Category: Current Events

“Pro-Life” is just another kind of Abortion

AntiAbortionMemeThis poster featuring Mr. Kouki’s statement is extremely misleading: it assumes that the fetus is a being for whom all choices can be made independently of the mother, and ignores the fact that it is actually totally dependent upon its mother while still in the womb.  It is another round in the effort to create a law that prohibits certain activities (abortion, in this case) as a way of settling a moral debate, even though history proves that such prohibitions are almost always ineffective, and often cause far more harm than good.

While I agree that abortion is not a step to be taken lightly (and hopefully, only extremely rarely); viewpoints such as that expressed in this poster are also a form of abortion, since they separate the child from its mother in another way – by declaring that the mother must be responsible for their child, but only as long as their decisions with regard to the child conform to the dictates of others.  Think about it: this poster declares that it is absolutely acceptable to abort the mother’s life in favor of the child’s.  Or, to put it another way, instead of the mother being allowed to decide whether to remove a fetus from within her body; the state feels it is justifiable to remove that same fetus from the control of the mother – while it is still in her body.  (I’d also note that this notion, which is part of the the Tea Party’s stance on abortion is completely at odds with one of its most basic principles, which is that the government already intrudes too deeply into the lives of American citizens.)

Continue reading ““Pro-Life” is just another kind of Abortion”

Safe Sex?

condom-59639_640Although I have disagreed with him in the past on many topics (such as abortion), I like much of what blogger Matt Walsh has to say in his recent post entitled “I will not teach my kids about safe sex because there is no such thing.”

Walsh’s thesis is – as he puts it – that in teaching kids about safe sex, “…we have taken the honesty, love, passion, beauty, and creative power out of the act, and replaced it with something sterile, guarded, frivolous, and disinterested.”

For Walsh, “safe sex” teaches kids that they must protect themselves as much as possible from the potential harm and dangers that can arise as a result of sexual contact.  He feels this misses the entire point of sex, and turns it from a beautiful expression of vulnerability and mutuality into a sterile act that is little more than shared masturbation, as well as providing a false guarantee that it is possible to have sex safely. Continue reading “Safe Sex?”

The Besiegement Narrative

Original Article: Even After Hobby Lobby, the Religious Right is Still Terrified

The “besiegement narrative” that the Right Rev. V. Gene Robinson talks about in his recent article found on The Daily Beast is indeed a theme I frequently saw and heard during my sojourn through many of this country’s more [religiously] conservative Christian denominations.

Such an “us vs. them” theology has a long history in Christian thought, going back to at least the time of the persecutions and martyrdoms of the early church, and even further back into ancient Judaism.  And, in fact, in examining other faiths, you quickly find that it is a universal theme.  This is because such a narrative is  a good way to define the boundary between who is and who is not one of “us” (whoever “us” is).  It is a theme that can bind people together; generate and focus emotional and physical energy upon a (real, potential or imagined) threat; and define what it means to be “us” by making it crystal clear who and what we are not.

This is not necessarily a bad thing.  Being able to draw a line that separates “us” from “not us” seems to be necessary – because if a group cannot define that boundary, it has a very difficult time explaining who they are, what they stand for, why they should continue to exist, and why you might want to be one of “us.”

Continue reading “The Besiegement Narrative”

Hobby Lobby – a Different Point of View

The Hobby Lobby decision implies that it is OK to treat others differently, and unfairly, merely because our religious beliefs dictate that we should do so. This is the sort of logic used by the religious extremists found in any faith: they believe their faith gives them the right to treat others in a way that is not respectful of them or their humanity.

Hobby Lobby315*304We’ve all heard (and read) lots of angry denouncements of the Supreme Court’s recent “Hobby Lobby” decision. I agree with many of them, especially George Takei’s eloquent statement; but, I’d rather not delve into that right now.  Instead, let’s begin by going in a different direction and ask “What is the decision, really?”

To be specific, the Supreme Court deems that “closely held corporations [shall not be forced to] provide health-insurance coverage for methods of contraception that violate the sincerely held religious beliefs of the companies’ owners. … regulations that impose this obligation violate RFRA, which prohibits the Federal Government from taking any action that substantially burdens the exercise of religion unless that action constitutes the least restrictive means of serving a compelling government interest.”

The court’s decision is also very carefully written to limit its scope and effect, even though efforts are already underway to extend the impact of this decision into new territory.   The justices explicitly state that they did not deem it necessary to address or consider the First Amendment (“Freedom of Religion”) claims of the plaintiffs, since the “Religious Freedom Restoration Act” (RFRA) is applicable to this case, and in the court’s opinion, the defense’s case clearly fails the tests imposed by the RFRA, as passed by Congress under President Clinton in 1993.

The justices go on to state: We do not hold … that for-profit corporations and other commercial enterprises can “opt out of any law (saving only tax laws) they judge incompatible with their sincerely held religious beliefs.” … Nor do we hold … that such corporations have free rein to take steps that impose “disadvantages . . . on others” or that require “the general public [to] pick up the tab.” … And we certainly do not hold or suggest that “RFRA demands accommodation of a for-profit corporation’s religious beliefs no matter the impact that accommodation may have on . . . thousands of women employed by Hobby Lobby.” … The effect of the HHS-created accommodation on the women employed by Hobby Lobby and the other companies involved in these cases would be precisely zero. Under that accommodation, these women would still be entitled to all FDA-approved contraceptives without cost sharing.

So, at first blush this all seems fairly reasonable, and it was such reasoning that helped lead to the end of the so called “Blue Laws” in many states that required businesses to be closed on Sundays. At that time – a generation or two ago – it was determined that such laws proved an unfair burden for – for instance– Jewish small business owners, who were already closing their shops on Saturdays due to their sincerely held religious beliefs.

Continue reading “Hobby Lobby – a Different Point of View”

Of Walls and of Mustafa Aslan

I never met Mustafa Aslan, but I know the people of Israel and Palestine – Christians, Jews, Muslims and Druze alike. Good people. People filled with compassion and faith. People with so much to offer for the benefit of their neighbors and the world as a whole. People who want peace, and through peace, a better life for them, their children, and their people.

10365995_10152221308927671_1126578232388527161_n
Mustafa Aslan

Mustafa Aslan, age 24, was a champion boxer is Palestine, and coached many children and teens there who were  interested in boxing.

He was shot dead last week in an Israeli Defense Force (IDF) raid, part of Israel’s massive effort to find the three Israeli teens who disappeared on June 12th while traveling within the Gush Etzion block of settlements near Jerusalem in the West Bank.

Given that there is no solid evidence as to the fate or location of these teens at the moment (nor even who kidnapped them) the IDF’s operations are not about finding the three teenagers, at least not any more:  It has become a vendetta: a campaign of revenge and collective punishment, terrorizing a largely defenseless and submissive population.

So far, from what I can tell (as this incident, particularly with regard to the IDF’s actions, is hardly mentioned in the US Media), at least 5 Palestinians have been killed by IDF forces in this “search.”

Many of my Palestinian friends, the West Bank’s Palestinian political leadership, the United Nations, US Leadership, and many in Jews as well, are universal in unequivocally condemning the disappearances.  All of them also call for restraint on the part of Israeli military and police forces in their use of force in their search.

It almost goes without saying that the IDF’s brutal actions, which go far beyond reasonable given the circumstances and lack of any actionable information as to the status or fate of the missing teens, departs from wisdom, let alone international law.  The logic used to justify the actions of the Israeli military, and the shedding of innocent blood, only makes sense if one views all Palestinians as vermin who have no right to exist.

Continue reading “Of Walls and of Mustafa Aslan”

All Too Silent a Witness

The irony of the watching the famous slow motion chase of OJ Simpson as I stood next to Ben Kinchlow alone in that room struck me as I stood there, and is one I still think of from time to time even now, 20 years later: There I was, a theologically progressive Christian working for a conservative Christian organization, standing next to a man who had once been a black nationalist, heavily influenced by Malcom X; then ordained as a minister in the African Methodist Episcopal church and who was founder of an organization dedicated to helping underprivileged African American kids and a man who for many years had been a prominent member of CBN’s leadership.

OJ and the Slow Chase

NB: A recent CNN opinion piece by Dorothy A. Brown entitled “Why Holder Remark Made White People Mad” has a lot to say that is right in line with what I say here.

You know, 20 years is a long time, and yet not so long…

Late in the evening of Friday June 17, 1994, I was in the lobby of The Founder’s Inn in Virginia Beach, VA watching the news on a television there while waiting for my (first) wife to finish up her work for the evening at the hotel’s bookstore and gift shop.

For those of you who aren’t familiar with the conservative Christian universe, The Founder’s Inn is on the campus of the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), the headquarters for Pat Robertson’s television ministry. I had only recently been hired there, to manage a software development department in their IT Division.

As I stood there, up on the screen came a “news alert” followed by a live telecast via helicopter of the famous “slow motion chase” by police down Interstate 405 in Los Angeles of a white Ford Bronco carrying O. J. Simpson, who was sitting in the back seat of the vehicle, pointing a gun at his own head.   At the time, he was the prime suspect in the murders of his former wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman.

Standing next to me watching that broadcast was a gentleman I barely knew, but whom I heard a great deal about and admired: Ben Kinchlow, a prominent Black evangelist and activist, and (at the time) co-host of Pat Robertson’s daily “700 Club” broadcast.

We stood side by side, wordlessly watching the spectacle unfolding before us for around 20 minutes before we both went our separate ways.

Continue reading “All Too Silent a Witness”

Minimum?

Image

 

This is a troubling Tea Party meme, one that claims you’re lucky to get the “minimum” you already have because you ARE “minimum” – in terms of skills, education, motivation and contribution to the workplace.  So (in effect) – once you are defined as “minimum” – shut up and don’t complain, and be happy with what little you’re already getting!

But in whose estimation is someone being labelled here as “minimum”?  Answer: those who are making the rules – i.e., not those who are being paid a minimum wage!  Is that valid?

Continue reading “Minimum?”

Be Happy

Many have already noted the irony of hardliners in the Islamic Republic of Iran arresting the youth who appear in this tribute to Pharrell William’s video “Happy.”  It seems that happiness is not allowed in Iran, particularly for youth.

Maybe so, but what I also find ironic is the many in the West who claim to be Christian and who condemn Islam – as a whole – for being a cruel and violent religion.  From time to time, we all see videos or screeds (in various internet forums or email) warning us of the evils of Islam.  The thrust of these is that Islam, and usually every other religion that is not Christianity for that matter, are branded as evil.  The authors of such missives usually emphasize that Islam is a threat to Christianity and/or to the United States, and that we must respond in kind.  Usually, the rantings of one or more extremist Muslim clerics or out of context quotes from the Koran or various Muslim prophets are supplied as evidence that Islam is bent upon destroying anything that stands in the way of Islam’s domination of the world.

I have several responses to such drivel…

Continue reading “Be Happy”

The Facts of Gun Ownership

This recent Facebook Meme makes it clear that unrestricted gun ownership has severe consequences. Let’s take a look at each of the countries mentioned in that poster, and compare their gun laws to what we have here in the US. What can we learn from such a comparison?

72316_10151146554085872_516093712_nThe poster shown here must be a bit old (there is no country named “West Germany” any more), but the relative ratios of handgun deaths in the US to levels in these other countries has not improved with time.

In reviewing the gun laws of each of  the countries in this list, wikipedia provides the following information…

Continue reading “The Facts of Gun Ownership”

Waterboarding, Baptism and the Dilemma of Women in Politics

1398707253422.cachedSarah Palin’s statement while speaking at the NRA Convention this week “…if I were in charge, they would know that waterboarding is how we baptize terrorists“ (as quoted in this article from the Daily Beast) once again shows that she is not a person given to connecting brain to mouth.

Yet, I also wonder, given how she phrased it – and her followup comments: is the underlying motivation for these thoughtless and harsh words because she does not want to be perceived as “soft,” per a common stereotype for women?

This is a charge often leveled against women in political office: Are they tough enough?  Are they capable of actually making hard decisions?   Are they the person you’d want to have in the Oval office when a crisis is at its’ peak?  We’ve seen such language and accusations used against not only Palin, but also Hilary Clinton, Wendy Davis, and even (for those of us who remember the early 1970’s) Shirley Chisolm.

Continue reading “Waterboarding, Baptism and the Dilemma of Women in Politics”

It’s not about Wingnuts and the “N” word

Racism is far from merely being about wingnuts using offensive language or people oblivious to the issue admitting they once spoke in that way. Racism has changed in some ways, but the basic mechanisms and patterns of it have not. What has changed is that people have gotten better at hiding their racist attitudes from others and even from themselves. The way we express our racism may have changed, but the basic issue still exists, and is a pervasive cancer in our politics and society. The real (and far more dangerous and despicable) racists are those who seek to exclude specific groups from participation in the political process when those groups are seen as not supporting the political party that is already in power. The biggest obstacle to change is that racists assume they are faultless.

Let’s begin by saying that the “N” word is an offensive, ugly word, and one I never willingly use. Racism is a topic that I feel deeply about, and am absolutely committed to confronting whenever (and wherever) it rears its ugly head.

So – when Nevada Rancher Cliven Bundy makes racist comments, when celebrity chef Paula Deen admits to using that ugly word, or when LA Clippers owner Donald Sterling is accused of making racist remarks – yes, I’m angered; and I will speak up.

But, I’ve done (and said) racist things, too.

In my early 20’s, I worked in a retail store.  One day, when I was the only sales clerk on duty, an elderly black man came in to ask for help with a particular item. Right then I was waiting on another customer, a woman, and so ignored him for the moment – in fact, I hardly noticed him. He waited patiently at the counter, since he saw that I was almost done with her.

In the meantime, another person came in – a white male – who walked around the first man and came over to where I was, at the other end of the sales counter.  When the woman left, this second man immediately began talking and I allowed my attention to focus on him, rather than turning to the man who had been waiting.

The first man immediately spoke up, saying (and I quote, as it is burned into my memory!), “Hey, I’m a customer too!  Or, is it that you don’t like to wait on n—-rs?”

I was mortified, as you might imagine, and immediately turned to help him.

Was I racist, or acting in a racist way?  Well, I didn’t think so. I had long prided myself in being “open minded” and respectful of others, no matter who (or what) they were. But I was being racist because the one who determines whether we are racist (or not) is not us, but those who are impacted by our attitudes and actions. The elderly gentleman was right: I was acting in a racist way, even if unintentionally.

Racism is far from merely being about wingnuts using offensive language or people oblivious to the issue admitting they once spoke in that way. Racism, as the columnist LZ Granderson points out, has changed. Or, to put it another way, the basic mechanisms and patterns of racism have not changed. What has changed is that people have gotten better at hiding their racist attitudes from others and even from themselves. The way we express our racism has changed, but the basic issue still exists, and is a pervasive cancer in our politics and society.

Continue reading “It’s not about Wingnuts and the “N” word”

Aborted Babies Being Incinerated for Electricity?

Note (6/23/14): As promised, I have kept tabs on this issue.  The blog posting that appeared to be the source of much of the furor has been deleted, but KOIN (a television station in Portland) did air a news article citing the allegations, which were originally made in the magazine “BC Catholic.”  

Snopes.com has posted an article summarizing their own investigation into the issue.  In summary, officials reacted quickly to the allegations: the incinerator facility in Oregon will not accept further shipments of medical waste until they are assured that aborted fetuses were not part of the waste stream, as is being alleged (but which has not been proven to be the case).

 

At the moment, there is an article out on the internet that is going viral, entitled “Aborted babies are being incinerated to provide electricity in the United States“.

If true, this would be quite a problem, as I believe that the irreverent disposal of human remains (as is claimed here) is illegal in most of the US.

Further, I cannot find any facts to back up the assertion that this is (or was) being done. The story seems to originate with the above-mentioned blog posting.  There are a lot of references that it and other sources cite; however, when you try to trace the links – all of them lead back to the blog I’ve linked-to above.  I also noted that all of the online articles misspell “British Columbia” the Canadian province as “British Colombia” – Colombia is in South America.  So, they are all almost certainly relying on a single source, and doing “copy and paste republishing” without verifying the facts – very poor journalism, let alone ethics!

Another thing that  troubles me about this whole issue is the leaps in terminology that are being made – starting with “medical waste” then leaping to “fetal remains” and finally “aborted babies” – i.e., the words have become more incendiary; but I can find no facts to justify the changes in language.

Finally, the British Columbia Ministry of Health (which is the correct name, not “British Colombia Health Ministry”) has not responded to this claim at all (as of this posting), nor has any other government body within Canada, nor (as far as I can tell) any government body or hospital in the US.

So, whether this claim is true or not, there is nothing to back it up as of yet, and the many pro-life sites that are trumpeting this as a huge crime are employing language that is becoming more and more heated – even though there is nothing to substantiate anything that they are saying.

All I’m suggesting is that we learn the facts before we risk unjustly accusing someone, or make ourselves look silly by coming down so vehemently against a situation that more than likely bears no resemblance to the way it has been presented in the media (so far).

I will keep tabs on this issue, and will update this blog post as new information becomes available.