It’s as Good A Time as Any

Tags

Bernie Sanders, Election 2016, Hillary Clinton, progressives

Well here we are again. I’m inclined to talk (ask my husband), so there is little point in trying to silence me. You have no doubt made your decision already about me.

I’m not one of those persons who people are casual about. You either like me or you hate me, seldom anything down the middle.

So I don’t give a rip’s roaring ass which one you adhere to frankly. I can come down on that both sides of that issue too, depending, so welcome if you are reading, screw you in absentia if you aren’t.

I don’t figure myself to be that much different than the rest of ya, a bit smarter than the average, a tad wiser given my age than a thirty-year-old. I know myself better than most people  bother to inspect their innards, and I’m comfortable with what I find. Not always happy with it, mind you, but comfortable.

I grew up privileged. Not in super rich mind you, but privileged nonetheless. Most average kids from working class families don’t believe that, but it’s true. It was a hell of a lot easier than growing up African-American or Hispanic. It would have been better to be male given the times. But I never went to bed hungry or didn’t have a pair of shoes. I had the opportunity of a pretty decent education back when it was still affordable for the working class kid.

It’s a small but constant wonder to me that I ended up being a bleeding-heart liberal. I shouldn’t have, at least as I measure it from examining the lives of those I went to high school with. Some of them are loons. Some of them are just immersed in their own lives of grandkids and whatever one is interested in if it ain’t the state of the world and all who inhabit it. A few are liberal, a few pointedly conservative, but I repeat myself–the loons.

But I pride myself most about being a rational thinking individual who manages to blend a sophisticated metaphysical belief system along with a logic based political view of the world at the same time. They conflict, my angelic side and my devil as you would expect, and when the conflict comes, I wrestle with it, I seek to escape from it, but I rarely can ignore it.

Back in 2008, I supported Hillary Clinton, until it was obvious she was losing to Obama. Then I switched allegiance, since John McCain and his Alaskan albatross proved  to be unacceptable as leaders of the free world.

So we are now 2015, and Hillary is running again. And I am supporting her again. And. . . .

I’m conflicted.

Bernie Sanders and I disagree on very little. I was frankly surprised that he gathered so much money so quickly.

I am sensitive to the notion that if all of us smart people read the tea leaves accurately and accord him no real chance, we in fact insure he will have no real chance. Yet Hillary is more than competent and it’s so time for a woman to take the leadership.

Yet Hillary and I don’t agree on a number of things, and I am more than aware that she is more conservative (by nature) and certainly by design than I am. She is more comfortable with Wall Street than I would prefer. She is more hawkish that I would prefer.

In some ways Bernie has made this easier. At least his has the good sense to run under the Democratic banner, which means he is no threat to siphon off votes in the election as a third party candidate.

So I’ve been quiet about Hillary for the most part, hoping to let Bernie’s run peter out as it is expected to, and let the conflict within my head die a quiet death. And yet, I’m mindful that if he has no chance, it can surely be in part because people like me, his natural allies, won’t switch.

I am more than aware of my conflict of interests, which devolve down to a moral choice or a loyalty choice. Both are important I suppose, but one is compelling.

I am, as I say, pretty much clear on what motivates me.

An example.

The other evening, my husband admitted, “I have no opinion on the President’s trade agreement. I simply haven’t read hardly anything about it, so I don’t know who has the better argument.”

“Same here,” I replied, “but my reasons are quite different. I have deliberately avoided reading about it. I know at the end, I’ll either have to diss Elizabeth Warren or the President, and he needs all the support he can get against the crazies, so I’ve avoided the cognitive dissonance becoming informed would cause.”

See? I can and do act to avoid issues I don’t want to deal with.

And as I scrolled through my Facebook feed, I basically stayed fairly quiet when the discussions turned to Hillary or Bernie.

Yet the nagging continued.

This is not a time to merely support the candidate who can win. At least not until we get to the crossroads. Until the primaries are completed and one has withdrawn, I figure I am required by my moral compass at least to support the candidate whose dedicated to doing the most for the average person.

So I find myself feeling all sorts of traitor in leaving Hillary’s side and offering my small donation to Bernie. I still figure he doesn’t have a chance, but if that happens, at least I can sleep well knowing I did the right thing. I followed my conscious and not my cynical political savvy self.

Nothing will change in this country before it is too late to matter unless we as citizens, victims of the government machine, stand up and stop this madness. I’ve truly had enough of those who promise a better future while continuing to “play the game”.  The game at this point is simply rigged, and so clogged with illegality and personal greed as to make even Satan blanche at the sheer chutzpah.

Perhaps it’s always been this way, with a small but vocal group warning of “the end” but with climate change and income inequality, I don’t see planet earth surviving much longer with humanoids being at the top of the ladder. Unless that is, we make drastic changes.

They say that the uber wealthy in the world now routinely have bunkers build beneath their luxury homes, guarding against what they know must surely come, the uprising of people who have nothing left to lose.

I fully expect Hillary Clinton will be the next president. I hope however that she is not. Not because she wouldn’t be okay as president’s go. But because following Bernie, would be a fine time for Elizabeth Warren. And at least with Bernie, we have an honest chance to turn the page to a new way of doing democracy.

But enough of fantasy politics.

Back to reality.

Where’s my checkbook?

Jesus Was Just Wondering

Tags

Catholic, Christianity, faith traditions, progressives, right wing evangelicals, social justice issues, theology

I assume that Jesus understands us better than we understand him. At least I hope that’s true. Otherwise, . . . well, I’d rather not think about it.

Still, I imagine sometimes that even Jesus picks up the phone after watching his super HD TV, dialed in on Fox or the Chinese equivalent for state-supported “news.” Dialing 4-6-3 (G O D), I over-hear this:

“Yo, Dad, how goes it? Say, have you been watching channel 3845? (E V I L)

“No?”

“Well, let me tell you and maybe you can explain why. . . .”

I figure a lot of stuff down here just befuddles even Jesus.

I read the other day that Marko Rubio was a Catholic but went to a Baptist church most of the time. That seems weird. Then I read that the NOM’s (National Organization for Marriage) main man, Brian Brown, is a former Quaker turned Catholic. That seems even weirder.

I noted, when I was a frequenter of Catholic Answers Forum, that some of the most vociferous “orthodox” types were former Baptists and Seven-Day Adventists. Now converts are more orthodox than the mainstream, that’s clear, but this goes beyond being orthodox, this goes to a self-righteously expressed proclamation against the poor, gays, women, and other marginalized groups.  I daresay most of them don’t like the Catholic position regarding immigration one bit. They are for war and for the death penalty. They consider social justice issues the heresy of the modernist lefty Cafeteria Catholic.

The only difference between themselves and the self-styled unchurched interpreter of “what the bible says,” is that  these Catholics mine the bible and encyclicals and Vatican documents for sentences and paragraphs to justify their arguments.

Frankly, what we find is that the right-wing of the Roman Church is most simpatico with the general home of fundamentalists–Southern Baptists. It seems that those who are “teaching” these new converts turn a blind eye mostly to their propensity to embrace biblical literalism and a failure to embrace things like universal health care, global warming, and even evolution. It seems more, that anyone who will sign on the dotted line, is okay. Just don’t ask too many questions.

I don’t know how other denominations are doing with this. I know the The Episcopal Church has been painfully working through a growing split between the left and right. And Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Methodists all have, are, or will be, doing the same.

The truth is, that most members in all these denominations are moderates. Most that leave their churches do so for no church, or another,  because they are tired of the warring they see.

I frequent NCR a lot, and read a significant number of the articles there. The comments are always the same, mostly supportive of the article or writer, but always with a few who warn of dire consequences if we continue to listen to voices of the progressive left. The Church is either on the perfectly right track and needs to go further, or is dangerously off track and in need of a rescue if it is to survive.

Indeed, many on the far right of the Roman church openly wish that we progressives would leave, even if it means that their church is drastically reduced in numbers. Is this true of other denominations? I have no clue. But I wonder.

Is it the right who cannot stomach “others” in their midst because it makes them uncomfortable in their well-ordered theology? Or is it the left that finds the right an unacceptable drag on the business of getting on with the Kingdom’s agenda of feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting the imprisoned? It’s hard to know.

Are there as many “new” conservative churches as there are “new” Catholic denominations. or new Methodists? Are well equally running away from each other?

If we are, they we are both to blame. This hardly comports with “loving neighbor” as Jesus for saw it. I mean Jesus scandalized his world by consistently eating and drinking with all the “wrong” people, all the “others” of his land.

It seems to me that it’s not supposed to be easy. If it were, humans would have realized the efficacy of it long ago and done it. It’s hard to work with those who continually threaten to throw a monkey wrench into the works. Ask any congress person and they will be happy to tell you about gridlock.

Compromise forces us to release our own desires and focus on incremental progress as being marginally better than no progress at all. Not something to throw a party about, but something to feel some satisfaction about.

Are there those in your congregations whom you find embarrassing for their views? How do you deal with them? I know that these Catholics whose political and social views I frankly abhor, are most difficult for me to embrace even in prayer.

 I frankly cringe when I read that some awful hatemongering right-winger like Bill Donahue or Brian Brown is a Catholic. They model Catholicism to an unknowing spectrum of America and the world. A lousy model, but a model nonetheless.

Do you find some “spokespeople” in your faith tradition embarrassing? Do they make you cringe? If you don’t, then need you ask if you are in a tradition that has become lazily easy for you? Is that bad?

I think Jesus wants to know what we think. Have you talked to him lately? I think he wonders about us, and perhaps it means we should wonder about ourselves.

Related Articles

• Marco Rubio tries to still debate over his religion (telegraph.co.uk)

Standing on the Roof With a Megaphone

Tags

civilization, fundamentalists, GOP, History, Juan Williams, liberals, Louis Gohmert, political ideology, Politics, progressives, right wing nuttery, Sarah Palin, sociology

I may as well. Things on the old computer front are getting rather ugly. So if I disappear, well I haven’t, I’ve just dragged this mother to a hospital for repair.

I’m almost at a standstill on FB these days, I can barely scroll. So I figured to download another foxfire which I had dumped as corrupted. Well, I didn’t get far before it “file corrupted me”. I tried opera again, same deal. I tried Google’s chrome, and you guessed it.

I finally got a forum question into Google, and maybe I can get an answer. It may be some security setting that needs changing.

But my e-mail is now acting up. If I’m sent a link, like a FB comment, I can’t answer it within e-mail, they won’t open anything. A pain, but I can cut and paste at least. It’s sooo totally frustrating.

The Contrarian doesn’t have problems since he usually just plays poker and goes to a couple of sites. I’m the one with four windows open and starting and stopping. Basically I figure that I’m moving stuff faster than the dial-up speed can take, and it just locks up. Then I have to shut down everything (I get lots of “not responding”) and start over. Over time, I guess I wind things up inside and suddenly everything starts to go awry.

Then it’s into the shop where they clean it all out again. Which seems unfair, since the Contrarian does maintenance every evening, clean-ups, virus updates, defrags. But apparently it can’t overcome my crazed Internet maneuvers.

And then there’s Twitter, which only partially works now. The New Twitter is crap as far as I’m concerned. They continue to say they are fixing it, but never do, at least not my problems. I’m about ready to return to Fred and Wilma and ask if they have an extra room I can rent. The MODERNITY is driving me nuts.

***

Many muse on why the West arose as the leader in civilization, dominating the landscape for several hundred years. Superficial answers don’t satisfy. You really have to go far back to uncover the probable reason, and it may well be location, location, location. Hardly a new idea to modern marketing! Anyway, it’s an interesting article and moreover it’s an even more interesting site that you might want to bookmark for return visits, if you are history minded that is.

***

Interesting question. Republicans self-identify with being conservative. Democrats are loath to even accept the designation “liberal”. We try to substitute progressive instead. We get ready to defend if accused of liberalism. It’s like having the plague, or a STD. Why?  Jonathan Alter attempts an answer. Bonus is that Alter gives mini-reviews of a lot of political themed books on Washington politics in general and Obama specifically.

***

BlackMagpieTheory has a great little poem about Sarah, dear Sarah. Short and sweet. Go see.

***

New GOPer Idiot to enter onto the radar screen is Repiglian Louis Gohmert, from the great sludge state of TexASS. Gohmert says Merika would be more fine if all the fine Christians, as he would define them were to take control and just impose God’s law on the land of the not-anymore-free. H/T to Ahab at Republic at Gilead for the above.  By the by, word is that Louis is perhaps the dumbest representative in the entire House, but I guess that is pretty self-evident.

***

I must say, there is something mildly giggly about a whole bunch of aging white men and their sexy grizzly girls, all fawning over Juan Williams, and trying to act all-inclusive and everything. Let’s slay the almighty NPR, with its tiny government funding to show how much we love our HOUSE NEGROES, cuz they make us look soooo COLORFUL and not at all the bigoted asshats we truly are.

We are after all, agreeing that it’s okay to think that Muslims who wear traditional Muslim clothing, place being Muslim above being Americans or whatever nationality they might be. Like Catholics who wear crucifixes and Jews who wear yarmulkes are of course placing their faiths above their citizenship. Native Peoples who wear braids, obviously will defend their ethnic group before they will carry a rifle for American against enemy invaders. Yeah, I can see that this all makes sense, and is not just another RACIST FEAR MONGERING TACTIC to gain the approval of the RIGHT WING BIGOT, ya know the ones with NASCAR/BUDWEISER  jackets and FLAGS on their car aerials all to announce that they place their JUST US above the common good of the ENTIRE country.

***

Related Articles

• Rose: Williams’ firing reflects fear in media (boston.com)
• Louis Gohmert’s Exquisitely Dumb Solution To The Unemployment Problem (huffingtonpost.com)

Life in the Big Tent

Tags

bible, conservatives, ECLA, exegesis, gay rights, progressives, scripture, The Episcopal Church, The Lutheran Church, theology

As some of you no doubt know, the ECLA has just voted to allow committed practicing homosexuals into ministry. They join a growing list of mainline Protestant churches who have done the same, including my own, the Episcopal Church. I believe the Quakers beat us all by decades, much to their credit.

The ECLA is now, or will soon begin to learn of the cost it incurs by this move. An interesting article in the Chicago Tribune acknowledges that the decision is being met with quite different responses, church by church within the Lutheran community.

We in TEC have been through this recently ourselves, as I alluded to. In reality, we didn’t craft a new provision, but simply returned to the original rule that places no impediment on anyone seeking ministry discernment. Each parish and diocese has handled the “discussion” as it sees fit.

One of the points made in the Tribune piece, is that perhaps God will more judge us not on the correctness of our decisions in this matter, but rather how we deal with the opposition without our congregations. And I think that may be key here. Church, representing Christian principles and what we hope are moral precepts, can and should stand as a banner as to how to remain in unity even when we are theologically divided.

So far we haven’t done a particularly good job of that. Many people within TEC have left, forming splinter churches who then try to align with Anglican churches in  Africa, which have been missionaried in a more conservative mode from the beginning.

We, at my church, have been discussing the issue through a forum on the convention over several weeks. Same-sex issues were reviewed along with the church’s legislative work on health care, war, evangelizing, women’s issues, and a  whole host of concerns. We too expressed our desire to approach those who think differently with care and gentleness.

We like to think of ourselves as a big tent, and indeed so do most mainline Protestant groups. We like to think we can accommodate different voices within our congregations while still adhering to the basic principles of Christian teaching. So far, we don’t seem to be doing so well.

Some see this as a general realignment of “progressive” forces and “conservative” forces, and that perhaps the future holds in store a loose agreement across denominational lines. I think that a distinct possibility.

 We, in talking, referred to some of the things that we have heard about our church since the Convention. I of course could go on at length at all the really nasty remarks sent my way by ultra conservative Catholics who are ex-Episcopalians. I’ve been called evil, and blasphemous, a heretic, and well, you get the picture. One person said our church was referred to as the “gay church.” She shot back, “And you think yours is straight?”

The level of rancor is admittedly high, and that is most sad. What is more sad, to me at least, is that all is said in the name of “Jesus.” The conservatives argue that we, by our stance, prove we have no love or allegiance to Jesus or the Gospel. We of course believe with all our hearts that we do.

This points up an equally sad thing. While reading and studying the bible is a fine thing, and to be encouraged, it is sufficiently broad and obtuse overall, that virtually any position can be vindicated by some verse or another. Worse, it of course has been. The bible has been used to justify slavery, polygamy, suffering at the hands of oppressive regimes, subjugation of women, war, the death penalty,and the list goes on and on.

All this and more can be justified or not in the hands of skillful manipulators or just by the innocent but untrained reader. There was and is something to be said for the reluctance, historically, of the Roman Catholic Church in giving the average person access to so powerful and dangerous a book.

But, as I said, I’m not here to claim that the bible shouldn’t be read. But I am here to proclaim that serious attention must be paid to experts in the field, those who are linguistic experts, who have studied the anthropological, archaeological, and historical records in defining and determining what the texts actually mean, who did or didn’t write them, and so forth.

The ECLA claims they spent eight years of study in making the recommendation that same-sex restrictions be lifted. No doubt a good part of that was a thorough study of scripture. There are dozens of excellently done books on the subject, done by scholars who spend a lifetime acquiring the skills to do proper, unbiased exegetical work.

 Those of us who have read this material, in quantity, find that the majority are in agreement that there is no barrier biblically to same-sex inclusion in our various religious practices, any more than there is a biblical barrier to womens’ inclusion.

Our recognition that those who continue to tout the “literalist” interpretation of  “it says what it means and it means what it says,” do so for reasons other than strict reason and rationality, will enable us to reach out to such people with loving gentleness and wisdom. We must help them to dismantle the emotional wall they have erected to protect themselves against a Gospel that is more inclusive and loving than they are prepared for. We must seek to uncover the needs and satisfy them in ways that no longer do violence to the teaching of Christ. Barring that, we must honor their right to think differently, bless them, and continue on our way, hopefully in unity.

If we cannot, then indeed, I would argue no one else can.