Tuesday, April 27, 2010

immigration, part one

The hot news topic recently has been immigration. It has been spurred by the enactment of a new stricter law in Arizona, a state that I spent considerable time in in the past, but which I am glad to be out of. There are many reasons, chiefly climate and politics, but I still have good memories and friends from that period in my life as well. My experiences in Arizona are complex, as is the issue of immigration. It brings up many issues of faith and politics interacting and I hope to cover a few over the next few posts in order to prod your thinking.

There is the issue of entitlement. We often think of entitlement as an attitude of "others", chiefly seen in the anti-equality arguments of social conservatives against (as they say) "special rights" for gays. But I think that those of us who can trace our ancestry in this country back to colonial times have a habit of thinking in terms of entitlement for ourselves - and that can be dangerous.

There is the issue of dealing with those less fortunate. Our hearts are drawn to give to help victims of natural disaster, poverty, disease, in foreign lands. But when they come here to live and work, our attitude changes. We tend to be very protective of "our space" ,."our resources",. and forget everything we learned in kindergarten (sharing).

There is the issue of law. We are adamant that others abide by the letter of the law, but how often have we slipped out of ticket due to an understanding officer? What if the law was applied to us with the tightness that we advocate for others?

And finally, the issue of passion. It is a good thing to be passionate and to have strong opinions - it shows we care. But all too often it can degenerate into fear, distrust, hatred, and prejudice , of many varieties (not just racial).

I think the most important thing is to think clearly and with empathy...or at least with sympathy. We may not always be able to identify with what others are experiencing or feeling, but we can try to "walk a mile" in others shoes and think how we would feel if what we advocate doing to them were done to us. It just might change our attitudes and our hearts.

More to come in future posts.

Thursday, April 15, 2010

let me have coffee please

Sometimes you just have to rant. I admit the TeaPartiers get me riled up. I was a history and political science major, so I think I am more versed on those subjects than the average jane and joe, but it still amazes me when I hear the stuff people say in these gatherings. But I know that throughout our history we have had much like this. Most people do not think past what they read in their (flawed) textbooks in school and don't remember much of that. They are seriously incurious and utterly unmotivated to investigate beyond the bare facts, even of our valued American heritage. And they tend to just echo the loudest voice that seems to mirror their politics.

We tend to resort to demagoguery, sloganeering, sound-bite patriotism, and platitudes. In the past it has gotten us into plenty of trouble - witness the "yellow journalism" of the Spanish- American War. While we may think that today's acrimony is some radical change from the peaceful past , I beg to differ. During the run-up to the Civil War we had one Senator beating another one senseless on the Senate floor in a debate over slavery. Today we have the Virginia governor issuing a Confederate Month celebration without even mentioning the "S" word. How forgetful are we?

I wouldn't be safe in Texas ("Remember the Alamo"? really?) and though I would like to tweak a few Tea Partiers they are too disturbing. I mean, has anyone asked them why they use a historical event that conflicts with their purported values to spark their movement? What do I mean? Well, ladies and gentlemen, the Boston Tea Party was nothing more or less than an act of political vandalism.

Destroying someone else's property (remember this was British,not colonial tea) to make a political point Kinda like the anarchists breaking store windows in Seattle during the WTO riots. Something that would seem an obvious violation of those pesky Ten Commandments that these Tea Partiers would love to see displayed everywhere. But yet we in America have through the years celebrated the event as a highlight of proud American history

I know, that will get me marked as a heretic in many circles - and that's not the end of things I could say about our skewed view of history. Let me be clear, I love my country and this is my home. I love the freedoms that we have and there is no where else like here. I am very grateful to God for allowing me to be born here. But love doesn't have to have blinders. If you love something or someone you want to make it or them better. Hiding from flaws is not love ,it is myopic (nearsightedness , for those of you without glasses :)

So my assignment to you is this. The next time you hear or read a platitude or slogan or appeal to "patriotism" don't just swallow it whole without analyzing it , to see if it makes sense. I know we are all busy, not in school anymore, and it is easy to just absorb the news. But if we are to avoid being led around like sheep by the latest loud voice we have to develop better brains and use ours heads to actually think, not just store trivia.

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

a world without....what?

Have you ever wondered what it would be like to do without some significant tool or technology?
If you ever camp, like we do , you know how it is to do without some modern conveniences for a while. And even then it is only for a short while and then we go back to the regular techie world.
What kind of things would you be willing to give up, or think that the world would be better off without? What scourges would you like to rid the world of? Sometimes I think cars are more trouble than they're worth, especially when needing fixing, but I can't see myself giving mine up any time soon.

According to some recent comments from so-called "conservatives" they would hate to see a world without nuclear weapons (or at least the US without them). Imagine that? Their response to the recent talks between the US and Russia on reducing nuclear arsenals is to warn about the danger of going back to pre-nuclear days. Does anybody who lived through the Cold War really think that it was a fun time and we wouldn't have been better off without nukes? You really would miss the "duck and cover" drills in elementary school?

It is not that I am against national defense, not in the least. In the same way that we protect our families and homes individually, we must be ready,willing and able to defend our country against those who wish to do us harm. But would you use a flamethrower or bombs to defend your house? No, because in defending you would destroy more than you saved, and the use of those things would harm all around you. Such is the case with nuclear weapons...poison the earth , sicken people, for years, and once you start there is no easy way to stop.
]If you have ever seen the records (pictures and first hand accounts) of the devastation of Hiroshima you might understand the importance of insuring that something like that never happens again.

There was a time when nations had no qualms about using chemical and biological weapons and WWI battlefields were full of their victims. These things are not contained to the battlefield and don't discriminate between soldiers and civilians. We got beyond thinking even having those were okay, perhaps one day we will do the same for nuclear.

To think that we as a country once contemplated a nuclear exchange with the Soviets, thinking that somehow anyone would "win" is disturbing. And to think that there are some who are "afraid" of reducing nuclear stockpiles is even more so. God has given us free will, but that does not mean that we should use that freedom to go down paths to destruction. I applaud the recent discussions and hope they will bear good fruit. And I pray that cooler heads will always prevail.

Sunday, April 4, 2010

Hope and Change

It always amazed me during the campaign of 2008 how the words hope and change were maligned by one side because the other side used them as rallying cries. They were dismissed as "touchy feely" and those who embraced them were dismissed as delusional. By many who should have known better. It is one thing to debate the kind of change needed or just what our hope should be, but we should never dismiss hope and/or change as being bad.

Think of this weekend and the celebration of millions of believers. Easter is all about hope and change. Hope is bound up in the idea of resurrection. That death is not the end, that there is a future beyond the grave, called Heaven. Reuniting with love ones and the our great Deliverer.
And not just in the far future, but right now. As we read in Jeremiah, God said to the children of Israel "I know the plans I that I have for you ...to give you a future and a hope". In many other places God assures us that while in this world we will have hard time He will be there with us to get us through. An appeal to hope is not wrong.

And what about change? The cross and the empty tomb are symbols of great change. They were the ultimate change points of a life lived to challenge the accepted thoughts and conditions of the day. The religious conservatives of the day were much like ours today and Jesus challenged them constantly to lose their chains of legalism and realize the spirit of the Law. How many times did he say in the Sermon on the Mount, "you have heard it has been said....but I say unto you" ? He chastised them for putting "theology" (or ideology) above the welfare of people. He called for a life of sacrifice and demonstrated it on the cross, removing the barriers between God and man. That was some change!

Too often we get stuck where we are, and with things as they are, and lose hope of things ever getting better. Or we comfortable where we are and fear change, thinking it will only be for the worse. But God calls us to better things, to grow each day. And we who have faith in God should live it out each day, and be the first to embrace hope and change, now and forever.

Happy Easter everyone :)

Sunday, March 28, 2010

what were they thinking?

What were they thinking? Have you ever said that, looking back on some historical event or movement? Did you scratch your head and wonder how people could think in a certain way and either promote or allow something to happen that today we all (or mostly all) think was wrong? Like "whites only" signs and attitudes in the South, internment of American citizens of Japanese ancestry in WWII, the Hollywood blacklist and other Red Scare tactics, or the continual racial/ethnic stereotyping of a many immigrants ove the years.

Hindsight, it is said, is always 20-20, but in order to prevent future folks from being tasked with the same retrospective we need to be proactive about things in the present. What things do we do now,or allow with rationalization that may at first glance appear rational, but upon reflection reveal our prejudices? And what prompts us to be that way?

Part of the reason is that we fail to walk in others' shoes - think in terms of how something will affect others and not just ourselves. We let fear rule, let our comfort zone feelings make a moral judgment on others, instead of embracing change and diversity. And, sometimes we either think anything we do or say in contradiction to what is being done or said will either make no difference or bring on us the ire of too many people.

We need to put ourselves in the picture (in the situation) and see how we would feel if the same things were done to or said about us. As Jesus said, do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Or as the English poet (a man of faith) John Donne said, "no man is an island entire of itself, we are part of the whole, each man's death diminishes me, send not therefore for whom to bell tolls, it tolls for thee".

We are all in this together, and we must be there for each other. It is a mandate of heaven

Thursday, March 11, 2010

social justice

Okay, got to make more than just one post per month. Just a quick post here.
A friend told me about a saying that was made by a religious figure (South American bishop)
that kind of sums up the problem with advocating social justice today
"when I gave food to the poor, I was called a saint, when I asked why the poor had no food, I was called a communist"
Those on the right are fine with charitable giving to those less fortunate, but not with organizing to reduce the problems that give rise to poverty. They have no sense of a collective responsibility to care for those less fortunate, and thus respond to calls for social justice with name calling.
Just today a popular rightwing TV and radio talker told christians to leave their churches if they mentioned social justice.
But isn't that a part of what Christ advocated? Try reading Matthew 25 and see what you think.

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

what are you know for?

One of my mom's favorite mantras was "accentuate the positive"
It used to bug me sometimes, because I would find things that I felt needed to be set straight and she always tried to put a positive spin on things. She was a real "glass half full" kind of person.

She gave everybody the benefit of the doubt and wanted the best for all. She wasn't naive, by any means, she knew people all too well. But she made a conscious choice to be an advocate for promoting positive change and conserving the things she knew to be good and uplifting.

These days it seems like many people are known more for what they are against than what they are for. They are the people of "no". To seemingly endless things they say "no". There's even a whole party of them in Congress. They don't like the solutions that are proposed to the problems we face but they don't offer any solutions either. Like a stubborn mule that digs in its heels they refuse to leave their stalls to travel to pasture, and yet complain that they are hungry.

It is easy to criticize. In school it was always easier to write a book report or critique if I didn't like the book or what it said. I could list off its defects easily. But if it was a book I really liked it was much harder. It is easier to tear down than to build. It is easier to point out flaws than to repair them. There is a place and time for pointing out flaws, but if all we do is point out things that are wrong, we become simply naysayers, stagnant and cold.

We are called to be better people. We who live by faith are called to build and grow. We are called to spread hope, to "seek peace and pursue it". We are called not to "curse" the darkness, but to light candles to disperse it.

So what are you known for? A simple question in complicated times