what i saw tonight...

i saw history being made. i watched as the nation overwhelmingly voted in the first black president of the united states. truly amazing. if only dr king were here to see this.

i saw america overwhelmingly choose to uphold the politics of hope over the politics of fear.

i saw america choose to put this country on track to restoring our standing in the international community. in this global community, each person on our planet is our neighbor, and tonight, i saw my country choose to support a candidate who loves those neighbors as he himself is loved.

i saw america choose a candidate who understands that the issues that challenge this country go beyond binary ideological warfare. i saw america choose a candidate whose intelligence drives him to tackle the root causes of problems, not just their symptoms.

i saw my generation take a stand against accusations of apathy. i saw my generation help turn this country towards a new day of hope, redemption, and a brighter future.

i saw fellow people of faith choose a man who truly embodies what it means to walk the walk.

i saw fellow people of faith utter racists comments in response to their new president-elect.

i saw fellow people of faith insinuate that god's will would only be done if mccain were elected. i saw fellow people of faith insinuate that the end times are nearer because of obama's election. i saw fellow people of faith suggest that obama is the antichrist. (as a side note...i'm tempted to write down the names of everyone who says they are scared now, or who said the country is headed for bad times, or said things like 'oh crap' when the results came in, and i want to go talk to them in two years, and ask them how they're doing. yeah. also, if the country does head into worse times, how is it not president bush's fault after what he drove the economy to and how he tarnished our foreign relations?)

i saw the american people unite under president-elect obama.

i saw barack obama win the election for president of the united states without the help of the supreme court or lost ballots.

i saw history.

Why I am Voting for Barack Obama... --Brian McLaren

Why I'm voting for Barack Obama, and why I hope you will too - Reason 3

[Thanks for all the positive responses to this series of posts. You can find Part 1 here ... and Part 2 here. Reminder - I'm speaking here for myself as a private US citizen, and not on behalf of any group. ]
Reason 3: The Least of These
I’m a Matthew 25 guy. That means that I take very seriously Jesus’ words about caring for “the least of these.” I don’t believe a nation’s moral greatness is measured by how many tax breaks it gives its richest individuals and corporations, or by it's kill-power in terms of weapons and readiness to use them, but rather by how it cares for its most vulnerable people – its children, its sick, its disabled, its unemployed, its minorities.
So when I come to an election, I don’t just ask, “Which candidate will do the most for me and my nuclear family?” I extend my concern.
I extend it to my extended family, which includes people with special needs and disabilities, people with chronic illnesses, gay people, poor people, people of advanced age, people with histories of addiction and crime and mental illness. How will they be treated in a McCain administration? How will they be treated in an Obama administration?
I extend my concern even farther. How about people who live less than an hour from my front door – in inner-city Washington DC, in impoverished sections of Baltimore – how will they fare? Which president will be most concerned about them? Or how about people in states like Ohio and Michigan … where hundreds of thousands of people are unemployed because too many American corporations shipped jobs overseas? Or people in Katrina-devastated areas of Mississippi and Louisiana? Or people in the coal country of Kentucky or East Tennessee and West Virginia, whose lives are being devastated by the “externalized costs” of “cheap coal?”
I don’t stop there either. I go beyond the US. I think about slums where I have walked, people I have met, shacks I have sat in and shanties I have eaten meals in … from Mexico to Chile to South Africa to Burundi. Which candidate will do the most for the least of the least of these?
And when I ask these questions, it’s not just a matter of foreign aid, as important as that may be. It’s a matter of trade as well: which candidate is most interested in trade policies that avoid exploitation abroad as well as at home? And it’s also a matter of war, because a nation at war has fewer resources to be generous.
The gap between rich and poor is growing greater and greater, in this country and around the world. So I ask myself, which candidate is concerned about strengthening the economy in robust ways that will not simply help oil companies, coal companies, and job exporters make higher profits, but will instead support the development of new “green” businesses that have the most promising future and can provide meaningful jobs here and abroad that workers can take true pride in?
Which candidate best understands poverty and economic vulnerability through the closest experience of it? Which one promises to bring the most resources – energy, intelligence, creativity, and commitment – to helping the least of these?
I don’t doubt that Senator McCain would make national defense his top priority as president, and I don’t doubt that he would be most ready to sustain or expand our war-making activities around the world. But I’m ashamed of our nation being known for rushing to war. I would like to be known for helping the poor.
In the end, I truly believe that a nation that helps the poor will have fewer enemies – and therefore more national security – than one that pursues its own national interest through war. As the Apostle Paul said, “Do not look out only for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. Your attitude should be that of Christ Jesus.” That other-oriented mindset is, to me, a powerful reason to support Barack Obama for president.
(You may be wondering, “What about the unborn? Aren't they among the least of these? And what about other living creatures - endangered species and the threatened ecosystems on which they depend? Aren’t they among the least of these?” I plan to address these issues in upcoming posts. Stay tuned. For more on Matthew 25, check out the Matthew 25 Network.)

"The Micah Challenge" Sends Letter to America's Churches....

reading this article challenged me. it inspired me. it made me hurt for my brothers and sisters outside of the privileged world. it reminded me that each time a child dies, jesus weeps and dies with them. each time a person goes hungry, jesus stomach hurts with theirs. each time a brutal oppressor exercises his muscle over a weaker group of people, jesus feels it. and each time we do nothing, we starve jesus. we beat jesus into submission. we kill god in the name of comfort.

what response does it stir up in you?

August, 2008


TO THE CHURCH IN THE UNITED STATES


As the Church of the Lord in what is known as the "Southern" part of the world, moved by the Holy Spirit to fight for the abundant life that Jesus Christ offers, we address our Christian family in the United States, a Church of the same covenant, faith and love. Grace and Peace to all of our brothers and sisters.


We know your works of love; these works have allowed millions of human beings for many generations in our countries in the South to receive the gospel, the Grace of Jesus Christ and the power of His Salvation. The U.S. church's untiring missionary effort planted in our lands Hope in Him who came to reconcile EVERYTHING.


Nevertheless, the political, social and economic situation in the places where this hope has been announced is increasingly distressing. Millions of people in the global South are dying of hunger, violence and injustice. These situations of poverty and pain are not simply the product of the internal functions of our countries; rather they are the results of the international policies of the governments that wield global power.


Therefore, we have this against you, brothers and sisters, that along with this powerful announcing of the Gospel, the Church from the United States has not also raised its voice in protest against the injustices that powerful governments and institutions are inflicting on the global South - injustices that afflict the lives and ecosystems of millions of people who, centuries after the proclamation of the Gospel, still have not seen the sweat of their brow turned into bread.


The worsening inequality and poverty in the South is alarming. Seven years since the United States and 191 other nations publicly promised to cut extreme global poverty in half by the year 2015 through the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), your country has made only a little progress towards fulfilling its commitments.


The MDGs should stir us to action because they echo the calls of the biblical prophets for justice and equity. Further, they are achievable and measurable markers on the roadmap to end extreme global poverty.


And so we ask you as sisters and brothers, citizens of the wealthiest most powerful nation on earth, to publicly challenge your candidates and political leaders - now and after the elections are over - to lead the world in the struggle to cut global poverty in half by 2015. If you who know the Truth will not speak for us who will?


The Church in the United States has the opportunity today to be faithful to the Hope that it preaches. We urge you to remember that the Hope to which you were called as a messenger demands that you seek first the Kingdom of God and God's justice.


Out of love for us, the global Church, in holiness, use your citizenship responsibly for the benefit of the entire world; it is for this very reason that the Lord poured out His life on the Cross.


All who have ears, let them hear what the Lord says to His Church.



Ndaba Mazabane

President

Association of Evangelicals in Southern Africa


Bishop Gerry Seale

General Secretary/CEO

Evangelical Association of the Caribbean


Dr. Richard Howell

General Secretary

Evangelical Fellowship of India


Rev Moss Ntlha

General Secretary

Evangelical Alliance of South Africa


C. Rene Padilla

President

Kairos (Peru)


Pastor Owen Isaacs

General Secretary

Evangelical Fellowship of Botswana


Bishop Efraim Tendero

President

Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches


Rev Heng Cheng

General Secretary/CEO

Evangelical Fellowship of Cambodia


Bishop Paul Mususu

Executive Director/CEO

Evangelical Fellowship of Zambia


Rev Bambang Semedi

General Secretary

Southern Part Sumatera Christian Church


Dr. Reynaldo R. Avante

National Coordinator

Micah Challenge Philippines

Bishop Mano Rumalshah

Bishop

Diocese of Peshawar (Pakistan)


Alfonso Weiland

Co-founder

Paz y Esperanza (Peru)


Erika Izquierdo

Paz y Esperanza (Peru)


Lawrence Tempfwe

National Facilitator

Micah Challenge Zambia


Rev Joe Simfukwe

Principal

Bible College of Central Africa


João Pedro Martins

National Coordinator

Micah Challenge Portugal


Rev Soleman Batti

Chairman

The Toraja Church (Indonesia)


Rev Untung S.K. Wijayaputra

President

The Toraja Mamasa Church (Indonesia)


d'Karlo Pyrba

Director

YABIMA Foundation (Indonesia)


Semuel Takajanji

Director

Kuda Putih Sejahtera Foundation (Indonesia)


Rev Iskandar Saher

Executive Director

Center for the Development of Holistic Ministry (Indonesia)


Gahungu Bunini*

General Secretary

Evangelical Alliance of Rwanda

*Signed on with the names of 16 pastors in the Evangelical Alliance of Rwanda



Bishop Mano Rumalshah

Bishop

Diocese of Peshawar (Pakistan)



Rev Michael Dasey

Rector

Gungahlin Anglican Church (Australia)



Rev Geoffrey Taylor

Director

SoulSupply (Australia)



Rev. Paul Craig

Senior Pastor

Diamond Valley Baptist Church (Australia)



Rev Greg Templeton

Pastor
Sydenham Baptist Church (Australia)



Morris Alex

Pastor

Souls Outreach Church



Captain Robert Casburn,

Commanding Officer

The salvation Army Northern Waves Fellowship (Australia)

Why I Am Voting for Barack Obama... --Brian McLaren

link

Why I'm Voting for Barack Obama - and Why I Hope You Will Too ... Reason 2

[This is part of an ongoing series. I am speaking as a private citizen and not as a representative of any group.]
Reason 2: Leadership Integrity
I am voting for Barack Obama because I value personal integrity in leaders. Personal integrity requires a leader to repudiate falsehood, hate hypocrisy, and pursue fidelity to justice and truth, in private and in public. A person shows a pattern of integrity through fidelity to his or her spouse, through his or her refusal to employ falsehood for personal advantage, and through his or her willingness to admit mistakes and forgo excuses or blame-shifting whenever lapses occur. It seems clear to me that Senator Obama surpasses his counterpart on all counts.
Sadly, tragically even, Senator McCain has not repudiated the proven dishonesty and deceit of the Bush-Rove-Cheney years. In fact, his campaign has been outstripping even Bush-Cheney-Rove in misleading the public with a straight face while claiming straight talk. Even fellow Republicans are finding McCain's tactics indefensible. Recalling the old saying about all being fair in love and war, McCain seems to see the world through a consummate warrior narrative (see EMC, Part 5), which leads him to love winning at all costs – including the expense of integrity, which in turn makes fidelity to “the reality-based community” quaint and only advisable when it is advantageous. Yes, all of us have lapses in integrity at times; all of us need grace. As a deeply flawed yet committed Christian, I am the first to affirm this. But when you look at personal and public patterns of integrity over many years, Barack Obama shines and John McCain stumbles badly.
But my concern is not only John McCain. I’m also terribly concerned about the party that nominated him. I don’t believe that a party that rushes to war based on a false pretenses deserves to be re-elected, no matter how loudly it claims to be for "family values" or "small-town values." Do you? Is there an integrity lapse more serious than this?

Some of us believe that the Bush-Cheney administration was sincerely mistaken about weapons of mass destruction in their build-up to war. In this view, we went to war because of a failure of intelligence. It was an honest mistake, some say – being careful to remember that the honesty of the mistake does not minimize its seriousness. Others of us believe that Bush-Rove-Cheney cynically manipulated the data – and us, the American people - to legitimize a war they wanted to prosecute for other reasons. In this view, it was a dishonest abuse of power. Either way, whether because of a deficit of good intelligence or a deficit of integrity, I believe that a party that puts so many American and Iraqi lives in harm’s way without sufficient cause does not deserve to be re-elected. They should be sent into the penalty box for at least one period or given a red card for at least one game. How can they be rewarded with another presidency?
If the Bush-Rove-Cheney party had repudiated their false premises for going to war, it might be different. If McCain had been true to his “maverick” reputation and had stood against the Bush-Cheney failure in intelligence and/or integrity, perhaps voting for him could be reconciled with a high commitment to integrity. But McCain has been the opposite of a maverick on the war’s “weapons of mass destruction” justification, and on the idea of pre-emptive war on which it stands.
Senator Obama has been the maverick. He stood against the war from the beginning. He wasn’t beguiled by “false intelligence” and he wasn’t fooled by a beguiling rationale. This reason alone would put me in Obama’s camp. I’ll raise the question once more: Does a party that creates a pre-emptive war based on false claims or poor intelligence deserve to be rewarded with another term?
Of course, we could add to the duplicity about WMD many other Bush-Rove-Cheney betrayals of integrity: hidden prison camps, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, torture, forged letters, the Valerie Plame incident, and so on. We could talk about the Republican duplicity of giving massive tax cuts to the rich while saddling the next generation with a record national debt, a classic case of robbing an unborn Peter to pay a fat-and-happy Paul. We could also lament how Senator McCain has stooped to the same kind of Rovian electioneering tactics that President Bush used against him so unfairly in 2000, and so on. Beneath all these issues, one issue is obvious: if we reward with another term in office a party that has deceived or misled us, we will get what we deserve.
I believe that Senator Obama is an extraordinary candidate. While his opponent indulges in surprisingly dishonest and divisive attack ads, Obama has resisted responding in kind, instead focusing on critical issues and "a new spirit of unity and shared responsibility." But even if Barack Obama were merely mediocre, simply based on the failures of the Republican Party to hold their president and vice president accountable for their lack of integrity (and/or intelligence) over these last eight years, I believe it’s high time for a change.
The American people have been fooled once already in this new century. Those who fooled us should not be rewarded with another term. I hope we won't let ourselves be fooled again.

Why I Am Voting for Barack Obama... --Brian McLaren

link

Why I'm Voting for Obama, and Why I Hope You Will Too: Reason 1
Reason 1: Framing Story

[Note: over the next few weeks, I'll be posting a number of personal reflections on the political campaign. I am only speaking as a private citizen, not as the representative of any group.]

My top reason for supporting Barack Obama for president centers in the narrative I believe he frames his life and work by, in contrast to the narrative John McCain frames his life and work by. To me, this issue of narrative (or framing story, for readers of my book Everything Must Change) means far more in a president than whether he claims to be liberal or conservative, religious or nonreligious, Christian or otherwise, Democrat or Republican.

Does anyone doubt that Senator McCain lives by a warrior narrative? This is the most consistent theme in his campaign. For him the world is clearly divided into us and them.


We are good; they are evil. We are right; they are wrong. We are about safety; they are about danger.

This dualistic and fearful narrative is deeply rooted in McCain’s generation. They were formed in the simple, binary context of Axis and Allies, and then Communists and Free World. When Communism collapsed, a new antagonist conveniently presented itself (pre-empting the expected "peace dividend" and keeping the famed "military-industrial complex" well funded). This new war became what McCain calls “the transcendent challenge of the 21st century,” the clash of the West with fundamentalist Islam. McCain’s word “transcendent” is significant. It suggests a kind of holy war mentality, because for McCain, these us-them dualisms are absolute and therefore of a cosmic, metaphysical, even spiritual nature.



The dualistic us-them mindset, I believe, is bogus and dangerous. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is, ironically, the same narrative that drives “fundamentalist Islam,” and so by following it, we will become more and more like those we call our enemies. We already have done so in recent years, in fact, with torture and secret prison camps and the like. This warrior narrative is what Senator McCain has most dangerously in common with President Bush. This “transcendent war” narrative is what we are in most desperate need of changing through this election.

Think about where this warrior narrative can lead in the next four years. From war with Iraq to war with Iran, maybe even war with Russia, any of which would likely require the reinstatement of the draft since our troops have been stretched to the breaking point over the last four years. Soccer and hockey moms who are comforted by McCain's warrior posture should keep this in mind, because there may well be an unanticipated downside to his fighter mindset.

Senator Obama certainly believes in a strong national defense. But I believe he leans toward a profoundly different narrative. It is a reconciliation narrative, a peace-building narrative, a collaboration narrative. He made it clear when he said he would change President Bush’s policy of not talking to our enemies. McCain and others tried to portray this alternative approach as cowardice and appeasement, but they were wrong. Instead of dividing the world into “us” and “them,” Obama’s narrative seeks to bring people together in a expanding us. While McCain’s narrative only offers enemies surrender and defeat, Obama’s offers them the possibility of reconciliation.

I favor Obama’s narrative or framing story because of two convictions I hold very deeply and passionately.

First, I am a committed Christian, and I believe a narrative of reconciliation is in harmony with the teachings of Jesus. Conversely, a narrative of domination and defeat is not: it is the way of Caesar, or what Jesus called “the kingdoms of this world.” I believe that at the core of Jesus’ teaching is the world's truly transcendent challenge and call – to rise above the old narrative of “love your brother and hate your enemy.” In other words, rather than to “transcendent war,” I believe God’s call to all people is toward transcendent reconciliation. I am convinced that war is inherently non-transcendent. It is, in fact, anti-transcendent. I feel the God-given call to love enemies and seek reconciliation and eventual collaboration rather than domination and defeat and extermination. I know that many Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, agnostics, and atheists would feel a similar revulsion to voting an energetic promoter of a warrior narrative into office for another four years (or more).

Second, I believe we have crossed a threshold in my lifetime. Senator McCain, because of his age and his viewpoint, lives on the older side of that threshold. This doesn’t mean he is evil, but it means he is responding in ways that are no longer appropriate to a world that no longer exists, and in that way, his viewpoint is no longer helpful.

On his side of the threshold, war – including nuclear war - is an option to keep on the table – so that “bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” slips so easily off the tongue. On this side, war is an abomination, a horrible evil that can never be entered into rashly or lightly (or under false pretenses). On his side, wars can be justified if “we” launch them, but not if “they” do. On this side, they are horrible and tragic no matter who launches them.

On his side, evil resides in them and goodness in us. On this side, there is goodness and evil on both sides.

On his side, the greatest enemy is “them.” On this side, the greatest enemies are realities both “we” and “they” must face together – environmental destruction, carelessness toward the poor, and the death-wish of security through war, for starters.

I believe McCain’s old warrior narrative is simply too dangerous to live by any more. That’s the first reason I am voting for Barack Obama. He would be the first to say that he’s not the Messiah, and he isn’t perfect, but he represents a turning … a turning away from the fear-based Bush-Rove-Cheney-McCain warrior narrative, and a turning toward a narrative that seeks peace through reconciliation and creative collaboration rather than through domination and a go-it-alone cowboy/bomber mentality. We’re not just voting for a president this year: we’re voting for a framing story our nation will live by, or kill by.

Tony Campolo on abortion...

Tony's Post on God's Politics

Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Moving the Abortion Debate Beyond Partisan Purists (by Tony Campolo)
In books and speeches, I have often said that God is neither a Democrat nor a Republican. I have contended that to make either party "The God Party" is idolatry. This, however, does not mean that Christians should abandon political activism. It has been said that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing. Consequently, I have long called for Christians to be involved in both political parties, striving to be the "leaven" that permeates both parties with biblically-based judgments and values derived from Christian beliefs.

Taking my own advice, this year I played a part in framing the abortion plank of the Democratic Party's platform. I helped the party to take what some have called a "historic step" by having the party become committed to abortion reduction.

More than 60 percent of all abortions are economically driven. The reality is that without provisions for hospital coverage; pre- and post-natal care; maternity leave so that a woman giving birth will not lose her job; and nursing assistance to help single mothers transition into parenthood, millions of women who want to carry their pregnancies to term will not do so.

The good news is that, with help from Jim Wallis and others, the party platform now calls for these needs to be met. It also calls for educational programs to reduce unwanted pregnancies, with room for the teaching of abstinence, and asks for government agencies to make adoptions easier.

These achievements were lauded by Democrats for Life and by the Catholic Alliance for Life. While at the Democratic National Convention, religious leaders of other faith traditions personally thanked me for my efforts. Even leaders of some pro-choice organizations hailed this compromise, claiming that at last they could find some common ground with pro-life advocates.

Purists, on the other hand, have had hard words for me, claiming that I should not have been involved in any way with a political party that is pro-choice. While I understand their desire to settle for nothing less than the overturning of Roe vs. Wade, I nevertheless believe that my decision to work for abortion reduction was a good one.

Consider these questions: If 10 children are drowning in a swimming pool, and you can only save six of them, should you save the six? Or, should you wait until help arrives that can save them all, even if you know that the six you could save will be lost in the meantime?

To my Christian brothers and sisters who are part of the party that has a pro-life platform, I have to ask whether they are willing to hold the Republican Party to its pro-life commitments. For several years, the Republicans controlled the White House and both houses of Congress, and had a Supreme Court wherein seven of its nine judges were Republican appointees. Yet no effort was made to overturn Roe vs. Wade -- and very little pressure to do something about this was put on Republican leaders by Evangelicals who had given them 82 percent of their votes in 2004. And, are they willing to demand that provisions such as I worked for in the Democratic platform become policies of their party? To fail to do so would be to protect the unborn child and then abandon that child and the mother in the delivery room. And do not raise the matter of how much money these proposals will cost. We all know better than that.

For those who condemn any compromise on this divisive issue of abortion, may I suggest that they consider not paying their taxes since they are financing a government that supports a woman's right to have an abortion -- and in some instances even puts money into organizations that perform them.

There are legitimate concerns about my actions, but I decided that if some of the unborn could be saved, it would be wrong for me not to do what I could to save them.

Tony Campolo is founder of the Evangelical Association for the Promotion of Education (EAPE) and professor emeritus of sociology at Eastern University.

i guess roland martin and i have our minds on the same topic.

roland martin's op-ed on abortion, sex-ed, and bristol palin.

the complexity of abortion...

Abortion at the RNC

I would highly suggest you follow the link above to a recent blog post from Jim Wallis, founder of Sojourners and Call to Renewal.
If you don't know who Jim is, you can check out his bio here.

The number of abortions that take place in our country each year is both astounding and appalling. Recent studies put the number at around 1.3 million per year. This is nothing short of a tragedy.

So what do we do to stop this? And better yet, do any candidates truly seek to reduce the number of abortions, and how? Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is safe to say that if a woman chooses abortion, it is plainly evident that her pregnancy was unwanted. The reasons for not wanting to keep the baby could be one of many (harm to the mother, lack of resources to raise a child, product of rape, etc.), or a combination thereof. But the point is that at some point the mother decides she doesn't want to keep a child. This decision is made 1.3 million times per year in our country.

To me, there are two ways to treat the problem of unwanted pregnancies. The first is to ensure that a woman who doesn't want a baby (for whatever reason) doesn't get pregnant. The second is to ensure that when a woman does become pregnant, she carries the pregnancy to term. It seems to me that there are many ways to tackle each of these treatments, but let me cover just a few. In regards to the first treatment, we must embrace a comprehensive sex education for all young people. This education would show all sides of the issue of sex. This includes teaching about abstinence as the only way to 100% prevent pregnancy (and sti's) but this education shouldn't stop there. Eventually, these young people are going to have sex. Some at a young age. Some on there wedding day for the first time. Regardless of when they become sexually active, they will need to understand their own anatomy and that of their partner. They will also need to understand the dangers of sti's (including hiv/aids) and how to practice safe sex. Again, these people will probably have sex at some point, and if we don't educate them when they are mostly in the public school system, when will we? We have a prime opportunity to reach young people as they physically and emotionally begin the journey to adulthood, and when the majority of them are in the public school system.

To share an example of how abstinence only sex-ed can fail people of all walks of life, I'll share an example of a young Christian boy...me! In high school, my parents opted to place me in the abstinence only class for sex-ed. At the time, I was fully in favor of this decision, as I was abstaining and choosing to wait until marriage to have sex. So what did I learn in abstinence only sex-ed? I'm not really sure. I already was choosing to abstain, and then some grad students from PLU came in and urged us to abstain. (Um, I think we were already choosing that seeing as we were in the class, yes?) Fast forward. I got married. I had sex. I had never been taught how to use contraception. I didn't get to see the student advisors (trained by medical professionals) demonstrate different forms of contraception during sex-ed using props. Now this may also speak to a larger problem (that being parental units who found it extremely difficult to discuss sexual matters) but I'll save that for a different post. Just wanted to share with you a story about the shortfalls of abstinence only education.

The second treatment is one that will certainly require an enormous amount of sensitivity. The process would involve convincing a woman who may be thinking about terminating a pregnancy to not go through with it. This would require an examination of her reasons for her decision, and this again would require an enormous amount of sensitivity. The obvious example is a woman who wants to terminate because of some reason other than her own health or rape. It should certainly be pointed out that there are thousands and thousands of couples strongly desiring to become parents through adoption, and that this woman can give one of those couples that gift. This in turn opens a can of worms regarding our adoption/foster child systems and how each candidate/political party would address their many problems. Saving that for a different post. However, a lesser heard side of the story in regards to a woman terminating pregnancy for a reason other than health or rape is this: cost. Is the woman covered under any kind of insurance? Will the adopting family be asked to pay for the birth mother's medical bills? Can they afford to do that? There are many complex issues surrounding adoption, and we should examine where the candidate we vote for stands on these issues.

And then of course there are the two instances that may stir the most discussion. What if the mother may face adverse health issues because of the pregnancy/delivery? What if the mother faces a possibility of death in pregnancy/delivery? I don't think these questions can be answered simply or cleanly. Philosophical and religious debates about the value of one life versus another, about God's will, etc., will certainly arise when this issue is discussed. And in the case of rape, the necessity of sensitivity reaches it's highest importance and the can of worms only gets bigger and messier.

So what's the point? The point is that abortion cannot and should not be reduced to two warring ideological factions. No political party or candidate is running on the platform that more abortions should be performed. However, one party is clear that they do not want to openly call for a reduction of unwanted pregnancies and therefore abortions, but instead is content to play the old ideological game and talk about pro-life issues but not make an effort to do something tangible and practical.

a reminder...

Have You Ever?

listen to this song if you get the chance. it has been a favorite of mine for some time now, and i always find myself listening to it when i'm challenged.

the reason i like it so much is that it reminds me to focus despite all my challenges on jesus. seek jesus.

in my time of change, of questioning, and of challenging my beliefs, i am truly seeking to know the heart and mind of jesus, and to embrace his mission.

lately this song has been on my mind, along with the following passage:

He has showed you, O man, what is good.
And what does the LORD require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy
and to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

just wanted to remind you why i am writing, and to remind myself who i am seeking.

my birthday

kerry woke me up early last thursday morning to celebrate my completion of 23 years of life!  i stumbled into the living room to find birthday streamers and balloons scattered around, with kerry waiting in the middle of it all, eager to present me with a gift!  am i lucky or what?  there is no greater joy that i've found than to wake up, roll over, and see her beautiful face watching me.  anyway, she  got me some new tennis balls since the weather is finally feeling like summer, as well as a brand new outdoor basketball!  we have a great little community court here that i can use now without having to borrow blake's ball!  finally, she also got me this wicked sweet water bottle (camelbak) that is bpa free.   the one in the picture is red like kerry's, but mine is dark green.  the blue cap on the bottle is actually where you suck the water through.  my co-worker called it a "man-nipple" though i don't think i'd go that far.  kerry and i had a nice dinner together that night, and a relaxing evening at home.  it was a great birthday.

the following evening i was expecting to have blake and sarah over for dinner.  we were going to have a huge mexican spread, and i was indeed looking forward to the tacos, guacamole, etc.  about 5:30, there's a knock on the door and kerry asks me to answer it.  to my surprise greg and sara fleehart had made the trek down from seattle and were at the door with blake and sarah!  it was quite a surprise!  for about 20 minutes we enjoyed the presence of our company, showing greg and sara around our new place and shared a few drinks.  then, another knock.  this time, nathan was at the door, and it was then i realized i truly have the greatest wife in the world.  she got all of our closest friends from the area (sans eileen who was in los angeles) to come and celebrate with us!  it was a fantastic evening with friends who we are quickly considering family.  i couldn't have asked for more on my birthday.  isn't kerry wonderful?

as a side note, greg and sara brought a few little gifts for me in this gift bag:

the bag is actually a hologram that changes between hannah montana and miley cyrus. amazing!

put away falsehood...

"Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor, for we are all members of one body." Ephesians 4:25

throughout the last year or two (and even now) there have been and are some seriously ridiculous rumors going around about barack obama. please visit this site:

http://www.matthew25.org/paf/index.htm

i've posted a link under "stuff to read" as well. the site is called "put away falsehood." yes, they are a p.a.c. yes, they recently endorsed obama for president. but they present the facts surrounding some of the more serious rumors and lies. read and learn. then decide.

regarding mr pickens and those ads -->

just a quick note. t boone pickens' plan (if you don't know what it is, click on one of those ads -->) is doing a lot of good in terms of getting the entire country to wake up and pay attention to our current energy problems.

while i don't think his plan is flawless, i think it's a step in the right direction towards better energy sources for our power grid. by adding that many wind farms between canada and texas, we will surely be getting more power from a better, cleaner source. i think his plan to use these savings (monetary and with nat gas) for powering ngv's like honda's civic is a bit of a stretch. while natural gas is certainly a nice alternative to crude oil from opec, i think we need to focus on moving towards transportation that relies fully on renewable, clean energy sources. natural gas may be a nice intermediate step, but along with non-food agro products, i don't see it as a viable long term source.

still, t boone certainly has gotten more people to start thinking about moving in the right direction, which in this case is a good thing.

are you kidding me?

this might be one of the craziest things i've ever seen. the bush administration is attempting to label most common forms of contraception (the pill, iud's, the ring) as abortion! Read the full article here.

Treating the Pill as Abortion, Draft Regulation Stirs Debate
By STEPHANIE
SIMONJuly 31, 2008; Page A11
Set aside the fraught question of when human life begins. The new debate: When does pregnancy begin? The Bush Administration has ignited a furor with a proposed definition of pregnancy that has the effect of classifying some of the most widely used methods of contraception as abortion.

A draft regulation, still being revised and debated, treats most birth-control
pills and intrauterine devices as abortion because they can work by preventing
fertilized eggs from implanting in the uterus. The regulation considers that
destroying "the life of a human being." Many medical groups disagree. They
hold that pregnancy isn't established until several days after conception, when
the fertilized egg has grown to a cluster of several dozen cells and burrowed
into the uterine wall. Anything that disrupts that process, in their view, is
contraception.

a good read for a thursday...

from the latest blog on "God's Politics":

Thursday, July 31, 2008
Tennessee
Church Shootings: The Culture War's Latest Casualties (by Craig Detweiler)
Tragically, the culture war crossed over fighting words to shooting
bullets. Once again, a community of faith was caught in the
crossfire. While 25 children sang songs from "Annie," a gunman fired
three shotgun blasts inside the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist
Church. The seven people shot and two people murdered on Sunday
morning are the latest victims of the culture war.

Sadly, this wasn't the first shooting to occur at a house of worship in America and not likely to be the last. Do we remember the four teenagers and three adults who were murdered at Wedgwood Baptist Church in Fort Worth, Texas in 1999? Two more died at New Life Church in Colorado Springs last December. In each case, the shooter turned their frustration with particular religious expressions into an occasion to kill. (And as a nation we continue to support the right to shoot others over sane gun control policies--but that deserves its own separate conversation).

While many evangelicals celebrated Cassie Bernall and Rachel Scott as martyrs who died for their Christian convictions at Columbine High School, I wonder if we will extend the same heroism to the victims in Tennessee? Evidently, usher Greg McKendry shielded the children performing selections from "Annie" and took the brunt of the shotgun blast. A retired school teacher, Linda Kraeger, also died from
gunshot wounds. She was merely visiting the church. In both Columbine and Knoxville, the cowardly shooters took out their grudges upon innocent victims. Those with a conservative faith died at Columbine. Those with liberal beliefs perished in Tennessee. We mourn for them all.

The shooter in Tennessee, Jim Adkisson, has been identified as an unemployed divorcee. A four-page note found in his car described his contempt for liberals. When the system failed to work (evidently, his food stamps had just run out), Adkisson took up arms, aiming at those who he had been trained to hate--gays and liberals. Why did he single out Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalists? Evidently, the church has recently posted a sign welcoming gays to their congregation. It set off a firestorm on conservative and Christian talk radio in East Tennessee. I found this online:

The specific chain of events that brought Jim Adkisson
to the TVUC sanctuary was a recent decision to erect a sign specifically
welcoming LGBT people into the congregation. That choice evidently set off a
firestorm in the local right-wing community with the specific church and its
location named repeatedly on right-wing and evangelical radio. The gunman,
already looking for someone to take out his rage on, evidently took the path of
local least resistance. At any rate, while I'm not sure it's even worth
assigning blame, it's not likely that Jim Adkisson would have driven the ten
miles from his exurban hovel to my family's church if he hadn't learned what he
needed about where to go on the radio.

While ultimate responsibility resides with the shooters, we can also connect these deaths to too much toxic talk radio. Both the left and the right play the blame game all day long. On talk radio, my problems are always somebody else's
fault. This is the kind of tragedy that occurs when we adopt war rhetoric,
turning our fellow Americans into enemies. Both sides have
effectively demonized the opposition, laying blame for our problems at others'
feet. Would it "kill" talk radio announcers to tone down their tenor
for the sake of the common good? Could they sacrifice a few ratings
points by refusing to serve the red meat their most radicalized listeners
relish? Can we discipline ourselves to change the channel when the
scapegoating begins? I still recall my shock and horror when Paul Hill
murdered Dr. John Britton in the name of 'life'. How could a graduate of Reformed Theological Seminary and an ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church of America take up arms, killing in the name of God? I recently saw the chilling documentary Lake of Fire, which illustrates all the tragedies surrounding the fight over abortion. Director Tony Kaye captured early footage of Paul Hill, boldly proclaiming death sentences upon abortion providers. Lake of Fire also presents
the horrors of an abortion procedure, including the emotional trauma that also
follows. This even-handed movie leaves you with an enormous amount of
sadness. There are no winners in Tony Kaye's bold documentary (or in our
current culture war). In response to all the overheated rhetoric, I created a
documentary, Purple State of Mind with my college roommate, John Marks. As I was a entering the Christian faith twenty years ago, John was exiting. We
revisited that crossing as an example of a constructive dialogue across the
religious and political divide. Purple State of Mind is rooted in the profound hope that we can co-exist despite our differences. But plenty of patient listening must precede that fragile peace. We will not get there by burying our differences, but by bearing one another's burdens enroute. I write this with a fair amount of trepidation. To promote peace to a war mongering people can get you in trouble. I don't want to be placed on anybody's hit list. I do not want to put my children in the line of fine because I extend an olive branch towards atheists, homosexuals, or anyone else deemed 'other' by the conservative Christian community. Churchgoers in Fort Worth, Texas and Colorado Springs and Knoxville want to worship in freedom rather than fear. When something your pastor says or your congregation does can get you killed, we live in decidedly dangerous times. Heaven help us all to cease fire.

Craig Detweiler directs the Reel
Spirituality Institute at Fuller Theological Seminary. He blogs at http://www.purplestateofmind.com/. His new book, Into the Dark, searches for the sacred amidst the top ranked films on the Internet Movie Database.

more

clearly from my last post i am finding myself moving into a new type of political ideology that isn't aligned with any one party, but seeks instead to support and advocate policies that focus on the "least of these", that focus on a consistent ethic of life, and that focus on a mutual respect for all of God's creation.

unfortunately, challenging political beliefs actually has turned out to be the easy part. the more difficult task is challenging my beliefs about the church and it's institutions, doctrine, and rituals. the easy way to "deal with" my new ideologies would be to simply say that this ideology has a place in the political arena, but that church is church and i need to be there and do all that goes into church.

as i tried to do this however, i felt my soul getting restless. i was sitting in sunday school classes of 50 people (48 of whom were 55 and older) discussing the nuances of paradise that we would experience when (not if) we went to heaven. two things bothered me. first, while i believe it is important to be confident of your faith, i find it dangerous to start listing "who gets in" and "who burns". there is a self-righteousness inherent in these discussions that turns me off. as i put myself in my atheist friends shoes, i see an arrogance about these types of conversations. if we are to be sharing the gospel with all people, then certainly we should be conscious of how are words are being perceived, not just how we intended them to be understood. second, i was bothered by the fact that we fat, rich, spoiled americans were sitting around on our butts debating how we would look in heaven, what we would do on the new earth, who we would know, etc....in other words, would heaven be as comfy for us as america is? 5 people die of AIDS every minute...meaning that in that hour long class, 300 people died around the world. it disgusted me that we were so wrapped up in our heavenly retirement plan. when jesus talked about the kingdom of heaven, i believe he was talking about something that is both in heaven and on earth. how do i know this? when he taught us to pray, we learned these words: "they kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven". the key there is "on earth." what are we doing to bring the kingdom to earth? and no, i don't mean "what are we doing to fulfill wild prophecies found in apocalyptic literature so that the rapture will happen sooner". (my thoughts on the book of revelation will come later i'm sure) what i mean is what are we doing to create a church, a faith, that the outcast of society can find safety in? is your church a place where an openly homosexual man or woman can find love? is your church a place that cares more about the radical calling to follow jesus, or is it more focused on providing a nice place for nice people to be nice together for a few hours before leaving in their nice lexus and going home to their nice house? if we are called to share jesus with the people of the world, then we must ask ourselves "what kind of jesus do people see in me?" do they see a jesus caught up in moral "codes", self-preservation, and personal gain? or do they see a jesus who has ALREADY DIED FOR ALL? who died for us while we ALL WERE STILL SINNING? do they see a jesus who loved the world so immensely that he followed his love to death? who took on the weight of the world's sin in a single moment? do they see a jesus who says "come to me child, you are loved" or who says "you are not loved unless you clean up your act"? these are important questions to wrestle with. they are consuming my mind and heart right now, to the point that i can barely sleep. i hope and pray that the jesus i share with people is a jesus who loves them, a jesus who provides a safe place for them, and a jesus who is their advocate.

as i think about these things, i can't help but also wonder what the purpose of church should be. for me, i too often find that church is a big friendly self-help group. we all are trying to improve who we are as christians, so that we can be sure we "get in" at the end. we join in bible studies to understand how we can be better christians, we join small groups to share how we are trying to be better, and we listen to preachers who share with us insights as to how we can be better christians. and yet jesus himself tells us what it is we should be focusing on.

Matthew 25: 31-45

31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'

40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'

41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

jesus plainly states that our final judgement will rest on how we treated the poor, the sick, the outcast, the lost....the least of this world. i have yet to find a church that is truly buying into this theology. i have been reading recently about the emergent church, and how they are seeking to establish a postmodern church that focuses more outwardly (towards the least and lost) and less on self-improvement. i'm hoping to learn more in the coming weeks.

ultimately, i am an individual that cannot ignore my deepest convictions, so kerry and i will be searching for a new place to foster our faith. during our search, we are hoping to do much more volunteering for the sick and poor, to deeply engage with close friends (both christians and non-christians), and to continually wrestle with how our faith is carried out in our lives and in whatever place we call church.

any thoughts? i'm afraid i've written quite a bit once again. thanks for reading though. peace.

please take 3 mins 36 secs and watch this video.