A lot has happened in the last few weeks. I'll try to share some of my ideas on the highlights:

1) Rioting in Paris . It started when two black youth were killed. It spread and is now an outlet of anger and frustration for some Muslim immigrants living in France. While I can not in at all good conscious condone violence, I have to say that rioting like this seems to have been coming a long time. Europe's Musilm, especially North African Muslim, community has been rapidly growing in recent years, however, in mnay countries immigrants live in poverty and in economically depressed areas. Frustration at the government, culture shock at Western Europe's significantly different values, and simply being a religious minority, leaves them open to the call of fundamentalism. The governments of Europe have not seemed to do much to right many of the economic and social injustices that these immigrants face, much how our government has failed time and again to make real change in the lives of oppressed and marginalized people of color.

It is important to note that these violent riots are being condemned by large portions of the European Muslim community. I applaud Muslims, and all people, who are working to non-violently address their oppression. Be that as it may, people are still people, and we should recognize that systematic oppression leads to frustrations that can boil over into violence like we see in Paris now and that we saw in LA for Rodney King.

2) While Bush condemns torture, Cheney is out working to get the CIA exempted from a torture ban. Let's face it: Torture is absolutely unacceptable. I've said it so many times before, I feel like a broken record: Human Rights are Human Rights. Cheney may think its not as easy to obtain information in interogations without torture, but torture is morally reprehensible. It goes beyond not wanting to hurt the wrongfully accused or not wanting torture to be used against our own troops who may be captured, it has to do with what our country stands for and what our values are.

3) Sheryl Swoopes , perhaps the biggest star of the WNBA came out of the closet as a lesbian. Yet it seemed that no one cared. This article from the Nation sums up my frustration over sexism and homophobia in sports. It is blatantly sexist to assume that it is easier for a lesbian to come out than a gay man. The issues faced are different, but not rankable as easier or harder. Also, it demonstrates the lack of understanding in the white sports casting industry and media in general over the extra pressure that African Americans face on issues of sexuality. Sheryl Swoopes is an inspiration for us all.

4) One of personal importance to me, the Council of Bishops of the United Methodist Church affirmed that they support membership of the UMC to all, regardless of sexual orientation. Its a glimmer of hope. Who knows, we may see changes in the Book of Discipline and the Law of the church soon to affirm membership to all. Now if we could just get the Council of Bishops to affirm membership in the clergy to all, regardless of sexual orientation.

5) I also want to post some feelings about the Supreme Court and Alito, but that will come later this week.

0 comment(s)

This morning, Bush named his new Supreme Court Nominee: Samuel Alito . This nomination quickly raised alarm bells for queer groups and feminist groups .

In my humble opinion, Bush is desperate to regain his footing in public opinion. His most loyal base, the religious Right went into revolt mode over Miers. He needs someone to when them back, passify them, and give them something else to focus on as the Scooter Libby indictment story goes on.

For that matter, the media can hardly cover both the nominee and Scooter Libby at the same time. They're too focused on getting one sensationalized story.

Lets focus on getting this guy a rigorous Senate hearing and force him to really discuss his ridiculous record of radical conservative rulings. Then, when all of it is fresh in the public and the Senate's ears, we can get his nomination rejected.


(In other news, this saddens me to a great extent. My church needs to begin a serious rethinking of how it treats its members and clergy who love the church too much to leave and who love their congregations too much to lie to them.)

6 comment(s)

Apparently tourism losses are the most news worthy affects of hurricane Wilma damage in Mexico ( story ). Not loss of human life, not destruction of homes and businesses, but loss of tourism is what makes the headline.

0 comment(s)

Paul Wellstone died three years ago today. I miss him. When he died, all of my fellow Minnesotans came together in a collective sense of loss. Wellstone gave progressives, and especially progressive people of faith, something to believe in. He is a model of the prophetic leadership we needed then, need today, and will need as long as we have government.

“In the last analysis, politics is not predictions and politics is not observations. Politics is what we do. Politics is what we do, politics is what we create, by what we work for, by what we hope for and what we dare to imagine.”

“I’m not making a decision I don’t believe in.” (2002, before voting against authorizing the use of force in Iraq)

“Our politics are our deepest form of expression: they mirror our past experiences and reflect our dreams and aspirations for the future.”

“Politics is not just about power and money games, politics can be about the improvement of peoples lives, about lessening human suffering in our world and bringing about more peace and more justice.”


RIP Paul. We miss you.

1 comment(s)

The future of the Democratic party ? I don't think that progressive Democrats are looking for a strong man with military background. I think that progressive Democrats may be looking for a strong man with a military background who can pull swing voters and moderates to the party.

From a progressive standpoint, there can hardly be anything more distasteful than the historical connection between military service and political clout. If we envision a society of and based on peace, how can we make the instrument of war the prerequisite for political service?

From a practical perspective, it works. Our country has moved so far to the right that any return to the center or to balance is going to require a gradual pull from politicians who can first lead the center, and then later from those who can lead the left.

At the end of the day, Hackett is probably what the Democrats need: a military veteran who can do much the same thing Kerry did in the wake of Vietnam. He'll pull the moderates, the swing voters, and maybe even a few conservatives who are disenchnated with their leadership right now. But what he is not is a progressive candidate. Attempts to label him as such, because progressive is the new buzzword of the Democratic party, are attempts (knowing or unknowing) to move the progressive movement to the right. Such attempts should be called out. Too much in thie country has already been moved to the right as it is.

1 comment(s)

Two articles Iread in the Nation illistrate well my complaints with the Democratic party now-a-days. This one discusses the failures of the right and the entrenched lieralism in most Americans. This one discusses Virginia Democrats begining to learn how to connect to Southerners who are populist economically but fiarly conservative socially. Surprise, surprise, it involves shedding arrogance, working with labor unions, and honestly discussing how your faith affects your belief in fighting poverty and injustice.

What the Democrats need now is someone to take the lead. Somone who can step into the vaccuum of disillustionment in those who bought into Compassionate Conservative and those whose Democratic politicians have drifted more and more to the center. It appears that some people in the party are begining to catch on. With any luck, what looks like seeds now will bloom in '08.

0 comment(s)

Bush’s approval ratings continue to drop . Where is the voice to challenge him? He’s doing all the work of digging his own hole, but why is no one offering a strong alternative? Do politicians only grow vocal chords during political campaigns?

5 comment(s)

While gay marriage and parenting are not my most favorite issues (queer people have more pressing concerns), I do think that its important to pass on this article that was posted on Gay Spirituality .

An easily assessible summary of a study on gay parenting on a respected reference website is an important resourse to have. Its a link I plan to keep handy in case web or live discussions take a turn that I want to throw some studies back in the face of the right's psuedo-science.

1 comment(s)

I strongly encourage you all to check out the Anabaptist Network . Their website has a posting of their "core convictions which I find to be useful and illuminating, both in thier content, and in the language they use to express ideas many of us share.

To quote the basic list (on the website, there are articles further unpacking each of these convictions):

1. Jesus is our example, teacher, friend, redeemer and Lord. He is the source of our life, the central reference point for our faith and lifestyle, for our understanding of church and our engagement with society. We are committed to following Jesus as well as worshipping him.

2. Jesus is the focal point of God’s revelation. We are committed to a Jesus-centred approach to the Bible, and to the community of faith as the primary context in which we read the Bible and discern and apply its implications for discipleship.

3. Western culture is slowly emerging from the Christendom era when church and state jointly presided over a society in which almost all were assumed to be Christian. Whatever its positive contributions on values and institutions, Christendom seriously distorted the gospel, marginalised Jesus, and has left the churches ill-equipped for mission in a post-Christendom culture. As we reflect on this, we are committed to learning from the experience and perspectives of movements such as Anabaptism that rejected standard Christendom assumptions and pursued alternative ways of thinking and behaving.

4. The frequent association of the church with status, wealth and force is inappropriate for followers of Jesus and damages our witness. We are committed to exploring ways of being good news to the poor, powerless and persecuted.

5. Churches are called to be committed communities of discipleship and mission, places of friendship, mutual accountability and multi-voiced worship that sustain hope as we seek God’s kingdom together. We are committed to nurturing and developing such churches, in which young and old are valued, leadership is consultative, roles are related to gifts rather than gender and baptism is for believers.

6. Spirituality and economics are inter-connected. In an individualist and consumerist culture and in a world where economic injustice is rife, we are committed to finding ways of living simply, sharing generously, caring for creation, and working for justice.

7. Peace is at the heart of the gospel. As followers of Jesus in a divided and violent world, we are committed to finding non-violent alternatives and to learning how to make peace between individuals, within and among churches, in society, and between nations.

3 comment(s)

I was reading Salon today and found this article on the front page. My first reactions were ones that I frequently have when I see articles about liberal faith in the main stream media: excitement that the voice of the religious left is getting out, and disappointment that all we seem to do is get out a steady stream “we do exist” messages that never get much farther than that.

As I read this article, I became very frustrated, because this article really is a lot of general ideas that float around the world of religious leftist blogs and dialogue, but it doesn’t go in depth into any of them, nor does it offer any steps of positive action that can be taken. Rather, it only accuses the Bush administration of not practicing what they preach.

Granted, the article has some good insights that I liked a lot. I really liked the idea of going to war in God’s name as a way of taking God’s name in vain.

I was disturbed by the claim that there were homosexuals in Jesus’ time. There were, but the idea of any kind of sexual orientation, be it hetero-, homo-, bi-, or even pomo- sexual, would not emerge until the 19th century in Germany. This fact is the basis for Christians who challenge Bible translations which use the word “homosexual,” a usage that emerged in the 20th century to replace the usual translation into “masturbator.”

Also, his parenthetical reference to abortion: “(The one legitimately complex issue is abortion, and one can see a case for Jesus being generally against it; still, it is not something he directly spoke about.)”, is an unfair one sentence touching on a ridiculously complex issue, and it would have strengthened his piece, and done more justice to pro-choice people of faith, to just leave it out.

In then end, I wish we could just get the national dialogue past the point where articles just try to affirm the existence of the religious left. I think our best option is to act like we don’t need to affirm our existence. If instead of trying to broadly challenge the religious Right on every issue, we should focus on strong critiques on individual issues. This way we can do justice to the issue, to the viewpoints on either side of the issue, and to ourselves. If people start seeing well thought out, strong critiques of the religious Right from the Religious Left, then it will go for granted that the religious left exists.

0 comment(s)

[ Older entries ]