I saw Jim Wallis speak today at the American Academy of Religion Conference. These are a few (approximate) quotes that I found particularly great:
“If you are an unborn child, it would be to your benefit to stay as unborn as long as possible, because once you are born you are off their radar screens.” — Jim Wallis, in reference to conservatives and prolifers
“When you start dividing ‘us’ against ‘them’, what you are doing is effectively uniting all of them against you.” –Andrea, the first panelist after Jim
“I’m from Canada, but I’m not here to be like the Canadian Goose on the White House Lawn — Here to shit on American politics.” — Douglas, the fourth panelist after Jim
The Democrats have taken the House and possibly the Senate. Donald Rumsfeld is resigning. What’s next, a heart attack on another key official (I’m not naming names)? Though this is all cause for celebration, I do have some concerns that are holding back my champagne toast. One is that the new Department of Defense guy is an “old friend” of the Bush family. He’s also been a subject of suspicion back in his Bush 1 days. Hmm…
I’m sad that my home state would pass proposal 2. Michigan, how could you do such a thing?
There has been a lot of talk about how our government should handle the US/Mexico border in this recent election season. Most of the arguments used to support the fence, the creation of felony charges against those here illegally, and other political immigration reforms have been based in the proclamation of following the law. I am concerned when the law is the only thing used to gauge right and wrong. Many times in the past we have found laws to be unethical, immoral, and just plain wrong. A good example would be past laws that discriminated against racial minorities. Though following the law was used as a weapon to chastise those who fought for rights, we would later look back on these laws as in fact wrong and deserving to be abolished or changed. Take Martin Luther King Jr. for example. Many religious leaders, colleagues of King, found following the law more important than fighting for what was right in the struggle for civil rights. What does it take to bring people to the realization that ethics, the decision to do what is right, comes before the law. In the sense of the US/Mexico border, we have to think of the right thing to do toward our fellow man, not just whether they cross over a desert without our permission. I’ve heard the argument that people should not have to be ethical towards “lawbreakers”, but is that how we honestly gauge ethical behavior? If you consider ethics, and look from the standpoint of many who are willing to pay coyotes to show them across a dangerous border, the crossers are making an ethical choice. They are choosing to risk their lives to ensure that they can support their own basic needs and that of their family. To them, that is the right thing to do, the ethical choice.
So how do we address the border issue from an ethical standpoint? We must first stop using ethnocentric policies to address the issue and look at the roots of the problem that drive these people into our borders. We also really need to look at what we really are afraid of. Is it really racially motivated? Are we as a country capable of looking past nationalistic and unethical standards in order to do what is right for thousands of desperate people waiting to risk it all to come here?
“The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God” (Leviticus 19:34)
I read an article that referenced how George W. Bush honestly believes in the absolute rightness of his choices. The article claims that it is his faith in God that gives him such self-confidence and assurance in everything he does. With W’s record on torture, unjust war, disregard for the poor to favor the rich, misuse of power, dishonesty… need I go on; how can he claim that God would abandon all that He has stood from since the beginning of time just to support his insanity? What a dangerous theology. What’s more dangerous is that many will support W just because he knows how to say Jesus.
At least there are some out there that are seeking to bring George and his administration to justice. According to this article, there are some that will not allow this man and his lackeys to claim immunity from war crimes. There is no more room for ‘god told me so’ when you act in an immoral manner, Mr. Bush. I don’t believe that it is God that W is hearing, and I recommend that he get checked for mental illness.
(Thank you to tenoch for the second article link.)
So, Saddam Hussein is going to die. Amazing. Our government brought him to “justice” for war crimes, but yet our government created a bill (the Military Commissions Act, to be exact) which gives the Bush administration, and all that are involved on his behalf, immunity from conviction for their war crimes. There is a feeling of hypocrisy here.
