Saturday, April 30, 2011

Mark 9:38-40


John said to him, ‘Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.’   But Jesus said, ‘Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterwards to speak evil of me.   Whoever is not against us is for us.' ~New Revised Standard Version of the New Testament


'Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make.
Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.'  
~ Pres George W. Bush, September 20, 2001, Address to Congress:


I find it strange how these positions seem to be the converse of each other – one invites relationship with others; the second forces an identity on them by requiring submission or opposition.  One wonders what the last ten years might have looked like had we chosen the first path instead of the second.

A thought on "Miranda" and other constitutional rights


Now this may seem "obvious" to someone formally schooled in the Law, but this just occurred to me – after years of watching perps have their rights read to them on various TV procedurals.

Miranda isn't about the particular person named "Miranda."  It's about the process that must be applied to everyone (regardless of previous record or behavior or reputation) to truly be "presumed innocent" and protected under the Law.

For all their talk about the Constitution and the importance of the Individual, it seems many conservatives on the Right only support constitutional rights for the persons of whom they "approve" – especially the right to vote.

Except 2nd Amendment Rights – which do seem to apply to everyone, without reservation.

Obama and the Tea Party - A Different Twist

  
A few months ago, The New Republic carried an insightful review Kate Zernike's Boiling Mad: Inside Tea Party America by Kate Zernike.  A key passage seems relevant in the current round of Birther talk:

But more than just nostalgia for a whiter America fuels this tantrum. “I can’t believe this is the America I grew up in as a kid,” says one of Zernike’s subjects. Pages later, another one reminisces about her own childhood America: “People would talk to their neighbors, have block parties, there was less stress in life.” What is striking is that those testimonies came from a twenty-nine-year-old and sixty-six-year-old, respectively—childhoods spent decades apart, in Americas that looked different from each other. They eulogize not so much the common, long-gone America of their childhoods, but the state of childhood itself. The relentless hurtling away from the simplicities of youth is what the Tea Partiers rebel against. But the grown-up world, with its complications, compromises, and disappointments, is here to stay, which is a cruelty that no election can salve. 
~ Elbert Ventura, Teaism

Obama is the first president in decades to both honor the separation of powers (let Congress take the lead on budgets and legislative details) and talk to us as reasonable adults (not children).  Do we know how to engage in adult discourse? 

After decade of pandering and simplistic, emotional presentation of our options, is some of the anti-Obama ranting a childish reaction to rational, adult conversation?

Are we seeing a national, primarily-but-not-exclusively-right-wing temper tantrum?


Image Information: 
President Barack Obama smiles before speaking to the press in the Briefing Room of the White House April 27, 2011 in Washington, DC. US President Barack Obama released a long form version of his birth certificate after extended criticism by those who do not believe he was born in the United States.
(April 27, 2011 - Photo by Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images North America)

Friday, April 15, 2011

Battle of the Wilderness



…Belief in white supremacy provided a rationale for slavery. As the French political theorist Montesquieu observed wryly in 1748: "It is impossible for us to suppose these creatures [enslaved Africans] to be men; because allowing them to be men, a suspicion would follow that we ourselves are not Christians."
~ James W. Loewen, Five Myths about why the South seceded 

This year we mark the 150th anniversary of the beginning of the Civil War.  I have been reminded of the last major round of observances fifty years ago.  In 1961, the civil rights movement was still fairly new in the national psyche.  As a child in the North, I did not yet connect the events I witnessed on the evening news with those hallowed battles of long ago.  In school, as part of the 100th anniversary of the Civil War, we studied Presidents and strategies and generals.  We did not discuss the causes of the war as in any way related to what was happening in our country now.    

Perhaps this is the proper approach for initiating children to this complex time in our history.  Perhaps it was a recognition that the Detroit suburbs were heavily populated with families who had migrated from the South in search of jobs -- as if silence was the best way to let the children of opposing sides get along in the classroom.

However, I think that something important was missing from our education.  We didn't learn to face the dark realities behind either of the historic struggles – the civil war of long ago or the fight for human rights happening in our streets and neighborhoods.  We were not encouraged to look into our own souls to find the fears and anxieties we might still carry with us. 

Now we are the adults and I look around and see the angry faces of Little Rock and Selma again.  This time they carry posters with distorted images of our first African-American president and argue for states' rights and secession and nullification.  I wonder if these adults had the same edited education I had.  And I wonder how many of those who find joy in these images and these slogans consider themselves good Christians.


Image Information:  Battle of the Wilderness | Desperate fight on the Orange C.H. Plank Road, near Todd's Tavern, May 6th, 1864 (Kurz & Allison, Art Publishers, Chicago, U.S.A, 1887)

On-going Loss


From a colleague on the ground in Japan. 

Failing to acknowledge loss of heritage can mean survival is the start of crisis
Brent Duncan
A humpbacked old woman with a walker was teetering along a busy coastal highway that cut through the debris that had been a coastal neighborhood of nearly 400 homes in Noda Village. The old woman showed me the spot where her home had been before tsunamis blendered it into shreds, then mixed those shreds with the ruins of an entire community. As tragic as that seemed, the old woman said that she did not care about her house and rice field. She motioned toward the vast wasteland of debris that had been her village, and said her only concern was to find in that mess the box that contained her ancestors.
I felt like a boy scout as I helped her across the highway to the area in which 85 volunteer airmen, sailors, and civilians from Misawa Air Base were clearing debris. The old woman joined us, wandering in the debris with the aid of her walker. Eyes to the ground, she looked for her ancestors. We helped her to seek, but we did not find.
This is not an isolated case. The media focus almost entirely on the loss of life and property. Although these are tragic beyond imagination, focusing on only these aspects of disaster means that we miss the destruction of livelihood, culture, heritage, history, and religion—core elements of identity that give humans purpose and hope.
A mental health professional who is administering to survivors in a remote fishing village told me that the main challenge now is preventing survivors from killing themselves. This seems dreadfully ironic: struggling to survive, only to commit suicide. During times like these, we need to look beyond immediate survival needs and engage in administering to the psychological, emotional, cultural, and spiritual needs of survivors. We must do this within the cultural context of those who are suffering, not according to our desires to impose our reality on them. Otherwise, survival only means the beginning of crisis.
Brent Duncan, Professor | University of Phoenix | Gakushuu.org


Image Information:  A destroyed landscape is pictured in Otsuchi village, Iwate Prefecture in northern Japan, after an earthquake and tsunami struck the area. Image date, March 14, 2011. (Credit: Reuters/Kyodo)

Bullies



As the Congress was debating how to "cut spending" the Republicans also spent a lot of time talking about Planned Parenthood and lying about it (see John Kyl, R-AZ)  My response is simple:

Democrats – please stop talking about the issue as "Planned Parenthood" – that just plays into the GOP talking points / makes their base happy.

Title 10 is about Women's Health Care; only a quarter goes to PPFA.  Only 3% of PPFA activities are related to abortions – and those are privately not federally funded.  NO federal dollars are being spent on abortions. Zero.  So, stop talking about abortion and playing the GOP game.

Talk about basic health care for women – that's what Title X is about.  Does the GOP want women to die?  Sorry, too strong – The GOP wants women to die if they are the "wrong" women, poor or old or working but without health insurance.

The GOP controls 1/3 of the political branches. They want 100% of the say. That's not a grown-up approach.  That's not even a childish approach – kids on playgrounds learn how to play by rules and "work with others" better than these guys.

The Hill Republicans – and their Tea Party allies – are bullies.  Stick to your guns.


Photo Source  http://allaboutcareerssite.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/workplace-bullying-2.jpg