Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Need Suggestions From You Fine People!
So, please let me know. Otherwise one of two things will happen:
1) I pick a direction that no one is interested in besides myself
2) I stop blogging
Happy Holidays everyone!
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Global Warming is an issue of morality, Ms. Palin
Global warming is all of the above. It is a moral issue, it is scary, it is political, it is real. Although I have to disagree with Sarah Palin on most issues, her description of “doomsday scare tactics pushed by an environmental priesthood” is correct. I agree with her statement, but not the sentiment behind it. I agree because the end is now scientifically in sight if we continue on our path and that to me is doomsday. And I also agree with the idea that the prophetical voices of many environmental activists are coming out in troves to warn us of the impending doom.
What I believe Sarah Palin was attempting however, was to say that this fear is unfounded. To show the world that the progressive left uses scare tactics as much as the conservative right. Unfortunately, the progressives have science to support their fears, whereas the conservative right has little to support their fear mongering. Exhibit A: Palin herself.
"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where– where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border."
I’m sorry, but the idea of an air invasion from Russia is pretty terrifying. And I’m not even sure Palin’s use of the term “junk science” could be applied to this, because there is no scientific proof of anything of the sort.
“The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."
This makes me shake in my boots as well. Standing in front of a death panel? Yikes. I better run for cover!
What this shows us is that fear mongering is something this country has come to know and treasure. Both the progressives and the conservatives use this as a technique, but the major difference, in my opinion, is that the issue of global warming is scientifically proven and will affect all of us. It will not just affect the poor, or the rich, or the healthy, or the sick, it will affect all of us.
It is absolutely immoral to ignore the scientific evidence that has shown us the trajectory of global warming. I rarely call out the morality of individuals, but I will say this: Sarah Palin, as a leader of society, one in whom people have placed their trust, you have a responsibility to lead people in the right direction. Your responsibility is to do your research into the subject, to read the evidence, talk to people from both sides. It is unacceptable and un-Christian to ignore this shocking proof of the demise of the earth. From one Christian woman to another, I beg you to do your research, to speak the truth, to be a leader for environmental justice. Not just watch as those who trust you jump off the proverbial cliff.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Decking the Halls in the White House?
Christmas decorations at the White House include a crèche in the East Room (despite reports that White House social secretary Desirée Rogers suggested that the Obamas were planning a "non-religious Christmas.") Should the White House, whose residents serve all Americans, display a crèche or a menorah or any strictly religious symbols during the holidays?
As a religious woman, I have to ask, does it really matter? In a perfect world, the White House would display decorations from every religious tradition, including atheist decorations (I am not exactly sure what those would look like). Maybe the Obamas thought about this, and maybe they realized that would show the world that they were working just a little too hard and that that is just a little too ironic when we still have the words “In God We Trust” printed on our money. And we still recite “One Nation, Under God” as children when we make our pledge of allegiance.
The Obamas are Christians. Always have been. And they live in a house. Therefore, decorations of that house will most likely include decorations that are slanted towards their persuasions. Just like the “style” of the interior changes with each new president and family, so too will hopefully the religion one day. I have a feeling that if the President were Jewish, this conversation would not be taking place for a couple of reasons. The creche would not be appropriate for what the occupants believed. Just as the creche is appropriate for what the Obamas believe, maybe a Santa Claus isn’t? Who knows.
I think the issue we are looking at is one of parenting. The Obamas have two young girls that they must raise in terribly difficult circumstances. Amidst all of the security and formality, these girls need to learn about their family’s morals and values. If the Obamas are Christian, which they have explicitly illustrated themselves to be, then the jobs of Michelle and Barack go beyond President and First Lady. They must also be the ones to explain their faith to their children, and where else can that be done than in their own house? In such a materialistic world, showing the girls what the season really means to their family is very important.
Maybe the Obamas are still working on getting the rest of their decorations up, like so many other families. Maybe the menorah is still in a box yet to be unpacked. Maybe the Kwanzaa Unity Cup is still being delivered. But all I can say is that let’s allow this family to have some aspect of normalcy in such a crazy predicament that is being the First Family.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Mommy, will you look under the bed? I think there’s a Muslim hiding.
Q: What's your reaction to Sunday's decision by voters in Switzerland to ban construction of minarets, the slender towers from which Muslims are called to daily prayers?
As a religious woman, this ban on the construction of minarets is absolutely terrifying. I am terrified because this comes on the wake of the shooting at Ft. Hood, and I feel that we as a country, in fact, as a world, are at the crux of something very dangerous. We are dangerously close to limiting the religious freedoms of our neighbor, and that never turns out well.
I’m not saying that we’re on the brink of internment camps, but maybe I am. Maybe that’s the next step.
I fear that the next issue of violence that can be attributed to anyone with even a miniscule relation to the Islamic faith will be the tipping point, and we will make it clear to our Islamic brothers and sisters that they are not welcome and that they in fact are in need of restrictions, control, and repression.
We live in a time where we are all afraid, and unfortunately, the scapegoat at the present moment is the religion of Islam. We are desiring so much to point our quivering fingers at the culprit, and in doing so have deemed a few crazy zealots as the models of the religion.
When George Tiller was killed by a religious zealot who was most likely Christian (although most news reports failed to mention this), the issue of the murderer’s religion was never in the forefront. Had the murderer been Islamic, the tables would have been turned dramatically.
Sure, Sweden might have different rules and regulations when it comes to religious freedom, but this decision to ban the construction of Islamic minarets symbolized the global fear of Islam.
What are we afraid of? Do these minarets remind us of our dwindling churches? Does the call to prayer remind us of our failing and disturbingly quiet prayer life? Or are we most afraid of the fact that people who are different from us are religious in a way that we refuse to come into conversation with?
I’m terrified. I fear that the worst is still to come. The more we oppress this religious group, the more reaction we will see. Could you expect anything less if you were in the same situation? May God and Allah help us all.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Where Have All the Progressives Gone?
U.S. Catholic bishops are defending their direct involvement in congressional deliberations over health-care reform, saying that church leaders have a duty to raise moral concerns on any issue, including abortion rights and health care for the poor. Do you agree? What role should religious leaders have -- or not have -- in government policymaking?
Despite the fact that I generally disagree with the sentiments of these Catholic bishops, I have to support the fact that they are living out their faith in very tangible ways. Catholics and Conservative Evangelicals have found their voices in the public forum and no one questions whether their faith guides their politics and policies. When it comes to those of us who are faithful and progressive, we struggle to find a way live out and proclaim our faith in the public square. So, with that being said, I think these Catholic bishops are on to something.
When I first entered into seminary, I found it very uncomfortable to introduce myself to strangers. Revealing the fact that I was a young seminarian almost always lead the person I was talking with to assume that I was a conservative fundamental Christian who was ready to start my judgment talk as soon as I was given the opportunity. I would try and find opportunities to illustrate my progressive and open-minded mentality in various and interesting ways, but now I know I was fighting against something bigger than me, I was fighting against the voice of religion that the secular world has come to know and fear.
It’s time for the progressive and faithful to take a stand and reclaim our position in the public square. We need more people to illustrate that faith can lead one to be open-minded and loving. Religion cannot and should not be the deciding factor of public policy, that is the beauty of this country, but, for those of us who are involved with religious groups - we work for them or we ascribe to them - we can allow those basic tenets to guide our lives and the ways we interact with the world.
But we have to be careful as well. As religious leaders, one must understand that our voices are influential to those who are watching. Therefore, reminding members of our faith of the breadth of opinions on issues is important. Unless the issue at hand is one of extreme prophetical nature, we must allow for differing voices to proclaim as well, as long as they proclaim the love of God.
The questions we are dealing with now are surrounding health care and issues of life and death. Maybe we should not be criticizing the Catholic bishops, but rather asking where all the progressive voices are in this deliberation?
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
When Discrimination Trumps Mental Health
The Fort Hood shootings have raised questions again about how the military should handle the personal religious beliefs of its soldiers, whether they are evangelical Christians, Muslims, Wiccans, and so on. What is the proper role of religion -- and personal religious belief -- in the U.S. armed forces? Should a particular religious affiliation disqualify someone from active military service? How far should the military go to accommodate personal religious beliefs and practices?
As a Christian woman, I am appalled at the way our country and the media in general is focusing on the religious affiliation of the Ft. Hood assassin. This question, although possibly filled with good intentions, is playing into the incredibly hateful and downright sinful nature of religious discrimination. If one claims to be a person of faith, one cannot point the finger at the religion of many for the mistake of one, that in the Christian world negates the love and compassion of Jesus.
This should not be the question that we are asking ourselves immediately following the massacre at Fort Hood because this shows the world how predictable we as a country can be. We should be focusing on the fact that this man was mentally ill and was not screened properly enough to deter him from being deployed, let alone a licensed psychiatric doctor.
There are more than 3500 Muslims who are serving our country in the armed forces. These people are truly necessary and deserve so much more respect than we have shown them and are continuing to show them following the shooting at Fort Hood.
Major Nidal Malik Hasan has yet to give a clear answer on what his motive was, but his religious affiliation has stolen the show. The U.S. military must come out with a strong stance that says they are not blaming the Islamic faith for this tragedy, which they have not done yet.
Why on earth should numerous Islamic groups across the country feel compelled to distance themselves from this individual? Had he been a Christian, the question of his faith would not even be mentioned, let alone displayed as a headline.
At this rate, this country will soon be screening out committed individuals for the armed services to the point where we only have white, Christian, heterosexual men protecting this diverse land, and frankly, that doesn’t make me feel safe. Instead of wasting our time, energy, and money on talking about limiting the religious diversity in our armed forces, we should look really long and hard at how well our mental health screening process is working. Maj. Hasan was sick, but he was also counseling sick people. Who knows how much damage he could have done beyond the physical destruction he caused this past week.
The shooting at Ft. Hood was obviously a tragedy, one that should not have happened. But instead of pointing the fingers at the scapegoat “other,” it’s time to take a hard look at the religious discrimination that we as a country are allowing to run rampant. Discrimination and hate. Decidedly un-Christian and un-American.
