By JEFF EDELSTEIN
jedelstein@trentonian.com
I’m just naive enough to believe. Not in matters of faith, but in matters of the here and now.
And that’s why I’m just naive enough to believe the Pope still matters in this fractured age, just naive to believe one man can move a billion (or more) to be better people, just naive enough to believe Pope Francis matters.
Of course — has to be said — Jews and Catholics don’t have the best historical record, but I’m not concerned about the past. The past doesn’t get the benefit of being seen through my naive glasses. But the here and now? I’m down, baby. And I think given the right set of circumstances — and the right Pope — a better world is within reach.
The Pope, in short, can matter. A lot. After all, there are 1.2 billion Catholics in the world. We’re talking nearly 20 percent of all humanity. And the Pope is in charge. To use the parlance of our times, he’s da man. As the Pope goes, so goes the religion.
And Pope Francis seems to be going the right way.
“How I would like a church,” he said last week, “that is poor and is for the poor.”
He’s already walking the walk — literally — as he’s eschewed his predecessor’s red shoes for some old black shoes, doesn’t seem interested in wearing anything but a simple crucifix, and his headgear is of the pared-down aesthetic.
He’s the Pope, unplugged.
And so this where the Pope matters. He matters because he has the earthly power to try and make the world a better place. When you’ve got 1.2 billion people behind you, a lot of good can come of that.
And yes, the Catholic Church has many scars and open wounds right now, and I’m not attempting to sweep any of that under the rug.
All I’m saying is at the right place and right time, the Pope can wield an impressive amount of power. And a truly humble Pope, a Pope who is one of the people, a Pope who genuinely seems concerned with the state of day-to-day affairs of the common man? Well, that’s a power I can get behind.
At least I’m naive enough to believe so.
— Read Jeff Edelstein every Sunday, Monday, Wednesday and Friday. He can be reached at jedelstein@trentonian.com, facebook.com/jeffreyedelstein and twitter.com/jeffedelstein.

In this weekly feature, found first in the print edition of The Trentonian every Wednesday, our two heavyweight columnists, L.A. Parker and Jeff Edelstein will square off against one another, with dueling columns on the same topic.

In the lead-up to each Split Decision, our writers agree on a topic then head off to their respective corners to pen their pieces. Then, each Wednesday, you'll get two unique takes on the same subject.

In this round of Split Decision, L.A. and Jeff stake out their positions on the situation that's arisen around Gov. Chris Christie's wife's charity for victims of Hurricane Sandy.

Check out L.A.'s piece here and take a look at Jeff's over here, and tomorrow we'll be launching a poll to see who you thought had the right idea on the subject.

By JEFF EDELSTEIN
jedelstein@trentonian.com
Rome wasn’t built in a day, and the Jersey Shore isn’t being rebuilt in a single season.
It’s going to take years for the Superstorm Sandy-ravaged land to once again resemble what it once was, years for the victims of Sandy to recapture their lives on the once-idyllic coastline.
This is not a slam-bang project.
Money and support for the rebuilding project is needed now, tomorrow and well into the future.
And that’s why I think anyone who has issue with Mary Pat Christie’s Hurricane Sandy New Jersey Relief Fund should just take a step back.
Read more »

Welcome to Split Decision!



In this weekly feature, found first in the print edition of The Trentonian every Wednesday, our two heavyweight columnists, L.A. Parker and Jeff Edelstein will square off against one another, with dueling columns on the same topic.

In the lead-up to each Split Decision, our writers agree on a topic then head off to their respective corners to pen their pieces. Then, each Wednesday, you'll get two unique takes on the same subject.

In this round of Split Decision, L.A. and Jeff stake out their positions on when and how to talk to kids about sex.
Check out Jeff's piece here and L.A.'s column here.

By JEFF EDELSTEIN

A video cassette recorder and a video cassette.
That’s how my dad explained sex to me.
And no, he didn’t show me grainy recording of some 1950s sex-ed film.
Nor did he pop in a bootlegged copy of “Debbie Does Dallas.” What he did, precisely, was demonstrate how humans have sex by using the VCR as the feminine and the video cassette as the masculine.
Go ahead. Take a moment. I understand.
I got this talk probably around 10 or 12 or somewhere in there, and I can assure you, despite my father’s best intentions, the VCR lesson wasn’t exactly a rousing success when it came to explaining the birds and the bees to me.
By the time I got to 7th grade, the school system began teaching me about sex. Now, I don’t mean to disparage gym teachers, as I’ve found virtually all of them in my schooling life to be most pleasant human beings, but really: They should not have been teaching me about sex.
It’s a miracle I’m not still a virgin.
Gym teachers still teach sex-ed, right? Who made this original decision?
I’ll tell you who it wasn’t: Someone with any sense. Really, teaching about sex is pretty important, and we’re leaving it to people who … well, who are gym teachers. Again, nothing against gym teachers, I swear, but it just seems odd.
You ask me? There should be legit professionals in the classrooms with our kids, and it should start at an early age. How early? Well, I’ll leave that to the sex ed professionals. The whole mystery of sex — which, let’s not forget, is right up there with “eat food” and “find shelter” as far as biological imperatives go — should not be so mysterious. In fact, the earlier and less mysterious we make sex to our kids, the less chance they’ll end up doing something stupid, like get pregnant or get someone else pregnant.
(So to be clear: Abstinence education? BWAHAHAHAHAHA!)
I have a boy and a girl. He’s 3, she’s 2. So I don’t yet speak from experience. But when the time comes, I want them to have a solid knowledge base when it comes to sex so they don’t go off into the wild, all wily-nily with their wilys and their nillys all geared up for something they’re just plain stupid about.
— Jeff Edelstein can be reached at facebook.com/jeffreyedelstein and twitter.com/jeffedelstein.

Welcome to Split Decision!



In this weekly feature, found first in the print edition of The Trentonian every Wednesday, our two heavyweight columnists, L.A. Parker and Jeff Edelstein will square off against one another, with dueling columns on the same topic.

In the lead-up to each Split Decision, our writers agree on a topic then head off to their respective corners to pen their pieces. Then, each Wednesday, you'll get two unique takes on the same subject.

In this second round of Split Decision, L.A. and Jeff take opposing positions on the question of whether immigrants to the United States should be made to learn and speak English. Check out L.A.'s take on the subject here, and Jeff's here, and decide which column you agree with more.

Listen: Unless you’re name is John Wandering Wolf Who Fishes in Clear Stream or something, you’ve got a pretty flimsy leg to stand on when it comes to all manner of discussion when it comes to immigration.

I mean really: How did you get here? Someone in your family immigrated here. (Big and obvious exception: Unless your relatives came over by force in the slave trade. Subject for another day.)

But if someone in your family came to America by choice, there’s a pretty good chance that person didn’t speak English when they arrived on our shores.

While I don’t know for sure, I’m pretty positive three of my four grandparents didn’t speak the language when they arrived, and I’m almost certain none of their parents — my great-grandparents — spokeuh da English when they came to America.

But they learned. You kind of have to if you want to “make it” in America.

And isn’t that why anyone comes to this country? To make it?

From the 1600’s to Ellis Island to today, America offers opportunity out the wazoo. So much opportunity, people were — are — risking death to come here.

(Slightly off-topic: I don’t understand people who hate the idea of immigrants sneaking into America. I mean, these are people willing to belly crawl through a desert for days on end to get here and work and make a better life for themselves. Isn’t that what we want in America? Hard working people who want to make a better life?)

To make “speaking English” a mandatory hurdle prior to immigrating to America — or for just living in America — just doesn’t make sense. Once here, believe me, immigrants want to learn how to speak the language. And the best way to learn any language is to simply be immersed in it.

Besides, this argument may be past-due anyway. Google Translate, anyone?
No such thing as not being able to speak the language as long as you’ve got a wifi connection.

Read Jeff Edelstein every Sunday, Monday, Wednesday and Friday. He can be reached at jedelstein@trentonian.com, facebook.com/jeffreyedelstein and twitter.com/jeffedelstein.

The winner of our first ever Split Decision match-up, as decided by our readers, is Jeff Edelstein!

Our new Split Decision feature pits Jeff against L.A. Parker in a columnist duel every Wednesday.
This week, both writers penned columns about people using their cell phones in public, and a vote was held, asking readers which they preferred.
Stay tuned for more from Split Decision, including more columns, more polls and more ways for you to get involved.

Welcome to Split Decision!

In this weekly feature, found first in the print edition of The Trentonian every Wednesday, our two heavyweight columnists, L.A. Parker and Jeff Edelstein will square off against one another, with dueling columns on the same topic.

In the lead-up to each Tuesday, our writer agree on a topic then head off to their respective corners to pen their pieces. Then, each Wednesday, you'll get two unique takes on the same subject.

In our first take on this new feature, the guys settle on the topic of cell phone use in public.

In L.A.'s piece, he recounts an episode of public phone sex he overheard in a grocery store, while Jeff explains why no one should be allowed to use their phones in public...except him.

By JEFF EDELSTEIN

I’m not entirely sure what I used to do when I waited in a line.

There I’d be, at Target, buying the essentials — underwear, milk, baseball cards — and I’d just ... wait in line.

When it was time to move up in line, I’d take a step forward. I was probably drooling while this was going on.

But today? I don’t mind lines. I’ll sometimes find the longest line out there, at Target, or Wal-Mart, or anywhere. Give me your worst, Motor Vehicle Commission — I can handle it.

Why don’t I care about lines? Because while I may not be happy to see you, yes, as a matter of fact, that is the entire output of human knowledge in my pocket.

Read more »