This morning I preached at Lincoln City Congregational Church (United Church of Christ) on the Oregon coast.  It was the first time one of my sermons has been interrupted by wildlife.

Luke 19:1-10 was the Gospel reading today.  You can download a podcast of my sermon below: 

Download 10_31_2010 11_46 AM

I'll say upfront that the sermon wanders a bit.

(some browsers - like Firefox or Google Chrome - will allow you to simply click on the link and listen...otherwise click with the RIGHT mouse button on the hyperlink and choose “Save Target As” and save to your desktop or other folder – once downloaded click on the file to listen).

Now On ITunes

You can now subscribe to my podcasts on ITunes by clicking here. 

We're all ready for tonight's trick-or-treaters.  Except that maybe Liz and I broke into the candy and, well, ate most of it.  Who buys chocolate two weeks before Halloween anyway? But a quick store run and we're set. Happy Halloween!  

As NARAL reports, there is legislation pending before Congress that "would allow the Federal Trade Commission to penalize Crisis Pregnancy Centers that advertise abortion-care services or counseling that they do not offer."

Crisis Pregnancy Centers often aren't want they claim to be:

Anyone seeking health-care services should receive comprehensive, unbiased, medically and factually accurate information. Women facing unintended pregnancy deserve noless. When women are fully informed, they are better able to make responsible andappropriate decisions about their reproductive health. Mindful of this, the anti-choicemovement has for years tried to restrict, control, and manipulate the information doctorsgive women facing unplanned pregnancies. Unable to shut down legitimate publichealthclinics, their most recent strategy is instead to build a network across the countryof anti-choice organizations, some of them posing as comprehensive health-care clinics –so-called “crisis pregnancy centers” (CPCs) or, as they would like to be called,“pregnancy resource centers.”

While some CPCs may provide appropriate support and information to women facingunintended pregnancies, many do not. Unfortunately, reports indicate that many CPCsintentionally misinform and mislead women seeking pregnancy-related informationwith the intention of dissuading them from exercising their right to choose.1 In fact,some CPCs may force women seeking objective health-care information to watch antiabortionfilms, slide shows, photographs, and hear lectures. Some may also refuse toprovide information about or referrals for birth control.2 These practices block womenfrom making fully informed choices about their reproductive health and may endangerwomen’s health by delaying access to legitimate health-care services.

Today, there are CPCs in every state and dozens of countries overseas.3 Many aresupported by one of three major umbrella organizations: the National Institute of Familyand Life Advocates (NIFLA), Care Net, and Heartbeat International. These three groupsprovide technical assistance and other support to CPCs including training, legal advice,organizational development, and financial assistance. Among them, these organizationsboast more than 2,300 partner and affiliate CPCs. Although such centers are still largelyunlicensed, many have developed in sophistication to such a degree that they now offercertain limited medical services. There are approximately 700 CPCs that have convertedto medical centers, and more than 55 percent of the NIFLA-affiliated centers are limited ultrasound providers.4 In the CPC setting, however, ultrasound is generally not used asa diagnostic tool, but as another means of persuasion.

Click here to read the full report on how these clinics operate.

A common misperception is that the "Christian position' on abortion is anti-choice.  The truth is that many Christian denominations support the right of women to make their own health care decisions.  I recognize that the issue of abortion is a difficult one and that good people can come to very different conclusions concerning this issue.  My own belief is that government shouldn't be in the business of making these kinds of decisions for women.  Women should have a choice.  

The General Synod of the United Church of Christ has said:

Whereas, women and men must make decisions about unplanned or unwanted pregnancies that involve their physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being; and …Whereas, abortion is a social justice issue, both for parents dealing with pregnancy and parenting under highly stressed circumstances, as well as for our society as a whole; …

Therefore, be it resolved, that the Sixteenth General Synod:

• affirms the sacredness of all life, and the need to protect and defend human life in particular;
• encourages persons facing unplanned pregnancies to consider giving birth and parenting the child, or releasing the child for adoption, before abortion;
• upholds the right of men and women to have access to adequately funded family planning services, and to safe, legal abortions as one option among others;
• urges the United Church of Christ, at all levels, to provide educational resources and programs to persons, especially young persons, to help reduce the incidence of unplanned and unwanted pregnancies, and to encourage responsible approaches to sexual behavior.

A reporter from The New York Times who recently visited a Crisis Pregnancy Center notes that she was provided with a pamphlet "about the risks of abortion" that "mentioned breast cancer, a link the National Cancer Institute has refuted, and something called post-abortion syndrome, for which the American Psychological Association, among others, says there is no evidence. As for the physical risks of pregnancy and childbirth? There was no pamphlet to discuss them."

Congress should act to protect women from anti-choice advocacy centers that pretend to be health care centers.  Send your message to Congress today.

President Obama announced this afternoon that explosive materials had been intercepted on cargo planes destined for the United States.  

Jewish synagogues in the Chicago area were the apparent target of these foiled terrorist attacks. 

We can be thankful that U.S. intelligence officials, in cooperation with other nations, uncovered this plot.  

As the president noted, preliminary evidence suggests that al Qaeda was involved.  That these terrorists, under the false guise of the Muslim faith, would twist religion into a violent ideology reminds us once again of the dangers posed by religious fundamentalists.  

In keeping with the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we must avail ourselves of all ethical means of rooting out terrorism.  

President Obama said in 2009 that: "To say that force may sometimes be necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history; the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."  We face an unreasonable foe in al Qaeda.  No one would argue with America's right to protect it's citizens but no one should argue either that the use of violence - even when justifiable - is anything more than an example of "the imperfections of man and the limits of reason."  

What we must never repeat are the human rights violations undertaken by the previous administration or the preemptive war that they waged in the name of fighting terrorism.  President Bush's actions further destabilized worldwide security through incompetence, hubris and his own misguided theological convictions that were soundly rejected by Christians across the globe.  

This afternoon let our prayers be with all those who seek peace in the midst of such violence and for those who have declared themselves to be our enemies.  Let light enter the darkness that has overtaken them and may we all work for a just peace.             

Action Alert from National Council of Churches Eco-Justice Program

Interfaith Statement for Chemical Policy Reform

Toxic chemicals enter and harm our bodies, plants and animals, and natural systems through air and water pollution, and chemicals in household products including cleaners, personal care products, plastic food and drink containers, textiles, and children’s toys.  Yet these chemicals are poorly understood and inadequately regulated.  The U.S. Government Accountability Office found that only 200 of the more than 80,000 registered industrial chemicals have been tested . Existing chemical policies fail to protect the web of Creation, including the human community.

While all people are at risk, some are more vulnerable. Communities of color and low-income communities suffer disproportionately from pollution caused by current and past industrial activity, waste disposal , heavily-traveled transportation routes, and consumer products containing toxic chemicals.  Researchers also warn that toxic chemicals negatively impact children, expectant mothers, and workers. Chemical workers suffer from chemical exposures because of the lack of public data on chemicals they use, unsafe workplaces, and lax enforcement of regulations.

As religious leaders and people of faith and conscience from diverse traditions, we affirm that reforming current chemical policies is vital to protecting people and life on God’s Earth.

Our Shared Call: Four Religious Values

The world’s faith traditions share values which serve as a foundation for ethical decision-making regarding toxic chemicals.  Four core values shared by the world’s great traditions are as follows:

• All life is to be respected.
• People of faith must ensure that air, water, and land – which belong to the Divine - sustain life on Earth.
• Society owes justice and care to its most vulnerable people and communities, and to future generations
• Our faith traditions call us to protect and promote the health of the human body.

This statement contains references to religious teachings that reflect these shared values. Sadly, existing chemical policies fail to respect these values.

The Principles: Strong Toxic Policies to Sustain All Life

Government policy on chemicals can and should protect people and all life on Earth. Chemical legislation should:

Protect People and All Life on Earth

• Remove the most dangerous chemicals, such as chemicals that persist, bioaccumulate, or are acutely toxic (PBTs), from use except when no safe alternative is available.
• Hold companies accountable for demonstrating that chemicals are safe.

Protect Vulnerable Populations

• Reduce the disproportionate burden of chemical exposure placed on workers, low-income people, people of color, indigenous communities, pregnant women, and children, and other vulnerable groups.
• Expand government biomonitoring, particularly in at-risk communities, to measure people’s toxic exposure.
• Invest in research to understand and protect children’s health from chemical harm.
• Provide chemical health and safety information to workers and the public.

Promote a Sustainable, Healthy Economy

• Fund “green” chemistry and engineering research to create safer chemicals and industrial processes.
• Promote a “green” economy that will allow all life to flourish and bring green jobs to low-income communities and communities of color.

Click here to add your name.

Note to idiot Democrats:  keep the Bible out of your political mailers, please.  It is a gross misuse of our faith tradition and something that the GOP has been rightfully criticized for in the past.

Has everyone gone insane?  

This press release just landed in my e-mail inbox:

San Diego—As Americans approach the eve of election week, U.S. Cardinal-designate Raymond Burke is reminding Catholics in an exclusive 25-minute video interview that they are bound in conscience to vote for political candidates who oppose aborting babies, embryonic stem cell experiments, euthanasia and so-called homosexual "marriage."

"Millions of Catholics have no idea it's a sin to vote for candidates who favor these grave evils, which attack the very foundations of society," said Thomas McKenna, President of Catholic Action for Faith and Family. "This matter-of-fact, pointed interview granted to me by Archbishop Raymond Burke in Rome last week makes it very clear what the responsibility of every American Catholic will be next Tuesday."

In recent years Archbishop Burke, who is prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura, the Church's "supreme court," has taught repeatedly that Catholic politicians who support abortion rights may not receive Holy Communion and that Catholics who know of the politicians' voting record on these issues cannot vote for them and retain "a clear conscience." 

McKenna interviewed Archbishop Burke in Rome on Oct. 20 literally hours after it was announced he would be elevated to Cardinal. The 25-minute interview is being released to help inform Catholic voters before the U.S. elections on Nov. 2nd. Some of the points the Archbishop makes are:

"As a bishop it's my obligation in fact, to urge the faithful to carry out their civic duty in accord with their Catholic faith."

"You can never vote for someone who favors absolutely the right to choice of a woman to destroy a human life in her womb or the right to a procured abortion."

"So, the Catholic Church in teaching that sexual acts between persons of the same sex are intrinsically evil, are against nature itself, is simply announcing the truth, helping people to discriminate right from wrong in terms of their own activities."

First, I proudly disagree with Burke.  But that's always been the case.  So do many Catholics.  

Is it ever appropriate for a church official like Burke to tell voters which candidates to vote for?  He clearly is speaking in his official capacity and not as an individual.  Burke is obviously promoting one political party over another.  What are the politics of Jesus?  

I've endorsed candidates before but have always used language similar to this statement that I offered when endorsing Barack Obama in 2008:

As a minister in the United Church of Christ, I trust deeply in the Constitutional principle of separation of church and state and my endorsement is therefore a personal one and does not reflect on the church I serve or my denomination. But as a citizen I believe that all Americans must engage in the political process as individuals for democracy to thrive. So I choose to add my voice today with millions of other Americans concerned about the direction of this nation.

Catholic Action for Faith and Family sent out this morning's press release.

The National Council of Churches USA developed a document a few election cycles back called Christian Principles in an Election Year.  The difference between this statement and Burke's remarks - and it is a profound difference - is that: "The principles are not intended to be partisan, but rather to lift up common principles that have been affirmed ecumenically and that can provide guidance..."  You'll note that the council never tells anyone who they should or should not vote for:  

Our Christian faith compels us to address the world through the lens of our relationship to God and to one another. Public discourse is enhanced as we engage civic leaders on the values and ethics affirmed by our faith. At the same time, religious liberty and the integrity of our democracy will be protected as candidates refrain from using faith-based organizations and institutions for partisan gain. We offer these ten principles to those seeking to accept the responsibility that comes with holding public office.

1. War is contrary to the will of God. While the use of violent force may, at times, be a necessity of last resort, Christ pronounces his blessing on the peacemakers. We look for political leaders who will make peace with justice a top priority and who will actively seek nonviolent solutions to conflict.

2. God calls us to live in communities shaped by peace and cooperation. We reject policies that abandon large segments of our inner city and rural populations to hopelessness. We look for political leaders who will re-build our communities and bring an end to the cycles of violence and killing.

3. God created us for each other, and thus our security depends on the well-being of our global neighbors. We look for political leaders for whom a foreign policy based on cooperation and global justice is an urgent concern.

4. God calls us to be advocates for those who are most vulnerable in our society. We look for political leaders who yearn for economic justice and who will seek to reduce the growing disparity between rich and poor.

5. Each human being is created in the image of God and is of infinite worth. We look for political leaders who actively promote racial justice and equal opportunity for everyone.

6. The earth belongs to God and is intrinsically good. We look for political leaders who recognize the earth's goodness, champion environmental justice, and uphold our responsibility to be stewards of God’s creation.

7. Christians have a biblical mandate to welcome strangers. We look for political leaders who will pursue fair immigration policies and speak out against xenophobia.

8. Those who follow Christ are called to heal the sick. We look for political leaders who will support adequate, affordable and accessible health care for all.

9. Because of the transforming power of God’s grace, all humans are called to be in right relationship with each other. We look for political leaders who seek a restorative, not retributive, approach to the criminal justice system and the individuals within it.

10. Providing enriched learning environments for all of God’s children is a moral imperative. We look for political leaders who will advocate for equal educational opportunity and abundant funding for children’s services.

Finally, our religious tradition admonishes us not to bear false witness against our neighbor and to love our enemies. We ask that the campaigns of political candidates and the coverage of the media in this election season be conducted according to principles of fairness, honesty and integrity.

Burke's on-going partisan political activity in his official capacity harms both his church and democracy. 

The New York Times reports:

Pressure is on to change the Roman Catholic Church in America, but it's not coming from the usual liberal suspects. A new breed of theological conservatives has taken to blogs and YouTube to say the church isn't Catholic enough.

Enraged by dissent that they believe has gone unchecked for decades, and unafraid to say so in the starkest language, these activists are naming names and unsettling the church.

— In the Archdiocese of Boston, parishioners are dissecting the work of a top adviser to the cardinal for any hint of Marxist influence.

— Bloggers are combing through campaign finance records to expose staff of Catholic agencies who donate to politicians who support abortion rights.

— RealCatholicTV.com, working from studios in suburban Detroit, is hunting for "traitorous" nuns, priests or bishops throughout the American church.

"We're no more engaged in a witch hunt than a doctor excising a cancer is engaged in a witch hunt," said Michael Voris of RealCatholicTV.com and St. Michael's Media. "We're just shining a spotlight on people who are Catholics who do not live the faith."

John Allen, Vatican analyst for the National Catholic Reporter, has dubbed this trend "Taliban Catholicism." 

This "Taliban Catholicism" has done more than just upset the Roman Catholic Church.  Ecumenical relationships have been upset as well.  Vatican II brought closer ties between Christians world-wide but those relationships have been endangered by those who see churches outside Catholicism as less than fully Christian (sadly, this includes the current pope).

Efforts to fight poverty have also been impacted.  Returning to the story in The New York Times:

The work of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is another frequent target.

Activists and bloggers, including Bellarmine Veritas Ministry of Texas, have been investigating the bishops' Catholic Campaign for Human Development, a national grantmaking program created in the 1970s to support community organizing and economic development.

The activists concluded that some of the grantees back same-sex marriage, artificial contraception or abortion rights. As part of the push, activists accused the director of the bishops' national social justice office of serving on the board of a nonprofit while it advocated for gay marriage and abortion. The claims against him were shown to be unfounded.

Still, the bloggers had an impact.

The bishop who oversees the anti-poverty grants said that a few, but not all, of the accused grantees had indeed taken positions contrary to church teaching and had been defunded. Since the controversy erupted, 10 of the 195 U.S. dioceses have suspended or dropped annual parish collections for the program, and the bishops are reviewing their grant policies.

Two Portland-area programs have been defunded as part of this crusade:  Children First for Oregon and Street Roots.  Street Roots published a story recently on their experience:

After five years of financial support through the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, Street Roots was informed this spring that it would no longer be eligible for funding.

The reason given by the Archdiocese of Portland in Oregon was the a single listing in Street Roots’ Rose City Resource, a pocket-sized booklet listing 300-plus resources for people experiencing homelessness and poverty. There, under the category of health care, was a listing for Planned Parenthood, which in a half-inch space included a description of the various basic services, including contraception, that the organization provides to low- or no-income customers seeking health care.

As the Portland paper notes, this is part of a larger trend:

Why now? What changed after five years of CCHD support for Street Roots? How did a piece of information suddenly morph into a theological offense?

Starting in autumn 2009, other groups began asking the same questions. The Chinese Progressive Association in San Francisco was among the first to get the call: CCHD, which was one of the founding funders for the 38-year-old Association, had to cut ties with the workers’ rights program. Also in California, the Young Workers United was told it was being cut from funding as well, as was the Rebecca Project for Human Rights, which helps homeless and disadvantaged women who have children. L.A. Community Action Network was “defunded” at its own request after CCHD tried to censor its newspaper. Women in Transition in Louisville, Ky., had its grant rescinded, and Preble Resource Center, which serves homeless youths in Portland, Maine, was ordered to return to CCHD funds for its Homeless Voices for Justice program. In Oregon, Children First for Oregon, a child advocacy group for vulnerable children, was culled from the list of grantees earlier this year.

Besides CCHD’s support, and beyond the commonality of their missions, these groups share something else: They were all targeted, investigated and determined unfit by a campaign of Catholic conservative groups that, via the prolific capacity of the Internet, have formed a nationwide coalition calling for the defunding of more than 50 poverty-alleviation organizations, and a radical overhaul — and even disbandment — of CCHD....

“These are politically motivated attacks,” says Chris Korzen, executive director of D.C.-based Catholics United, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization doing online advocacy and education programs around the Catholic Social Tradition. “And they fit into this broader narrative that we’re unfortunately seeing in our system now, where social change is limited to charity and not actually fixing social structures that cause poverty and other problems.”

The intent of these attacks, Korzen says, is to demonize community organizing behind the arguments against abortion and same-sex marriage. That’s the end result of what this campaign is doing,” Korzen says. “It’s taking away care from those who need it.”

A Catholic himself, Korzen says Catholic social teaching is being hijacked by political agendas.

“This hyper-individualism that some are pushing in a political context does not have a lot of support in Catholic social teaching,” Korzen says. “So, essentially what we’re seeing is groups who are using Catholic teaching to promote what really is a secular agenda.”

It’s not a new thing, Korzen says. Indeed, CCHD for decades has had its critics. But today it gets the added boost of leveraging political gains with a galvanized voting block, further inflamed by the personalities parading through our ever-expanding media options.

Obviously, Roman Catholics are not alone in facing the problem of radical fundamentalism.  We see this at work in the Protestant tradition as well.  There is a dangerous "You're Either With Us Or Against Us" mentality at play.  Groups like Focus on the Family and the Institute on Religion and Democracy are prime examples of the "Protestant Taliban."   Religious fundamentalism is a threat not only to the church universal but also to civil society and the democracy we enjoy in a pluralistic society.      

As a minister in the United Church of Christ, I'm deeply troubled when extremist Christians use religion to disparage other faiths.  The truth of the matter is that we all can learn from the different ways we understand the Almighty.  God's work is the work of reconciliation.  Christian extremists who make millions off attacking the Islamic faith or those who threaten to burn the Qur'an for free publicity make all Christians look like religious zealots.  Their actions damage the church universal.  

We can blame part of this on the media that enjoys controversy (and the public that eats it up).  Stories about different faiths working together don't get covered but the work of inter-religious dialog is of critical importance to the future of humanity and it should not be ignored.

As the World Council of Churches reports, early this November Christians and Muslims will gather to seek common ground during a time in history where faith is used to often to divide people:

High-ranking Muslim and Christian leaders as well as renowned scholars and interfaith practitioners, representing various Islamic and Christians organizations, will gather 1-4 November at the Ecumenical Centre in Geneva for an international consultation on Christian and Muslim concerns. 

The international consultation, which is called "Transforming Communities: Christians and Muslims Building a Common Future", will identify and address issues of common concern and provide guidance for cooperation between Muslims and Christians, including faith-inspired approaches for joint Christian-Muslim action.

A joint statement will be issued at the end of the consultation on 4 November during a press conference.  

The consultation will open with keynote addresses by His Royal Highness Prince Ghazi Bin Muhammad bin Talal,personal envoy and special advisor to His Majesty King Abdullah II of Jordan, and Archbishop Anders Wejryd of the Church of Sweden.

Also participating in the consultation will be: the general secretary of the World Council of Churches, Rev. Dr Olav Fykse Tveit; Dr Muhammad Ahmed Sharif, general secretary of the World Islamic Call Society; Dr Abdulrahman Al-Zayed representing the Muslim World League; and Ayatollah Muhammad Ali Al-Tashkiri, secretary general of the World Forum for Proximity of Islamic Schools of Thought.

Rev. Thomas Wipf, president of the Federation of the Swiss Protestant Churches and the Swiss Council of Religions, and Sheikh Yousef Ibram, imam of the Geneva mosque, will also be attending.

The consultation, which builds on the solid basis of past initiatives and achievements by a variety of organizations and networks, is a joint Christian-Muslim initiative in planning, funding and participation. The conveners are the World Council of Churches (WCC), the World Islamic Call Society, the Royal Aal al Bayt Institute and the Consortium of A Common Word.  

"Christians and Muslims have a joint responsibility to contribute the very best of their theological, spiritual, and ethical resources for the common good of humanity", stated the organizers.

The group expects the consultation to "develop concrete ways of building a common future, in order to achieve more compassionate and just societies, based on equality, co-citizenship and mutual respect".

Wouldn't it be nice if CNN and FOX News used their networks to offer wall-to-wall coverage of this event?

Please keep the organizers and participants in your prayers.

Religious bigotry as a for-profit industry:

Steven Emerson has 3,390,000 reasons to fear Muslims.

That's how many dollars Emerson's for-profit company — Washington-based SAE Productions — collected in 2008 for researching alleged ties between American Muslims and overseas terrorism. The payment came from the Investigative Project on Terrorism Foundation, a nonprofit charity Emerson also founded, which solicits money by telling donors they're in imminent danger from Muslims.

Emerson is a leading member of a multimillion-dollar industry of self-proclaimed experts who spread hate toward Muslims in books and movies, on websites and through speaking appearances.

Leaders of the so-called "anti-jihad" movement portray themselves as patriots, defending America against radical Islam. And they've found an eager audience in ultra-conservative Christians and mosque opponents in Middle Tennessee. One national consultant testified in an ongoing lawsuit aimed at stopping a new Murfreesboro mosque.

But beyond the rhetoric, Emerson's organization's tax-exempt status is facing questions at the same time he's accusing Muslim groups of tax improprieties.

"Basically, you have a nonprofit acting as a front organization, and all that money going to a for-profit," said Ken Berger, president of Charity Navigator, a nonprofit watchdog group. "It's wrong. This is off the charts."

The Tennessean has the story. 

This morning I was honored to be the guest preacher at Bethel Congregational United Church of Christ in Beaverton, Oregon.  The congregation has discerned it's mission as being that:

We are called to be an open and inclusive, 
open and affirming community of faith,
worshiping God, 
sharing the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, 
and practicing God's unconditional love for all creation. 

I preached today on Luke 18:9-14.  You can download a podcast of my sermon below:

Who Is The Good Guy?

(some browsers - like Firefox or Google Chrome - will allow you to simply click on the link and listen...otherwise click with the RIGHT mouse button on the hyperlink and choose “Save Target As” and save to your desktop or other folder – once downloaded click on the file to listen).

Now On ITunes

You can now subscribe to my podcasts on ITunes by clicking here. 

I want to thank The Rev. David Randall-Bodman for his invitation to preach and to the people of Bethel for their hospitality.  

The Family Research Council (FRC) - which bills itself as a pro-family Christian organization - has issued their voter's guide.  It is important to note that in reality the FRC is a conservative political organization and not a religious body.

What they consider "family values" is often the opposite of what millions of Christians across the United States consider moral.   

Their guide, which is being distributed over the web and in churches across Oregon and the nation, ranks candidates and according to them 6 out of 7 members of Oregon's Congressional delegation are 100% anti-family.

What did Wyden, Merkley, Blumenauer, Wu, DeFazio, and Schrader do to earn their "anti-family values" label?

They voted for health care reform that cuts costs and expands coverage for tens of millions of Americans, voted to fight the HIV/AIDS epidemic, voted to protect the right of women to make their own health care decisions and voted for hate crimes legislation to protect people from violent assaults and even murder.

Wyden and Merkley added insult to injury (from FRC's point of view) by voting to confirm President Obama's nominees to the Supreme Court and even had the gall to vote for legislation that would require groups that spend money on political campaigns to disclose their donors! 

The truth is that Wyden, Merkley,  Blumenauer, Wu, DeFazio, and Schrader voted for the common good.  As a minister, I strongly dispute the Family Research Council's assertion that these votes were in any way anti-family. In fact, many of the votes taken by these members of Congress were ones recommended by Christian and Jewish national organizations - like the National Council of Churches USA and the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism.   

I commend  these Oregon leaders for their wisdom, compassion, and family values.  No, I don't agree with them all the time (Schrader's support for the NRA is quite troublesome, for example) but these are people of integrity.

Oregon's U.S. Rep. Greg Walden, for the record, received a 75% positive rating from FRC.  I don't consider him to be "anti-family values" because he disagrees with me on public policy issues.  We just have different views on important matters.    

Our politics need to be more civil.     

From The Washington Post's blog On Faith:

If Jesus were running during this election cycle, he would be subject to attack ads.

Imagine the possibilities. Imagine that the various towns named in biblical texts were in somewhere USA.

On foreign policy:

A shot of the World Trade Center towers falling. 

Voiceover: 9/11. The nation suffers the worst attack on its soil in history. But Jesus says that we ought to love the people who did this. He says: "do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who misuse and persecute you." (Matthew 5:44) Love al Qaeda? Do good to the people who attacked us? This is no plan to keep us safe. Jesus. Soft on defense. Wrong for America.

On guilt by association:

Scene: Nighttime on a city corner where prostitutes and drug dealers are doing business. Cut to Jesus having dinner with the same people.

Voice: People are known by the company they keep. Jesus is friend to prostitutes, drug dealers, tax collectors. Is this the kind of man we want in the United States Senate? Jesus. He's just not one of us.

On family values:

Scene: Children outside playing in the yard, happy and carefree. The father is washing the car while the mother watches from the kitchen window. Everyone is happy and contented.

Voice: Strong families are the backbone of America. Faith and family are what make this country strong.

Next scene: Father and son are screaming at each other. A daughter stomps out of the room, slams the door and leaves the mother looking lost and bewildered.

Voice: But Jesus wants families to be at war with each other. He said: "For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be those of his own household." (Matthew 10: 35-36) Is this what we want for our families? Is war in our homes a family value? Keep Jesus in Nazareth and in the carpenter's shop. We do not need him in Washington.

On Jesus' patriotism:

Scene: Jesus is speaking to a large audience. He says: "Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the Day of Judgment than for you." (Matthew 11: 21-22)

Voice: Why does Jesus hate America? Do we really want someone who hates his country so much making laws for us? Real America, tell Jesus no on Election Day.

On socialism:

Scene: A scene from the movie Dr. Zhivago when he comes home from the war to find strangers living in his house. The woman says there was room for many families here. Freeze frame. 

Voice: Karl Marx says that the government ought to take from each according to his abilities, and give to each according to his needs. This is socialism. This is communism. Jesus agrees with Marx. He says to be saved, you have to give your hard-earned possessions away. He said: "Go and sell whatever you have and give it to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven."(Mark 10: 21) Jesus. Socialism. Dangerous for America.

Our elections have been about which candidate seems to be the less monstrous. For some of us, a return to party loyalty is the lens through which we view the campaigns and the various attack ads. Our side tells the righteous truth, and the opponent airs only distortions. Negative advertising seeks to show that the opponent is extreme and dangerous, a person who is not one of us, who does not share our values. However, even Jesus can be portrayed as some kind of monster.

Our politics need to be more civil.

Excerpts from The Rev. Joe Darby's view of Preaching with Sacred Fire: An Anthology of African-American Sermons, 1750 to the Present: 

A friend of mine at The Post and Courier, who knew that I’d get restless while recovering from surgery, gave me some “homework” – to read “Preaching with Sacred Fire: An Anthology of African-American Sermons, 1750 to the Present” and do a book review. In addition to keeping me occupied, the book was enlightening and revelatory...

It hit me while reading those sermons that the historically black church and her preachers – from Richard Allen to Frederick Douglass to Adam Clayton Powell to Martin Luther King, Jr. – served as America’s spiritual and moral conscience....

Too many preachers today are more interested in “preaching style” and entertainment than in making a difference in the lives of those in and beyond their churches. Too many sermons today are the equivalent of theological “fast food” – long on sensory appeal and pleasant taste, but short on spiritual nutrition. Too many “megachurches” serve up a counterfeit Gospel that emphasizes personal prosperity but ignores personal and corporate responsibility for those who are lost, hurting and in need of advocates who can speak truth to power. Rather than being sold on the liberating power of Jesus, many churches have simply “sold out” and allowed divisive demagogues like Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh and Rocky D. to create confusion without challenge.

Those who laid the foundations of the historically black church once sang in brush arbors and praise houses that we should “all go back to the old landmark.” We should take their admonition seriously today. Those who stand in the pulpit should be authentic in promoting spiritual and social well being and in demanding that America be “one nation, under God with liberty and justice for all.” Those in the pews should make it plain that we are to be about our Father’s business and change our churches, our communities, our state and our nation for the better. Going to the polls on November 2 and electing those who go beyond empty words to stand for progress and well being for all of God’s children would be an excellent starting point.

Click here to read the full review.  His critique of the failures of preachers and the church today speaks to black, white and multi-cultural churches across the United Sates.  

Rev. Darby is the senior minister of Morris Brown AME Church in Charleston, SC.

I'm conflicted over Juan Williams' remarks made on FOX News in which he said he was afraid to fly with Muslims.  The conflict on my part arises from a lack of understanding concerning his comments.  Did he mean to characterize all Muslims - stereotype them - as terrorists?  Or was he admitting a unjustified but real fear he shares with other Americans post 9/11 knowing that he was wrong to think such things?

Did he just speak poorly or was there generalized bigotry toward Muslims at play? 

NPR's Ombudsman, Alicia Shepard (who writes that the networked has handled the situation poorly), makes this very fair statement today on NPR's website:

I can only imagine how Williams, who has chronicled and championed the Civil Rights movement, would have reacted if another prominent journalist had said:

"But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see an African American male in Dashiki with a big Afro, I get worried. I get nervous."

In any event, NPR was justified in firing him.  Williams long ago left mainstream journalism for the hyper-opinionated world of FOX News (or MSNBC, for that matter).  The New York Times does a good job of explaining the difference between the two types of media:

NPR’s decision Wednesday to fire Juan Williams and Fox News Channel’s decision to give him a new contract on Thursday put into sharp relief the two versions of journalism that compete every day for Americans’ attention.

Mr. Williams had his NPR contract terminated Wednesday, two days after he said on an opinionated segment on Fox News that he worries when he sees people in “Muslim garb” on an airplane. He later said he was citing his fears after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks nine years ago.

NPR said Wednesday night that Mr. Williams’ comments were "inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices." According to a report in The Los Angeles Times, Fox News chairman Roger Ailes offered Mr. Williams a new three-year contract on Thursday morning, pegged at nearly $2 million total.

By dismissing Mr. Williams, one of its senior news analysts, NPR argued that he had violated the corporation’s belief in impartiality, a core tenet of modern American journalism. By renewing Mr. Williams’ contract, Fox News showed its preference for point-of-view — rather than the view-from-nowhere — polemic. And it gave Fox the opportunity to jab NPR, the public radio organization that has long been a target of conservatives for what they perceive to be a liberal bias.

Those competing views of journalism have been highlighted by the success of Fox and MSNBC and the popularity of opinion media that beckons many traditional journalists. That Mr. Williams was employed by both Fox and NPR had been a source of consternation in the past.

In early 2009 Mr. Williams drew the ire of NPR’s ombudswoman when he said on Fox that Michelle Obama has “got this Stokely-Carmichael-in-a-designer-dress thing going,” an allusion to a leader of the black power movement of the 1960s. Afterwards, NPR made it known that it didn’t want Mr. Williams identified as an NPR employee in appearances on "The O’Reilly Factor," the Fox News program hosted by the conservative commentatorBill O’Reilly.

"This isn’t the first time we have had serious concerns about some of Juan’s public comments," the NPR chief executive Vivian Schiller wrote in an e-mail message to affiliates.

She said that his most recent comments "violated our standards as well as our values and offended many in doing so.” Ms. Schiller declined an interview request.

Like many other news organizations, NPR expects its journalists to steer clear of situations that might call its impartiality into question -- an expectation that is written into the organization’s ethics code.

Williams departed from traditional journalism as soon as he stepped onto the studio of FOX News.

The AP reported today that Vivian Schiller, NPR's CEO said:

...Williams' firing is not a reflection of his comments (on Fox News Channel) that he gets nervous when he sees people in Muslim garb on an airplane. She said she has no problem with people taking controversial positions, but that such opinions should not come from NPR reporters or news analysts. Williams, Schiller said, is a news analyst, not a commentator or columnist.

Schiller also sent out an e-mail today to NPR affiliates in which she stated:

"A critical distinction has been lost in this debate. NPR News analysts have a distinctive role and set of responsibilities. This is a very different role than that of a commentator or columnist. News analysts may not take personal public positions on controversial issues; doing so undermines their credibility as analysts, and that's what’s happened in this situation. As you all well know, we offer views of all kinds on your air every day, but those views are expressed by those we interview — not our reporters and analysts.

"Second, this isn't the first time we have had serious concerns about some of Juan's public comments.  Despite many conversations and warnings over the years, Juan has continued to violate this principal.

"Third, these specific comments (and others made in the past), are inconsistent with NPR’s ethics code, which applies to all journalists (including contracted analysts): 'In appearing on TV or other media. ... NPR journalists should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist. They should not participate in shows ... that encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis.”

"More fundamentally, 'In appearing on TV or other media including electronic Web-based forums, NPR journalists  should not express views they would not air in their role as an NPR journalist.'

And, she said the firing came after "several cases'' of Williams veering from journalistic ethics.

As the child of a television executive, I can tell you that growing up we were not even allowed to have political yard signs.  Such a visible display of political leanings could be easily construed as representing the news departments of the stations my father worked at.  Of course, this was a time (not that long ago, really) will journalistic ethics were grounded in the work of people like Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite.  

As President Obama noted in a recent interview with Rolling Stone, that era is over:

The golden age of an objective press was a pretty narrow span of time in our history. Before that, you had folks like Hearst who used their newspapers very intentionally to promote their viewpoints. I think Fox is part of that tradition — it is part of the tradition that has a very clear, undeniable point of view. It's a point of view that I disagree with. It's a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world. But as an economic enterprise, it's been wildly successful. And I suspect that if you ask Mr. Murdoch what his number-one concern is, it's that Fox is very successful.

When Williams left the ideals of Murrow behind for the big money and politics of FOX News he abandoned the ethics of an objective press that is still represented in places like National Public Radio, whatever their faults might be.

The Right is now howling for an end of public financing of NPR, as Politico reports:

“I think it’s reasonable to ask why Congress is spending taxpayers’ money to support a left-wing radio network – and in the wake of Juan Williams’ firing, it’s clearer than ever that’s what NPR is,” said House Republican leader John Boehner (R-Ohio.)

What the GOP fears most is an independent and free press that can't be bought.  They don't care about freedom of the press or journalistic ethics.  The want a corporation, like FOX News, that promotes their agenda and even contributes financially to their campaign coffers.

Juan Williams is right where he belongs now.  Now he is free to say whatever he wants.  Just don't call what he does journalism.  

Action Alert From United Church of Christ Justice and Witness Ministries

There is more than fall in the air this election season.  Unfortunately, there is an air of mean-spiritedness and partisan squabbling in the 2010 midterm election cycle.  No doubt you have seen the political ads and heard the news coverage of candidates trading not ideas and solutions but rather accusations.  It is easy to do one of two things in an election year:

• join the win-at-all costs competition
• or reject the whole business and participate minimally, if at all. 

There is another option: respectful and responsible engagement.

As people of faith we are called to a higher standard of engagement with our neighbors – even and perhaps especially those with whom we disagree on an issue.  Our faith provides us with spiritual resources to take the conversation to another level.  We can choose respect and hope over animosity and bitterness. We can choose to listen and learn rather than attack and insult.  We don’t have to avoid the hard issues.  We can have civic discussions in civic tones.

You can help bring civility to the election campaigns by signing onto the UCC Our Faith Our Vote Civility Pledge and by encouraging others in your congregation to join you.  It is one way of making a concrete commitment to raise the bar of public debate.  The Our Faith Our Vote website also includes resources and tips on how to have civil discussion on the hard issues in our congregations and communities. 

Last week I wrote the Oregon Attorney General's office asking that they investigate the Portland City Attorney's office for withholding information that a Portland Police officer - under investigation for excessive use of force - had created public memorials to Nazi SS troops in a Portland park. As The Oregonian reported today, the attorney general's office wrote back today and suggested that I file a  complaint with the Oregon State Bar, which investigates professional misconduct among attorneys. I will follow-up with the Bar.  

However, my intention is to work with other faith leaders in Portland to ask the AG to demonstrate his outspoken commitment to civil rights by engaging directly in these issues.  As the Chasse case illustrates, these incidents are not isolated but are part of a pattern of deception that place the civil rights and safety of all Portlanders in jeopardy.  We face a crisis of leadership and my hope is that the AG will eventually step in to help fill that void.  Oregon Attorney General John Kroger has promised to be a fierce defender of civil rights.  

Just yesterday I met with leaders of Albina Ministerial Alliance (AMA) to talk about a coordinated response to these matters from Portland's faith community.  AMA has already called on the state's AG office to establish a special prosecutor to deal with legal issues that arise when a police officer kills a civilian in the line of duty or is accused of excessive force.  Clearly, the system as now designed does not work.  

I will continue to work in partnership with other concerned Portlanders on these critical issues of accountability.  

Comments like this from GOP Senate nominee Christine O'Donnell, as reported in USA Today, show the value of a good education: 

The exchange came in a debate before an audience of legal scholars and law students at Widener University Law School, as O'Donnell criticized Democratic nominee Chris Coons' position that teaching creationism in public school would violate the First Amendment by promoting religious doctrine.

Coons said private and parochial schools are free to teach creationism but that "religious doctrine doesn't belong in our public schools."

"Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" O'Donnell asked him.

When Coons responded that the First Amendment bars Congress from making laws respecting the establishment of religion, O'Donnell asked: "You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?"

Yep, it is.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The First Amendment has guaranteed religious liberty in the United States for over two hundred years.  Visit the website of the Interfaith Alliance to learn more about why the separation of church and state is so vital to our democracy - and our freedom in a pluralistic society.        

Discrimination against the Dalit people of India is real, often times violent, and as troublesome as the Apartheid system in old South Africa.  I saw this firsthand when visiting South India in 2003 as part of a group from Eden Theological Seminary.  Sadly, most people across the globe are unaware of this human rights crisis  The World Council of Churches reports on an upcoming conference to address the moral issues involved: 

At a conference of church leaders being convened by the National Council of Churches in India in partnership with the World Council of Churches in New Delhi from 22-24 October 2010, the sin and scandal of caste discrimination right within the church will be the main topics of discussion.

Organized as a follow up to the Global Conference on Justice for Dalits in Bangkok in March 2009, the Delhi conference is expected to call on the churches to end caste discrimination in the churches and the society and to be in solidarity with the Dalits in their struggles for dignity, justice and life and for a new social order that is free of caste.

About 100 leaders from churches, ecumenical organizations and Dalit initiatives are expected to participate in this event.

A new publication, Dalit Theology in the Twenty First Century: Discordant Voices, Discerning Pathways, edited by Sathianathan Clarke, Deenabandhu Manchala and Philip Peacock and jointly published by the World Council of Churches and Oxford University Press (New Delhi) will be presented at the conference.

I was very fortunate during my 2003 trip to make friends with The Rev. Raj Bharath Patta, then a student at Gurukul Lutheran Theological College and now the Executive Secretary of the National Council of Churches in Inida's Commission on Dalits. You can read more about the upcoming conference on their website. 

Sunday, December 5th is being recognized this year by churches in India as "Dalit Liberation Sunday."  Please consider marking the day with a special prayer in your church.

Related Post:  A Podcast Sermon On Romans 13:8-14: Pray, Fast For The Dalit People

Updated

As one of the clergy who conducted the memorial for James Chasse, I am sickened by the information released today by Chasse family lawyers at a just concluded press conference that I've attended which clearly shows the Portland Police Bureau's own actions led to Mr. Chasse's death and that this fact was covered-up.

We've known for some time that the actions of the police were the cause of Mr. Chasse's death - that fact is not new - but what we did not know until today was the extent in which officers lied to cover-up their actions and how those lies deliberately led to Mr. Chasse not receiving life saving medical care.

Officers dehumanized Mr. Chasse while he was in their care and even tried to plant drugs on him to create the illusion that his injuries were in some way self-caused when in fact the police brutally assaulted him without cause.        

The fact that the officers - including Officer Humphreys - are still on the force should be concerning to all Portlanders.  There is reason to believe there is corruption within the ranks of the Portland Police and that City Hall has helped to protect the officers involved.  Either the Oregon Department of Justice or the U.S. Department of Justice need to launch a wide-ranging investigation into the Bureau's activities.

- Rev. Chuck Currie

Related News:  Chasse Case Coverup? Family Attorney Says So. (The Portland Mercury) 

Related News: Chasse family claims documents show police cover-up (KATU)

Sunday morning I talked with the "Early Edition" Sunday school class at Ainsworth United Church of Christ about the ballot measures Oregonians will be considering this November.  Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon - our state's council of churches - has made recommendations on the measures.  My own views are in line with EMO's:

Measure 70: Veterans Home Loans Expansion. Vote YES

Measure 71: Oregon Legislature Annual Sessions Amendment. No Position

Measure 72: Authorizes exception to $50,000 state borrowing limit for state property projects. No Position

Measure 73: Increases mandatory minimum sentences for specified crimes. Vote NO

Measure 74: Regulated Medical Marijuana Supply System Act. No Position

Measure 75: Authorizes Multnomah County Casino. Vote NO

Measure 76: Continues dedicated funding for parks, wildlife and water shed protection. Vote YES

City of Portland Measure 26-108: Continues City public campaign financing for Mayoral, Commissioner and Auditor candidates. Vote YES

You can download EMO's voter guide here.  It contains an explanation of each measure and EMO's rational for each recommendation. 

I will be voting YES on Measure 71 and I'm learning toward a YES vote on Measure 74 (though I agree this issue really ought to be considered by the Legislature and not by initiative - if only wishing made it so - and if I do vote YES it will be a vote to keep the debate alive rather than strong support for the measure as written).  I have not come to a conclusion on Measure 72.  These three measures are ones that EMO did not make recommendations on for various reasons.

So why should churches be making recommendations on ballots measures?  The United Methodist Church provides the best answer in their Social Principles:

The United Methodist Church believes that the church has the moral imperative to act for the common good. For people of faith, therefore, there are no political or spiritual spheres where their participation can be denied. The attempt to influence the formation and execution of public policy at all levels of government is often the most effective means available to churches to keep before humanity the ideal of a society in which power and order are made to serve the ends of justice and freedom for all people. Through such social action The United Methodist Church generates new ideas, challenges certain goals and methods, and help rearrange the emphasis on particular values in ways that facilitate the adoption and implementation of specific policies and programs that promote goals that are congruent with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This task of the Church is in no way in contradiction with our commitment to a vital separation of Church and State. We believe that the integrity of both institutions is best served when both institutions do not try to control the other. Thus, we sustain with the first amendment to the Constitution that: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;” We live in a pluralistic society. In such a society, churches should not seek to use the authority of government to make the whole community conform to their particular moral codes. Rather, churches should seek to enlarge and clarify the ethical grounds of public discourse and to identify and define the foreseeable consequences of available choices of public policy.  

The recommendations made by EMO are just that - recommendations.  People of faith can come to different conclusions on difficult issues.

These recommendations come from "a" Christian perspective but not "THE" Christian perspective.  There is room for debate and dialog.   

Dreaming of Eden: American Religion and Politics in a Wired World, the new book by Chicago Theological Seminary's Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, is out. Just got my copy today.

Dr. Thislethwaite writes in the introduction:

The digital ages gives enormous power both to image and storytelling, and it does so with lightening speed.  Those Americans who best understand the power and the deep religious meaning of the shift to the digital age and storytelling will succeed in getting their message across.  That group of Americans will also understand the messages that are most dangerous to their point of view, and they will be better able to counter them.  And those Americans who don't understand the religious power of this time as it is generated in blogs, movies, graphic novels, Twitter, Facebook, and cable television (to name just a digitized sources of image and story) will be left in the dust, religiously and politically speaking.

Buy the book, for sure, but also visit the book's website at http://www.wiredwisdom.net and take part in the on-going conversation there.

The Rev. Dr. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite is a minister in the United Church of Christ.

I'll post a review once I'm finished.

Using secret money - a now legal tactic - the GOP is out spending Democratic candidates by 9 - 1 in the midterm elections.

Campaign spending is a scandal.  Politicians are bought and sold and this year the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and their allies are trying to buy the midterm elections with unprecedented spending.  Common Cause reports:

Tens of thousands of Americans are engaged this October in the good work of citizenship: running for office, contributing their money, time and talents on behalf of candidates and causes.

These Americans are justifiably proud of their activities. They join in civic life with pride, signing their names to letters-to-the-editor, identifying themselves when they go door-to-door to distribute campaign literature, openly contributing money to candidates and political action groups. They understand that transparency is fundamental to fair play in politics.

But this year, thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, a few "citizens" have decided to hedge their bets and exploit our political rules; they're trying to tell the rest of us how to vote without revealing who they are or what they have at stake in our elections. 

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is merely the most visible player in this game. The Chamber and some other trade groups and corporations are pouring millions of dollars into our political system in secret, using the tax laws to hide their own involvement, as well as their donors. 

Even worse, questions are being raised about whether the Chamber, which has pledged to invest up to $75 million in this campaign cycle, is providing a conduit for foreign businesses to influence the elections. The Chamber denies it, but so far has declined to open its books for inspection. 

Our democracy is not based on secrecy. If disclosure is what we deserve from the people who run for office and the people who contribute to candidates, surely it's what we deserve from EVERYONE who invests in our political system, especially those investing millions of dollars. 

Even if every penny of the Chamber's political spending comes from domestic sources, the money – and all the rest of what's being spent under the cloak of secrecy – is tainted. 

And the sad fact is this all could have been avoided. The DISCLOSE Act, twice blocked from even coming up for a vote in the Senate by a minority of senators through the filibuster, would have imposed reasonable disclosure requirements on the Chamber and other groups now exploiting campaign finance laws.

And the Fair Elections Now Act, ready for passage in the House when it comes to a vote, would let candidates run competitive races without having to rely on big donors, foreign or domestic. 

When Congress returns to Washington after the election, it must get busy and pass both DISCLOSE and the Fair Elections Now Act. Americans shouldn't have to endure another election year in which we can't know who is spending mystery money, foreign or domestic, by the millions to affect who gets chosen in our own elections.

 The elections being waged this year are not democratic.  What is occurring in America is a fraud that cries out for reform.

National religious leaders - including the National Council of Churches - have said in the past that:

That is more true today than ever.  All Americans, regardless of party, should be offended by the corruption of our politics.    

Related News: Voters Say They Want To Know Who Funds Ads

A Portland police officer under fire for erecting memorials to Nazi SS troops in a public park (a cop with a history of using excessive force against anti-war demonstrators) is finding some support today:  on Stormfront.org, a website that bills itself as "a community of White Nationalists."

The Southern Poverty Law Center reports:

Created by former Alabama Klan boss and long-time white supremacist Don Black in 1995, Stormfront was the first major hate site on the Internet. Claiming more than 130,000 registered members (though far fewer remain active), the site has been a very popular online forum for white nationalists and other racial extremists.

More on the website from SPLC here.

Preaching Sun., Nov. 7th at Forest Grove United Church of Christ

Preaching Sun., Oct. 31st at Congregational Church (UCC) Of Lincoln City

Preaching Sun., Oct. 24th at Bethel Congregational United Church of Christ (Beaverton)

Teaching "Early Edition" Adult Ed Class at Ainsworth UCC on Sun., Oct. 17th at 9am

We hear so much about what is wrong with the Portland Police Bureau - and boy, is there a lot that needs to be talked about in regards to that - that it is easy to overlook the good.  As I told reporters yesterday with KATU and KOIN, most of my interactions with the police have been good.  Most cops are good and decent public servants who care deeply about the community.  So I'm excited to see that Street Roots, Portland's paper that covers issues of homelessness and poverty, has a new regular column: written by Portland Police Officer Robert Pickett.  This is a great way to promote dialog and understanding.   

Want to learn more about Oregon's ballot measures?  Join me at Ainsworth United Church of Christ this Sunday (October 17, 2010) at 9am for the church's Early Edition forum.

Ainsworth is a multi-cultural, multi-racial, open & affirming, Just Peace and accessible church. We celebrate that God is still speaking in our world today and that God’s extravagant welcome and love is for everyone. We hope that your journey of faith will lead you to us and that you experience God’s love through us.

I'll be leading a discussion of the measures and we'll review recommendations made on each one by Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon (EMO).  You can download EMO's ballot guide here.  We'll be there to talk just about the ballot measures - not the candidates or their positions on the issues.  

Ainsworth United Church of Christ is located on the corner of NE 30th & Ainsworth.

Related story: First of 33 trapped miners reaches surface

Click here to watch video from KOIN-TV.

Related Post: The Oregonian Reports On My Call For Independent Investigation Regarding Capt. Mark Kruger

Related Post: The Oregonian Reports On My Call For Independent Investigation Regarding Capt. Mark Kruger

Americans United reports:

Evangelist Lou Engle believes the rally he held in Sacramento, Calif., over Labor Day weekend will be a turning point for America.

Engle boasted that his event would do nothing less than spark a nationwide revival. As Frederick Clarkson, a researcher of the Religious Right noted, the Kansas City, Mo.-based preacher asserted that “The Call Sacramento” event would be the “hinge of history” that opens the door to “the greatest awakening” and lead to “returning our nation to its righteous roots.”

It may sound ambitious, but Engle isn’t the only Religious Right leader with big plans these days. Indeed, it has been a busy fall for the theocrats, who are on the march nationwide in advance of next month’s elections.

Rebounding from two difficult years, an array of Religious Right organizations are waging a massive – often under-the-radar – campaign this fall to register church-going voters, drive congregants to the polls and elect favored candidates.

Their goal is simple: Help their political allies recapture the House of Representatives and Senate and move their issues front and center on the national stage.

Although many of the events are cast as benign-sounding prayer rallies or calls for revival, there is often a not-so-subtle political component as well. Many of the confabs include partisan speakers or incorporate voter mobilization activities.

Recent events included:

Aug. 28: Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” Rally. Beck, the controversial Fox News pundit, sponsored a rally at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C., that attracted about 100,000 attendees. (A smaller “Divine Destiny” event at the Kennedy Center the night before drew 1,500 people.)

Beck is a Mormon but often features “Christian nation” rhetoric on his program, with David Barton, a Texas Religious Right activist who insists that church-state separation is a myth, as a frequent guest. Beck described his event as a celebration of civil rights and said it would be non-political. However, Sarah Palin was among the speakers, and the day after the rally, Beck attacked President Barack Obama’s religious beliefs during a national television appearance.

Sept. 3-4: “The Call Sacramento.” Engle, a Pentecostal preacher who is popular with evangelical college students, held this event in California’s capital in part due to the ongoing “cultural war” there over same-sex marriage. Engle demands that conservative Christians “vote and act according to God’s heart and mandates” and portrays politics as a struggle between “kingdom power” and “this present darkness.”

Sept. 10-11: Faith & Freedom Coalition Conference and Strategy Briefing. Former Christian Coalition operative Ralph Reed’s attempt to get back in the political game was tested when his new group, the Faith & Freedom Coalition, held its first conference in Washington, D.C. Reed –who fell from grace due to his involvement in the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandals – claims to be raising $32 million to steer conservative Christians to the polls.

Sept. 17-18: Values Voter Summit. The Family Research Council (FRC) and allied organizations held their annual Summit in Washington, D.C. This event has become the leading Religious Right conference in the nation and attracts a bevy of major Religious Right leaders and Republican politicians. In addition to the FRC, sponsors included the American Family Association, the Heritage Foundation and Liberty University.

Sept. 19: “Pray & A.C.T.” The Rev. Jim Garlow, an associate of Newt Gingrich, organized this project, which features a period of 40 days of prayer and fasting prior to the elections. The D.C. kickoff included a voter registration component and will conclude Oct. 30 with a rally at the Lincoln Memorial. Supported by a broad coalition of conservative religious leaders, the Renewing American Leadership project calls for Christians to “transform the culture” by “voting in elections only for candidates who affirm the sanctity of life in all stages and conditions, the integrity of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, and religious liberty and respect for conscience.”

Sept. 20: The “40/40 Prayer Vigil.” This nationwide event, sponsored by the Southern Baptist Convention, the nation’s largest Protestant denomination, claims to focus on personal spiritual revival. However, the 40-day vigil begins with a prayer for voter registration, includes a prayer for Christians to run for office and ends with a prayer for “discernment of candidates” and for “God’s people to vote.”

Sept. 26: “Pulpit Freedom Sunday.” The Alliance Defense Fund urged evangelical pastors nationwide to violate federal tax law by endorsing or opposing candidates from the pulpit.

Why are there so many events, and why do so many of them feature voter mobilization?

In a nutshell, the Religious Right’s fortunes are closely tied to the Republican Party’s status. When the GOP lost power in Washington in 2008, the Religious Right also took a hit. Its legislative proposals have stalled, and it finds itself unable to block bills and court appointments and effectively influence governmental policy.

Eager to regain power in the nation’s capital (and in state legislatures), the Religious Right is going all out to do whatever it can to help more of its allies get elected to public office.

Full story.

The Oregonian reports on my request for an independent investigation into the Portland Police Bureau and city of Portland's handling of Capt. Mark Kruger: 

Two community activists have called for outside agencies to investigate the Portland city attorney's office after anOregonian story revealed the office stashed controversial "memorial plaques" to five Nazi-era soldiers put up by a Portland officer at a city park for at least six years, without any investigation into the officer...

The Rev. Chuck Currie, a United Church of Christ minister who unsuccessfully ran for the Multnomah County Board of Commissioners, asked state Attorney General John Kroger for an independent investigation. Alan Graf, an attorney who had sought the plaques as part of discovery in a 2002 lawsuit against the city, requested an investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice. 

"I write today to ask for an investigation into the city of Portland's handling of a police matter with serious implications for our community," Currie said in an e-mail to the attorney general on Sunday. "A serious breach of trust now exists between Portlanders and their police." 

Full story.

You can read my letter to the Oregon Attorney General here. 

As a one-time Pacific University student, I'm proud of how the Pacific community reacted today after "slurs against women, Muslims, and members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community" were found written in chalk on a university building.  The Oregonian reports:

FOREST GROVE -- Three days after finding hateful words scrawled in chalk outside a campus building, Pacific University sophomore Blaise Holden drew hearts on a nearby stretch of sidewalk. 

"There's a strong reaction against it. People don't want to be passive," he said. 

Holden was among more than 75 students who gathered Monday in a courtyard at the Forest Grove campus to combat an outbreak of hateful graffiti with a "love chalk." 

The messages found Friday outside three campus buildings included slurs against women, Muslims, and members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered community. 

One of them, Holden said, included the phrase "abortion is green," suggested that the 9/11 terrorists attacks were an inside job, and quoted a bible verse while targeting gay men. 

"I just sat and stared for a really long time and tried to figure out where that was coming from," Holden said. 

By early Monday afternoon, the sidewalks had been smothered with hearts, peace signs, rainbows and multicolored messages of acceptance. "You are beautiful," one message read. Another: "Support diversity."

As a minister in the United Church of Christ, I am particularly disheartened that someone used Scripture to attack gays and lesbians.  Hate is not the way of Jesus.  But so many - including political groups like Focus on the Family - misuse Scripture to promote hate and discrimination that there is no surprise that this event took place.  

On the Right, we see what feels like unprecedented hatred directed against women, Muslims and gays.  Just listen to Glenn Beck, Lars Larson, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich or GOP New York State gubernatorial nominee Carl P. Paladino. 

Those that preach hate must accept some of responsibility for acts of hate that occur.  

Today the Pacific community stood up to such hate and set an example for all of us. 

We were actually on the Pacific campus on Friday.  Liz's office held a conference there to discuss school based health care centers.  I always enjoy visiting.

Pacific University was founded in 1849 by Congregational pioneers and remains related to the United Church of Christ.  I will be preaching at Forest Grove United Church of Christ, across the street from Pacific's main campus, on Sunday, November 7th.  The service begins at 10am.  All are welcome. 

We just returned from the commitment ceremony of our friends Paul and Wave.  Paul is someone that I've known for around 25 years (wow!) and I could not be happier for him and Wave on this very special day.  The service was wonderful, filled with joy and God's Holy presence.  It was an honor to attend with so many friends.   

The Rev. Nathan Meckley performed the ceremony.  

The Rev. Dr. Arvin Luchs read Scripture.

Paul and Chuck, old friends.

Liz and I both continue to look forward to the day when our gay and lesbian friends are afforded all the same basic rights and legal protections that we have been given in our marriage.  

Updated

The Oregonian reports:

For years, past police chiefs and city attorneys have vigorously fended off critics who called Portland police Capt. Mark Kruger a "Nazi sympathizer." They said he was simply a history buff who collected military memorabilia and had belonged to a World War II reenactment club. 

But now, a Portland commander and a Portland Police Performance Review Board have found Kruger brought "discredit and disgrace upon the Bureau and the City," by building a public tribute to five Nazi-era German soldiers at a city park while employed by the police bureau. 

During the course of the police investigation, Internal Affairs investigator Mike Barkley learned the city attorney's office had stashed away the plaques in a litigation file for at least six years. 

But the city had never initiated an investigation into what they were for or why Kruger put them up until the city got pressure from Robert Seaver, a former friend of Kruger's who dogged city officials with explosive e-mails, interviews with the media and an embarrassing YouTube video featuring Kruger posing in German uniforms. 

Former police Commissioner Dan Saltzman, who said he was alarmed there hadn't been a prior in-depth inquiry, last October called for an internal investigation of Kruger. Seaver filed a formal complaint with the Independent Police Review Division the next month. Both prompted the Police Bureau's first, wide-ranging internal investigation of Kruger and a sustained violation. 

Now, a former Portland attorney who had sued the city and Kruger in federal court, and Seaver, accuse the city attorney's office of a "cover up." 

Full story.

Who knew, when did they know it and why was nothing done? 

Update:  I wrote a brief letter after posting this blog entry to the Oregon Attorney General's Office asking for a state investigation into this matter.   You can read the letter here.

I can't believe I just had to write that.

Albert Mohler and Mark Driscoll might have gone off the deep end (well, let's just all agree they have - no need for debating the point) but most Christians aren't so rigid.

This month the United Church of Christ, for example, published a piece on "20 Ways To Add More Prayer To Your Life."  

#12?  

Yoga. 

Just realized that as of this month I've been writing this blog for seven years.  That represents 3451 posts and another 8713 comments.  Over 1 million visits.  This was one of the first progressive Christian blogs.  Since then many have followed (with better writers, thankfully!).  Still, I've enjoyed blogging and I'm grateful for the impact this little website has had.  

Today the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Liu Xiaobo.  

The New York Times reports:

BEIJING — Liu Xiaobo, an impassioned literary critic, political essayist and democracy advocate repeatedly jailed by the Chinese government for his activism, has won the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of “his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China.”

Mr. Liu, 54, perhaps China’s best known dissident, is serving an 11-year term on subversion charges, in a cell 300 miles from Beijing.

He is one of three people to have received the prize while incarcerated by their own governments, after the Burmese opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, in 1991, and the German pacifist, Carl von Ossietzky, in 1935.

By awarding the prize to Mr. Liu, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has provided an unmistakable rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarian leaders at a time of growing intolerance for domestic dissent and a spreading unease internationally over the muscular diplomacy that has accompanied China’s economic rise.

Human Rights Watch has more:

(New York) - The awarding of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize to the Chinese writer and human rights activist Liu Xiaobo underscores the urgent need for rights reforms in China, Human Rights Watch said today.

Human Rights Watch reiterated its longstanding call for the release of Liu, whom a Beijing court sentenced to an 11-year prison term on December 25, 2009.  His spurious "subversion" charges stemmed from his role in drafting and circulating Charter '08, an online petition which advocates putting human rights, democracy, and the rule of law at the core of the Chinese political system. Originally signed by 303 Chinese citizens, including rights defenders and legal activists, it has been widely circulated online and has now collected thousands of signatures. Prior to his formal arrest on June 23, 2009, Liu had been held incommunicado since his detention on December 8, 2008.

"This award will no doubt infuriate the Chinese government by putting its human rights record squarely back into the international debate," said Sophie Richardson, Asia advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. "But this Nobel Prize honors not only Liu's unflinching advocacy; it honors all those in China who struggle daily to make the government more accountable."

Human Rights Watch last week awarded Liu Xiaobo its 2010 Alison Des Forges Award for Extraordinary Activism.

Human Rights Watch has characterized Liu's arrest as politically motivated, and determined that the conditions of his detention did not meet minimum standards of fairness and due process. A former professor of literature, Liu spent nearly two years in prison following the crackdown on the June 1989 Tiananmen Square protests. Following his detention in December 2008, which violated the minimum procedural guarantees specified under Chinese law, a group of prominent signatories, including several Nobel Prize winners, sent an open letter to Chinese President Hu Jintao urging him to secure Liu's release.

Liu's imprisonment is part of wider political hardening in China which began in the run-up to the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. Since that time, the government has imposed long prison terms on high-profile dissidents on baseless state secrets or "subversion" charges, expanded restrictions on media and Internet freedom, and tightened controls on lawyers, human rights defenders, and nongovernmental organizations. Since early 2007, the Chinese government has also broadened controls on Uighurs and Tibetans; arbitrary detentions and enforced disappearances swelled both in Xinjiang and Tibet, and the practice of detaining people unlawfully in secret facilities known as "black jails" has continued.

"The Nobel Committee made an important decision this year to highlight a reality few want to acknowledge about China - that its government continues to persecute human rights advocates, lawyers, and journalists," said Richardson. "Liu Xiaobo epitomizes the Nobel Peace Prize ideals by never deviating from his belief in peacefully expressing universal ideals and speaking truth to power."

Human Rights Watch also reiterated its call for the Chinese government to release Liu and other jailed or "disappeared" activists including Hu Jia, Gao Zhisheng, Tan Zuoren and Huang Qi. Liu is arguably the most well-known government critic currently in prison, but he is one among many suffering similar - or worse - persecution.

"The Chinese government should see Liu Xiaobo as the Nobel Committee clearly does: not as an enemy or an embarrassment, but rather as someone whose courageous advocacy embodies the best of China," said Richardson.

Join me today in e-mailing the Chinese Embassy in Washington, DC demanding the release of Liu Xiaobo and other political prisoners: [email protected] .

Related Site:  Nobel Peace Prize

Update:  President Obama has released the following statement:

I welcome the Nobel Committee's decision to award the Nobel Peace Prize to Mr. Liu Xiaobo.  Last year, I noted that so many others who have received the award had sacrificed so much more than I.  That list now includes Mr. Liu, who has sacrificed his freedom for his beliefs.  By granting the prize to Mr. Liu, the Nobel Committee has chosen someone who has been an eloquent and courageous spokesman for the advance of universal values through peaceful and non-violent means, including his support for democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.

As I said last year in Oslo, even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal to all human beings.  Over the last 30 years, China has made dramatic progress in economic reform and improving the lives of its people, lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty.  But this award reminds us that political reform has not kept pace, and that the basic human rights of every man, woman and child must be respected.  We call on the Chinese government to release Mr. Liu as soon as possible.

As I've mentioned previously, Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon - our state's council of churches - has endorsed Measure 26-108, which provides public financing for candidates running for city office.

The measure is a great vehicle for taking big money out of politics and reducing corruption.  Of course, the Portland Business Alliance - which likes to purchase their candidates (candidates that then often work against the common good of our community) - is working hard to defeat the Measure 26-108.

Yesterday, the Voter's Pamphlet came out.  A group of religious leaders - myself included - had a statement in the pamphlet where we explained why we support measure 26-108:

More faith leaders - including Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon - have since endorsed Measure 26-108. We're joined by many local business groups that don't share the Portland Business Alliance's agenda, neighborhood leaders, good government reform activists, and other citizens who want democracy to be fair and accessible to the people - not just those with deep pockets.

Please join me in voting YES on Measure 26-108. 

It has been ten months since President Obama announced his Afghanistan strategy - a surge of 30,000 troops with a withdrawal date of mid-2011.  Today I finished Bob Woodward's new book Obama's Wars.  Go read it.  Let me offer just a couple of impressions.

1.  The president inherited a disaster.  This was obvious from the start as President Bush abandoned Afghanistan to invade Iraq.  But the situation confronted by President Obama seems to have been even worse than most people thought.

2.  As Vice-President Biden forcefully articulated, Pakistan is the source of much of the terrorism in the world today and they actively undermine American efforts in Afghanistan.  Biden was right to call for more engagement with Pakistan.  I was struck by how much evidence we now have of Pakistani security forces' involvement with terrorism directed at India and the United States, though some of this has been previously reported.

3.  I was unaware at how clearly U.S. military leaders attempted to limit President Obama's options to develop a plan for Afghanistan.  They did everything up to outright insubordination to undermine the president.  It was only President Obama's forceful leadership that required that U.S. military officials ask and answer difficult questions.  Even then, the president basically wrote his own plan instead of relying on the military. 

What is the goal now in Afghanistan?   As the president has stated, the U.S. goal is to degrade the Taliban so that it cannot retake power (which would be a disastrous human rights nightmare) and to keep al-Qa'ida from attacking the homeland or our allies.  Are these goals achievable?

I still support the Sojourners statements that I signed onto in 2009, which read in part:

We are concerned that the discussion in Washington, D.C., is far too narrow. We respectfully and prayerfully suggest that you pursue a strategy built on a humanitarian and development surge.

Massive humanitarian assistance and sustainable development can rebuild a broken nation, inspire confidence, trust, and hope among its people, and undermine the appeal of terrorism. And it costs less - far less - than continued war.

Lead with economic development, starting in areas that are secure, and grow from there - providing only the security necessary to protect the strategic rebuilding of the country. Do not make aid and development another weapon of war by tying it so closely to the military; rather, provide the security needed for development work to succeed. This kind of peacekeeping security might better attract the international involvement we so desperately need, both from Europe and Arab and Muslim countries.

Pursue political and diplomatic solutions by promoting stable governance in Afghanistan and Pakistan; seeking political integration of those elements of the Taliban that are willing to cooperate; engaging with the United Nations and regional states to stabilize the region and promote economic development; and investing in international policing to prevent the spread of extremists and the use of terror.

Having said that, I believe that there are few if any good options in that part of the world.  We lost the war there when we invaded Iraq.  Now we face war and a humanitarian disaster in Afghanistan and entrenched terrorist forces in Pakistan, an unstable nation with nuclear weapons.

As someone who opposed the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, I'm still looking for the magic answers on how to end this war, not leave the nation in shambles, and how to keep al-Qa'ida or their allies from attacking us and obtaining Pakistan's nuclear weapons if that nation (or even parts of it) fall.  

(My opposition to the invasion - which was the position adopted by Portland's First United Methodist Church, where I then served as the director of community outreach - was based on a shared concern for civilian casualties and a concern that the U.S. would follow historical patterns and abandon the region after defeating the Taliban, which is essentially what happened as the Bush Administration turned toward Iraq without dealing with the fallout from the war in Afghanistan).                    

Religion News Service (RNS) published an article today that basically asks the question: what is the White House Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships doing?  From their story:

WASHINGTON (RNS) Six months after advisers turned in 164 pages of recommendations to the White House’s faith-based office, thorny church-state questions remain unanswered and some critics say the office has been used to push the president’s health care reform.

Much of the work done by the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships has been low profile, and successors to the blue-ribbon advisory panel that ended its work in March haven’t been named.

Outsiders say whatever progress has been made has been done too quietly and that the White House has dragged its feet on a promise to change Bush-era rules that allow federal grant recipients to hire and fire based on religion.

Joshua DuBois, special assistant to the president and the office's director, is quoted in the article as saying "the administration has started or finished implementing at least half of the advisory council’s 64 recommendations." 

Critics have questioned why the office was involved in connecting faith leaders on a September conference call with the president about health care reform. Obama told clergy they could be “validators” for the reform, according to Politico.

“If that office is doing this, what are they not doing they should be doing?” asked the Rev. Welton Gaddy, president of the Interfaith Alliance.

Added former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson in a Washington Post column: “Obama has mainly employed his faith-based office to defend federal initiatives, particularly health care reform.”

Some council members, however, said there was nothing inappropriate about the White House trying to reach a broader audience through religious leaders.

“When there are issues at the federal level and information that need to get out to a network, we’ve got a great relational network,” said the Rev. Peg Chemberlin, president of the National Council of Churches and a former advisory council member.

I was on the call in question and participated in another such call with White House staff this week on poverty.  Such outreach efforts are completely appropriate.  Often these type of outreach efforts provide an opportunity for dialog between local and national church leaders and White House policy makers.  The White House may sometimes ask for support but they don't issue talking points and real debate takes place.  

President Bush used his version of this office to award financial grants to clergy who supported his political agenda and only met with religious leaders who supported his platform.  He refused to meet with bishops from the United Methodist Church, for example, who opposed his invasion of Iraq.

President Obama, on the other hand, reached out to a range of faith leaders to sit on his faith council.  Some of the people chosen had been openly hostile to the president's campaign in 2008 and continue to have serious objections to his views on stem-cell research and abortion, for example.  President Obama has made it clear that he will not use faith as a partisan political weapon.  That to me is a mark of character. 

The slow pace of Washington is frustrating and perhaps there is some legitimacy to the criticism that the White House hasn't moved fast enough on the recommendations made by the council.  I'm not on the inside enough to know.

But I do know this:  the faith community is an important constituency in American life, just like the business community or the labor community.  It is also very diverse.  The White House Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships does an excellent job of making sure that diverse faith leaders have access to the president through his staff (though some high profile leaders have more direct access).  The White House Office of Public Engagement is also a valuable partner in this work. 

Because the faith community intersects with the government on so many levels it is important to have an office such as this where ideas can be debated and efforts to fight homelessness or hunger, as examples, can be coordinated in true partnership. 

Some of the criticism of the office may be valid, as I noted, but some of it appears more partisan in tone or (and this is appropriate) coming from advocates trying to push their own policy agendas.

You can learn more about the work of the office here.

Action Alert From Justice & Witness Ministries of the United Church of Christ

Everybody is talking about “Waiting for Superman,” a Hollywood movie that endorses charter schools as the primary solution to the education struggles of children in our nation’s poorest schools.  All the evidence suggests instead that we need to turn attention and resources on the public schools society has left behind, rather than turning over the future of our poorest children to charter schools. We must provide the same opportunities for children in rural and urban schools as we do for children in more privileged suburban settings.

As a people called to love our neighbors as ourselves, we in the church look for school reform that balances the needs of each particular child and family with the need to create a system that secures the rights and addresses the needs of all children.  “Waiting for Superman” misrepresents the scale of public education, an institution that serves 50 million children and adolescents across the United States. Charter schools serve only 4 percent of students, and evidence shows that most children including those who are poor or who have special needs will remain in traditional public schools. Further, a prominent Stanford University study demonstrates that only 17 percent of charter schools are better than comparable public schools. 

In July, seven civil rights organizations released a profound statement that contradicts the movie’s contention that charter schools should be the primary tool for school reform. The writers express serious “reservations about the overrepresentation of charter schools in low-income and predominantly minority communities. There is no evidence that charter operators are systematically more effective in creating higher student outcomes… And there is even less evidence that charters accept, consistently serve, and accommodate the needs of the full range of students.”

In the church we have steadfastly declared a set of values to guide public school reform when Congress reauthorizes the Elementary and Secondary Act.  Send the letter below to remind Congress, the President, and the Secretary of Education of these principles:

• Federal policy must address public school inequality. Congress should allocate federal resources for equity and use its power to press states to close opportunity gaps.
• Federal policy must reduce reliance on standardized tests as a primary “school improvement” strategy.Children need fewer tests, and those that are employed should be better designed to improve teaching, measure real performance, and encourage exploration and critical thinking.
• Federal policy must support and improve, not punish, public schools in America’s poorest communities.  The federal government must help struggling schools with support for excellent teaching and leadership and support for out-of-school enrichments like preschool, medical care, and after school and summer enrichment.
• Federal policy must improve public education as the bedrock of our democracy and public schools as the anchors of communities.  Only a just system of public education has the capacity to secure the rights and address the needs of all children, and only if citizens are attentive and work to make it so.

Click here to send a message to the president, Congress and the Secretary of Edcuation.

Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon has endorsed Measure 26-108, saying:

"Usually, EMO does not take positions on local ballot measures. We do, however, sometimes make exceptions when a ballot measure seems to have statewide or national significance and is of unusual importance. After evaluating this measure, we feel it does have both statewide and national significance. The movement to reduce the influence of wealthy donors in public elections is ongoing at a local, state and national level, and a defeat of this measure would be a setback with ramifications beyond Portland. Additionally, because, as people of faith, we believe the election system must recognize the fundamentally equal worth of all people before God, and because we believe we have an important role to play in protecting the interests of the poor and vulnerable, we believe it is consistent with our religious values to support the voter-owned election system established in Portland. We recognize there have been problems with one or two candidates who inappropriately made use of public funds in elections held under this relatively new system. However, after those problems came to light, changes have been made to reduce the opportunities for further abuses. As Portland grows and becomes even more diverse as a city, it becomes increasingly important to encourage candidates from a variety of backgrounds including worthy candidates who may not have sufficient funding, either personally or in their network of acquaintances—to fund a campaign in the absence of public financing. For these reasons, we endorse Measure 26-108, and urge a YES vote on voter-owned elections."

Along with a growing list of religious leaders, I also urge a YES vote on Measure 26-108.

Barack Obama campaigned on the promise not to play politics with science (something his predecessor was often accused of).  

But now it appears that this White House, according to the bi-partisan National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling that the president created to investigate the spill, "blocked government scientists from warning the American public of the potential environmental disaster caused by BP's broken well in the Gulf of Mexico."  

The Washington Post reports: 

A commission set up by President Obama to scrutinize the Gulf of Mexico oil spill has released preliminary reports that say the administration created the impression that it was "either not fully competent" or "not fully candid with the American people about the scope of the problem."

The National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling released four "working papers" Wednesday that said the administration's response was marked by confusion about the spill rate, slowing the federal effort immediately after the oil exploration well blew out April 20.

The commission staff's preliminary papers also said that Obama's Office of Management and Budget later delayed a report by government scientists that would have included a "worst-case" estimate of the rate of the spill, weeks before the government revised its own official estimates upward.

The reports delivered a harsh assessment of the administration's later contention that most of the spill was "gone." They point to comments by Carol M. Browner, Obama's climate and energy czar, who in a television interview mischaracterized a report as saying that three-quarters of the spill had disappeared.

Anyone found to have been involved in misleading the American public in the matter, including Carol Browner, must be removed from their position immediately.

As someone who has defended the president's response to the BP spill, I am appalled at the findings of the commission.  However, I assume that this will be corrected and moving forward mistakes like this will not be made. 

Today "Fighting Poverty with Faith" - a coalition of over 40 national faith groups convened by the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA), Catholic Charities USA (CCUSA) and the National Council of Churches (NCC) - held a conference call with officials from the White House to discuss efforts to fight poverty in America.

Fighting Poverty With Faith is holding events across the country this month "to educate and to advocate around poverty in America."  Poverty declined in the United States during much of the 1990s but after new economic policies were enacted in 2001 poverty began to grow and then skyrocket as the economy collapsed in 2008.  Only President Obama's economic stimulus plan kept the country from falling into another great depression.  And even though poverty continued to grow in 2009 - to 44 million Americans - another 6+ million Americans would have fallen into poverty without the stimulus plan and the plan is credited with reducing "the severity of poverty for 33 million additional Americans who are poor by lifting their incomes, typically by more than $700," according to the non-partisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 

Still, work needs to be done.  The president campaigned on a pledge to reduce poverty by half over ten years.  The Half in Ten Campaign - endorsed by the Justice and Witness Ministries of the United Church of Christ and the Center for American Progress, among others - has outlined plans that would help accomplish that goal.  We need the White House, which is already doing a lot to help alleviate poverty, to launch a coordinated effort to achieve the goal of reducing the number of Americans living in poverty by half.  This afternoon I wrote the president a letter asking him to do just that and to use a major national venue - such as the 2011 State of the Union Address - to outline his plans moving forward.

We are fortunate to have in the White House a president who once worked as a community organizer - a job that had him working in neighborhoods and churches to fight poverty at the local level.  Perhaps no president in modern times has such intimate knowledge or obvious commitment to this issue.  It is also clear that the White House staff shares the president's deep concern about poverty.

I hope that you will contact the White House and urge them to do even more to fight poverty and to thank them for their leadership on this moral issue thus far.  Finally, please visit the Fighting Poverty With Faith to learn more about how your faith community can become involved.     

Related Post:  Poverty Must Be An Election Issue

Updated

Did this really happen? The New York Times reports:

“God is good,” Andrew M. Cuomo declared as he took the pulpit at Brown Memorial Baptist Church on Sunday, prompting a thunderous response from the audience. “All the time,” he bellowed.

That, more or less, concluded the religious portion of Mr. Cuomo’s visit. For the next 10 minutes, Mr. Cuomo delivered a pitch for support in his bid for governor, citing his record as attorney general and assailing his opponent “for trying to divide us.”

The church’s pastor, the Rev. Clinton M. Miller, quickly encouraged congregants to vote for Mr. Cuomo. Congregants clapped politely, if warily, as if their hands were a tad callused from the parade of politicians.

If so, it should trigger an IRS investigation.

Partisan politics have no place in the pulpit. Churches that engage in such activity can - and should - lose their tax exempt status.  

Related Post: "Election Year Pledge for Clergy"

Update: Americans United has written the IRS calling for an investigation of this church.

This evening I had the honor of speaking at a benefit for Portland Homeless Family Solutions - the group that operates the Goose Hollow Family Shelter at First United Methodist Church and the 13 Salmon Family Center at First Unitarian Church.  You can download a podcast of my remarks below:

Download Rev C Currie Portland Homeless Family Solutions

(some browsers - like Firefox or Google Chrome - will allow you to simply click on the link and listen...otherwise click with the RIGHT mouse button on the hyperlink and choose “Save Target As” and save to your desktop or other folder – once downloaded click on the file to listen).

Now On ITunes

You can now subscribe to my podcasts on ITunes by clicking here. 

The rough text of my remarks can be found below:

Most Americans have been shocked and saddened by the suicide of Rutgers student Tyler Clementi.

It is a terrible tragedy.  Could it have been prevented?  And do churches carry some responsibility for the difficulties faced by young gay and lesbians in American?  Those are questions that The Rev. Candace Chellew--Hodge, a colleague of mine in the United Church of Christ, asks today in a post on Religion Dispatches:      

I wonder if the folks over at Focus on the Family are proud of themselves today.

Earlier this month, Focus began a concerted media effort to sink the Safe Schools Improvement Act now pending before Congress that would prevent bullying in schools. FotF mouthpiece Candi Cushman was quoted everywhere from ABC to CNN pushing against the legislation because she believes discouraging kids from taunting other kids perceived to be gay or lesbian would "promote homosexuality to kids."

In the past few weeks, the effect of Focus' push to block anti-bullying laws is being felt by at least three families who have lost children to suicide. Truth Wins Out compiled this list:

• Seth Walsh, the Bakersfield, CA 13-year-old who hanged himself from a tree in his back yard after years of being bullied, died Tuesday afternoon after nine days on life support. Police investigators interviewed some of the young people who taunted Seth the day he hanged himself. "Several of the kids that we talked to broke down into tears," Police Chief Jeff Kermode said. "They had never expected an outcome such as this."

• Asher Brown, 13, an eighth-grader killed himself last week. He shot himself in the head after enduring what his mother and stepfather say was constant harassment from four other students at Hamilton Middle School in the Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District in Houston Texas. Brown, his family said, was "bullied to death" - picked on for his small size, his religion and because he did not wear designer clothes and shoes. Kids also accused him of being gay, some of them performing mock gay acts on him in his physical education class, his mother and stepfather said.

• Billy (William) Lucas, 15, a student at Greensburg Community High School in Greensburg, IN, was found dead in a barn at his grandmother’s home Thursday evening -- he had hanged himself. Friends say that he had been tormented for years. "He was threatened to get beat up every day," friend and classmate Nick Hughes said. "Sometimes in classes, kids would act like they were going to punch him and stuff and push him. Some people at school called him names," Hughes said, saying most of those names questioned Lucas’ sexual orientation.

And just to show that bullying isn't merely a high school problem, there's news of a Rutgers University freshman who killed himself after his roommate and a friend taped him having sex with another man and broadcast it on the Internet.

In her CNN appearance, Cushman swore that Focus believes "every child should be protected from bullying" but they, and other Christian groups, continue to fight against anti-bullying measures that would specifically target bullying against gay and lesbian students. Even though studies show that specific policies are more effective than general anti-bullying policies, Focus and their cohorts continue to fight it because they believe it demonizes Christians and gives special status to gays and lesbians.

Instead of being concerned for the actual lives of gay and lesbian children (or those perceived as gay and lesbian), Focus' true motive is to continue its political and religious agenda at the expense of these children. Their own position paper on the subject accuses groups like the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network or GLSEN, which advocate for the gay-specific bullying policies, of using the policies to create diversity training, "evade parental rights" and "circumvent traditional marriage laws."

While it's true that teaching children to value each other no matter what their sexual orientation or gender identity may lead to more tolerant people -- it's disgusting to see an organization put its morality politics over the lives of children.

Click here for more. 

The Human Rights Campaign is asking "Secretary of Education Arne Duncan to speak out immediately and to push every school in the nation to implement anti-bullying policies inclusive of sexual orientation and gender identity."

As the United Church of Christ has noted, it is a Christian responsibility to help stop bullying and discrimination.