The following is an open letter written by Timothy Robbins the actor to Gregory Soumas, head of the Board of Elections in New York City.
As you may or may not have heard, Mr. Robbins' name was purged from the voter rolls in his polling place where he has voted since 2004. When he showed up at his polling place to vote on Nov. 4th, he was told his name was not on the rolls. In order to vote, he had to show up at the county courthouse and go before a judge to get a letter stating he had the right to vote at his polling place.
Following this event, Mr. Soumas wrote a letter to Mr. Robbins basically stating what a nit-wit Robbins was for not checking to see if he was an active voter at his polling place. Instead of sending the letter to Mr. Robbins, Mr. Soumas sent the letter to various media outlets including newspapers and the Internet. The letter contained a copy of Mr. Robbins' voter registration card containing his address and driver's license number.
Following is Mr. Robbins' reply to the letter written by Mr. Soumas. I only wish I could write like this. All I can say is, "Right on, Mr. Robbins!!"
Read on.
Mr. Gregory C. SoumasBoard of Elections in the City of New YorkExecutive Office 32 BroadwayNew York, NY 10004-1609
November 17, 2008
Dear Mr. Soumas:
I would like to publicly apologize for being such a dim-witted dilettante on Election Day. I was under the naïve assumption that I could vote where I voted in the last two elections. Your thoughtful letter pointed out that if I had voted in the recent primary election in September I would have discovered that I was no longer registered in the polling place I have voted in since 2004.
Considering your position at the Board of Elections and your deep respect for the democratic process I must assume that my local 14th St. poll worker, Betty J. Williamson's assertion that my name was on the active voter rolls for the primary in September of this year was erroneous and that she must be as confused and wrongheaded as I am. If Ms. Williamson saw my name in the book in September that would mean that you are lying. Certainly you wouldn't lie about a thing like that. That is unbecoming of a man of your bureaucratic stature. And why would anyone in the Board of Elections be eliminating legitimate voters from the rolls in late September and October of 2008? That's just crazy and un-democratic.
I should also apologize for the misguided actions of Justice Paul G. Feinman in issuing a court order on Election Day allowing me to vote on 14th St. He apparently thought that a printed out record from your own Board of Elections computer verifying my polling place as 14th St was justification for issuing the court order. If he had only thought to contact you, you could have helped him understand the logic and wisdom of eliminating my name from the book on 14th St. where I have always voted and leaving my name registered at a place I have never voted.
I must also thank you for sending your letter not to me but to all the major newspapers in the New York area and across the internet. I understand it was your way of clearing up this matter and for that I am grateful. I am particularly appreciative of your sending a copy of my voter registration card with my home address and driver's license number to all the newspapers and, by extension, to millions across the internet. What celebrity dilettante wouldn't want his private information made public? What kind of snob gets angry that his family's safety might be compromised? It comes with the territory, right?
I was thinking of returning that favor by publishing your home address in this letter but then I thought that maybe one of the thousands of New Yorkers that were taken off the voter rolls in the last two months might not understand what a patriotic upstanding man you are and might show up at your doorstep with the misguided assumption that you are a petty vindictive corrupt scumbag.
Tim Robbins
New Yorker since 1961
Voter since 1976
P.S. If anyone reading this letter had a similar experience on Election Day it can and should be reported at 866ourvote.org.
cc: Commissioners of ElectionsMarcus Cederqvist, Executive DirectorGeorge Gonzalez, Deputy Executive DirectorPamela Perkins, Administrative Manager Beth Fossella, Coordinator, Voter RegistrationSteven H. Richman, General CounselTroy Johnson, Chief ClerkTimothy Gay, Deputy Chief Clerk
Election Day
Mr. Gregory C. Soumas Board of Elections in the City of New York Executive Office 32 Broadway New York, NY 10004-1609 November 17, 2008 Dear Mr. Soumas: I would like to publicly apologize for be...
Mr. Gregory C. Soumas Board of Elections in the City of New York Executive Office 32 Broadway New York, NY 10004-1609 November 17, 2008 Dear Mr. Soumas: I would like to publicly apologize for be...
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Post Election Thoughts
I have long been a supporter of Barack Obama. I first heard of him when he was making a run for the Senate in Illinois. After seeing him interviewed I went and purchased his book, Dreams From My Father. I was struck by the elegance of his writing and by his straightforward and honest approach to his life. I read his second book, Audacity of Hope, when it was published and I thought at that time that this guy was really going to go places.
And so he has.
He has reached the mountain top. He has achieved what only forty three other men in the history of our country have achieved. And he is an African-American.
The general consensus of the black community seems to be that they would never see this day come in their lifetimes. And here they are witnessing history…making history. My heart is full. I celebrate with them and for them.
They can now tell their children and grandchildren….and mean it….that they can achieve anything and that there are no limitations. The path to the mountain top has been paved.
I celebrate for our country too; for looking past the color of skin and into the contents of the heart. For clearly recognizing the need for change and exercising their Constitutional rights to make that change. For hearing the reverberating cry of, “Yes we can!” and believing it and allowing it to vibrate in their hearts and minds.
I celebrate. And, I hope.
I hope that President Obama will be safe. I know full well that there remain pockets of hatred and bitterness in this country. I know well that there are those who deny bigotry but yet speak hate behind closed doors. I know the maniacal acts that can be committed when one has so much conviction that they are ‘right’ and they are acting on behalf of a higher power. These things grip me with fear.
I keep President Obama and his beautiful wife and daughters in my daily thoughts and I will hope with all my might for his success and safety, because his success means success for this country and his safety will mean that this country actually has progressed past judging a person by the color of their skin.
The passage of anti-gay propositions in several states has brought me sadness. Just as we seem to be collectively moving past the issues of civil rights with regard to race, we are bogged down in the mire of civil rights with regard to sexual orientation.
It is heart wrenching to me that my fellow brothers and sisters cannot see past their biases and fears to reach a place of understanding; the understanding that all human beings deserve to love and be loved, and to enter into committed relationships which allow them certain legal rights.
At one point in our American history and not so very long ago, people were not allowed basic civil rights because of the color of their skin. Whites marrying ‘blacks’ was an aberration. White people didn’t want their children to sit in the same classroom as black children. White people wouldn’t use the same water fountains as blacks. It was not uncommon for blacks to be hung or lynched. The more tolerant whites who weren’t for actually physically harming someone merely used slurs and insults as their weapons. Blacks weren’t allowed to vote which is a Constitutional right given to all citizens of this country. For years and years and years they had to endure harm, embarrassment, hatred, fear and sometimes death.
Slowly but surely as those brave souls who stood up and peacefully protested and continually fought in ways large and small, the country began to change. America’s citizens began to see that these people they had been afraid of posed no threat. They too had beating hearts, hopes and dreams and children they loved.
Yesterday on Election Day, people of all races stood with arms entwined celebrating the broken barrier of racism as Barack Obama became the 44th president of the United States.
Unfortunately, a majority of those people also voted to strip thousands of citizens of their basic civil rights. By denying citizens to marry whom they choose, we deny them the pursuit of happiness. Sure, they can live together, but they can never enjoy what we as “straight” Americans get to enjoy; the legal and public declaration that they are joined together as a committed loving married couple.
Just as blacks marrying whites didn’t create the downfall of the American family, neither will gay marriage. It is ridiculous to think otherwise. It is once again fear of the unknown that keeps us as a society from progressing.
I know firsthand what “gays” are like. They are exactly like you and me. They laugh and cry and hope and dream and long for children and for security for those they love. They donate kidneys to parents, care for partners with brain tumors, help their children through the brutal teenage years and support their parents in their twilight years. They also long to be in relationships that are recognized by society as legitimate and legal.
My heart aches for my friends who are gay. This election year was a setback in their quest for civil rights. I have sat in their homes and held their hands, sang with them, danced with them, laughed with them and cried with them. I love them dearly and long for them to feel as though they too are ‘real’ Americans; Americans who get the same rights and privileges as their countrymen.
So, today I feel both joy and sadness. But more than anything I feel full of hope. I hope for a better tomorrow and I dream of the day when I can stand shoulder to shoulder with all of my fellow men and know that we are all ‘free at last.’
And so he has.
He has reached the mountain top. He has achieved what only forty three other men in the history of our country have achieved. And he is an African-American.
The general consensus of the black community seems to be that they would never see this day come in their lifetimes. And here they are witnessing history…making history. My heart is full. I celebrate with them and for them.
They can now tell their children and grandchildren….and mean it….that they can achieve anything and that there are no limitations. The path to the mountain top has been paved.
I celebrate for our country too; for looking past the color of skin and into the contents of the heart. For clearly recognizing the need for change and exercising their Constitutional rights to make that change. For hearing the reverberating cry of, “Yes we can!” and believing it and allowing it to vibrate in their hearts and minds.
I celebrate. And, I hope.
I hope that President Obama will be safe. I know full well that there remain pockets of hatred and bitterness in this country. I know well that there are those who deny bigotry but yet speak hate behind closed doors. I know the maniacal acts that can be committed when one has so much conviction that they are ‘right’ and they are acting on behalf of a higher power. These things grip me with fear.
I keep President Obama and his beautiful wife and daughters in my daily thoughts and I will hope with all my might for his success and safety, because his success means success for this country and his safety will mean that this country actually has progressed past judging a person by the color of their skin.
The passage of anti-gay propositions in several states has brought me sadness. Just as we seem to be collectively moving past the issues of civil rights with regard to race, we are bogged down in the mire of civil rights with regard to sexual orientation.
It is heart wrenching to me that my fellow brothers and sisters cannot see past their biases and fears to reach a place of understanding; the understanding that all human beings deserve to love and be loved, and to enter into committed relationships which allow them certain legal rights.
At one point in our American history and not so very long ago, people were not allowed basic civil rights because of the color of their skin. Whites marrying ‘blacks’ was an aberration. White people didn’t want their children to sit in the same classroom as black children. White people wouldn’t use the same water fountains as blacks. It was not uncommon for blacks to be hung or lynched. The more tolerant whites who weren’t for actually physically harming someone merely used slurs and insults as their weapons. Blacks weren’t allowed to vote which is a Constitutional right given to all citizens of this country. For years and years and years they had to endure harm, embarrassment, hatred, fear and sometimes death.
Slowly but surely as those brave souls who stood up and peacefully protested and continually fought in ways large and small, the country began to change. America’s citizens began to see that these people they had been afraid of posed no threat. They too had beating hearts, hopes and dreams and children they loved.
Yesterday on Election Day, people of all races stood with arms entwined celebrating the broken barrier of racism as Barack Obama became the 44th president of the United States.
Unfortunately, a majority of those people also voted to strip thousands of citizens of their basic civil rights. By denying citizens to marry whom they choose, we deny them the pursuit of happiness. Sure, they can live together, but they can never enjoy what we as “straight” Americans get to enjoy; the legal and public declaration that they are joined together as a committed loving married couple.
Just as blacks marrying whites didn’t create the downfall of the American family, neither will gay marriage. It is ridiculous to think otherwise. It is once again fear of the unknown that keeps us as a society from progressing.
I know firsthand what “gays” are like. They are exactly like you and me. They laugh and cry and hope and dream and long for children and for security for those they love. They donate kidneys to parents, care for partners with brain tumors, help their children through the brutal teenage years and support their parents in their twilight years. They also long to be in relationships that are recognized by society as legitimate and legal.
My heart aches for my friends who are gay. This election year was a setback in their quest for civil rights. I have sat in their homes and held their hands, sang with them, danced with them, laughed with them and cried with them. I love them dearly and long for them to feel as though they too are ‘real’ Americans; Americans who get the same rights and privileges as their countrymen.
So, today I feel both joy and sadness. But more than anything I feel full of hope. I hope for a better tomorrow and I dream of the day when I can stand shoulder to shoulder with all of my fellow men and know that we are all ‘free at last.’
Dear Mr. President
No matter what happens from this point forward, you have brought about a mighty change in the collective hearts and minds of this nation. You have opened the way for all of those who will come after you and they will see that there are no limitations in America.
Travel well to the White House that awaits you. Travel safely. I will keep you and your daughters and your wife in my thoughts and heart every day.
Go with the wind at your back. Let it push you to the greatness that is inside of you. You have told us that "yes we can." We believe you and we believe in you.
The future awaits you. Go well and travel safe.
Travel well to the White House that awaits you. Travel safely. I will keep you and your daughters and your wife in my thoughts and heart every day.
Go with the wind at your back. Let it push you to the greatness that is inside of you. You have told us that "yes we can." We believe you and we believe in you.
The future awaits you. Go well and travel safe.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
I hope those Jimmy Choos taste good...
In recent days, Governor Sarah Palin has begun referring to Senator Barack Obama as “Barack the Wealth Spreader”, referring to his proposed tax plan that would provide greater tax relief for lower income individuals than those with higher incomes. Obama recently explained his support for progressive taxation, saying, “I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”
Palin contends that Obama’s characterization of his tax plan revealed him to be a “socialist” who wants to “redistribute” American wealth. Palin argues that the Obama tax plan “discourages productivity”, will “punish hard work,” and will “stifle the entrepreneurial spirit.”
Conservatives have echoed Palin’s sentiments, insinuating that Obama is a “Marxist” and referring to his tax plan as “welfare.” The Obama-as-a-socialist theme has become the center of the McCain campaign.
But Palin’s criticisms of Obama’s “spread the wealth” remarks are ironic, as she recently characterized Alaska’s tax code in a very similar way. Just last month in an interview with Philip Gourevitch of the New Yorker, Palin explained the windfall profits tax that she imposed on the oil industry in Alaska as a mechanism for ensuring that Alaskan’s “share in the wealth” generated by oil companies.
The direct quote by Sarah Palin from the interview:
“And Alaska – we’ve set up, unlike other states in the Union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs. It’s to maximize benefits for Alaskans, not an individual company, not some multi-national somewhere, but for Alaskans.”
In fact, Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share (ACES) program which manages the redistribution of oil wealth in Alaska brings in so much money the state needs no income or sales tax. In addition, this year ACES will provide every Alaskan with a check for an estimated $3,200.American Journalist Hendrick Hertzberg notes, “Perhaps there is some meaningful distinction between spreading the wealth and sharing it…but finding it would require the analytical skills of Karl the Marxist."
Oops, Governor Palin. I guess you're a "socialist" too.
Palin contends that Obama’s characterization of his tax plan revealed him to be a “socialist” who wants to “redistribute” American wealth. Palin argues that the Obama tax plan “discourages productivity”, will “punish hard work,” and will “stifle the entrepreneurial spirit.”
Conservatives have echoed Palin’s sentiments, insinuating that Obama is a “Marxist” and referring to his tax plan as “welfare.” The Obama-as-a-socialist theme has become the center of the McCain campaign.
But Palin’s criticisms of Obama’s “spread the wealth” remarks are ironic, as she recently characterized Alaska’s tax code in a very similar way. Just last month in an interview with Philip Gourevitch of the New Yorker, Palin explained the windfall profits tax that she imposed on the oil industry in Alaska as a mechanism for ensuring that Alaskan’s “share in the wealth” generated by oil companies.
The direct quote by Sarah Palin from the interview:
“And Alaska – we’ve set up, unlike other states in the Union, where it’s collectively Alaskans own the resources. So we share in the wealth when the development of these resources occurs. It’s to maximize benefits for Alaskans, not an individual company, not some multi-national somewhere, but for Alaskans.”
In fact, Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share (ACES) program which manages the redistribution of oil wealth in Alaska brings in so much money the state needs no income or sales tax. In addition, this year ACES will provide every Alaskan with a check for an estimated $3,200.American Journalist Hendrick Hertzberg notes, “Perhaps there is some meaningful distinction between spreading the wealth and sharing it…but finding it would require the analytical skills of Karl the Marxist."
Oops, Governor Palin. I guess you're a "socialist" too.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Someone on the Right is right
I haven't posted anything here lately because I really use Myspace to blog. (www.myspace.com/rubberflubber)
All of my posts/rants have been being posted there recently. I thought I'd go ahead and post this particular article here as well because it's worth a read by anyone and everyone who manages to lay their eyes on it.
This article was written by a Mormon (LDS). It's somewhat encouraging to find that not everyone on the far right who has a belief in a higher power, believes that everyone who doesn't believe as they do are damned to hell.
I live in MormonLand Arizona and have my stomach turned daily as I drive by the 'Vote Yes on 102...vote Yes for Marriage" signs. Prop 102 is AZs answer to California's prop 8. A Yes vote would mean changing the constitution to define a marriage as a union between a man and a woman. For some reason, the Mormons around here...and apparently all over the country are enormously threatened by someone else's love and commitment.
Read on:
A MORMON'S LAMENT: THE CHURCH IS ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY AGAIN WITH PROPOSITION 8
In late 2002, as President George W. Bush began building his case for preemptive war in Iraq, a remarkable thing happened. In contrast to the general timidity of American churches in response to the conflict in Vietnam, leaders of faith were speaking out. Observed the Reverend Jim Wallis at the time:
"Opposition to war with Iraq has come from a wide spectrum of the churches - Roman Catholic, Protestant denominations, Evangelical, Pentecostal, black churches, Orthodox. All of the statements, letters, and resolutions from church leaders and bodies take the threat posed by Saddam Hussein seriously, but they refuse war as the best response.
Importantly, these church leaders are not making their decision based on whether or not they approve of President George W. Bush - some do and some don't. Rather, they are doing so on the basis of Christian theology and moral teaching."
One notable exception to this dissent: the Mormon Church.
The LDS Church's cautious official response to the war (one of the most consequential decisions in recent American history) and near-unconditional subsequent support for the Bush Administration (in 2005, Dick Cheney was awarded an honorary doctorate and invited as the commencement speaker at BYU, the Church's flagship institution), raise important questions about the Church's involvement in political affairs, particularly when an issue has moral/ethical implications. When should it speak out? When should it stay neutral? And how does it treat its members with minority views?
Nearly six years and thousands of lost lives since the war began, Mormon authorities still haven't weighed in on Iraq, Abu Ghraib, or Guantanomo Bay. Neither have they directed semi-annual Conference addresses to the genocide in Sudan, human rights violations caused by multi-national corporations, or climate change that could have devastating effects on future generations. Instead, in the past few months they have decided to take action on a "moral issue" of a different sort: denying gay couples the constitutional right to get married in California.
In support of California's Proposition 8, the Mormon Church has gone into political overdrive. Under the direction of Church leaders' admonition over the pulpit, they have formed a formidable grassroots machine, providing boots on the ground, making phone calls, writing letters, forwarding emails, while donating an astounding $19 million to the cause.
"What we're about is the work of the Lord, and He will bless you for your involvement," apostle M. Russell Ballard proclaimed in a broadcast to church buildings in California, Utah, Hawaii and Idaho.
This stand, sadly, follows a disturbing trend of being on the wrong side of history on issues of social justice and equality for the LDS Church.
For nearly 150 years, the Mormon Church stubbornly held to a racist policy that refused all members of African descent the privilege of entering temples or receiving the Priesthood. Even as slavery, segregation, and Jim Crowe receded into the American past, the Mormon Church still treated its own black members as second-class citizens. The practice was justified as the plan of God. Apostles and prophets, the highest authorities in the Church, rationalized the continued discrimination by pointing to the "curse of Cain" and disobedience in the pre-existence. Other leaders said they simply didn't know but were sure God had some mysterious reason for keeping the full blessings of the Gospel from black people. Only a rare few leaders, including apostle Hugh B. Brown (and many more grassroots members), spoke out on behalf of civil rights. So the infamous ban lived on until 1978.
Along with polygamy, this blatant institutional racism is perhaps the most regrettable scar in Mormon history. Though progress has been made, race remains a taboo subject to this day for most Mormons, shrouded in shame and myth. It hasn't helped that the Church still hasn't publicly acknowledged or apologized for its racist past.
Yet sadly this is not the only example of the Mormon Church attempting to stifle progress and equality. In the 1970s the Church went to great efforts to oppose the Equal Rights Amendment for women. Much like Proposition 8, they argued that it undermined the traditional structure of the family. Church leaders called it "a moral issue with many disturbing ramifications for women and for the family as individual members and as a whole." President Spencer W. Kimball said it "would strike at the family, humankind's basic institution."
Sound familiar?
So here we are, in 2008, and now the threat is gay people who are already gay, who love each other and in many cases live together, and want to get married. How does this hurt the average Mormon family?
If the concern really was the practical welfare of the family, perhaps the Church could instead invest its vast resources into making healthcare universal and affordable, expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act, cracking down on child predators, and improving the quality of our educational system. All of these issues have a direct impact on my family and millions of others.
You hear of marriages ruined all the time because of abuse, neglect, or stress over finances. But I have personally never heard of a divorce caused by another gay couple getting married.
Yet instead of focusing on issues that can really help nourish our families we obsess over a word. A word we refuse to share. A word that has never been perfectly fixed. There was a time, after all, when inter-racial marriage was just as taboo and illegal as gay marriage. Marriage has been many things, but the common ideal has been and should continue to be a relationship built on love and commitment.
So to my fellow Mormons: I ask you to please re-consider. Take the time you would spend fighting this errant cause with your family. Go to a movie. Take a drive together. Watch the World Series.
Maybe you don't completely understand homosexuality. Maybe you think it's a sin. But shouldn't we leave that to God and allow others to be who they are and make their own choices? As followers of Christ, isn't it always better to err on the side of compassion and love?
Martin Luther King once lamented in his famous letter from Birmingham Jail:
"So often the contemporary Church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an arch-defender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the Church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the Church's silent---and often even vocal---sanction of things as they are."
In case after case when the moral chips have been on the table, I have hoped for my Church what Dr. King prayed for in his time: that "the Church as a whole will meet the challenge of [the] decisive hour." But sadly, so often on the issues of peace, equality and social justice, it has failed, whether by silence or misguided support.
With Proposition 8 it is time to stand for justice, not discrimination. It is time to stand for equality. It is time to be on the right side of history. Regardless of race, gender, or sexuality human beings are human beings and deserve to be treated as such. Today I voice my public support in favor of treating my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters as equals, and ask my fellow Mormons to do the same.
UPDATE: To clarify, I commend all the good, charitable work the LDS Church does and have written about it in the past. The purpose of this article is specifically on the Church's response to political issues with moral implications.
All of my posts/rants have been being posted there recently. I thought I'd go ahead and post this particular article here as well because it's worth a read by anyone and everyone who manages to lay their eyes on it.
This article was written by a Mormon (LDS). It's somewhat encouraging to find that not everyone on the far right who has a belief in a higher power, believes that everyone who doesn't believe as they do are damned to hell.
I live in MormonLand Arizona and have my stomach turned daily as I drive by the 'Vote Yes on 102...vote Yes for Marriage" signs. Prop 102 is AZs answer to California's prop 8. A Yes vote would mean changing the constitution to define a marriage as a union between a man and a woman. For some reason, the Mormons around here...and apparently all over the country are enormously threatened by someone else's love and commitment.
Read on:
A MORMON'S LAMENT: THE CHURCH IS ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY AGAIN WITH PROPOSITION 8
In late 2002, as President George W. Bush began building his case for preemptive war in Iraq, a remarkable thing happened. In contrast to the general timidity of American churches in response to the conflict in Vietnam, leaders of faith were speaking out. Observed the Reverend Jim Wallis at the time:
"Opposition to war with Iraq has come from a wide spectrum of the churches - Roman Catholic, Protestant denominations, Evangelical, Pentecostal, black churches, Orthodox. All of the statements, letters, and resolutions from church leaders and bodies take the threat posed by Saddam Hussein seriously, but they refuse war as the best response.
Importantly, these church leaders are not making their decision based on whether or not they approve of President George W. Bush - some do and some don't. Rather, they are doing so on the basis of Christian theology and moral teaching."
One notable exception to this dissent: the Mormon Church.
The LDS Church's cautious official response to the war (one of the most consequential decisions in recent American history) and near-unconditional subsequent support for the Bush Administration (in 2005, Dick Cheney was awarded an honorary doctorate and invited as the commencement speaker at BYU, the Church's flagship institution), raise important questions about the Church's involvement in political affairs, particularly when an issue has moral/ethical implications. When should it speak out? When should it stay neutral? And how does it treat its members with minority views?
Nearly six years and thousands of lost lives since the war began, Mormon authorities still haven't weighed in on Iraq, Abu Ghraib, or Guantanomo Bay. Neither have they directed semi-annual Conference addresses to the genocide in Sudan, human rights violations caused by multi-national corporations, or climate change that could have devastating effects on future generations. Instead, in the past few months they have decided to take action on a "moral issue" of a different sort: denying gay couples the constitutional right to get married in California.
In support of California's Proposition 8, the Mormon Church has gone into political overdrive. Under the direction of Church leaders' admonition over the pulpit, they have formed a formidable grassroots machine, providing boots on the ground, making phone calls, writing letters, forwarding emails, while donating an astounding $19 million to the cause.
"What we're about is the work of the Lord, and He will bless you for your involvement," apostle M. Russell Ballard proclaimed in a broadcast to church buildings in California, Utah, Hawaii and Idaho.
This stand, sadly, follows a disturbing trend of being on the wrong side of history on issues of social justice and equality for the LDS Church.
For nearly 150 years, the Mormon Church stubbornly held to a racist policy that refused all members of African descent the privilege of entering temples or receiving the Priesthood. Even as slavery, segregation, and Jim Crowe receded into the American past, the Mormon Church still treated its own black members as second-class citizens. The practice was justified as the plan of God. Apostles and prophets, the highest authorities in the Church, rationalized the continued discrimination by pointing to the "curse of Cain" and disobedience in the pre-existence. Other leaders said they simply didn't know but were sure God had some mysterious reason for keeping the full blessings of the Gospel from black people. Only a rare few leaders, including apostle Hugh B. Brown (and many more grassroots members), spoke out on behalf of civil rights. So the infamous ban lived on until 1978.
Along with polygamy, this blatant institutional racism is perhaps the most regrettable scar in Mormon history. Though progress has been made, race remains a taboo subject to this day for most Mormons, shrouded in shame and myth. It hasn't helped that the Church still hasn't publicly acknowledged or apologized for its racist past.
Yet sadly this is not the only example of the Mormon Church attempting to stifle progress and equality. In the 1970s the Church went to great efforts to oppose the Equal Rights Amendment for women. Much like Proposition 8, they argued that it undermined the traditional structure of the family. Church leaders called it "a moral issue with many disturbing ramifications for women and for the family as individual members and as a whole." President Spencer W. Kimball said it "would strike at the family, humankind's basic institution."
Sound familiar?
So here we are, in 2008, and now the threat is gay people who are already gay, who love each other and in many cases live together, and want to get married. How does this hurt the average Mormon family?
If the concern really was the practical welfare of the family, perhaps the Church could instead invest its vast resources into making healthcare universal and affordable, expanding the Family and Medical Leave Act, cracking down on child predators, and improving the quality of our educational system. All of these issues have a direct impact on my family and millions of others.
You hear of marriages ruined all the time because of abuse, neglect, or stress over finances. But I have personally never heard of a divorce caused by another gay couple getting married.
Yet instead of focusing on issues that can really help nourish our families we obsess over a word. A word we refuse to share. A word that has never been perfectly fixed. There was a time, after all, when inter-racial marriage was just as taboo and illegal as gay marriage. Marriage has been many things, but the common ideal has been and should continue to be a relationship built on love and commitment.
So to my fellow Mormons: I ask you to please re-consider. Take the time you would spend fighting this errant cause with your family. Go to a movie. Take a drive together. Watch the World Series.
Maybe you don't completely understand homosexuality. Maybe you think it's a sin. But shouldn't we leave that to God and allow others to be who they are and make their own choices? As followers of Christ, isn't it always better to err on the side of compassion and love?
Martin Luther King once lamented in his famous letter from Birmingham Jail:
"So often the contemporary Church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an arch-defender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the Church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the Church's silent---and often even vocal---sanction of things as they are."
In case after case when the moral chips have been on the table, I have hoped for my Church what Dr. King prayed for in his time: that "the Church as a whole will meet the challenge of [the] decisive hour." But sadly, so often on the issues of peace, equality and social justice, it has failed, whether by silence or misguided support.
With Proposition 8 it is time to stand for justice, not discrimination. It is time to stand for equality. It is time to be on the right side of history. Regardless of race, gender, or sexuality human beings are human beings and deserve to be treated as such. Today I voice my public support in favor of treating my gay and lesbian brothers and sisters as equals, and ask my fellow Mormons to do the same.
UPDATE: To clarify, I commend all the good, charitable work the LDS Church does and have written about it in the past. The purpose of this article is specifically on the Church's response to political issues with moral implications.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Newsweek Article Worth a Read
Palin Is Ready? Please.
McCain says that he always puts country first. In this important case, that is simply not true.
Fareed Zakaria
NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Oct 6, 2008
Will someone please put Sarah Palin out of her agony? Is it too much to ask that she come to realize that she wants, in that wonderful phrase in American politics, "to spend more time with her family"? Having stayed in purdah for weeks, she finally agreed to a third interview. CBS's Katie Couric questioned her in her trademark sympathetic style. It didn't help. When asked how living in the state closest to Russia gave her foreign-policy experience, Palin responded thus:
"It's very important when you consider even national-security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the airspace of the United States of America. Where—where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there. They are right next to—to our state."
There is, of course, the sheer absurdity of the premise. Two weeks ago I flew to Tokyo, crossing over the North Pole. Does that make me an expert on Santa Claus? (Thanks, Jon Stewart.) But even beyond that, read the rest of her response. "It is from Alaska that we send out those …" What does this mean? This is not an isolated example. Palin has been given a set of talking points by campaign advisers, simple ideological mantras that she repeats and repeats as long as she can. ("We mustn't blink.") But if forced off those rehearsed lines, what she has to say is often, quite frankly, gibberish.
Couric asked her a smart question about the proposed $700 billion bailout of the American financial sector. It was designed to see if Palin understood that the problem in this crisis is that credit and liquidity in the financial system has dried up, and that that's why, in the estimation of Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson and Fed chairman Ben Bernanke, the government needs to step in to buy up Wall Street's most toxic liabilities. Here's the entire exchange:
COURIC: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries; allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?
PALIN: That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the—it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.
This is nonsense—a vapid emptying out of every catchphrase about economics that came into her head. Some commentators, like CNN's Campbell Brown, have argued that it's sexist to keep Sarah Palin under wraps, as if she were a delicate flower who might wilt under the bright lights of the modern media. But the more Palin talks, the more we see that it may not be sexism but common sense that's causing the McCain campaign to treat her like a time bomb.
Can we now admit the obvious? Sarah Palin is utterly unqualified to be vice president. She is a feisty, charismatic politician who has done some good things in Alaska. But she has never spent a day thinking about any important national or international issue, and this is a hell of a time to start. The next administration is going to face a set of challenges unlike any in recent memory. There is an ongoing military operation in Iraq that still costs $10 billion a month, a war against the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan that is not going well and is not easily fixed. Iran, Russia and Venezuela present tough strategic challenges.
Domestically, the bailout and reform of the financial industry will take years and hundreds of billions of dollars. Health-care costs, unless curtailed, will bankrupt the federal government. Social Security, immigration, collapsing infrastructure and education are all going to get much worse if they are not handled soon.
And the American government is stretched to the limit. Between the Bush tax cuts, homeland-security needs, Iraq, Afghanistan and the bailout, the budget is looking bleak. Plus, within a few years, the retirement of the baby boomers begins with its massive and rising costs (in the trillions).
Obviously these are very serious challenges and constraints. In these times, for John McCain to have chosen this person to be his running mate is fundamentally irresponsible. McCain says that he always puts country first. In this important case, it is simply not true.
URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/161204
Monday, September 1, 2008
Hypocrisy
This is copied directly (not translated...ahem...) from the Blogger website of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. (Mormon church)
"THEDOCTRINE AND COVENANTSOF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
SECTION 89
Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Kirtland, Ohio, February 27, 1833. HC 1: 327–329. As a consequence of the early brethren using tobacco in their meetings, the Prophet was led to ponder upon the matter; consequently he inquired of the Lord concerning it. This revelation, known as the Word of Wisdom, was the result. The first three verses were originally written as an inspired introduction and description by the Prophet.
1–9, Use of wine, strong drinks, tobacco, and hot drinks proscribed; 10–17, Herbs, fruits, flesh, and grain are ordained for the use of man and of animals; 18–21, Obedience to gospel law, including the Word of Wisdom, brings temporal and spiritual blessings.
1 A aWord OF Wisdom, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion—
2 To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the aword of wisdom, showing forth the order and bwill of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days—
3 Given for a principle with apromise, adapted to the capacity of the bweak and the weakest of all csaints, who are or can be called saints.
4 Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you: In consequence of aevils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of bconspiring men in the last days, I have cwarned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelation—
5 That inasmuch as any man adrinketh bwine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him.
6 And, behold, this should be wine, yea, apure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.
7 And, again, astrong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies.
8 And again, tobacco is not for the abody, neither for the belly, and is not good for man, but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle, to be used with judgment and skill.
9 And again, hot drinks are not for the body or belly.
10 And again, verily I say unto you, all wholesome aherbs God hath ordained for the constitution, nature, and use of man—
11 Every herb in the season thereof, and every fruit in the season thereof; all these to be used with aprudence and bthanksgiving.
12 Yea, aflesh also of bbeasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used csparingly;
13 And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be aused, only in times of winter, or of cold, or bfamine.
14 All agrain is ordained for the use of man and of beasts, to be the staff of life, not only for man but for the beasts of the field, and the fowls of heaven, and all wild animals that run or creep on the earth;
15 And athese hath God made for the use of man only in times of famine and excess of hunger.
16 All grain is good for the afood of man; as also the bfruit of the vine; that which yieldeth fruit, whether in the ground or above the ground—
17 Nevertheless, wheat for man, and corn for the ox, and oats for the horse, and rye for the fowls and for swine, and for all beasts of the field, and barley for all useful animals, and for mild drinks, as also other grain.
18 And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings, walking in obedience to the commandments, ashall receive bhealth in their navel and marrow to their bones;
19 And shall afind bwisdom and great ctreasures of dknowledge, even hidden treasures;
20 And shall arun and not be bweary, and shall walk and not faint.
21 And I, the Lord, give unto them a promise, that the adestroying angel shall bpass by them, as the children of Israel, and not slay them. Amen.
The Official Scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"
I have a problem with this.
Growing up my entire life as a Mormon, it was hammered into my head that drinking, smoking, partaking of tea and any beverage with caffeine in it was a no-no. Doing so would be in violation of The Word of Wisdom.
First of all....what a bitch. What kid doesn't want to pound Dr. Pepper or Coke with their friends at a slumber party? Second of all....what a crock.
I'm assuming that the no caffeine rule is a translation issue because I never have and still do not see that it is prohibited by the Word of Wisdom.
I also see that wine is not prohibited if it's for offering sacrament and is homemade. Whoopee!!! How in the hell did I miss that part?! I guess wine wasn't really on my agenda in middle school yet. I was far too concerned about being banned from drinking all of my favorite soft drinks.
The thing that sticks in my craw the most about religion is the hypocrisy of it all. So...somewhere in there someone determined that caffeine is bad and apparently store bought wine is bad but homemade wine for religious purposes is okie dokie. I know from personal experience that this particular piece of "divine inspiration" is made a big deal of in the Mormon church. But how about the large part of this dictate that talks about not eating meat except in times of winter or famine? I know very few Mormons who are vegetarians. If followed to the letter, one would not drink store bought wine, partake of any sort of tobacco, only eat meat in winter or times of famine and eat grains as the major part of their diet. (I'm still not sure to this day what is meant by "hot" drinks. I see no cross reference of explanation for it so is the reader to assume that hot chocolate and wassail are also prohibited?
It was my understanding growing up that the Word of Wisdom was intended as a guideline to keep help the members of the church live a healthy lifestyle.
In my 30 years of experience in the Mormon church, I found that a large portion of the membership of the church was overweight or obese. Church socials were gorge fests and most of the activities revolved around food. We're not talking about vegetarian fare here. We're talking mayonnaise filled salads, chicken, hamburger, hot dogs, sweets....but no caffeine!
I would be interested to hear a rational and logical explanation as to how one can be 'obedient' to the Word of Wisdom and be obese. According to the Lord, if you're obedient to it, he will bless you that you will be able to run & not be weary and walk and not faint. Apparently, physical fitness and good health is high on the Lord's agenda. If this is indeed the case, then wouldn't he be pretty concerned that a large portion of his followers are fatties? I mean, how many caffeine related deaths and illnesses are there? Now let's count the number of illnesses and deaths directly related to obesity. A rational thinking person might conclude that obesity is a greater sin than drinking a Mountain Dew or even a glass or two of wine now and then. (And how about those reports that scientifically conclude that red wine actually has health benefits?!)
In the Mormon church there is something called a "Temple Recommend". It's basically a pass that you get that allows you to go to a Mormon temple. In order to get that pass, you have to fulfill certain requirements such as being a regular tithe payer, being obedient to the Word of Wisdom, etc. I know firsthand people that have been denied a Recommend because they admitted in their interview with their church leader that they drank beer. I also know dozens upon dozens of fat Mormons who hold those recommends in good standing.
???
I'm picking on the Mormons here because it's the church I'm most familiar with. The same hypocrisy and worse exists across the board of religious sects.
I'll be the first to stand and say that sometimes I may be hypocritical. The difference is that I don't subscribe to any philosophy that I claim to be a follower of and conduct myself in a contradictory manner to that philosophy.
My mother inspired this rant. She's a die hard Mormon who has had surgery on both knees because she's too heavy and her cartilage has worn out. In her eyes, I'm a heathen because I drink. My lifestyle (a few drinks every now and then) makes her sad because she thinks my soul is damned in the hereafter. Her lifestyle makes me sad because in my eyes, her hypocrisy has already damned her soul in the here and now.
"THEDOCTRINE AND COVENANTSOF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
SECTION 89
Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Kirtland, Ohio, February 27, 1833. HC 1: 327–329. As a consequence of the early brethren using tobacco in their meetings, the Prophet was led to ponder upon the matter; consequently he inquired of the Lord concerning it. This revelation, known as the Word of Wisdom, was the result. The first three verses were originally written as an inspired introduction and description by the Prophet.
1–9, Use of wine, strong drinks, tobacco, and hot drinks proscribed; 10–17, Herbs, fruits, flesh, and grain are ordained for the use of man and of animals; 18–21, Obedience to gospel law, including the Word of Wisdom, brings temporal and spiritual blessings.
1 A aWord OF Wisdom, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion—
2 To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the aword of wisdom, showing forth the order and bwill of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days—
3 Given for a principle with apromise, adapted to the capacity of the bweak and the weakest of all csaints, who are or can be called saints.
4 Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you: In consequence of aevils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of bconspiring men in the last days, I have cwarned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelation—
5 That inasmuch as any man adrinketh bwine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him.
6 And, behold, this should be wine, yea, apure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.
7 And, again, astrong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies.
8 And again, tobacco is not for the abody, neither for the belly, and is not good for man, but is an herb for bruises and all sick cattle, to be used with judgment and skill.
9 And again, hot drinks are not for the body or belly.
10 And again, verily I say unto you, all wholesome aherbs God hath ordained for the constitution, nature, and use of man—
11 Every herb in the season thereof, and every fruit in the season thereof; all these to be used with aprudence and bthanksgiving.
12 Yea, aflesh also of bbeasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used csparingly;
13 And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be aused, only in times of winter, or of cold, or bfamine.
14 All agrain is ordained for the use of man and of beasts, to be the staff of life, not only for man but for the beasts of the field, and the fowls of heaven, and all wild animals that run or creep on the earth;
15 And athese hath God made for the use of man only in times of famine and excess of hunger.
16 All grain is good for the afood of man; as also the bfruit of the vine; that which yieldeth fruit, whether in the ground or above the ground—
17 Nevertheless, wheat for man, and corn for the ox, and oats for the horse, and rye for the fowls and for swine, and for all beasts of the field, and barley for all useful animals, and for mild drinks, as also other grain.
18 And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings, walking in obedience to the commandments, ashall receive bhealth in their navel and marrow to their bones;
19 And shall afind bwisdom and great ctreasures of dknowledge, even hidden treasures;
20 And shall arun and not be bweary, and shall walk and not faint.
21 And I, the Lord, give unto them a promise, that the adestroying angel shall bpass by them, as the children of Israel, and not slay them. Amen.
The Official Scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"
I have a problem with this.
Growing up my entire life as a Mormon, it was hammered into my head that drinking, smoking, partaking of tea and any beverage with caffeine in it was a no-no. Doing so would be in violation of The Word of Wisdom.
First of all....what a bitch. What kid doesn't want to pound Dr. Pepper or Coke with their friends at a slumber party? Second of all....what a crock.
I'm assuming that the no caffeine rule is a translation issue because I never have and still do not see that it is prohibited by the Word of Wisdom.
I also see that wine is not prohibited if it's for offering sacrament and is homemade. Whoopee!!! How in the hell did I miss that part?! I guess wine wasn't really on my agenda in middle school yet. I was far too concerned about being banned from drinking all of my favorite soft drinks.
The thing that sticks in my craw the most about religion is the hypocrisy of it all. So...somewhere in there someone determined that caffeine is bad and apparently store bought wine is bad but homemade wine for religious purposes is okie dokie. I know from personal experience that this particular piece of "divine inspiration" is made a big deal of in the Mormon church. But how about the large part of this dictate that talks about not eating meat except in times of winter or famine? I know very few Mormons who are vegetarians. If followed to the letter, one would not drink store bought wine, partake of any sort of tobacco, only eat meat in winter or times of famine and eat grains as the major part of their diet. (I'm still not sure to this day what is meant by "hot" drinks. I see no cross reference of explanation for it so is the reader to assume that hot chocolate and wassail are also prohibited?
It was my understanding growing up that the Word of Wisdom was intended as a guideline to keep help the members of the church live a healthy lifestyle.
In my 30 years of experience in the Mormon church, I found that a large portion of the membership of the church was overweight or obese. Church socials were gorge fests and most of the activities revolved around food. We're not talking about vegetarian fare here. We're talking mayonnaise filled salads, chicken, hamburger, hot dogs, sweets....but no caffeine!
I would be interested to hear a rational and logical explanation as to how one can be 'obedient' to the Word of Wisdom and be obese. According to the Lord, if you're obedient to it, he will bless you that you will be able to run & not be weary and walk and not faint. Apparently, physical fitness and good health is high on the Lord's agenda. If this is indeed the case, then wouldn't he be pretty concerned that a large portion of his followers are fatties? I mean, how many caffeine related deaths and illnesses are there? Now let's count the number of illnesses and deaths directly related to obesity. A rational thinking person might conclude that obesity is a greater sin than drinking a Mountain Dew or even a glass or two of wine now and then. (And how about those reports that scientifically conclude that red wine actually has health benefits?!)
In the Mormon church there is something called a "Temple Recommend". It's basically a pass that you get that allows you to go to a Mormon temple. In order to get that pass, you have to fulfill certain requirements such as being a regular tithe payer, being obedient to the Word of Wisdom, etc. I know firsthand people that have been denied a Recommend because they admitted in their interview with their church leader that they drank beer. I also know dozens upon dozens of fat Mormons who hold those recommends in good standing.
???
I'm picking on the Mormons here because it's the church I'm most familiar with. The same hypocrisy and worse exists across the board of religious sects.
I'll be the first to stand and say that sometimes I may be hypocritical. The difference is that I don't subscribe to any philosophy that I claim to be a follower of and conduct myself in a contradictory manner to that philosophy.
My mother inspired this rant. She's a die hard Mormon who has had surgery on both knees because she's too heavy and her cartilage has worn out. In her eyes, I'm a heathen because I drink. My lifestyle (a few drinks every now and then) makes her sad because she thinks my soul is damned in the hereafter. Her lifestyle makes me sad because in my eyes, her hypocrisy has already damned her soul in the here and now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
