Browsed by
Category: justice

a test of national character

a test of national character

Comments 0 Comment

Our initial response to the victims of hurricane Katrina was a test of our national character, a test we largely failed. Since then, government agencies and especially non-governmental agencies and groups and single individuals have distinguished themselves by acts of genuine compassion and timely help to dislocated families. But there is much, much yet to do.

Our long term commitment to the rebuilding of the ravaged Gulf coast and to the restoration of livable communities in that same region will also test our national character. Katrina exposed the nightmares within the American dream. Katrina revealed the huge disparities that exist among us with regard to wealth and opportunity and safety and access to health care. What we saw we could not deny … but we are capable of forgetting what we saw.

In a Washington Post column released today E. J. Dionne writes:

It has long been said that Americans have short attention spans, but this is ridiculous: Our bold, urgent, far-reaching, post-Katrina war on poverty lasted maybe a month.

Credit for our ability to reach rapid closure on the poverty issue goes first to a group of congressional conservatives who seized the post-Katrina initiative before advocates of poverty reduction could get their plans off the ground.

As soon as President Bush announced his first spending package for reconstructing New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, the Republican Study Committee and other conservatives switched the subject from poverty reduction to how Katrina reconstruction plans might increase the deficit that their own tax-cutting policies helped create.

Unwilling to freeze any of the tax cuts, these conservatives proposed cutting other spending to offset Katrina costs. The headlines focused on the seemingly easy calls on pork-barrel spending. But some of their biggest cuts were in health care programs, including Medicaid, and other spending for the poor …

I was naive enough to hope that after Katrina the left and the right might have useful things to say to each other about how to help the poorest among us. I guess we’ve moved on. You can lay a lot of the blame for this indifference on conservatives. But it will be a default on the part of liberals if the poor disappear again from public view without a fight.

(Read the entire column)

I worry that the focus will be on rebuilding cities instead of on rebuilding lives, that we will make this an opportunity to fashion a new New Orleans, a new Gulf coast, and forget about the problems and the people of the old one.

We cannot forget what we saw. We cannot just “move on” and fail to deal with the social and moral and political liabilities that so magnified Katrina’s capacity to cause human suffering. We must not fail this test of our national character.

it’s about who we are

it’s about who we are

Comments 0 Comment

Last Wednesday evening, the United States Senate overwhelming passed an amendment sponsored by John McCain to be attached to a defense spending bill. The amendment specifies that: “No person in the custody or under the effective control of the Department of Defense or under detention in a Department of Defense facility shall be subject to any treatment or technique of interrogation not authorized by and listed in the United States Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation.” It further mandates that: “No individual in the custody or under the physical control of the United States Government, regardless of nationality or physical location, shall be subject to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.”

The Bush administration has indicated that it would likely veto the bill since the amendment is “unnecessary and duplicative” and “would limit the president’s ability as commander-in-chief to effectively carry out the war on terrorism.” In other words, extraordinary problems require extraordinary solutions, and we cannot preemptively “bind the hands” of the United States military if we hope to win the war on terrorism.

In fact, the opposite is true. When we “unloose the hands” of our military, we lose the war on terrorism, because we will ourselves have become no different than our enemies. As Senator McCain said about his amendment: “But this isn’t about who they are. This is about who we are.”

the malice that lies hidden within us …

the malice that lies hidden within us …

Comments 0 Comment

From The Christian Century magazine:

THE MIND OF THE BEHOLDER: Racist intent is often hard to prove, but what else explains why two similar photos distributed by the Associated Press (August 30) received very different captions? One photo shows a black male wading through chest-deep floodwater in New Orleans; the caption says he has just finished “looting a grocery store.” A similar photo of a white man and woman has a caption that says they were wading in water after “finding” food at a grocery store.

a “natural” disaster?

a “natural” disaster?

Comments 0 Comment

Among the letters read on air today during NPR’s Morning Edition program was a letter from an Arizona correspondent objecting to an NPR story that cited the disproportional effects of hurricane Katrina on people of color and people of low income. He wrote: New Orleans is a sandcastle built at low tide … The storm did not discriminate on the basis of race or class.

Absolutely right. The storm did not discriminate. People discriminate! And discrimination did lead directly to greater suffering in the aftermath of the storm among people of color and people of low income. Poverty means you live in homes less ready to withstand the damaging effects of wind and in places less protected from the damaging effects of water. Poverty means when they say Get out, you don’t have the means to get out or a place to get out to. Poverty means when disaster does strike you have fewer resources with which to mitigate its effects, fewer resources with which to rebuild your life. You don’t have health insurance, homeowner’s insurance, savings accounts.

Poverty means when help is mobilized, you aren’t high on the priority list. A classmate of mine who works for the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta noted that Charity Hospital, a large New Orleans hospital serving the low income community, was not evacuated until two days after their generators ran out of gas. He writes:

    The flood forced them to retreat vertically, crowding the patients into the upper floors. After the generators ran out of gas, around day 3, the mechanical ventilators and dialysis machines also quit. They tried to ventilate the patients who needed it by hand squeezing rubber bags attached to their trache tubes by hand; a number of the patients died. Patients who needed dialysis also died; there is no way to do that without electricity. The staff faced a new and awful problem – what to do with the growing number of corpses. The morgue was out of commission, the hospital wards were overflowing. They decided they had no other option than to float the dead out into the flood waters. It hurt like hell, but they saw no other choice … They had to focus on saving the living as best they could. I do not blame them. I still cannot fathom what delayed the rescue effort for 5 days, but I think we as a nation have to find out, if we want to salvage our membership in the civilized world.

Meanwhile, high priced Ochsner Clinic Hospital was evacuated almost immediately …

It is our shame that we ignore the devastating effects of poverty among our own neighbors until something like Katrina “lifts the covers” for a moment and forces us to look. It is our shame that we support programs and elect leaders that protect our own interests rather than the common interest. It is our shame that our hearts are moved by the specter of a great natural disaster, but unmoved by the great unnatural disaster that plagues our nation every day.

a moral imperative for victims?

a moral imperative for victims?

Comments 0 Comment

When hateful people produce lasting hatred in us … hate wins. When violent people make us violent … violence wins. When cruel people leave us with nothing but a burning desire for revenge in our minds and hearts … cruelty wins. When evil done to us gives birth to evil done by us … evil wins.

As I drove to work this morning, I listened to reports on NPR of the Israeli pullout from the Gaza strip. I heard interviews with militant Palestinians who credited the pullout to the armed resistance alone, giving no credit to the political process, showing no support for the diplomatic efforts of their own leadership, calling only for more violence to oust Israel from the West Bank as well. It was most disheartening.

It was disheartening to see once more that steps toward peace — baby steps though they may be — do so little (do nothing!) to soften the hardened and entrenched hatred of one people for another, do so little (do nothing?) to change the tide of history and move people toward rapprochement.

Is there a moral imperative for victims? Or does their victimization “excuse” whatever choices they may make? Can we expect the victim of oppression to show grace and mercy and restraint and maybe even love to the oppressor? Or is that a preposterous expectation?

There can be no shalom until victimizer and victim alike are set free from the cycle of oppression. There can be no shalom until the oppressors humble themselves before God and until the oppressed humble themselves before God. There can be no shalom until God does it … and until we are ready to let God do it!

finding a way through a no-win situation

finding a way through a no-win situation

Comments 1 comment

In just a few weeks, members of the United Church of Christ will gather in Altanta, Georgia, for General Synod, the biennial national gathering of the church. The UCC has never shied away from controversy, choosing to speak boldly and to act boldly whenever it has discerned a call of the Holy Spirit. It is most certainly a strength of the church that it is ready to witness faithfully, to follow where Christ leads, even when that witness may provoke dismay and alarm. But this summer, the UCC will take up an issue that is as explosive and divisive as any it has considered in its almost fifty year history. That issue is gay marriage.

General Synod will consider three separate resolutions on gay marriage. One resolution sponsored by the Southern California/Nevada Conference calls on the UCC to affirm equal marriage rights for same gender couples. (Text of the resolution). The second, sponsored by the Central Atlantic Conference, calls for prayer and study on the issue. (Text of the resolution). The third resolution, sponsored by eight individual UCC churches, asks the UCC to provide faithful witness by supporting the definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. (Text of the resolution).

It is a no-win situation. If the church votes down the gay marriage resolution or chooses to ask for more prayer and study, it will be seen by its more progressive members as reversing its course, failing in courage, or, at best, dragging its feet. Many will view the UCC as losing the distinctive”edginess” that is its hallmark.

On the other hand, if the equal marriage rights resolution is passed, many in the church will see this as a betrayal of the scriptural witness and an abandonment of the Christian virtues of chastity and fidelity. Many will view the UCC as losing its way, as losing Jesus’ way.

So what do I think? My concern is with the integrity of the witness of our church, our core witness to the unity Christ intends for his Church. It is this very zeal for witnessing to Christian unity that brought our church into being in the first place! So my concern, first of all, is not so much with result, but with process. Paying attention to process is the only way through this no-win situation.

I have long found helpful the analysis of conflict provided by David Augsburger in his book, “Caring Enough to Confront.” He observes that in any conflict situation two things are at stake: (1) the issue being contended, and (2) the relationship between the contenders.

His book provides a catalog of conflict styles. In brief, some folks value issue over relationship. Defending the truth, “my” version of the truth, becomes paramount. Fighting for what is right, for what is fair, for what is just, takes precedence. If the relationship between “me” and my “opponent” of the moment is damaged or even destroyed, so be it; the issue is what matters.

Other folks value relationship over issue. They will be ready to stop fighting, to compromise, to give in, whenever they perceive a relationship is in jeopardy. They would rather swallow their pride and their need to be right to protect a relationship that matters to them.

Augsburger contends that the different styles each have their time and place, but that the healthiest approach overall to conflict is to learn to value both issue and relationship. This is not compromise which means going 50-50. It means complete honesty and complete humility … 100-100! It means caring enough about the issue to make sure “you” hear “me” out, and caring enough about relationship to make sure “I” hear “you” out.

It is this “marriage” of truth and love, “speaking the truth in love” as the apostle Paul puts it, that I believe is sorely lacking in this debate. Proponents of gay marriage accuse those who would reserve marriage for the union between one man and one woman of being homophobic and reactionary and intolerant and unchristian. And defenders of traditional marriage accuse gay marriage advocates of being faithless and unbiblical and amoral and unchristian!

Both sides do need enough courage to voice their convictions fully, but they also need enough humility to acknowledge and respect the integrity of the convictions of their counterparts. We need to understand that the impulse that drives followers of Jesus to advocate equal marriage rights for gays and lesbians is not libertarianism, but a desire to fulfill the gospel of Jesus Christ, to enact Jesus’ radical acceptance and affirmation of those deemed “outsiders” by the rest of society.

And we need to understand that the passion that motivates others to reserve marriage to the committed relationship of one man and one woman is not fear of change, distrust of what is foreign and strange to them, but a sincere desire to fulfill the gospel of Jesus Christ, to follow Jesus in paths of wholeness and faithfulness!

Granted, motives on either side of this issue are not always pure and undivided … But we will have already lost no matter the outcome of these debates if we do not recognize that we are alike passionate about the gospel of Jesus Christ. It is our common allegiance to Jesus, our genuine commitment to listening together to Jesus, that can keep us together and make us a real church, a vital church, even when we do not yet agree on the “mind of Christ” with regard to this or any other particular issue. Do not demonize a brother or sister in Christ! That well may be the sin against the Holy Spirit!

May the Holy Spirit lead our church as we struggle with difficult issues, as we seek to know the mind of Christ. May we act with all boldness, and love each other with all humility.

as we forgive our debtors

as we forgive our debtors

Comments 0 Comment

“Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors …” We pray these lines from the prayer Jesus taught his followers in worship just about every Sunday. “As we forgive our debtors …” And sometimes, that means money. Yes, money!

I was delighted to hear this week of the commitment of the G8 nations to forgive some $40 billion worth of debt of the eighteen poorest nations in the world. The eighteen include: Benin, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guyana, Honduras, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia.

Yes, some of the debt-forgiveness is conditional, tied to political correctness and tied to compliance with cetain economic standards, but it is still forgiveness! Debt-forgiveness can take a terribly heavy monkey off the back of these nations and allow them the freedom to move forward with social and economic development, not simply to mark time or slide backwards because of crippling payments on accumulated debt.

This is a good act! This is a compassionate! It may be well overdue … but forgiveness is always timely!