning, and also, student satisfaction with the course. When looking at the past couple of semesters and remembering the sometimes hateful comments from students on End of Course evaluations, it is very easy to think of the students as the enemy. Since I struggle with being a people-pleaser, this can turn from being helpful into a sinful obsession. But my students are not the enemy – not even close. So I need to refocus my thoughts on the real enemy and what I can do to make Biology for Non-Majors and better experience for all involved (this includes myself).

• Enemy #1: Fear of a new way of learning from students. Even though I utilize Team-Based Learning as my pedagogical model, this does not eliminate using some amount of lecture in the course. I have experimented with different approaches different semesters, and am planning to intentional and clearly defined lecture. I don't think I will end up talking anymore in class, but I will now show the *magical* powerpoints on important and challenging concepts, rather than just answering questions and (gasp) writing on the board. I have also gotten rid of some case studies and changed the in-class activities to hands-on drawing, building of models and more. In all honesty, this approach will have more of a 'building' component of student knowledge as we work through each unit. Hopefully, Enemy #1 will be lessened as students see a mixture of class activities which address multiple learning styles within the class.
  
• Enemy #2: Apathy on the part of students. To combat these attitudes, I will be showing a Discovery Channel video about a current event concept related to the unit we are studying. This will take up about 10 minutes of class time, but if it catches the interest of just 1 student, it will be worth it. I am also changing the major individual assignment from a scary research paper to posting in our forums about a current event article that I have chosen. I hope that by making the connections to the real world in more than one venue, these non-majors will see the usefulness of studying biology to their own lives.
  
• Enemy #3: Fear of saying or doing the wrong thing with my students. This enemy rears its ugly head in many scenarios. The area that is most on my mind is my never-ending struggle/ various ideas on how to best teach and approach the questions of origins and evolution with my students. It is very important to me (and to SWU) that we teach students to think from a Biblical worldview. My latest idea consisted of giving teams a table with information about various views and then asking them to decide which views may be held by someone with a Christian worldview. But now I don't know if I like this idea. It seems harmless and easy enough to do this, but I don't know if I can complete this activity in a way that would work in a single class period (which is all the time I can allot for the activity). I have been reading and thinking and praying and discussing with others these ideas in a very intentional way for the past 6 years, and I don't think I could complete this activity in a satisfactory manner. I approach this topic by emphasizing the need for humility and the effect of one's worldview. I also confess my own journey to best understand all of the scientific and theological issues connected to the discussion. No – I don't believe that one's views on this topic define whether you are a Christian or not, but I do think that a high regard for Scripture, its inerrancy and authority exclude some views of origins of life and origins of man (this could be the topic of another blog, but not now). The only weapon again Enemy #3 is continuing and thoughtful preparation for each class. Unfortunately, my perfectionistic tendencies leave me often feeling like I have not done a great job and have done the wrong thing. However, I keep reading and thinking and working through these questions to be able to do better the next time. Another "weapon" in this area is prayer – that God would give me the words and thoughts for the particular students sitting in that classroom. I need to remember that all students are different and need to hear different things from me to different topics. I will never have the *PERFECT* thing to say to explain any topic.
  
• Enemy #4: Forgetting that the students (and their evaluations) are not the enemy. Part of the reason I love teaching is getting to know and interact with my students. Viewing them as the enemy takes away this joyful part of the job. I do my best work as a teacher when I am invested in the students. I must always remember that even though they are sinners just like me, they are made in the image of God. He loves them and me – He brought them to my class for a reason – He expects me to pray for, care for, and disciple them to the best of my ability in the area of biology and faith.
  

I often tell my students that all of life is sacred – learning biology (the study of God's living creation) – is not a secular pursuit. Remembering my ultimate goal – to glorify God as I teach my younger brothers and sisters in Christ about His Creation – makes my job exciting and meaningful to me. Getting these ideas down on "paper" will hopefully allow my mind to rest and recharge for the next few weeks – August will be here before you know it!

Amelia Island Vacation 2011

The past week has been spent in one of my favorite places in the whole world with my favorite people in the whole world.

For the past 7 days, we have been off the mainland of the United States on Amelia Island. Eric & I visited 12 years ago for our 2^nd wedding anniversary and for the past 4 years, we have taken our children there for our annual family vacation. We know the locations of all the good restaurants, the places we like to shop, and where to get ice cream for dessert every night.

Amelia Island is not commercialized and the sea life is evident. We found 4 sea turtle nests in the area of the beach where we were staying.   Sadly, we even saw a dead sea turtle on the beach, along with 41 jelly fish (these were spread over a 1.5 mile area of the beach).

One of my very favorite things to do is read and sit on the beach.  So doing them at the same time is nearly heaven on earth.  Here are the 7 books that I finished reading while at the beach - I admit, I started Austen's Persuasion the day before we left and I did start another book that I got about halfway finished before we got home (which is not pictured because I have not finished it).  Still, 7.5 books in 8 days is pretty good and a new record for me.

We were lucky to see a Nuclear Submarine heading into port/ base at Kingsland, Georgia. You can't see all of the other boats and helicopter escorting it up the St. Marys River. It was an awesome site that Eric and I enjoyed. We tried to explain to the kids how special and rare it was to see this, but I don't think they believed us.

Here are the "Annual" photo ops on Amelia Island – one at the big anchor by one of our favorite restaurants, another with Peg Leg downtown (across the street from the big anchor), and the last showing off our skills as hockey, I mean, mini golf players.

This was our view this morning as we walked to the ocean. I always love watching the pelicans dive – you can see two in this picture. Yes, it is the black blobs right above the water.

And here are my beach bum children. They humor me by telling the beach, the island, Florida, and Georgia goodbye as we drive home. They wish (just like we do) that we could just buy a beach house on Amelia Island and maybe even live there. So here are to this year's lovely memories and yes, we are already looking forward to next year when we will leave the mainland for another week and enjoy the island.