James Dobson released a “Letter From 2012 in an Obama Administration” earlier in the week, which coming from a leader of the religious right, was embarrassing to Christians around the country.
Jim Wallis, also a leader in the evangelical movement, called Dobson out for his biased and hatred-filled prose and asked for an apology. The letter “shows the kind of negative Christian leadership that has become so embarrassing to so many of your fellow Christians in America. We are weary of this kind of Christian leadership, and that is why so many are forsaking the Religious Right in this election.“
He goes on to say… ”Dr. Dobson, you of course have the same right as every Christian and every American to vote your own convictions on the issues you most care about, but you have chosen to insult the convictions of millions of other Christians, whose own deeply held faith convictions might motivate them to vote differently than you. This epistle of fear is perhaps the dying gasp of a discredited heterodoxy of conservative religion and conservative politics. But out of that death, a resurrection of biblical politics more faithful to the whole gospel–one that is truly good news–might indeed be coming to life.”
We can only hope that Wallis’ vision for the future comes to pass.
October 31, 2008
George Will discussed the price tag attached to this years presidential campaigns as McCain has attempted to discredit Obama’s campaign because of the large amounts of money being donated and the offer of public financing he declined.
I think this is the best summary of the situation to date:
“The Center for Responsive Politics calculates that, by Election Day, $2.4 billion will have been spent on presidential campaigns in the two-year election cycle that began in January 2007, and an additional $2.9 billion will have been spent on 435 House and 35 Senate contests. This $5.3 billion is a billion less than Americans will spend this year on potato chips.“
October 31, 2008
This may be the best thing to come out of the entire election cycle!
October 31, 2008
I found Susan’s post to be an interesting summary of the shifts in political voting some parts of the country is seeing, as it relates to our religious views.
“Religion is not a hat that you can take off or put on at will. When I voted in this presidential election (and yes, I’ve already voted), I didn’t take my religion off and leave it outside in the care of an election monitor while I did the civic thing and cast my ballot. So, yes, I think there is a religious reason to vote for one candidate and against the other.
For some, voting their religious values means voting on a set of issues like abortion or gay marriage. To me, religion is the sum of all my values, my fundamental conviction that the world is a divine gift and we humans are responsible for receiving that gift with joy and working with God to serve one another and all living things. God loves this world and we are to love God with our whole hearts and our neighbor as ourselves…
My religious reason for voting for Senator Obama is because I believe in hope. I also believe the fear-mongering of Senator McCain’s campaign violated my religious convictions at the deepest level and it was the main reason I did not vote for him and Governor Palin.
But come January 2009, I will not expect any president to do the work of faith for me. I expect, no matter who is president for the next four years, to work side by side with all my fellow citizens to see that we hope for more and we give in to fear less. ”
October 30, 2008
Yesterday afternoon Rebels in the eastern part of the Congo (DRC) took over the small town of Goma. To many, this is a conflict thousands of miles away in towns we’ve never heard of, involving people with names we simply cannot pronounce.
But what happened yesterday in Goma is huge. Goma is the capital of the North Kivu province, and sits at the top of Lake Kivu, which seperates Rwanda and the DRC. Tension have been high in the eastern provinces for some time. It is home to the largest UN peacekeeping force on the planet, with over 17,000 troops on the ground. The ongoing conflict stems in part from the Rwandan genocide. Hutu’s fled to Uganda and the Congo after the Rwandan genocide, because they feared retaliation from the Tutsi’s who had been the target of the genocide. Some of these Hutu’s formed militias, which Rwanda and a cultish group of rebels under the leadership of Laurent Nkuda have denounced. The Congolese armies have been collaborating with these militias and the government has failed to control them. Nkuda’s group was formed in order to ‘defend the Tutsi population’ but Nkuda has recently expanded his mission to include the ‘liberation of all of the Congo’. The population is largely unsympathetic to Nkuda’s cause, and are resenting all Tutsi’s in increasing numbers.
Early Wednesday fire was exchanged along the border between Rwandan and Congolose militaries. Citizens began to flee the region and headed for Goma, a small city considered a safe haven for refugees. Nkuda and his rebels then advanced on Goma, but stopped short at the city gates. The citizens and refugees then began fleeing again, this time alongside the Congolese troops who are refusing to fight any longer. They are not being paid regularly and are exhausted from years of tension in the region. Nkuda agreed to a cease-fire with the UN troops left to defend Goma.
UN officials have give the UN troops in Congo permission to defend the city from the rebels if need be. However, they have not been given permission to defend the city from Rwandan troops, who are rumored to be crossing the border and engaging in some of these firefights. There is an increasing sense of frustration with the UN among the civilian population who do not feel any safer with the troops there.
The conflict is rife with ethnic tensions, international controversy and domestic problems. The UN, the Congolese Government and Nkuda have begun another round of peace negotiations, though many are cynical about its potential to change much on the ground. The last deal signed in January 2008 only lasted through August when tensions led to new rounds of violence. Many fear that if a stable solution is not worked out in coming months, the entire region will explode with ethnic and nationalistic violence- and that the presence of 17,000 UN troops will not be a sufficient international response.
October 30, 2008
On Wednesday Sen. Obama held a rally in Richmond, VA- a place that by Gov. Palin’s definition may be ‘real America’ simply based on its history. Richmond was the capital of the confederacy, and the capital of a state that hasn’t voted for a democratic presidential candidate in 44 years. He confronted the recent (and somewhat outlandish) attacks from the right that democrats are unpatriotic and liberals are un-american, saying:
“There are no real parts of the country and fake parts of the country… There are no pro-America parts of the country and anti-America parts of the country. We all love this country, no matter where we live or where we come from. Black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, young, old, rich, poor, gay, straight, city dweller, farm dwellers, it doesn’t matter. We’re all together.”
“There are patriots who supported this war in Iraq; there are patriots who opposed it. There are patriots who believe in Democratic policies and those who believe in Republican policies. The men and women from Virginia and all across this country who serve on our battlefields, some are Democrats, some are Republicans, some are independents, but they have fought together and bled together, and some died together under the same proud flag.”
Thank goodness Sen. Obama has the sense to denounce the politics of fear and division that some Republicans have resorted to in the final weeks of the election.
Powell also made the point on Meet the Press last week with this story:
I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother at Arlington Cemetery and she had her head on the headstone of her son’s grave. And as the picture focused in you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards: Purple Heart, Bronze Star. Showed that he died in Iraq. Gave his date of birth, date of death, he was 20 years old. And then at the very top of the headstone, it didn’t have a Christian cross, didn’t have a Star of David. It had a crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan. And he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9-11. And he waited until he could go serve his country and he gave his life.
Now we have got to stop polarizing ourselves in this way. And John McCain is as nondiscriminatory as anyone I know but I’m troubled about the fact that within the party we have these kinds of expressions.
October 23, 2008
“ To those who would say he is only supporting Obama as a fellow African American, Powell pointed out that if this were the criterion, he could have made his endorsement months ago. Much more important, I think, is that Powell is a moderate Republican who listens to all this innuendo about terrorism and all this nonsense equating the income tax with socialism and wonders what in the world has happened to his once-grand old party.”
That’s all folks.
October 21, 2008
There are now no fewer than seven current national polls that show Obama with a double-digit advantage: Newsweek (+11), ABC/Post (+10), Democracy Corps (+10), Research 2000 (+10), Battleground (+13), Gallup (+10 using their Likely Voter II model) and now this CBS News poll.
The numbers speak for themselves. Though having a few prominent conservative philosophers speak out against McCain surely doesn’t hurt either. Chris Buckley (son of William Buckley Jr; founder of the conservative publication, the National Review) resigned over the weekend after public outcry regarding his column last week in which he asked McCain why in the world he would have chosen Palin as his VP. He is the second columnist at the NR to question the choice of Palin, following in the footsteps of Kathleen Parker who received 12,000 pieces of hate mail after her original column,urging Palin to step down, was published in the NR. Buckley quoted Ronald Reagan as he left the NR, saying “I haven’t left the Republican Party. It left me.”
If Colin Powell endorses Obama after the debate tonight, as expected based on his views on the management of the Iraq war, it will be “the final nail in the coffin of the Republican campaign to hold onto the White House. “
The conservative politicos are in a real quandary with this election, as the republican party faces an identity crisis which is playing out on the national stage. The fringes of the party have become more extreme, openly shouting “terrorist” and “kill him” at their rallies, and Palin has fit right in by stirring up the pot. Meanwhile many of the mainstream republicans have found appeal in the policy proposals of Obama and Biden. The Republican party no longer stands for the small government (just look at the bailout package the Bush administration proposed) or family values (many have been disillusioned with the political scandals that have plagued the evangelical republican base in recent history). It is increasingly apparent that the republicans don’t have time to reorganize themselves in time for this year’s election, but the party will have to do some extensive soul searching after November in order to solidify a conservative philosophy with a platform relevant in the 21st century. Such a platform would have to appeal to some of the moderate and yes, evangelical, voters which have been leaving the party in droves. This must include practical environmental policies (drill here, drill now is in no way practical or sufficient- the oil won’t be available for 30 years!), an embrace of the civil rights of individuals based on the foundations of the constitution (which the Bush administration has mauled so horribly in the past 8 years), moderate social policies to address poverty in America (an increasingly important issue among the “religious right”), and base it all on a philosophy of governance that does not include the types of Rovian politics seen of late. The road ahead is a steep one indeed.
October 15, 2008
Gov. Palin’s nomination as the GOP VP candidate has been accompanied by discussions of her views on sex education, rights of women, and her stance on abortion. As a staunch conservative her views are pro-life and pro- abstinence-only sex education. Her opinions on the matter are based on her personal and religious convictions to which she is entitled, as you and I are entitled to our opinions. However the efficacy of abstinence only education for American teenagers is a legitimate concern of many. In addition, recent policy changes in the Bush administration on the subject are, regardless of one’s personal convictions, failing women in Africa we have pledged to assist and are on the brink of failing to protect American women’s right to access comprehensive health care information.
Teenage Hormones
The age at which teens become sexually active is the same (17) across the modern industrialized nations, however the pregnancy, abortion and STD infection rates vary greatly. This is, in part, because of the ways these teens are educated about the consequences of their choices. In today’s Post, Amy Schalet compared the pregnancy and abortion rates of the US to those in the Netherlands. Teens engage in the same behaviors, but the difference? Dutch teen pregnancy rates are six times lower than in the US, and the abortion rate is significantly lower as well. Similarly, in Canada, the pregnancy rate is half what ours is.
Like some other controversies at the heart of the culture wars, this problem — which, after receding nationally since the early 1990s, appears to be worsening again — need not exist. High teen pregnancy rates result in part from our inability to talk honestly and wisely about teen sexuality. And they are exacerbated by policies that prohibit such talk.
Imposition of Policies
US AID quietly decided this week to prohibit a British aid organization, Marie Stopes Int., from distributing any contraceptives which are paid for by the US. The intent of the policy is to punish China for their population control program through force abortions, because Marie Stopes Int. is a provider of family planning services in China (they maintain they have not ever been a part of the force-abortion policies). While it is admirable that the Bush administration is attempting to stand up to this policy, the tragic side effects are that women in Africa will not have the access to family planning resources that they once had. The Bush Administration is not simply targeting Stopes‘ abortion services, the administration is taking condoms, birth control and IUD’s away from clinics that desperately need them. Marie Stopes International supports numerous rural clinics throughout Africa, and in many communities are the only source of contraceptives and simple reproductive health care.
Conscience Objections in the Medical Field
In late August HHS announced a proposed rule with the intent of providing greater protection to medical employees who have moral objections to particular medical procedures, particularly abortions. Laws of this kind were first passed in the 1970’s to allow individuals to object to performing medical procedures on religious grounds. The law protects the critical first amendment rights of individuals in the medical field. However there is concern that the recently proposed regulations are too vague and will allow doctors, nurses and other medical staff to interpret anything (including the provision of emergency contraceptives to rape victims) as objectionable and therefore refuse service. Many would agree that doctors have the right to not perform particular services based on their personal convictions. The disagreement arises when they are allowed to define for themselves what is objectionable, and refuse women access to services that they want or need. Hillary Clinton has been particularly outspoken on this issue, while others are convinced the effects of the regulations, if made final, would be less severe. HHS opened the regulation up for comment letters and is currently in the process of reviewing them before making final decisions. Whether or not the regs are finalized, HHS should include more specific language to protect patients and ensure that they are always given access to comprehensive information and services, even if a specific doctor is will not accommodate their desires.
October 9, 2008
