Metacentricities

Update: Welcome readers from Slate. Have a cup of coffee, stay a while …

As I said, one of the things I am interested in is the ways in which religion and politics plays out in the US. There has been quite the blog storm about the speech Barak Obama gave a few days ago, at Pentecost 2006: Building a Covenant for a New America conference.

I read the full speech, which you can find on Street Prophets. It’s really interesting, in a variety of ways. One of the most important things is context. He was giving this talk to a group of religious (I believe primarily Christian) progressives. The conference was co-sponsored by Sojourners, which is an explicitly Christian organization, and Call to Renewal is a group of churches and faith based organizations working on poverty issues. So he was speaking to people that are religious, and care deeply about religion, as well as progressive. I think it’s important to take these words in context.

The progressive response to this speech is exemplified by Chris Bowers, who says:

Obama has not only helped close the triangle on the notion that Democrats are hostile to religion, he has closed the triangle on who Democrats should appeal to in order to win elections. This danger of this is that in a nation where the only voters who matter to both parties are conservative evangelicals, then the only legislation we will ever get will be of the sort that appeals to conservative evangelicals. This will be the case no matter which party is in charge of Congress. Thus, closing the triangle on electoral strategy in this manner completely obliterates progressivism itself.

In other words, what Obama has done is to say that Republicans were right all along, Democrats are hostile to people of faith. And, fully, that he is indicating that Democrats should only be focusing their efforts on Evangelical voters. Daily Kos says:

Today Sen. Barack Obama inexplicably attacked his Democratic colleagues
in a contorted speech about religion, accusing them of failing to,
"acknowledge the power of faith in the lives of the American people."
Portraying his own Democratic party as atheists unwilling to court
evangelicals and other churchgoers …

But, there are other voices. One blogger says:

If you read the whole speech, the almost kneejerk response to Obama pretty much illustrates his point of the discomfort by some progressives in any discussion of religion in the public square.

So, let’s look at the speech. Obama starts out with:

But today I’d like to talk about the connection between religion and politics and perhaps offer some thoughts about how we can sort through some of the often bitter arguments over this issue over the last several years.

I do so because, as you all know, we can affirm the importance of poverty in the Bible and discuss the religious call to environmental stewardship all we want, but it won’t have an impact if we don’t tackle head-on the mutual suspicion that sometimes exists between religious America and secular America.

Now, there are a number of ways to read this. You can read it is "secular=progressive" "religious=conservative". If you do that, then, sure, what he is saying might be then construed to mean that "Democrats are hostile to religion". But keep reading. His first example is about his own campaign against Alan Keyes. He talks about how Alan Keyes was, at the end of the campaign, basically saying that Obama was not a true Christian. And Obama was encouraged by his supporters not to entertain his arguments. But, Obama is a Christian, and so, as he said:

What they didn’t understand, however, was that I had to take him seriously. For he claimed to speak for my religion - he claimed knowledge of certain truths.

…

What would my supporters have me say? That a literalist reading of the Bible was folly? That Mr. Keyes, a Roman Catholic, should ignore the teachings of the Pope?

Unwilling to go there, I answered with the typically liberal response in some debates - namely, that we live in a pluralistic society, that I can’t impose my religious views on another, that I was running to be the U.S. Senator of Illinois and not the Minister of Illinois.

But Mr. Keyes implicit accusation that I was not a true Christian nagged at me, and I was also aware that my answer didn’t adequately address the role my faith has in guiding my own values and beliefs.

And, of course, it makes perfect sense that he felt the need to use the "typically liberal response" but felt that inadequate. Had I been running, I’d feel the same. Then, this, I think is the key paragraph:

Democrats, for the most part, have taken the bait. At best, we may try to avoid the conversation about religious values altogether, fearful of offending anyone and claiming that - regardless of our personal beliefs - constitutional principles tie our hands. At worst, some liberals dismiss religion in the public square as inherently irrational or intolerant, insisting on a caricature of religious Americans that paints them as fanatical, or thinking that the very word "Christian" describes one’s political opponents, not people of faith.

He then talks about how religious people in the US are, and a bit of his own faith journey. He then returns to the issue at hand:

… if we truly hope to speak to people where they’re at - to communicate our hopes and values in a way that’s relevant to their own - we cannot abandon the field of religious discourse.

Because when we ignore the debate about what it means to be a good Christian or Muslim or Jew; when we discuss religion only in the negative sense of where or how it should not be practiced, rather than in the positive sense of what it tells us about our obligations towards one another; when we shy away from religious venues and religious broadcasts because we assume that we will be unwelcome - others will fill the vacuum, those with the most insular views of faith, or those who cynically use religion to justify partisan ends.

In other words, if we don’t reach out to evangelical Christians and other religious Americans and tell them what we stand for, Jerry Falwell’s and Pat Robertson’s will continue to hold sway.

This paragraph is, I think probably the paragraph that most upsets progressives. This might have been what the Kos post was speaking about, but it’s hard to see how Obama’s words could be construed that way. What you do with that statement is key. I think most progressives might take this to mean that Obama thinks that perhaps the Dems should backpedal on issues like abortion or gay rights. And this is symptomatic of the problem: the right has so successfully framed the terms of the debate, that talking about religious issues and values means these hot button issues. But I actually think that what Obama is doing is trying to get us out of that framing. He continues by talking about the kinds of ways we can do this.

He then goes into a great example of how problematic some kinds of rhetoric can be. He received a letter from someone who is finds abortion problematic, and he felt that the rhetoric about choice on Obama’s website about this issue was not fair-minded. He then changed the text on his website. This could possibly be used to suggest that he is backpedalling on choice. But I’d say it means that he is being more thoughtful and less inflammatory in his rhetoric (things I talk about frequently.) He then ends the speech with:

It is a prayer I still say for America today - a hope that we can live with one another in a way that reconciles the beliefs of each with the good of all. It’s a prayer worth praying, and a conversation worth having in this country in the months and years to come. Thank you.

In the end, I think that this is very positive. He is right, most people in this country have some sort of faith, and Republicans have exploited this to forward thier basically immoral agenda. He’s not saying, and I’m not saying that we need to do the same. What he is saying, and I agree, is that politics and religion do mix, and we (that is, progressives) ignore that at our own peril. Does this mean that we have to be conscious of the separation of church and state? Youbetcha. But it’s time to talk about what our values are, and all of the variety of places, whether it be Christianity, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam, or secular humanism, where we get those values.

technorati tags:obama, democrats, politics, faith, progressive, religion

I’m just as blue as the next person. In fact, I’m so blue, I might even be indigo. (If you remember high school physics, and ROY G BIV - Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo, Violet - for the colors of the rainbow) I support the ACLU, NARAL, all of those lefty organizations that many on the right find troublesome. However, I’m beginning to find problematic some of the tactics of left wing organizations and activists.

Not so long ago, I talked about "means and ends" that the means are the ends. I got an email in my box from NARAL today, with a video which I found very troubling. It basically depicts various right wing people as monsters like godzilla, or swamp thing, etc. Why is it that we can’t just say that we disagree with them, and see things differently, than cast them as pre-historic swamp monsters? Do we appreciate being dehumanized by the likes of Ann Coulter? So why do we feel it is OK to dehumanize them in return? What does this actually, really do, besides either scare people enough enough that they’ll cough up money?

I’ve never liked using fear as a tactic. I don’t like the fact that the Bush administration uses fear as a tactic to make it more likely that people will bend over when they do things like tap phones and get phone records. I don’t like using fear of a theocratic takeover of the US as a tactic either. The truth is always far more complicated and nuanced, but complicated and nuanced feels like it doesn’t lead to either action, or to contributions. But the continued process of ignoring complicated and nuanced realities leads to more divisivenss, and more fragmentation - and these are the things that are, ultimately, the enemies of social change.

technorati tags:abortion, religousright, aclu

As per usual, TreeHugger has some great stuff. One of which is that people who sleep more use less energy. Good reason to sleep late!

• Some tidbits on ethanol that really make you think
• Stephen Hawking sounds the alarm about global climate change, and suggests we think about space. Fast.
• Go buy some ugly fruit at the supermarket. It’s good for the environment
• Apple needs to get it’s act together to get on the non-toxic computer bandwagon

technorati tags:treehugger, environment, computers, ethanol, fruit

In an interesting story in SFGate today, a study has apparently found that people in the US are more isolated from each other than ever before:

Americans are far more isolated today than they were two decades ago, and a sharply growing number of people say they have no one in whom they can confide, according to a comprehensive study of the decline of social ties in the United States.

…

The study, funded by the National Science Foundation, paints a sobering picture of an increasingly fragmented America, where intimate social ties — once seen as an integral part of daily life and associated with a host of psychological and civic benefits — are shrinking or nonexistent. In bad times, far more people appear to suffer alone.

Communities are fragmenting, and we’re not connecting with each other. This, inevitably will have long-lasting social repercussions. It would be interesting to see how this differs by generations. And, for me, the question arises, how can progressive communities of all faiths help with this?

technorati tags:communities, isolation

Stephen Colbert, who used to be on The Daily Show, but now has his new show, “The Colbert Report” which I don’t watch, since I don’t have a TV. But occasionally, I get snippets of stuff. First, was his speech at the annual Correspondents dinner in Washington, which was an incredible success (for everyone, I assume, except the person who made the contract with him.) Now, he interviews a congressman, who is a Baptist, who, although he advocates the display of the Ten Commandments in public buildings, can’t name them!

technorati tags:congress, tencommandments, westmorland, stephencolbert

They have made it possible for gay church leadership and clergy. It gives local presbyteries the option to ordain gay clergy, and allow for gay leadership. It was approved by 57% to 43%.

In the other denominational meeting, the Episcopal Church has voted to "exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion." In other words, no more gay bishops, at least for a while.

technorati tags:pcusa, ecusa, lgbt, clergy, ordination

I am, finally, at the destination that I will be at for three weeks - the Pioneer Valley of Western Massachusetts. It feels a bit like a homecoming - it feels familiar and comfortable, in that way that a home does. It’s not too hot, today, which is a nice thing. And, not a lot has changed. I’m sitting at what used to be a new cafe in Northampton, with good coffee (actually, I’m having Chai) and free wifi. I’ll have to go back to my old haunt of Haymarket Cafe, too. This area is a lot like Berkeley in that regard - it can support any number of independent cafés. Yay. No more Starbucks in middle america (or suburban NY) for a while.

It’s also nice to know that not only do I get to see people, I get to slow down, and just be for a while - keep being on my extended vacation. That feels good. So, if you know me, and live here, expect a phone call, or an email, or call me. I want to see everyone.

technorati tags:northampton, travel

I’m really continuing to enjoy this denominational annual meeting watch. Most recent - the Presbyterians decided to “receive” a gender-inclusive policy paper. That means:

The divine Trinity — “Father, Son and Holy Spirit” — could also be known as “Mother, Child and Womb” or “Rock, Redeemer, Friend” at some Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) services under an action Monday by the church’s national assembly.

…

Besides “Mother, Child and Womb” and “Rock, Redeemer, Friend,” proposed Trinity options drawn from biblical material include:



• “Lover, Beloved, Love”



• “Creator, Savior, Sanctifier”



• “King of Glory, Prince of Peace, Spirit of Love.”



Early in Monday’s business session, the Presbyterian assembly sang a revised version of a familiar doxology, “Praise God from whom all blessings flow” that avoided male nouns and pronouns for God.

There were, of course dissenters, and this does not bind any congregations to follow it. Seems like a step in the right direction. Also, apparently today they will be voting on whether to allow some presbyteries leeway in ordaining gay clergy. We’ll see what happens.

technorati tags:pcusa, gender, trinity

For denominational conventions. For some reason, it finally dawned on me that it seems that most major denominations have their annual meetings/conventions/synods in the summertime. Since the UCC Synod only meets every other year, and this isn’t one of them, I’ve been reading little bits and pieces about the other interesting meetings going on. UUA General Assembly is coming up soon, the Episcopals and Presbyterians are still meeting and the Southern Baptists just finished meeting. There are some really interesting tidbits coming out of the meetings:

• The Episcopals elected a woman as the top bishop. Woohoo! Some think this puts them in even more trouble with the Anglican Communion, because some member countries don’t think women should even be priests. (There is a conference blog)
• The Episcopals and Presbyterians are dealing with the issue of gay clergy, and gay unions (of course, both the UUA and the Southern Baptists have long since dealt with the issue in their own ways.)
• One of the most fascinating quotes I found in reading about the Southern Baptists was this one: "What angered me was that a reasonable discussion about the nature and extent of Christian liberty in the Gospel seems impossible among brethren who affirm the inerrancy of biblical authority. We do not seem to understand what Christian liberty is all about, and we certainly do not seem willing to recognize or appropriate the scriptural latitude for the sake of fellowship and peace." Of course! How can you possibly have a reasonable discussion when you read the Bible in the skewed fashion that is necessary to insist upon inerrancy? When you insist upon inerrancy, it’s basically an argument about what text proves one point, versus what text proves the other. How does that help? This was from the discussion on the resolution against alcohol, that the SBC approved. (What was that stuff about Jesus turning water into - uh, what was it? Oh, right, wine.)
• The SBC also passed a very anti-environmental resolution, that was partially based on the myth of unclear science about global climate change.
• Oh, and Condi Rice spoke to the SBC folks. I wonder what that was about?

technorati tags:pcusa, gc06, ecusa, sbc, uua

How wonderful for these folks to choose to hold this conference while I’m on the East Coast! I’ll be heading to the Progressive Faith Blog Conference (I was a host of the Progressive Faith Blog Carnival a while ago.) There are a bunch of cool folks that are going to be there, and I’m excited to get to meet some of my favorite bloggers real live in person, and talk about the progressive faith blogosphere, and what kinds of things might come from it. And, of course, I’ll be blogging it!

A bit ago, I sort of gave my old colleague and buddy Beth a little bit of a hard time on a post about “Tagging for social change.” But Beth has been someone who has been ahead of the curve in the nptech world on tagging and folksonomies, and I have come to realize that in the same way that the nptech world needs people to help identify and corral the folksonomy a bit, I think that the same goes for the religious blogosphere. So, I’m now calling myself a tagvocate for the progressive faith blogosphere, and I’ll put up a post at some point soon about tags that I’ve used, and run into, that we should be advocating for. And, Beth, I might even sign up for that tagvocate email list.

technorati tags:nptech, tags, progressivefaith, progfaithblogcon