A corollary to yesterday's post about political bedfellows

George W. Bush Bush dumped $848,000 worth of Harken Energy stock back in 1990, two months before the company announced a $23.2 million loss; he was 34 weeks late in filing a form the Securities and Exchange Commission required to record the sale... According to Time Magazine, "...Harken concealed losses by selling most of a subsidiary to an off-the-books entity controlled by company insiders. Bush was on the audit committee, which, at least in theory, approved the deal. It's the same tactic used by Enron—on a massive, more pernicious scale..."
Time reported in the same issue that "Halliburton, while Cheney was CEO, greased the books to boost the firm's flagging fortunes." Creative accounting.

Dennis Kozolowski, Ken Lay, Merrill Lynch, Enron, Andersen, Halliburton, Adelphia, R.J. Reynolds, Tyco, Bristol-Meyers, Global Crossing, the list goes on and on of individuals and corporations involved in abuse and corruption during early part of Bush's FIRST term. It's as if there was no S.E.C. no accountability or transparency or ethics of any kind in business, finance, and government.

The Bush years were a new gilded age or cancer-stage capitalism. A culture of corruption flourished.

Is it any wonder that we're now dealing with the likes of Bernard L. Madoff, Goldman Sacs, Lehman Brothers, the entire mortgage-based-securities, and auto executives flying in on private jets to ask Congress for bailouts?

Obscene greed. Yet Conservative Christians only get worked up about abortion and gay marriage. When I wrote columns scrutinizing John McCain's connection to the "Keating 5" and the S&L bailout scandal of the 1980's and how his role in deregulation of the financial sector may have helped lead to our current meltdown I was raked over the coals as some kind of unpatriotic, America-hating, abortion promoting liberal.

Transparency and accountability, and a whole lot of self-discipline is what America needs now.
Time for Relief, Recovery, and a whole lot of REFORM.

But what do I know? People have labeled me a "liberal" and now I have to wear that label like a scarlet letter.

Sex, Politics, and Religion

Lately, this has been a kinder, gentler blog what with the poetry and pictures and feeble attempt at fiction and all. But just for a little bit, I'd like to return to it's original mandate and talk about sex, politics and religion for a little bit. I posted a quote from and a link to an article by Evangelical pastor and Liberal social activist Jim Wallis on my "Prophet, Priest, and Pirate" blog-

"The Religious Right was a Christian mistake. It was a movement that sought to implement a ' agenda' by tying the faithful to one political option -- the right wing of the Republican Party. The politicizing of faith in such a partisan way is always a theological mistake. But the rapid decline of the Religious Right now offers us a new opportunity to re-think the role of faith in American public life.

Personally, I am not offended or alarmed by the notion of a post-Christian America. Christianity was originally and, in my view, always meant to be a minority faith with a counter-cultural stance, as opposed to the dominant cultural and political force. Notions of a 'Christian America' quite frankly haven’t turned out very well." ~Jim Wallis

Read the entire article at Sojourners.com

THAT blog as an RSS feed into my Facebook profile page and I tagged several friends (both Red and Blue) to share it with them. What wound up happening is that a former student who's very much a religious conservative commented on it and kept the discussion thread going for several days. Rather than post a full transcript of everything everyone said, I'm just presenting what I wrote here, so it may read a little choppy . You may want to imagine what other people wrote to me.

Recently right-wingers were attacking Sen. Chuck Grassley, an opponent of gay marriage for not being outspoken enough or moving quickly enough in response to Iowa's recent Supreme Court decision calling a ban on gay marriage unconstitutional. They're accusing him of drifting away from socially conservative values. I guarantee that if Jesus was traveling 21st century America as He did first century Palestine, Christian Conservatives would criticize Him for cavorting with sinners and tax collectors and for not fasting and not ceremonially washing His hands and gleaning grain from the edge of fields on the Sabbath and healing on the Sabbath etc. etc.

One of my biggest beefs with my fellow Christians is that we too often lean too heavily on the Law at the expense of the Gospel. We cannot and will not turn people's hearts toward God by legislation or judicial decision or constitutional amendment or for that matter by ranting and raving and protest and boycott. We can never save someone from their sin by coercively preventing them from sinning. It's as ridiculous as thinking that we can extract reliable intelligence from an enemy by torture.

People who genuinely want to follow Jesus and can't give up on their precious "culture war," should consider that we are not battling against flesh and blood and therefore conventional (and by that I mean political, practical, and especially Machiavellian , Tzu-ian and Rovian) tactics. The way to win the hearts and minds of unbelievers (and first of all, we can never do this, only God, with Holy Spirit can do it- perhaps using us as His tools) is with love, compassion, example, and prayer. And by addressing their needs, not what we perceive as their faults and errors.

---

I've always felt that Christianity should be leery of associating itself too closely with either party and that Christians need to keep Jesus and His cross central to our theology, and beware of letting our moralist agendas eclipse Him. Admittedly, I am often just as guilty of this as anyone who is passionate about conventional wedge issues or "values" issues (depending on whether you see them with red or blue glasses). Call me chief among sinners, but my point is, that the true kingdom will only advance AND American civil discourse will only thrive when we all stop using "religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon."

Don't we need to love our enemies and pray for those that persecute us? Even when our most treasured issues are at stake?

---

You'll all notice that I tried not to say anything about gay marriage or my opinion on it, I only meant to use Sen. Grassley's predicament to highlight how we go off the rails with our legalism sometimes. I'm not prepared to condone what God disapproves of- however, my don't see how my marriage needs defending from gay people and even if I'm uncomfortable with it, I don't think that the secular, Constitutional right to equal protection under the laws is not something that God, Scripture or the Church deny to non believers or any kind of sinners. These positions may confound many of my dearly loved brothers and sisters in Christ. It is interesting to consider that while the Catholic Church considers marriage a sacrament, the Lutheran Church does not. And, Moses and Paul both write about homosexuality but Jesus Himself didn't address it directly.

I've always been of the opinion that the state should license civil unions and the Church should offer marriages.

Be that as it may, my original intention with this post was never to get involved in a debate on gay marriage. It was to consider our balance on Law and Gospel. I was wondering if sometimes (and this may be as true for me and liberal issues as it is for anyone else with conservative issues) do our temporal, social, political, and moral concerns like meat offered to idols, all things are permitted, but not all things are helpful.

---

To look after orphans and widows in their distress, do not mistreat an alien or oppress, love your neighbor as yourself, love your enemy and pray for those that persecute you, judge not lest ye be judged, mercy triumphs over judgment... these are God's values as I read them. America, just like every single individual has always and daily failed to... Read More uphold these values- indeed may very well be incapable of upholding them. We all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Sure, I was knit together in my mother's womb, but I was also conceived in sin. Sure, the United States may have been founded by people who called themselves Christian and modeled our laws after Judeo-Christian traditions, but don't kid yourself, they were business men, politicians, even pirates and privateers, ambitious, sinful mercenaries who killed and enslaved for selfish gain.

Be careful not to fall prey to the Hegelian notion that says that God blesses us more than other countries because we're somehow more Christian than they are. Remember who the Puritans were seeking religious freedom from? King James, as in the King James Bible- a very Christian monarch.

Calvinists, Thomists, Augustinians, and Lutherans (and for that matter in a secular vein- Hobbsians and Lockeans) all have drastically different concepts of human nature and I suppose sin itself, for that matter. As a Lutheran, I believe that on this side of death we all live in a perpetual and inescapable state of sin. Only Jesus' death and resurrection saves me. But during this life the best we can do is make allowances because, like Moses found, people have hard hearts. I agree, as Jesus, we shouldn't shy away from calling wrong wrong, but Jesus still loved and died for people who got divorces, or committed adultery by lusting after someone with their eyes and commit murder by hating people.

---

John Adams once warned that "power always thinks it has great soul, vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak, and that it is doing God's service when it might be violating all His laws. Our passions the powerful are assured... posses so much metaphysical subtlety and so much overpowering eloquence that they insinuate themselves into the understanding and the conscience of the weak and convert both to their party."

---

One American thinks that permitting gay marriage or teaching evolution are a betrayal of God and the values which America was founded on. Another American may think that employing torture or violating 4th and 5th and 14th Amendment rights, or fabricating intelligence reports to support unprovoked military action is just as much an unconscionable betrayal of those same values.

Sen. Charles Grassley is deliberative and thoughtful, not reactionary. Whatever ways I may disagree with him, I don't think he deserved to be attacked by people whom he agrees with because he isn't speaking as loudly and angrily as they as quickly as they have. It just seems to me, that we often fault on the side of Law because we are motivated by anger and fear, whereas the Gospel is always motivated by love- not weakness or trying to please everyone, but genuine love and concern. The goal is that all would come to Christ and salvation, not for me to defend God FROM them.

Like it or not however, for one person protecting and preserving how our society operates is damaging it and preventing it from operating how it how it ought to. Po-tate-o Po-tOt-o. One Christian says God instituted infant baptism, another says... Read More God wants young adults to decide to be baptized. One Christian says Christ is really present in the bread and wine, another says it's just symbolic. Likewise, one American loves the 1st and 4th and 8th Amendments, another loves the 2nd and 10th most. One American looks at the 2nd Amendment and focuses on the "well-regulated militia," another focuses on the individual's right to bear arms. One looks at the 1st Amendment and emphasizes that the right to practice one's religion should not be impeded, another emphasizes that the state should not establish, favor or promote any one religion above another one. Yet, E pluribus unum, from many, one.

---

If you really want to nit pick- sure, God created woman out of man when He saw that he should not be alone, and the Bible says, for this reason a man should leave his mother and father and the two shall become one, but there is no clear legal definition given for a marriage. Adam and Eve didn't get a license from the county clerk or have a ring or a ceremony. Abraham, Jacob, David, and most notoriously Solomon all practiced polygamy. Fundamentalist Mormons are convinced that that should be legalized. Less than fifty years ago many states prohibited Blacks and Whites from getting married. Most states now have a concept called "common-law" marriage in which it categorizes people who've been cohabiting without the blessing of the Church.

---

Pluralism sucks, and you may be scared that God will punish us for it, or that He'll withdraw His blessing for it, but would you prefer a theocracy? Who'd get to be the Mullah? Yours or mine? I'll take pluralism.

When is the culture that influences the church the worldly, unchurched culture that seems so relativistic and when is the seemingly pious and religious subculture of religiosity that is nevertheless human, but imagines itself from God?

Zwingly and Calvin and Wesley insisted on bending the world's culture into our Christian expectations, whereas Luther called us to influence and participate, but not get overly hung up on it because its more valuable to keep our eyes on the cross, and of course then there's Benedict who thought we should remove ourselves from the world. It's a little like Mary and Martha, the busy body (who, mind you, is working for God) or the open heart with eyes and ears focused on higher things. If you're focus is truly on Jesus, how can you have time to notice all the specks in other people's eyes?

---

Lutherans teach that we can never fulfill the Law, but thanks to Christ's work on the cross, we now live in the freedom and grace of the Gospel. Whereas Baptists believe that once one's saved, you are obligated to start following the Law, keep every thought captive etc. It seems to set up some unrealistic expectations on Christians to be perfect. Granted, we shouldn't abuse our freedom by thinking of grace as a license to sin. But my point is, one of the problems with the "Evangelical" or Conservative-Christian movement in America is that rather than having the Law precede and direct us toward the Gospel, we're starting to think that the Gospel precedes and directs us into Legalism.

THAT is the main point I hoped to communicate by posting the quote from and link to an article by Jim Wallis- not get into a heady debate about the so-called culture wars. One of my OTHER problems with extreme right wingers is that they seem to be constantly on the defensive, itching for conflict. I wanted civil, academic, abstract, discussion- not all out argument. I think that if the truth is truth it stands by itself, Share it, explain it, but why feel like you need to defend it? God is God and I am not. He can defend Himself.

I still think that right-wingers went to far when they came down on Senator Grassley -who is on their side!

---

One of my OTHER problems with extreme right wingers is that they seem to be constantly on the defensive, itching for conflict. I wanted civil, academic, abstract, discussion- not all out argument. I think that if the truth is truth it stands by itself, Share it, explain it, but why feel like you need to defend it? God is God and I am not. He can defend Himself.

I'm a compulsive teacher, I want people to think and discuss, even if it takes cognitive dissonance to start the process. Unfortunately it comes of as me being a muck-rucker because I upset the applecart by not simply marching in lock-step with everybody else on every single issue.

---

Writing, speaking, extrapolating, defending, try to cajole and convince and apply apologetics till we're blue in the face, someone will always disagree and worse, someone will always take offense. Obviously there were several times in there when Craig felt that I didn't hear him and a few when I did probably misread his points. There were also several times where I think he felt like I may have been attacking him when actually I was desperately trying to convince him.

⁸ All things are wearisome,
more than one can say.
The eye never has enough of seeing,
nor the ear its fill of hearing.

⁹ What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.

Why be angry at the sun or chase after the wind? I still say, let the rain fall down on the just and the unjust. Jesus knows the weeds from the grain, let Him sort it all out in the end.

Christian Nation?

For decades now, religious right-wingers have been telling us that we need to be a "Christian Nation," and that God is punishing us for permitting abortion and homosexuality. I've always held that America was founded on commerce, specifically mercantilism and imperialism dependent on slavery- not on the Bible or mighty, idealized Christian principles. I also have the philosophy that a "Christian Nation" begins at home- in other words, we all need to work on producing good fruit (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, etc. etc.) rather than trying to impose or legislate a religious morality.

But in the wake of yet another stock market dive and almost daily revelations about CEOs', Madoff, and the Bush Administration's abuses and misuses of money and government- someone said to me that we seem to be a LONG way from being a "Christian Nation," and that we seem to be a society based on greed , lobbying, deregulation, loopholes, off-the books accounting, mortgage-backed securities, schemes, plots, and getting richer quicker without any consideration of the impact on others. And Rush Limbaugh warns that the Democrats will take away our liberties. What he means is that they'll demand accountability and transparency so that the fat cats won't have the liberty to rob the rest of us blind anymore. We've already seen out privacy and Constitutional protections revoked by the Cheney/Bush government who eliminated habeus corpus, tortured and secretly listened to us.

I may sound like a liberal, even a (gasp) "socialist," and people may accuse me of inciting "class warfare," but the Bible I read says that it is "easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." (Matt 19:24, Mark 10:25, and Luke 18:25). I think that if we were to truly become a "Christian Nation," we would have to become our brothers' keepers. We should not just return the tax structure to what it was like under Reagan, but pre-Reagan (the middle class grew most robustly between 1932 and 1980). The Obama administration is finally starting to talk about the cost of health care and insurance, and it's high time.

The Republicans had control of all three branches of government under George W. Bush. Supposedly, their "base" are conservative-Christians. Not only did we lose our standing in the world in terms of foreign policy, but the current recession (some suspect depression) created by the supply-side, laissez faire economic faith worshiped so devoutly since Ronald Reagan began deregulating markets and busting unions, rhis recession is pulling the entire world's economics into crisis. This isn't God's divine retribution, but it IS direct result of our collective, corporate sin. The sins, not of homosexuality or abortion, or teaching evolution but the sins of greed, arrogance gluttony and avarice.

Gays and illegal immigrants aren't the problem. Iran and Iraq aren't the problem. Muslims and foreigners and Hollywood and high school and college science teachers aren't the problem. We're losing jobs and homes and insurance and benefits and maybe we want to blame Bernie Madoff or George Bush, but let's face it, as the cartoon character Pogo said back in the 50's, "we have met the enemy and he is us." Matthew 28 is important, Jesus did die for our sins so that we can join Him in Heaven someday, but you know what? Matthew 25 is ALSO important. If we aren't feeding the hungry, healing the sick, visiting those in prison, loving the unloved and unlovable- loving our neighbors and even our enemies- if we aren't caring for the poor, the aliens, the widows and orphans- if we are more intent on protecting our profits and avoiding taxes than sharing the fruit of our labor with others in need, then how DARE we call ourselves Christian, let alone a "Christian Nation."

"Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong?" ~James 2:5-7

Hot and cold running arguments

Conservative Christians have been arguing that there's no such thing as global warning. I'll admit that it's been a hard winter which certainly makes it easy to doubt the veracity of claims from scientists, politicians and activists who warn us that we're damaging the environment. Be that as it may, Christians should be careful not to close their ears to the pleas of Al Gore too quickly.

The position of many is that humans must be amazingly arrogant to think that we could somehow ruin or damage something which only God Himself has created. Hey, I'm no deist, I'm totally with you that God is God and I am not and that He alone retains ultimate sovereignty over His Earth.

But please hear me out. My wife and I are home owners. The deed is in our name, we pay the mortgage and the property taxes and the utility bills. But guess what- we still have to nag our kids to clean their rooms and pick up their dirty clothes off the floor and hang their towels in the bathroom and their coats on their hooks. Believe me, as much as I love my children, given complete run of the house, they would wreck it in short order.

When we were renters we were blessed with a great landlord. He was a good friend and a master electrician. He took care of the furnace and the air conditioner and the security alarm. Once he even fixed the garbage disposal. But guess what- I still had to take out the trash and sweep the floors and scrub the bathrooms and wash the windows, and change the air filter not to mention flush the toilets and dust the furniture.

Sure, it may seem arrogant to think that humans are capable of destroying what God has made, but I'm afraid that it's also terribly irresponsible and perhaps even just as arrogant to assume that we aren't damaging the planet, even to the point of altering the climate. Just as children naively and perhaps selfishly assume that their parents are going to take care of everything- (especially if they're spoiled and never taught to make their own beds or wash and fold their own clothes) we would be fools to imagine that 7 billion people, ravenously consuming limited resources, especially with fossil fuels are not or could not demean and even destroy God's creation.

Maybe they did a disservice to mislabel climate change as "global warming" so that when Iowa has the 6th coldest winter in recoded history, the conservatives are so quick to declare that it's all some big lie that we should ignore. The weather has more extremes and the oceans are rising, there may not be any more or any fewer volcanoes, earthquakes or wars, but there are more tsunamis and hurricanes and those hurricanes are more powerful that they used to be. The winter may be colder in Iowa, but the summer is also hotter. And smog , contaminated water, and endangered species are not things to shrug off and disappearing polar bears is not something to just joke about.

Please consider something. Conservatives may not have much patience for environmentalists and they're justified be concerned that jobs shouldn't be sacrificed for trivial and emotional campaigns to save obscure animals. However, why would environmental activists, scientists, and all those terrible "Liberals" make up false claims about the environmental crisis? Just to make themselves feel important? To undermine and destroy all our precious freedoms and American way of life? Do they really want to just ruin all the fun?

Please. These are serious people and as "bleeding hearts," they are by definition, caring and concerned people who want to help make things better. Even if you think that they are sometimes overzealous or misguided, you cannot argue that they are uninformed or negligent. They are thoughtful and intelligent and their concern is for all our best interest. So please, don't write them off as morally inferior or irrelevant and ignore them.

Indeed, we all- especially Christians, need to search ourselves and reflect on our behaviors and attitudes toward the environment. I know that I for one am guilty of crass consumerism and laziness when it comes to "leaving more behind than I came in with," which was the opposite of how they taught us to treat out campsites in Boy Scouts.

God calls us to be stewards of HIS Earth. It was the first responsibility He gave to Adam and Eve and a serious responsibility bestowed on Noah. Humans may be the only creatures made in His own image and the apple of His eye, the only ones He sent His Son to die and rise again for, but it is still arrogant, selfish, and short-sighted for us to think that we are the only creatures that He cares about or that all of creation is meant merely for us to use up and cast off any way we please or that He won't hold us accountable for our poor stewardship- including letting us wallow in the squalor we find ourselves in.

I like to tease atheists by letting them know that just because they don't believe in God, He still believes in them. Well you know something- just because conservatives deny that there's such a thing as global warming, doesn't mean that we shouldn't all start buying that ocean front property in Arizona!

A corollary to yesterday's post about political bedfellows

George W. Bush Bush dumped $848,000 worth of Harken Energy stock back in 1990, two months before the company announced a $23.2 million loss; he was 34 weeks late in filing a form the Securities and Exchange Commission required to record the sale... According to Time Magazine, "...Harken concealed losses by selling most of a subsidiary to an off-the-books entity controlled by company insiders. Bush was on the audit committee, which, at least in theory, approved the deal. It's the same tactic used by Enron—on a massive, more pernicious scale..."

Time reported in the same issue that "Halliburton, while Cheney was CEO, greased the books to boost the firm's flagging fortunes." Creative accounting.

Dennis Kozolowski, Ken Lay, Merrill Lynch, Enron, Andersen, Halliburton, Adelphia, R.J. Reynolds, Tyco, Bristol-Meyers, Global Crossing, the list goes on and on of individuals and corporations involved in abuse and corruption during early part of Bush's FIRST term. It's as if there was no S.E.C. no accountability or transparency or ethics of any kind in business, finance, and government.

The Bush years were a new gilded age or cancer-stage capitalism. A culture of corruption flourished.

Is it any wonder that we're now dealing with the likes of Bernard L. Madoff, Goldman Sacs, Lehman Brothers, the entire mortgage-based-securities, and auto executives flying in on private jets to ask Congress for bailouts?

Obscene greed. Yet Conservative Christians only get worked up about abortion and gay marriage. When I wrote columns scrutinizing John McCain's connection to the "Keating 5" and the S&L bailout scandal of the 1980's and how his role in deregulation of the financial sector may have helped lead to our current meltdown I was raked over the coals as some kind of unpatriotic, America-hating, abortion promoting liberal.

Transparency and accountability, and a whole lot of self-discipline is what America needs now.
Time for Relief, Recovery, and a whole lot of REFORM.

But what do I know? People have labeled me a "liberal" and now I have to wear that label like a scarlet letter.

The point is just to make you think

It's Thursday, they day I used to always write a column. I have a few spare minutes because the 7th grade Art class that I teach M, W, and F have PE on Th. So what do I do with myself? What is to become of this blog if it's no longer a repository of printed columns?

Well, that all remains to be seen. But I still have the itch. "Why do writers write? "May as well ask "why do fish drink?" It's a compulsion, even if there's no one reading. Ah, but I may be deluding myself here, but I've been led to believe that there are at least a few of you out there- if not several who didn't read my column in the Mapleton PRESS, you read it HERE. So how can I abandon you entirely?

If you are a regular reader, you know that I am an idiosyncratic person and I tend to spend an inordinate amount of time defending my political opinions from those who think I should fit in a box (preferably their box). Liberals (which are not bad) think that I am too conservative. Conservatives (also not necessarily a bad thing to be, if you genuinely are and don't just identify yourself as that) obviously think that I am way to "liberal" (especially if they're at all religious) although more often than not, those who identify themselves as "conservative" wouldn't know a REAL liberal if one bit them in the ass ( I feel like I can use language like that now that I'm my own publisher and I'm not writing for print, forgive me if I went too far).

Comedian Mort Sahl once said that if you "maintain a consistent political position for too long in this country, you'll eventually be tried for treason."

Kurt Vonnegut once noted that "Thanks to TV and for the convenience of TV, you can only be one of two kinds of human beings, either a liberal or a conservative."

I want people to know (and not just you few readers, so please carry this message to others- become my "apologists")- I want people to know that while yes, I'm a registered Democrat, and yes, I voted for Barack Obama and intend to give him a chance because I believe he is both more intelligent and more empathetic than George Bush, I am who I am, an independent thinker, responsible practitioner of representative democracy, and a deeply devout disciple of Jesus of Nazareth, the only begotten Son of the one and only living God, but I am not any kind of ideologue and I resent being labeled and compartmentalized almost more than I resent being pressured to conform to anyone's box.

So, as someone who- believe it or not-is fairly conservative on many issues and a deeply committed Christian, may I present the following cartoon critique of the Republican coalition:


I've wanted to do this one for a while, but couldn't find our copy of Hop on Pop. This cartoon is how I see it. You're certainly entitled to disagree, the point is just to make you think.

This is the crux of all I believe about the Republican Party. Not Republicans themselves, mind you. Many of my closest friends and best loved relatives are Republicans, and they are basically very good people with pure hearts and the very best intentions. But let's face it- as the cartoon points out, those religious and social conservatives are "in bed" with corrupt corporatism, and plenty of other unsavory characters.

George Bush is a long way from even Ronald Reagan, let alone Barry Goldwater. There's not much of Dwight Eisenhower's progressivism and internationalism left in the Grand Old Party. And Teddy Roosevelt's reform progressivism and conservation? Long gone. And don't get me started about Lincoln.

Friends, readers, neighbors, relations- if you are passionately identifying yourself with the Republican party or if you are zealously judgmental, intolerant or even just over enthusiastically skeptical of Democrats, Progressives, and Liberals of any stripe- beware. The conservative movement, Right-wing talk radio, and a few false prophets on TV want to continue to use wedge issues to make you think that they are right and everyone else is wrong. Think for yourselves instead. Evaluate policies, projects, proposals and people individually on a pragmatic, case-by-case basis. Be skeptical. The national Republican Party likes to "use religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon."

Hey, I believe in a balanced budget and reducing deficits and the debt. I believe in protecting American industry and American jobs. I love Jesus and attend church every week, I don't condone drugs or promiscuity. You'd THINK that that would make me a "conservative." But I believe in the little guy and the small town, the mom and pop business, and the family farm. I believe in oversight and accountability (AKA regulation) and it seems that in this day and age, at least in the area that I live in, I'm considered a "LIBERAL Democrat." As if that were some great sin anyway.

I don't believe in abortion- makes me conservative, but I recognize that rape, incest and life threatening complications ought to be exceptions to any prohibition of abortion. Besides, human nature being what it is in a sinful world, people will still seek abortions if they were outlawed, and the idea of going back to a time of coat hanger abortions makes me cringe. So I can life with permitting clean, safe, legal abortions in the first trimester. For some people that makes me an unforgivable godless liberal monster.

Interpreting the Constitution in such a way that "reproductive rights" and more importantly, a right to privacy is implicit may not be "strict construction," but by most definitions, Washington, Jefferson, and even more so Lincoln were liberal.

I believe that by definition, marriage involves one man and one woman. You can call a coup a sedan, but it still only has two doors. This makes me conservative, some would even call me a bigot. On the other hand, I believe that constitutionally, we cannot deny anyone equal rights and opportunities under the law. If two consenting adults have been living in a monogamous, committed relationship, we cannot legally and should not deny them insurance benefits, tax status and spousal rights. That, no doubt makes me a "flaming" liberal.

Sorry, but neither my marriage or my faith are in the least bit threatened by permitting homosexuals their civil rights. Frankly, that's a VERY "strict" interpretation of the Constitution and while people may thing it opens up the door for a more permissive society, it is actually a very conservative approach to civil matters.

Once upon a time "conservative" meant someone who wanted to protect American economic interests. Outsourcing jobs overseas doesn't do that. Seeking the least regulation, oversight and taxation for huge corporations and the wealthiest 2% of our population definitely doesn't do that.

Once upon a time "conservative" meant someone who wanted fiscal responsibility and restraint, no deficits if at possible and limited debt. Pay as you go, transparency and accountability. Reagan didn't and neither have either Bush.

Once upon a time "conservative" meant someone who wanted to protect national security and was leery of unnecessary international entanglements, but also leery of a standing military that played too big a role in domestic life. Regard both Washington and Eisenhower's farewell addresses. I don't think that invading Iraq was conservative, I think it was reckless. I don't think that preemptive unilateral invasion was conservative, I think it was a radical new precedent. Especially when most of the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia and based in Afghanistan, when Osama is a religious extremist whereas Hussein was a secular nationalist and they loathed each other.

Once upon a time "conservative" meant someone who wanted the federal government to leave decisions to states and municipalities. No Child Left Behind has been an intrusive, unfunded, misguided, misdirected, mistake that over burdened millions of schools that encouraged corruption, malfeasance and mediocrity.

In other words, I believe that I am a million times more "conservative" than most national Republicans today, including and especially soon to be former President Bush!

You're certainly entitled to disagree, the point was to make you think.

Not by might, not by power, but by My Spirit, says the Lord

I have been trying to say this to my fellow Christians for the last 25 years, but they wouldn't hear me because I'm a lefty. Cal Thomas is notorious arch-conservative columnist. Surely they might just listen to him-

RELIGIOUS RIGHT R.I.P.

By Cal Thomas

Thirty years of trying to use government to stop abortion, preserve opposite-sex marriage, improve television and movie content and transform culture into the conservative Evangelical image has failed. The question now becomes: should conservative Christians redouble their efforts, contributing more millions to radio and TV preachers and activists, or would they be wise to try something else?

...Scripture teaches that God’s power (if that is what conservative Evangelicals want and not their puny attempts at grabbing earthly power) is made perfect in weakness. He speaks of the tiny mustard seed, the seemingly worthless widow’s mite, of taking the last place at the table and the humbling of one’s self, the washing of feet and similar acts and attitudes; the still, small voice. How did conservative Evangelicals miss this and instead settle for a lesser power, which in reality is no power at all? When did they settle for an inferior “kingdom”?

Evangelicals are at a junction. They can take the path that will lead them to more futility and ineffective attempts to reform culture through government, or they can embrace the far more powerful methods outlined by the One they claim to follow. By following His example, they will decrease, but He will increase. They will get no credit, but they will see results. If conservative Evangelicals choose obscurity and seek to glorify God, they will get much of what they hope for, but can never achieve, in and through politics.

Read the entire article on Thomas's official website

When will the truth finally set us free?

Recently someone forwarded an email to me warning that Barack Obama is the Antichrist because the book of Revelation says that his reign will be 42 months, the same as a U.S. Presidential term. Big mistake. I hit the "reply" button and preached that brother a sermon. Here's what I wrote:

It's not possible for the book of Revelation to claim the anti-christ is of Islamic decent, 1) Islam wasn't invented yet when it was written, 2) it's a religion not an ethnicity so you can't be of Islamic decent.

An anti-Christ is anyone who takes attention away from the true Christ.

I suggest you read the 1 John 4:1-3

"Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world."

Obama publicly acknowledges Jesus as his Lord and savior.

While you're at it, you need to bone up on your both your theology and your eschatology a little bit. Many fundamentalist strains of Christianity believe in a false doctrine called dispensationalism that is not truly found in Scripture, but rather was developed in 19th century America.

You're trying to frighten Christian voters into being afraid of Barak Obama, a devout Christian himself- not a Muslim or the anti-christ. This is NOT a Christ-like behavior.

1 John 4:18 tells us that "There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love." Besides, Jesus tells us in Matthew 5 and Luke 6 to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us.

What you're doing is "the ends-justifies-the-means." You're so afraid of Obama yourself, that you're willing to spread lies and propaganda about him to insure that McCain/Palin win. That's not Jesus- that's Machiavelli.

Dispensationalists pretend to be friends of Israel because they think that Jerusalem will be some kind of celestial star-gate for Jesus' second coming, when in reality they are anti-semitic, hating Jews and blaming them for killing Jesus. They can't wait for them to be "Left-Behind" and sent to Hell. Whereas, granted, Jesus may be the only way, truth and life (John 14:6) BUT- God does not WANT ANYONE to perish (2 Peter 3:9).

It's so unfortunate that politics makes such strange bedfellows because Catholics that are so adamantly opposed to abortion find quick and fervent allies among fundamentalist and evangelicals in the religious-right movement, yet many of these allies suspect the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church itself of being the Antichrist and/or the Beast!

How do we know that Jerusalem won't be a cosmic star gate for his arrival to usher in some millennial reign? Jesus told the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4:22-24 that His true worshipers will worship in spirit and in truth, not in physical, geographical or political locations.

As for predictions and prophecies and televangelists who think that the market crash is a sign of the end times or Sarah Palin's prediction that Christians will find refuge from the tribulation in Alaska- Jesus tells us that he will return like a thief in the night in 1 Thessalonians 5:2 and in Matthew 24:36 He assures us that "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." We need to love and trust Him and not worry about signs or trying to help arrange things for Him politically. He doesn't need any help.
I know you mean well and I'm sure you truly love God and America, I'm sure you're a good person. But be careful not to be corrupted by politics and political messages, whether they're from the right OR the left. Don't be motivated by fear or anger. Be motivated by love and a desire to reconcile everyone to Jesus.

As God tells us in 2 Peter-
" 3His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. 4Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

5For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love. 8For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9But if anyone does not have them, he is nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins."
Thank God, He's granted us liberty and privilege to elect our own leaders in the United States. If you want to vote solely on social issues that are important to you so be it. This is your right. But please, don't be frightened into any choice based on shoddy theological assertions of people who seek to use religion as a means to assert their political agendas.

Remember Galatians 3:28- "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus."
Guess what- there is neither Republican nor Democrat, Independent nor Libertarian, Black nor White, Asian nor Hispanic, Urban nor Suburban, Metropolitan nor Rural, either. Believe it or not, there ARE Liberal Democrats who LOVE Jesus and America and want what's best for everyone. I'll even bet that when we get to Heaven, we might just find a few Socialists, Communists, and even Anarchists there!

When will we ever live up to our motto? "E Pluribus Unum"- From many, one.

Soon, I pray.

Please forgive me if I've come off as angry or condescending in either of these emails. I happen to love Jesus and to love America and I have been wounded and persecuted and attacked and alienated and ostracized and doubted, slandered and shunned because I disagree with other Christians who watch Fox News more than they read their own Bibles and I feel like I have to either take a stand like Luther or gradually be pushed away from my Savior by His own "sheep."

Please forgive me, but please, please, don't fall prey to fear, lies, or political propaganda, let alone to false prophecies, false doctrines, and foolish heresies. Read the Bible, not political email forwards. Share God's love and His good news of forgiveness, not fear and racism.

Sad for representative government in Iowa

What a shame. Schultz won, and won big.

He had the money- thanks to a lobbying group- to out advertise Freidrichsen big time. How tragic for Hoffman, that the voters in our district would choose idealogical extremism rather than honest and reasonable public servant-hood.

As a Christian, I want Christian voters to wake up and realize that the far right brand of religiosity that King and Schultz represent is one of pure legalism like the Pharisees, not the grace, mercy, forgiveness, love, and compassion of Jesus Himself.

Right-wing religion isn't about Jesus and His teachings, it's about fear, anger, and the desire to control society- not about helping others or first changing yourself. Stop abortions, stop gay marriage, stop immigration- We know what you hate, but what are you for?

Want to go back to the days of coat hanger abortions? Especially the girls who are victims of rape and incest.

Rather have the gay folks in freaky night clubs than mundane, monogamous domesticity?

Prefer those immigrants to be bringing all kinds of diseases, involved in crime, uneducated and wallowing in decrepit ghettos instead of working withing the system and contributing to, even though they're culturally different than you and me?

Okay then, make sure you put all of your energy into preventing anything you don't like from happening. Keep trying to make sure those you distrust are driven underground.

As a fiscal conservative, someone who opposes deficit spending and seeks accountability and reform in government- I wish that conservative voters would wake up and see that being beholden to ANY PAC, lobby, or interest group means that you have THEIR interests at heart, not your constituents. No matter how just and righteous their positions seem.

Iowans for Tax Relief? No one likes paying taxes, but we all like decent roads, safe bridges, and competitive schools. Tax Relief is a red herring for Republicans to swindle voters out of paying attention to real issues and it always has been. ITR was an easy way to get some bucks for campaign. Lets say we want to deport all the illegal immigrants, prevent all the abortions, and deny all the homos spousal benefits- we have to have some revenue to pay to enforce all those socially conservative laws. What the Hell, let's go out on a limb and say that we are going to stay in Iraq for another hundred years. How ya gonna pay for it? Taxes are a necessary evil, my friend.

The keys are how you structure the tax burden and what you spend the revenue on. Republicans want to tax the working class the most and millionaires, billionaires and corporations the most and they want to spend the money on no-bid military contracts to corporations they hold stock in. Democrats prefer a progressive tax structure where the more you can afford, the more you're asked bare. And we want to spend it on silly, frivolous things like infrastructure, education, law enforcement, scientific research, and who knows, maybe even health care.

Even more sad than Schultz winning Hoffman's seat in the Iowa House is that the Democrats of Dist. 55 don't have their act together enough to even field a candidate to oppose Schultz this Fall. Come on team, wake up and get it together by 2010!!!

I didn't want to write about this in my actual column in the PRESS. I don't want to alienate too many of my readers, because I honor and appreciate their sensitivities to "traditional values," and I realize that to many of them King and Schultz are "favorite sons," and local boys done good. And in spite of how vehemently I've written here, I don't want to create any animosity or make any personal attack on Schultz. I'm sure he holds all of his beliefs as sincerely as I hold mine and I even imagine that he doesn't see the ITR or any other Committee or group with the experience that Clarence did, so he doesn't see anything wrong with taking their money. They're a means to an ends and the ends is just a means by which to fight for his "values." But I just had to vent, so I did it here. So here it is.

People accuse Liberals of being "elitist" snobs who think we're all better than everybody else. That's because we think things all the way through and don't oversimplify them into their most base black-and white forms. Here's what I mean; no one is "pro-abortion." I value life and love babies, but the fact is that when more restrictions are put on abortions, then abortion rates rise. The Bible may disallow homosexuality, but the Constitution guarantees equal treatment under the law, and Jesus cavorted with tax collectors and prostitutes, not religious and political leaders. And Latinos come here for jobs and a better way of life, not to dilute or undermine traditional white Anglo-Saxon Protestant society. We should investigate employers who offer them jobs at bellow minimum wage with no benefits under the table so they don't have to withhold FICA and Social Security taxes. If we don't reach out to them in their native Spanish language, we increase things like TB and other diseases among them, and increase their crime rates and decrease their literacy rates. That makes them more of a drag on our society, not less of one.

Thinking things through is not bad, and it's not snobby or elitist.

Sigh. Enough ranting. I need to finish yearbook pages, order supplies, maybe even write a real column or draw a cartoon. Isn't there anyone else in Western Iowa who can see how short-sighted our supposed representatives are?

Sorry right-wingers

If it walks like a duck...

I'm sorry. I've had someone call me a reactionary. I've offended dearly loved friends by being so frustrated with them for seeing the Bush administration in a favorable light. I'm sorry, sue me.
Right is right and wrong is wrong, or as they teach you when learning how to mount a horse, "left is right and right is wrong."

You'll know a tree by it's fruit. Jesus said that. So okay, look at Republican policies and this Administration, then look at all those "bleeding heart liberals" (including Jimmy Carter) that you think are such America-haters and unpatriotic, slimy socialist- Which group has the right kind of fruit? Check out Galatians chapter 5 (it's in the Bible).

Bad Apples;

• sexual immorality (Senator Craig, Senator Foley, Pastor Ted Haggard...)
  
• impurity and debauchery
• idolatry (Ronald Reagan, god of all that is 'Right') and
  
• witchcraft (Nancy Reagan's Astrologers)
  
• hatred (nooses in trees, torture at Abu Ghraib, xenophobia, racial profiling, gay bashing, alarm about illegal immigration, etc. etc....)
  
• discord (The religious right, the Big-business right, the internationalist right, the Neo-Con right, the gun-nut right, the nut-job in the woods in a militia and or white supremist group right....)
  
• jealousy (First Bill Clinton, now Hillary Clinton)
  
• fits of rage ( Vice President Cheney telling people to "F--- Off" all the time)
  
• selfish ambition (MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY, MONEY... big oil, Enron, stock portfolios, the Carlyle Group, Haliburton, did I mention big oil?
  
• dissensions
• factions and
  
• envy (did I mention the Clintons?)
  
• drunkenness (Tom DeLay, Dennis Hastert, and oh yeah, is 'W' a "dry-drunk?" How come no one cares that he usded to have a cocaine problem, but they freaked out when they heard that Bill Clinton once tried pot?)
  
• orgies, and the like (well, okay, who doesn't like a good orgy? Republican or Democrat)
  

Good Fruit:

• love (see also compassion, empathy, caring...)
  
• joy
  
• peace (blessed are the peacemakers, who said that? Hmmmm)
  
• patience (okay, not me)
  
• kindness
  
• goodness
• faithfulness
• gentleness and (you're right, not me again, or any other political humorist or cartoonist)
  
• self-control (yeah, I know- obviously I need to work on this one otherwise I wouldn't go off on rants like this or let my blood pressure go up every time someone compares George W. Bush to Abe Lincoln or Jesus or whoever. Breath, breath, find your happy place...)

Gay Marriage- among other topics

I recently had an interesting volley of emails with a friends. Thought I'd share them here:
Cool Stuff. Here is the first one from my friend who's a Lutheran Middle School teacher:

One of the best things to happen to me was that I've had to teach
Civics for a couple of years now. I rather enjoy it. We just finished a rather long simulation dealing with the Constitution. Check out the Interact Simulation Website to see what I'm talking about. Way cool. Anyway. They had a good time learning about parliamentary procedure if nothing else. I think for such a long time I focused on the History side of things that I never really dealt with the mechanics of government. Now I'm rather enjoying
myself in what I'm learning. I'm no expert by any means. I must say I learned a lot from you. Thanks for the insights that you provide.

We have a principal now whose a bit on the freaky conservative side. I admit that I'm not too crazy about gay marriage business and all but I'm also quite sure that there will be Democrats in Heaven. My principal, who's also the 5th grade social studies teacher, has made statements to the effect that being a Christian and a Democratic party member are next to impossible. NOT!! I have made it quite clear in my Civics class that that is not the
case. My mantra is "If you don't know how the Constitution works, you will be at the mercy of those that do." AND...I refuse to use my influential position as a teacher to make little Republican clones--or any party clones for that matter.

Well, I better go. Dinners ready. Thanks again for your insights.


And here is my first reply to him:

As good as all the history shows on History Channel and Discovery Channel are (that ne Dogfights on Friday nights is SO cool) I think that one of the best that I'd show to kids if I was still teaching HIstory is History Detectives on PBS.
They show the actual reseach process based on doccuments and evidence. Don't get me wrong, I agree that there are certain names, dates and battles that kids need- absolutely, but I've always felt that understanding, analysis and application are more useful and valuable than mere knowledge at least that's my perspective on Bloom's taxonomy.

I always tried to help kids see the dynamic tensions, the balances of divergent interests. That may be safe when you're talking about the Whiskey Rebellion or Federalism and Anti-Federalism but even when you get into Manifest Destiny or Reconstruction, if there are colleagues or parents who are wing-nuts, they can freak. Am I wrong that scrutiny and using critical thinking skills are good things? Non partisan things?

Unfortunately there are people who don't believe we should teach, they send their kids to a parochial school to be indoctrinated, not to learn how to think for themselves.

"It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."
~George Orwell, 1984;


Whats funny is, you know how when you're a kid and somebody farts, you say "whoever smelt it, dealt it!"? What's funny is that the firt people to accuse others of revisionist history are the people who either have swallowed some propaganda or don't know enough about history (or government) so they're victoms of revisionist history themselves.

I still LOVE your mantra.

And another from my friend:

Hello again,

More food for thought.

Personally I cannot condone the homosexual lifestyle. It is immoral. Yet these are people who desperately need to hear the Gospel message. Hate the sin but love the sinner.

Just thought I'd say that so that up front. Now let's move into the political realm. I like your analogy of defining marriage to calling the sky blue. However, can one not also argue that a Christian in a democratic society has the glorious opportunity to help further the Gospel's spread by voting on issues such as this? Churches throughout the country (at least in some states where the marriage amendments were on the ballot) worked the issue of marriage into Bible studies and sermons out of growing concern that the institution was under "attack". True, I concede to the fact that parties would use this as a means to further their own agendas. Alas, this is politics. But couldn't it also be the Holy Spirit nudging people to witness through their votes, or across their dinner tables with their families as they discuss the issue? Granted, there are some real goofballs out there that have some serious hate issues, but what if out of perhaps hundreds of conversations about marriage amendments that a handful of marriages were strengthened and maybe some members of the gay community were given perhaps a moment of pause to consider the possibility of repentance and begin a journey that could ultimately bring them closer to our Lord? If that were the case for at least one person, then I guess I'd be happy to call this controversy over marriage a success. God has blessed us with the gift of democracy, wouldn't it be foolish and even sinful not use that gift to ultimately spread the Gospel?

Now, I will say that I would not likely favor ANY national amendment to define marriage because I feel that, based on the separation of powers under the federal system, it is the states that have the power to make laws concerning marriage, NOT the central government. Allowing the federal government to step in here would probably not be wise or a good use of our national government's time and treasure. However, if society elevates the gay lifestyle to the same status as say the African or Hispanic community, making this a civil rights issue, well, I guess then, as a civil rights issue, perhaps this is how the question will
have to be settled someday.

Forgive me if I don't sound clear, I'm trying to articulate my views as I write here. It's helping me to better understand my own position. You know, I recall teaching a unit in my U.S. history class about the labor unions. I recall how some early unions fought for political and economic reform by attempting to radically change the political landscape in order to accomplish their goals. Populism? Yet then you look at folks like Samuel Gompers and the collective bargaining process. They ended up playing the system better. Kind of like practicing your basketball layups rather than trying to drastically change the overall rules of basketball to fit your playing style. Okay, maybe I'm stretching this a little, but couldn't America's Christians take a cue from this? Try to be better Christians and share the gospel
BETTER instead of getting the government to do it. If the Grace of God were made more readily accessible through the witness of believers to nonbelievers, maybe we wouldn't have such a problem with issues like gay marriage. Maybe if the love of Christ was more readily evident through works of service and sincere praise, hearts would be turned Christ BEFORE people could be suckered into counterfeit feelings of love offered through such things as
homosexuality, pornography, and materialism. Let us be firm in our doctrine but also loving in how we treat others and strive for a better balance between Law and Gospel.

Well, I'm tapped out. Chew on this for a while and fire back when you have time.

Hope your family is well.



And another response from me:

Just so we're up front- I'm not gay, nor have I ever played a gay person on TV. (just trying to lighten the tone a little) Seriously, the older I get, the more I read and study Scripture, and the more I learn about the process that theologians, including early church fathers use to interpret scriptures, two hot-button issues become clearer to me: 1) that no matter how you try to dice it, God has prohibited homosexuality and 2) He probably did not intend for us to exclude people from roles of responsibility because of their gender as much as we have.

Hows that sound? Conservative on one issue and Liberal on another? Maybe.

I seem to want to talk about Luther's Doctrine of the Two Kingdoms. My understanding of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution leads me to believe that even though my religion considers homosexuality a sin, it would still be unfair in the eyes of the civil law to deny a monogomous homosexual long-time companion from providing for their partner financially or legally in ways that a traditional married spouse could.

I know a Republican law maker who has killed anti-gay marriage legislation in committee because if it came up to a vote, he knew he'd have to vote for it. The solution some progressive Christian leaders like Tony Campolo have suggested is similar to what's been done in Europe; civil authorities issue civil union agreements, and churches conduct marriages, but neither institution may do the other. As it is the Roman Catholic Church does not recognize Lutheran marriages, so if one district/synod of the American Episcopal Church blesses gay unions, the LCMS certainly shouldn't be cumpulsed to recognize that union. If marriage is from God, either as a full blown sacrament as the Catholics believe or as a metaphor for Christ's relationship to His Church as we do- why should we cede the ordination of marriages to any temporal, civil authority anyway? Doesn't that profane the institution? Teddy Roosevelt, not a particularly devout Presbyterian, didn't want "In God We Trust" on our currency because he believed it was blasphemous!

I guess I'm more comfortable as a Democrat, even when there are Democrats who do, accept, or believe things that make my skin crawl, is because Democrats are pragmatic and practical, they believe in detente' and compromise because they know that we live in a broken world and we have to make the best of it. What I have observed over the last 36 years is that because the Republican party chooses positions that are inflexible, they promote hypocricy. Wittness Gambling Bill Bennett, thieving Ralph Reed, drug-poppin' Hatian hooker employing Rush Limbaugh, and most recently pediphile Mark Foley, and Meth using gay hating gay guy Rev. Ted Haggard.

Love the sinner, hate the sin. Yeah, maybe the Holy Spirit may convict someone in their heart because our pastors and politicians are all up in arms about a wedge issue like gay marriage. Or... people who are struggling feel persecuted, hated and alienated. They're like Luther who practices self-flagilation because they look up at the cruel, unempathetic Christ as a heartless, angry judge, instead of as the approachable, patient, compassionate, yet hold you responsible and don't indulge your selfish sinful nature Father that He really is? Are we driving people out of the Church and making it less likely that they will hear the Word and come to repentance? What's the most effective means to influence our society? By voting? By legislating? Maybe, there's certainly room for that and I'd even agree that it is our duty. But so is by being salt and light, by being Jesus' arms and legs, in our relationships. "A Christian Nation begins at home" is one of my mantras. Walk the walk yourself, rather than screaming and shouting at others when they don't.

Unfortunately it is a sticky, complicated mess. It involves theology, civil rights, and biology too. Is society "elevating" homosexuality to the level of race? Is it a choice? A decision? Some conservatives are libertarians and even if they hate gays, they don't believe the government shoud interfere. Is it a disorder? Like a desease? If so, maybe we should regulate it like smoking, alohol, and drugs. If it is, surely we can't be more judgemental of them than we are of aloholics, adicts, or other people with disablilities. Thank God that through the Grace of our Lord, Heaven will be filled with drunks, smokers, pot-heads, adulterers, people who kuss and have looked at porn or cheated on a math quiz.... Yeah, see, I guess it gets down to how if I've even looked at a woman with lust in my heart I just as well pluck my eye out, huh? Or... if it's not a choice or a disorder, is it a genetic trait- can they help it? Would a black man choose to be black in a racist society? And if they can't help it, they what do we do with that, especially in the light of what the Bible says? Some scientists believe that biology suggests that sexual preference is not something one can help. Can't change genes. Not fair? Blame Adam & Eve? Blame Satan? Blame God?

Detente' (thank you Mr. Nixon & Mr. Kissenger for that one) Coexist. How do you put the toothpaste badk in the tube? All things, including society suffers from atrophy. And finally, don't be a control freak like the parent or principal who wants to produce clones instead of wanting to disciple children and equip the saints. Like it or not, we live in a pluralistic society. Many of the new Democratic Congressmen and Senators are pro guns, pro God, anti-gay marriage and anti abortion, but they're also anti-supply-side-economics or anti war.
This is a fallen world, and human, temporal law is about making it as fair and survivable as possible, not about making it right or godly or perfect- only the blood of Christ can do that. Too many "Christian Conservatives" today are confused about Law and Gospel. They think it's our job to prepare America for Christ's second comming, that we're somehow supposed to make this world obedient for God. That's not our job. Our job is to spread the word that we don't HAVE to work, we just have to accept His gracious gift because the work is done.

I'm sure plenty of Christian NAZIs thought that Deitrich Bonhoffer should go to Hell for lying to and dissenting against the God-instituted government in Germany. Thank God they would have been wrong, just as people who don't think that Christians can be Democrats may be well-meaning, but wrong. Or as John McLaughlin might say, "WRONG!"

Whew. Sorry to be so dang long-winded. I think, therefore I can't shut up.

Thanks for the forum and the fellowship.

What Emails Would Jesus Forward?

Recently, I received an Email forward that claimed to be an appeal from radio psychologist Dr. James Dobson asking my help in fighting famous Atheist Madeline Murray O'Hare. The Email claimed that she was responsible for 'Touched By An Angel' being taken off the air, and now she was trying to take all Christian broadcasting off the air.

It turns out this is a hoax. Dr. Dobson has made no such appeal. 'Touched By An Angel' was a successful program that ran for 9 seasons (1994- 2003) and simply ran its course. O'Hare disappeared in 1995. In 2001, authorities in Texas found her remains in a shallow grave.

The Email ended with a "PETITION TO REINSTATE PRAYER IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS." You're supposed to add your name to the bottom of the list and forward it on to everyone in your address book. The one millionth signer was supposed to Email the whole shebang to President George W. Bush.

The guy doesn't even have Email, he's said he doesn't believe in it. If you were President, would you open any Emails with a Million "Fwd: Fw: Fw: Fw:" in the subject line?

So, who would write these prayers for public schools? Southern Baptists? Methodists? Roman Catholics? Greek Orthodox? Lutheran? These groups are all Christians, yet there are many Evangelical Protestants who do not believe that Coptics, Lutherans and Catholics are true Christians.

The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod doesn't recognize 7th Day Adventists as actual Christians because they deny the doctrine of the Trinity taught in the canonical Creeds.
Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons are not Christians, although many of them think that they are. What if my child had a Scientologist teacher? Or a Unitarian or a Jew, Hindu, Hare Krishna or Buddhist? Or what about a practitioner of Wicca or some other neo-pagan tradition?

I'm a public school teacher and I don't believe that it's my place to tell my students how to pray, let alone what to believe. If they are Christian, and it's okay with their parents, I would love to encourage, help nurture and mentor their faith. But the time for that is outside of class, not in front of all their classmates during time meant for Journalism, Art or whatever other subject matter. The last line of the Email said this:

"REMEMBER! : Our country was founded on freedom of religion."

Many people these days are proud of the fact that the Pilgrims founded the Plymouth colony for religious freedom. But who were they seeking freedom from? King James I, as in "the King James Bible." Protestants and Christians were killing each other in England in Jesus name for decades. The Puritans weren't exactly known for offering religious freedom to others, heretics, Jews, and of course accused witches certainly weren't.

The Plymouth Company that founded the Massachusetts Bay Colony and the London Company that founded Jamestown were businesses. America was founded on making money, even if it was Christians who did it.

Please, read Matthew 6:5-7 and rethink your position. Jesus never forces Himself on anyone.

If you want you kids to pray in school, enroll them in a Christian school. May I suggest a few excellent Lutheran Schools- visit http://www.valpo.edu/lutheran/lhsdir/index.htm

The separation of Church and state is the price we pay for our freedom of religion.
I loved the "Touched by an Angel" show, but lets face it, the true religion of America is consumerism. Money makes TV networks turn-round. If your faith in and relationship with Jesus is important to you, turn off your TV and open your Bible. You'll win more souls by being like Him, and near Him than by trying to force a cultural/political agenda on anyone, by TV programming, petitions, prayer in public schools, or Spam Emails.

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson

What would Jesus Talk About

This column was started with a mission, to talk about “sex, politics, and religion- not necessarily in that order…” and I might add, the kitchen sink too. The point being, this is somewhere were we’ll talk about more than work or the weather, not that those things aren’t vitally important.

Actually I’m not sure I ever have written about sex. Of course that’s why the phrase “sex, politics, and religion” was invented, to tell you what not to talk about in polite company. You can see why. Talk about sex and you might be embarrassed or else people will think you’re some kind of pervert. It’s an intensely personal and intimate issue, so it should just as well be private.

Religion is also an intensely personal and hopefully intimate thing too. I think it should be personal and intimate anyway, maybe you don’t believe that way. Because religious beliefs are held so intensely and deeply, it can be dangerous to talk about it without offending people. No one really wants to compromise on what they interpret to be sacred or even what they consider to be primary fundamental doctrine. “I’m always right and you’re always wrong,” is the perspective we assume when we become absolutist about our religious beliefs.

Don’t get me wrong, I certainly don’t mean to promote “relativism.” Certainly there are absolutes, there is truth, and if Jesus said that He is the way the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father but by Him, a whole lot of other people must be wrong. What they think is truth, must not be.

But the problem there is, I’m not God. I hope you’ll agree that you aren’t either. While they may imagine that they’re God’s personally appointed spokesmen on Earth all those televangelists, denominational leaders, and “faith-based” politicians aren’t God either. None of us has a monopoly on the God-breathed, inerrant truth. No one but Him.

Too often we decide not to talk about religion, not because we don’t want to offend someone else, not because we’re afraid they’ll judge, reject, or persecute us, but just because we know it’s likely to make things tense, maybe even lead to argument.

You know it’s true. One of the biggest complaints I hear from atheists is that all the wars have always been caused by religion. I tell them, no people cause wars. Jesus didn’t cause the crusades or the holocaust. Saint Mary and Martin Luther didn’t start the 100 year’s war. You can’t even really blame Muhammad for terrorist attacks or jihads. People go to war, people full of hate, fear, jealousy, greed, and anger. Religion is only their excuse, a convenient pretense.

Then there’s politics. It’s about control. You think my candidate is a liar and a philanderer, so you want to wrest control away from him. I think that your candidate is ill-equipped, ill-advised, has ill-conceived notions and at best made grave mistakes and at worse abuses his power- guess what, I won’t want him in control anymore than you wanted the other guy.

It gets even uglier if our politicians wrap themselves in the banner of faith. How may abused spouses stay in a bad marriage because they love their abuser. Do we sometimes defend politicians like someone enabling an addict because we think that they share our beliefs, and by God, we know our beliefs are absolutely right- so somehow no matter wrong they do, at least they’re right about a few things.

Here is a true story that involves all three- sex politics and religion:

Once there were two people. One was a white, middle-aged man. He taught Religion at a Christian school. The other was an Hispanic teenaged girl who attended that Christian School.

The man and his wife could not have children. They were staunchly pro-life. They boycotted companies that supported candidates or charities that condoned abortion. They marched for the right to life, admirable civic participation. But rather than a day or even a unit of one or two of his Religion classes, anti-abortion indoctrination dominated most of the time in most of his classes.

The girl lived with a single mom. She was interested in history and politics. She especially enjoyed learning about the civil rights movement and women’s rights. The girl grew more and more depressed as she attended the Religion teacher’s class. She became silent and sullen, she doubted her faith and God’s love for her. At one point later in college, she even thought about suicide.

The girl had been the victim of incest as a child. But of course she kept it a secret. There are some things you just don’t talk about.
__________________________________________________________________________________
A note just for blog visitors: I'm no more "pro-abortion" than I am actively "pro-life" I just want Christians to see that the "Religious Right" aren't as compassionate or as conservative as they claim to be. It's okay to vote for Democrats, it's not immoral and your eternal salvation is not put in danger. Likewise I want Democrats and Republicans both to be GENUINE and open about their own personal faith experiences and convictions, but not coercively impose their faith traditions on anyone.

The last few posts on this blog (bellow this column) have links to organizations that are BOTH Christian and progressive or liberal. If you're struggling with your faith because of the current political climate, you're not alone.

Jesus was a dirty, barefoot hippy, radical who was executed by an unjust political establishment because the entrenched institutional religious power brokers didn't want to hear about turning the other cheek, going the extra mile, loving your neighbor, and selling all you have and giving it to the poor!

Of course, He forgave them, for they knew not what they were doing.

And by the way, He loves you, no matter who you are.

What's a moral issue?

"I think the Religious Right makes a mistake when it suggests that there are only two religious values issues: abortion and gay marriage. Many care about other things, but when it comes to politics, these are their primary political, public issues ... As an evangelical Christian, when I find 2,000 verses in my Bible about poor people, I insist fighting poverty is a moral values issue, too...After 2,300 Americans have been killed, 106 from Ohio, and so many Iraqis, we must say that when you go to war, whether you go to war, and whether you tell the truth about going to war is a moral values issue, too."

~Rev.Jim Wallis

The Radical Middle: Conclusion

Both Liberal John Locke and Conservative Thomas Hobbes were right about some things, and both were wrong about some things. Can't there be three sides to every issue?

Gun Control- One extreme says that there shouldn't be any. Anyone should be able to own any gun. The other extreme says that no one needs any guns in the 21st century anymore so no one should be allowed to own any. But somewhere in the middle we can talk about waiting periods and hunting weapons or home protection as opposed to instruments of murder and war.

Death penalty- One extreme says that not only should murder be punished by death, but so should rape and kidnapping. The other extreme says that it's barbaric, cruel and unusual. Surely, somewhere in between we can talk about DNA evidence and redemption and rehabilitation- yet restitution, consequence, and deterrence.

Stem Cells- One extreme says that we shouldn't play God, the other thinks that science has the solution to almost everything. Somehow, so long as we're not deliberately fertilizing eggs to create stem cell lines, if legal fertility treatments, produce cells that will be disposed of anyway, why not allow those to be used for research?

Gay marriage- One extreme stands outside of churches with posters that say "God hates fags." The other extreme would be blasé' about deviant behavior becoming more and more acceptable as just another lifestyle choice. Somewhere in the middle we can see that the constitution guarantees rights to everyone no matter how different from us, like it or not, so if marriage is so holy, then why should states issue marriage licenses? Let marriage be religious and civil unions be social.

Evolution- One extreme says that God created the earth in 6 24-hour calendar days as we know them, roughly 6,000 years ago. The theories of Charles Darwin threaten all Christian norms and not only should Intelligent Design be taught in public schools, but Darwinism should not. The other extreme is that we're all random stardust and everything we know is by random accident. Religion is a delusion and an opiate and not only is the whole concept of Intelligent Design laughable, but you can put your faith in any of the scientific theories in current textbooks, including Darwin's and there's no place for any religion in our schools.

Yikes, right? Seems like there would be no middle, but come on- obviously both of these are too absolutist. No scientific theory or discovery can shake my faith because "faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see (Hebrews 11:1)." Whereas science is studying, testing, and reporting those things that you CAN see. You can't measure, calibrate, quantify or qualify faith, prayer, love, devotion, belief or forgiveness. And the problem with science is that it depends entirely on what we can see, but the very act of observing something alters it's natural state- so we can never observe something the way it really is. It's like trying to see if the light turns off in the refrigerator when you close the door. The evidence suggests that the rock is billions of years old. Evidence may suggest that a candle has been burning for three hours, unless you lit it with a blow torch.

So where is the middle? Teach scientific method as a method and ALL scientific theories as theories. Teach critical thinking skills, then go ahead and present Intelligent Design as a theory, but attribute it to who advocates it and why and let students make their own judgments about it. But don't try covertly sneak religion into the science classroom. Teach religious doctrine and dogma at Church, at home or at parochial schools in Religion class.

And remember, the First amendment prohibits public school teachers from using their position to proselytize students, but it also protects every students right to freely speak about and practice their religion anywhere, including school. So, as long as the kids initiate it and the teacher facilitates discussion rather than advocating or promoting any one position, there's no reason that kids can't talk about their views on evolution or religion or anything else in any classroom.

Abortion, the war in Iraq, equal pay for women, affirmative action, a progressive tax code, the distribution of power and responsibility between the three branches of government, the balance of power and responsibility between states and the Federal government, participation in international treaties and organizations, illegal immigration, domestic spying, work safety, drug safety, TV ratings, boring budgets and appropriations… everything from infrastructure to Social Security can divide us and anyone can have a liberal positions on one or two issues and yet a very conservative positions on several other.

Not all Republicans are filthy rich and white males and not all Democrats are herb smoking New Agers who can't wait to spit on our soldiers when the come home. So both as Christians and as Americans, we should be slow to judge and quick to look for what we have in common with others, so that together we can move forward on the things we agree on instead of stereotyping each other and resenting each other because of what we disagree about.

"It is good to grasp on to one and not let go of the other. The man who fears God will avoid all extremes."~ Ecclesiastes 7:18

____________________________________________
"The gospel is meant to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable." ~Garrison Keillor

MLK Day

Did you know why MLK was in Memphis for the garbage workers' strike when he was shot on his motel balcony? Two black garbage men sought shelter from a storm during a break. The city wouldn't let them inside with white workers, so they sat in the tailgate of their truck. They were crushed to death by the compactor. During the protests and labor strike that followed, workers wore placards that read "I am a man." As in, a human being- not a piece of garbage.

Today fundamentalist white Southern Baptist "conservative-Christians" dominate American politics, and unfortunately, American theology. Their issues are anti-abortion, anti-gay, anti-Darwin, pro-war and pro-rich. Their end-times theology of "millennialism" is perhaps their greatest false doctrine which has a dangerous influence on all the rest of their teaching, but worst, on American foreign policy. I will stipulate that abortion is wrong and that the Bible clearly does not condone homosexuality- but should Christians only protect a human being before it is born? Don't we also have a responsibility to be our brothers' keepers their whole lives?

Dr. King is most remembered for his leadership in the non-violent civil rights movement, but the Nobel Peace Prize winner was also an opponent of war and a champion of social and economic justice. Today, on his birthday, please pray that God will lead our nation and it's leaders away from coruption and complacency and toward His will for us to have a heart for the poor, the weak, and the infirm. Pray that "compassionate conservatism" would become reality, and not mere campaign rhetoric.

"...any religion that professes to be concerned about the souls of men and is not concerned about the economic conditions that damn the soul, the social conditions that corrupt men, and the city governments that cripple them, is a dry, dead, do-nothing religion in need of new blood."

~Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

James 2 (New International Version)

Faith and Deeds

¹⁴What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? ¹⁵Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. ¹⁶If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? ¹⁷In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

¹⁸But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds."
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.

¹⁹You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

²⁰You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?

Please visit http://www.sojo.net/- Soujourners: Christians for Justice and Peace

Too many sides to too many issues

Before President W. Bush I considered my self "post-partisan," a moderate, a "pro-life Democrat." I was disappointed in and felt betrayed by President Clinton's infidelity and dishonest. I always tried to see past party lines. I believe in hashing out issues and getting to hard compromises. I made every effort to try to help Republican friends see that Democrats and "Liberals" weren't all a bunch of pro-gay, pro-communist, evil, hedonistic atheists out to destroy our way of life. Now, I will freely admit that I am angry about the war, just as angry as many of my dearest friends and neighbors have been about abortion for years.

The thing is none of us (my self included) ought to be single-issue voters. The other thing is that there are scores of issues that are every bit as ugly, wrong, immoral and "un-Christian" that our society and both our parties need to wrestle with.

I hope that this column provokes readers to think and talk about some of them. One of the purposes of a newspaper (and of the internet, I guess) is to be a forum for the free expression and discussion of ideas. A couple people have emailed or signed my guestbook anonymously instead of writing letters to the editor for the NEWSpaper & LEADER to publish. Please write the paper, don't be afraid, your ideas are just as legitimate and certainly as passionately held as any of mine. I'm not always right and I hope I never intentionally put anyone else down.

Here is a note that some one left on my website's guestbook. I could write them back because they left a bogus email address.

"tina - Many Democratic officials warned of Saddam's weapon capabilities and stock piles of biological weaponery since 1998: Clinton, Albright, Pulousi, Gore, Kennedy, and more .... before Bush was even in the White House. If you are going to spout off as some sort of expert you should know your facts and not just talk out of frustration and anger. The last time I checked ... Congress basically handed the President a blank check in 2002 and backed him with full support. He did not do this alone. Your column is unclear as to intent other then another flaming liberal trying to burn everything around him. Beings as though you are a Lutheran I find this even more appalling. Do you really wish to support the killing of innocent unborn babies in the ballot box, because we have soldiers willing to fight to protect you and what you have to say? I would certainly hope the cost of fuel would not cause you to jump that direction. There are many issues to consider, and your angry column was irresponsible to your neighbors."

I know that the administration didn't go in without support. Heck, I was won over for a while. That only makes it worse. Because many of us (Republicans included) feel duped and used and yes, guilty. Tina is absolutely right, I shouldn't just write out of anger- that part did make me "flaming," although (except for the blank check that Congress gave Bush) I try really hard to include as many facts as I can any time I write about politics. I do not support the killing of innocent unborn babies, but I also don't support killing innocent live babies, youth, adults or elderly. I don't support cutting programs for the poor while maintaining and even increasing tax cuts for the super rich and for corporations. I wish I'd never supported a unilateral, pre-emptive, unprovoked invasion of a tiny, weak nation that had nothing to do with the terroist attack on us. I don't attack rape, torture, and denying basic human rights to anyone, even to terrorists.

Please forgive me whenever any of you feel that any of my columns are irresponsible. I want to be a good neighbor. But please, can I just tell you that I feel like your questioning my faith or impugning how "Chirstian" I am if you assume that I am totally pro-choice or somehow must want to see babies die because I vote for Democrats or criticize Republicans. Sin is sin and wrong is wrong, unfortunately there is no escaping it in this world, especially in politics.

In Boy Scouts I was taught, "God, Country, and Family- in that order." I believe that God created us with a nature that asks questions. I believe that our founding fathers designed our system of government so that we are not only allowed to scrutinize it and express our displeasure with it, but that it is our duty to do so. And I believe in supporting families, even the unborn members of those families, but I have not seen the current administration neglect support for middle class and poor families while flaunting faith and values for political expedience. If I were a Republican or a Fundamentalist Evangelical I would feel abused.

I'd like to leave you with some quotes from Republican leaders. Three of the four are some of my favorite politicians, no sarcasm intended, they really are (sorry to disappoint any of my fellow Democrats). My point in sharing them is that the bush administration may have won your votes by being "pro-life," but I contend that they've pursued policies that are cruel and abusive of life.

All of us, Democrat and Republican, Green Party and Libertarian, Lutheran, Fundamentalist Evangelical, Catholic, Methodist, whoever All of us need to stop accusing each other of being less-Christian, less-moral, less-right. We need to see past our differences so that we can be alert to how un-Christian, immoral, and wrong we can sometimes be.

"If we are viewed as a country that engages in torture ... any possible information we might be able to gain is far counterbalanced by (the negative) effect of public opinion... This battle we're in is about the things we stand for and believe in and practice. And that is an observance of human rights, no matter how terrible our adversaries may be." -- Senator John McCain (R-AZ)

"I think the administration is making a terrible mistake in opposing John McCain's amendment on detainees and torture." --Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE)

"I'm a strong supporter of Senator McCain's amendment. I don't think the White House should veto it." -- Former Secretary of State Colin Powell

"The United States can win the war on terrorism without sacrificing our values." --Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)

PS- Torture is NOT "Pro-Life"