So the US Government just released its annual Trafficking in Human Person’s Report. (read the report, it is a good general overview of the issue). In the report certain countries are listed as being top offenders and could face sanctions from the US if they fail to take steps to change the injustices in their countries. Well that is unless President Bush feels like waiving sanctions or Condi Rice decides to leave gross offenders (India) off the list “out of concern about alienating the Indian government.” So the point is that if the country is worthless to us, we will punish them for trafficking women and children into forced prostitution and slavery. But if the country is big and potentially powerful, we will overlook such a trivial thing as injustice. (Not that sanctions are the answer to this sort of issue, but government is more of a blunt tool…). Anyway, read more about it here.
Category: Politics
Support the Jubilee Act
From Jubilee USA –
How do you eliminate poverty? Well, passage of the Jubilee Act is one way and “we” need your help.
This “we” is not just the Jubilee staff and members of Congress who believe that this legislation could help stop millions and millions of dollars in debt payments to the IMF and World Bank from leaving countries like Haiti, Liberia and Burundi. This “we” is the collective voice of the Global South.
For people in impoverished countries, passing debt into the next generation’s hands is as natural as passing down the legacy of a people.
For people in impoverished countries, the legacy of debt left by dictators and the reality of structural adjustment programs that privatize natural resources are all generational legacies — generational legacies that should be buried.
The Jubilee Act, which is the centerpiece of Jubilee’s 2007 Sabbath Year campaign, ensures promises made by the G8 two years ago are kept by urging U.S. Treasury, the IMF and World Bank to keep their agreement.
Last Thursday, the Jubilee Act was re-introduced in Congress by the bipartisan team of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Rep. Spencer Bachus (R-AL).
The Jubilee Act:
* Calls on the Bush Administration, the IMF and the World Bank to keep their promises on debt cancellation;
* Calls for expanded debt cancellation for impoverished countries that will use the freed resources well and require debt cancellation to meet the Millennium Development Goals;
* Calls for new standards for responsible lending and creditor transparency by calling for measures to address the problem of vulture funds as well as audits of odious and illegal debts from the past.
Cry Havoc and Let Slip the Dogs of War
A recent study being released states that military veterans are more than twice as likely to be in prison for sex crimes than are people without military experience. While veterans are less likely to be incarcerated in the first place, about a quarter of those sentences are for sex crimes against women are children. The article then claims that researchers are at a lose to understand why.
As soon as I read about these findings, I was reminded of the conversation of an Afgani woman I overhead where she discussed the American military’s behavior in Afghanistan (read my blog post about it here). Another incident of cruel and senseless violence inflicted on a child.
And they really wonder why this is an issue?
When you take a group of people, mostly men, and teach them through intense indoctrination to objectify the Other of course stuff like this will happen. It takes seeing the Iraqis or Afganis as “the enemy” and not as real people in order to be able to kill them. If the soldiers didn’t objectify others and instead saw that they were mothers, fathers, lovers, teachers, grandparents, and someone’s child their ability to kill them would be compromised. They must be taught not to care, not to see the human face, and not to see life from the perspective of that other person. Alfie Kohn actually addresses this issue in his book Unconditional Parenting –
People who can – and do – think about how others experience the world are more likely to reach out and help those people – or, at a minimum, are less likely to harm them. Kafka once described war as a “monstrous failure of imagination”. In order to kill, one must cease to see individual human beings and instead reduce them to abstractions such as “the enemy”. One must fail to realize that each person underneath our bombs is the center of his universe just as you are the center of yours: He gets the flu, worries about his aged mother, likes sweets, falls in love – even though he lives half a world away and speaks a different language. To see things from his point of view is to recognize all the particulars that make him human, and ultimately it is to understand that his life is no less valuable than yours. Even in popular entertainments, we’re not shown the bad guys at home with their children. One can cheer the death only of a caricature, not of a three-dimensional person.
Less dramatically, many of the social problems we encounter on a daily basis can be understood as a failure of perspective taking. People who litter, or block traffic by double-parking, or rip pages out of library books, seem to be locked into themselves, unable or unwilling to imagine how others will have to look at their garbage, or maneuver their cars around them, or fail to find a chapter they need.
And so while it pains me to read about it, I am not surprised that those who are taught to objectify others in order to kill them retain that mindset and apply it to other aspects of life. Combine the idea that women and children aren’t “real people” with real feeling and lives but are instead seen as objects to be used with the military insistence of might makes right and one is left with conditions ripe for abuse. As this study shows that objectification of others and violent imposition of power over them is a sad reality.
What saddens me even more is that most people will assume that the solution to this problem is just to apply more of the same – have the bigger more powerful government impose harsher punishments on offenders. There will be no questioning of the military or their need to murder (that wouldn’t be patriotic now would it?) I seriously doubt that lessons in perspective taking will ever catch on in our society, much less our military. So instead of being understood and appreciated as a person, those of us who have faced objectification must continue to live in fear.
Spar the Rod…?
Of course this bill is being labeled as intolerant and anti-christian. Apparently hitting children is the only godly way to get them to do what you want. While the revised bill does allow open handed spanking, that’s not good enough for some groups that insist that harder objects must be used to break the child’s will.
Why is this a bad thing to some? One church whose advice pamphlet on spanking will be challenged by this new law, says that “guiltiness of sin can only be removed by God at salvation, but God has established a method by which children can have human justice satisfied and thus remove guilt. This method is spanking,” because “The reality about Biblical spanking is that it works in a child’s life to help bring him to the point of salvation.” This church advises parents that “children should be disciplined starting shortly after birth with spanking beginning at the manifestation of the rebellious will,” and that if after spanking “If the will has not been broken, spank again. Some of the ways the administrator of discipline can tell if the child is still being willful is if he turns around or puts his hands behind him during the spanking, or if he screams during or after the spanking.” Oh and the Bible is clear that you can only use a rod to spank. They also tell parents that “when parents know to spank for a disobedience but withhold the rod, they are sinning.”
I guess they’re going to have to revise their theology or finally be punished for abusing children.
I know most spanking advocates aren’t as extreme as this church, but I really have a hard time understanding it still. Just like I really can’t fathom how anyone could hold the mindset that women are inferior to men, I can’t understand how anyone can think it’s okay to hit a child. I see it happen all the time, but I still don’t get it. If it was a man hitting a woman or even a person hitting a dog – they would be prosecuted. But to hit a child is considered an inalienable right. I posted this quote before, but it is fitting today –
When a child hits an adult, we call it hostility.
When an adult hits an adult, we call it assault.
When an adult hits a child, we call it discipline.” – Haim Ginott”
Why? To show that they are bigger and stronger and have power over the child? To teach that might makes right? To break the child’s will/personality? To control the child? To instill the fear of discipline (or God)?
I do not want my child to think that just because someone is bigger and more powerful than she is they can do whatever they want to her (no matter what our national war policy might imply). I do not want my child to be a good person because she fears physical harm if she isn’t. I do not want my child to love/serve me or God out of fear.
There’s something messed up about having to use laws to punishment parents who hurt children in order to punish them. One would hope common sense and love would dictate that, but other forms of rampant violence (spousal abuse, rape…) show that control and intimidation through physical violence is too often the norm. So if we need to add laws that protect babies and children to those that protect women, then so be it.
Colossians Remixed 4
This post is part of my ongoing response to the questions I posted as part of this month’s book discussion on Colossians Remixed by Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmaat over at the Emerging Women blog. (read my other responses – here).
Question #4 –
4. But wait a minute you cry! Aren’t Christians supposed to subject ourselves to the governing authorities and all that? The authors respond – “Rather than read [Romans 13] as providing carte blanche legitimation for any regime, regardless of how idolatrous and oppressive it might be, we suggest that Paul is actually limiting the authority of the state. The state is a servant of God for our good. it has no legitimacy or authority in and of itself, apart from subjection to the rule of God. and when the state clearly abrogates its responsibility to do good, when it acts against the will of God, then the Christian community has a responsibility to call it back to its rightful duty and even to engage in civil disobedience (see Acts 12:6-23). The state has no authority to do evil”. (p185)
I like the balance created here.
I have often heard the “subject yourself to the governing authorities” used as that sort of carte blanche. It is a line used to silence all opposition and dissent. Question the war, the Patriot Act, or No Child Left Behind and you are treated as if you are questioning the existence of God. And labeled a liberal (its hard to tell which is worse)
Then from another camp if I merely attempt to say that the government is in a good position to help make the world a better place and I’m told that I look to the government for my salvation. And that I’m a liberal.
So I like this response. That government thing – it’s there because of God. You know “for by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.” The government is just one more thing that can serve God for his glory. Can it be corrupted by power and swayed by greed? Of course and we have the empires to prove it.
But the responses that say “well even if it is doing God’s work we won’t let it or support it” and those that say “well even if it’s doing evil, we have to support it” just don’t make sense to me. To me the government can be used as a tool to advance God’s kingdom (and I so don’t mean this in a theocratic dictatorship sort of way) or it should be called out when it engages in practices contrary to kingdom values.
So to pledge one’s allegiance to the government (or to a party within that government) instead of God (or as it is subtly twisted – in the name of God) misses the point. Our purpose is to serve God and spread God’s love. If the government is on board with that great. If it is working against that mission, then it needs correction.
For another interesting take on this check out this post over at Theolog.
Evidence of Global Warming
The world has changed…
The BBC has run a great article detailing how global warming has already started to change the world. Read it here.
The facts about how a climate change as small as 1-1.5 degrees will have major impacts on the world reminds me of that scene from Jesus Camp where that homeschooling mom was ridiculing and teaching her boys the utter falsehood of global warming because a couple of degrees is nothing. But as one could tell from the rest of the lesson, they really didn’t care much for science or facts.
What I don’t get is how people can be so sold to a political party that denies global warming for political reasons that they ignore the threat that people may die because they have no water.
English Only
For those of you who recently expressed surprise that people in America advocate for “English only” laws, read this –
WASHINGTON (AP) — Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich equated bilingual education Saturday with “the language of living in a ghetto” and mocked requirements that ballots be printed in multiple languages.
“The government should quit mandating that various documents be printed in any one of 700 languages depending on who randomly shows up” to vote, said Gingrich, who is considering seeking the Republican presidential nomination in 2008. He made the comments in a speech to the National Federation of Republican Women.
“The American people believe English should be the official language of the government. … We should replace bilingual education with immersion in English so people learn the common language of the country and they learn the language of prosperity, not the language of living in a ghetto,” Gingrich said to cheers from the crowd of more than 100.
“Citizenship requires passing a test on American history in English. If that’s true, then we do not have to create ballots in any language except English,” he said.
Peter Zamora, co-chair of the Washington-based Hispanic Education Coalition, which supports bilingual education, said, “The tone of his comments were very hateful. Spanish is spoken by many individuals who do not live in the ghetto.”
He said research has shown “that bilingual education is the best method of teaching English to non-English speakers.”
Spanish-speakers, Zamora said, know they need to learn English.
“There’s no resistance to learning English, really, among immigrants, among native-born citizens,” he said. “Everyone wants to learn English because it’s what you need to thrive in this country.”
In the past, Gingrich has supported making English the nation’s official language. He’s also said all American children should learn English and that other languages should be secondary in schools.
In 1995, for example, he said bilingualism poses “long-term dangers to the fabric of our nation” and that “allowing bilingualism to continue to grow is very dangerous.”
Bilingual programs teach students reading, arithmetic and other basic skills in their native language so they do not fall behind while mastering English.
On voting, federal law requires districts with large populations of non-English speakers to print ballots in multiple languages.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
There’s a part of me that groans at the thought that Gingrich is still around, much less considering a run for the Presidency (God help our country). But to see such racist and self centered talk coming from a person in a position of power is sad. America is full of itself, we are mostly monolingual in this global economy, and we think we can do whatever we want to the rest of the world. Besides helping us stop being complete jerks, how exactly is bilingualism dangerous? I desperately would like for my child to have a bilingual education. There are schools where she can be immersed in two or more languages – helping her learn language when she is most able to and broadening her knowledge of the world. I don’t want her to be a self centered ugly American who thinks everyone else is beneath her. But if politicians like Newt force racism down our throats, she may not easily get that chance (or will be ridiculed for her tolerant global liberal ideas – but mommy gets enough of that and can teach her how to cope…).
Faith and the Environment Forum
They spent time discussing why environmentalism is a faith/moral issue. For many of them it went beyond God’s command to be good stewards of our earth. They focused on Jesus’ command to love and serve the least of these – to help the poor and oppressed. They explained how already the harm being done to our world hurts the poorest in the world the worst. Inuit women whose breastmilk is full of toxins because of the pollution of the rest of the world, the Africans who are starving because of how climate change has destroyed their ecosystem, the farmers who are exposed to toxins so they can grow our food for 8,000 a year, and the poor who live along the world’s coasts that will take the brunt of the superstorms and rising oceans. If we are to follow Jesus’ command to love others, we have to take care of the world as well.
There was also discussion as to why people (and most Christians) don’t care about the environment. Reasons such as a twisted dispensational theology, a separatist theology that sees the “world” as including the physical planet, a conception that it distracts from more important things like getting people to say the Sinner’s Prayer, a tendency to avoid associating with people who are different from them (like Al Gore!) and a belief that God will never let us really hurt the world were all reasons that were discussed. But most of the presenters agreed that Christians, like most Westerners, ignore the environment because of laziness, economics, and politics. We are too lazy to change, we are too cheap to change, we are too in the pockets of big business to change, and we care more for a political agenda than we do God’s commands to change. These are the hurdles that need to be overcome before we can mobilize churches to follow Christ in this area.
One issue that hit home for me was that of food. The techniques of raising our meat and getting our food to us do a lot to hurt our environment. The mass cattle farms do more to harm the environment than our transportation does. So buying food that comes from places that care for the world and those animals helps reduce that impact. But the issue is held in tension with other harmful practices. If I have to drive an hour (use gas, create CO2) to get to the closest Whole Foods to get organic meat is the impact worth it? Or is creating the demand for healthy, environmentally friendly foods worth it? The idea is of course to buy as locally as possible. We buy a share in a local CSA farm during the growing season, but haven’t done much meatwise. I did get the tip last night to check out Eat Wild for local organic meat – so does anyone want to go in ($2000) to buy a whole cow?
As a take away from the evening I realized that the issues were a lot bigger and more complex than I had thought. There is a lot more that I need to do to care for God’s creation, but that my motivation shouldn’t be guilt or fear, but hope for a better world.
Give Peace a Chance
So this seems like an interesting way to work for peace –
The mission of the Global Orgasm is to effect change in the energy field of the Earth through input of the largest possible surge of human energy. Now that there are two more US fleets heading for the Persian Gulf with anti- submarine equipment that can only be for use against Iran, the time to change Earth’s energy is NOW!
The intent is that the participants concentrate any thoughts during and after orgasm on peace. The combination of high- energy orgasmic energy combined with mindful intention may have a much greater effect than previous mass meditations and prayers.
The goal is to add so much concentrated and high-energy positive input into the energy field of the Earth that it will reduce the current dangerous levels of aggression and violence throughout the world.
Global Orgasm is an experiment open to everyone in the world.
WHO? All Men and Women, you and everyone you know.
WHERE? Everywhere in the world, but especially in countries with weapons of mass destruction.
WHEN? Winter Solstice Day – Friday, December 22nd, at the time of your choosing, in the place of your choosing and with as much privacy as you choose.
WHY? To effect positive change in the energy field of the Earth through input of the largest possible surge of human energy a Synchronized Global Orgasm. There are two more US fleets heading for the Persian Gulf with anti-submarine equipment that can only be for use against Iran, so the time to change Earth’s energy is NOW!
I guess the peacemakers really are blessed. 😉
International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women
Given recent discussions and posts, I think it apropos to have a post about the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women which falls on Nov. 25 each year. General polls across America show that the public believes that domestic abuse is a serious problem and that doesn’t even refer to the horrors the women who are sold into the sex trade have to face. Around the world, women not only face ideological sexism, but violence in all its forms. Physical, sexual, emotional, spiritual violence continue to plague women.
But where in the church do we hear much about this? Recently as I took Emma to the pediatricians I saw in the bathroom a sign about domestic abuse asking if one is afraid of someone they love. I realized that it had only been in medical situations (the pediatricians, my ob/gyn, the maternity ward) where I had ever encountered that question before. Unlike a majority of the women I regularly hang out with, I have never had to deal with abuse, but it shocked me that it has only been in “secular” medical settings that the topic has ever even come up. I can’t recall ever having heard violence against women addressed in church (besides us bringing up the sex trade with the youth group). Shouldn’t the church be leading the cause to stop oppression and violence? Shouldn’t caring for the unfortunate and showing love be a huge concern for all of us?
I have to wonder if the sexist assumptions that still haunt parts of the church (as has been demonstrated so clearly recently) has something to do with the church’s inaction in speaking out against violence against women. If women are inferior and are to submit to men, that can easily be translated into the idea that men can therefore do whatever they want to women. No matter what the theological assumptions of men being a loving, protective covering for women, it still places men in a position of power over women. Hierarchy often has the unfortunate side effect of allowing those in power to manipulate, harm, oppress, dominate, and humiliate those “below” them.
But fortunately there are some religious voices that are speaking out against the violence even if the circles I had run in haven’t always talked about it. On April 5, 2006 forty-two national religious leaders from around the country declared violence against women as intolerable and pledged their commitment to its eradication. The National Declaration by Religious Leaders to Address Violence Against Women will be distributed to every battered women’s program in the U.S. Women will see this list and determine whether their faith community supports them in seeking safety for themselves and their children. When people of faith join with other community leaders to address domestic violence, we will see ancient roadblocks turn into resources that save lives and bring healing.
The Declaration –
We proclaim with one voice as national spiritual and religious leaders that violence against women exists in all communities, including our own, and is morally, spiritually and universally intolerable.
We acknowledge that our sacred texts, traditions and values have too often been misused to perpetuate and condone abuse.
We commit ourselves to working toward the day when all women will be safe and abuse will be no more.
We draw upon our healing texts and practices to help make our families and societies whole.
Our religious and spiritual traditions compel us to work for justice and the eradication of violence against women.
We call upon people of all religious and spiritual traditions to join us.
To find out more or to sign the Declaration click here. Join your voice in prayer and action this Nov. 25 to help stop the violence against women.