Phil's Peace Blog

What's Wrong with Cute?

2008-10-14T06:59:00.000-07:00

What's wrong with Cute is the same thing that is wrong with Profane.

I totally agree with Diane Stafford ("Let's not wink at careless gesture," Oct. 9). In watching the vice-presidential debate, I really didn't think much about Palin's wink and folksy manner of speech since I was favoring Biden, anyway, but Stafford was very thorough in pointing out the down-side of such behavior and speech patterns.

I like to think that I can look past the superficial aspects of one's appearance or speech or behavior and focus on the content of their character and ideas, but subconsciously I know that surface matters, that speech matters, that behavior matters. My gray ponytail and white Amish beard and frequent attendance at anti-war protests over the past 47 years may reinforce some people's stereotype of hippies and dismiss me. But at least I try to use thoughtful and serious language to express myself, to bathe regularly, and to dress appropriately for the occasion.

When the protestors at Kent State University in May, 1970, were vilified as sub-human and deserved to be shot by the Ohio National Guard, I was shocked. I laid the blame on the narrow-mindedness of the pro-war "adult" generation. But now that I am 65, I know that the grooming habits and drug use and profanity and "free love" of some of the protestors gave excuses to those who despised dissent anyway.

As we voters evaluate the candidates for President and Vice President, let us try to focus on the issues and the leadership strengths and weaknesses of the candidates, but may the candidates present themselves respectful of our natural tendency to see only the surface and show us the true depth of themselves.

Phil Rhoads
Overland Park, KS
(An edited version of this letter appeared in The Kansas City Star on October 13, 2008.)

Depleted Uranium

2007-10-12T17:00:00.000-07:00

This is a 6-minute teaching presentation on the issue of Depleted Uranium and the Stop-DU campaign of Christian Peacemaker Teams. For more information, see http://stop-du.org/, and see http://www.cpt.org/.

(I am sorry that the resolution is so fuzzy -- email me at Phil.Rhoads@gmail.com and I will be glad to present a high-resolution version for your group.)

Idea for Children’s Story

2007-08-31T14:22:00.000-07:00

Peace&Justice Sunday
September 30, 2007

Characters: Choir director — Jan Buerge
Men in Choir — Mike Peters, Bob Carlson, Jim Martin
Inmate in Choir — Victor Torreros (wearing mask)
Sunday School Teacher — Phyllis Carlson
Kids in Class — Emma Campbell, Joel Campbell, Hannah Schrag, Jason Leuenberg, Marina Kaufman, Andrew Moore, Jacob Kaufman, etc.
Police Officer — Phil Rhoads

Preparation: Children to make wadded-up paper balls, put equally into 2 buckets. One bucket will be for the Police Officer and one for the Inmate in the Choir.

Introduction: Phil will ask the Children if they know any of the sayings of Jesus. If no one can think of any, Phil will give examples, like “I was hungry and you gave me (food), I thirsty and you gave me (something to drink), I was a stranger and you (welcomed me), I was naked and gave me (clothing), I was sick and you (took care of me), I was in prison and you (visited me).” Phil will ask the Children if they know who Paul was and if they know any of Paul’s sayings. Phil will suggest, “if your enemies are hungry, (feed them), if they are thirsty, give them (something to drink).” Phil will explain to Children that today we are going to try to imagine what Jesus meant when he said to “Love Your Neighbor” and “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy,’ but I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”

Scene 1: Children sit on floor of sanctuary facing the altar. Choir lines up on the podium facing the congregation. Choir director and choir pantomime directing and singing. Recorded music from East Hill Singers (“Holy, Holy, Holy”) plays from sound system.

Scene 2: Children sit on podium around their Sunday School Teacher who is on a chair. Inmate enters from off-stage with his bucket of paper balls. He throws paper balls at children and the teacher. Anyone hit with a paper ball pretends to be wounded. Choir director enters from off-stage and observes with horror what is happening and runs for help. Police Officer enteres from off-stage with his bucket of paper balls. He holds up one ball and yells menacingly (in pantomime). Choir director and choir members enter from off-stage. Director and one member calmly surround the Police Officer to block him from Inmate. The other two choir members surround the Inmate and block him from the Police Officer and from the Sunday School Class. The Inmate kicks over his bucket and throws down his remaining paper balls on the floor. Everyone stares at the Police Officer and after a pause, he quietly lays down his bucket and his remaining paper balls on the floor. Then everyone except the Police Officer and the Inmate kneel and pray. The Police Officer motions to the Inmate, and they walk together slowly off-stage.

Ending: Jan gives each child and each adult in the skit a set of Peace Stickers to pass among all the members of the Congregation. The Police Officer and Inmate (with mask removed) join in passing out the Peace Stickers.

Issues Poll for Rainbow Peace & Justice

2007-08-31T12:26:00.000-07:00

Peace & Justice Sunday
September 30, 2007

A. Please look over the following list of issue areas (the list is from the MCC web site: http://mcc.org/us/washington/issues/

B. Think of an imaginary budget of time and/or money. Your unit of measure may be hours or dollars.

C. Allocate your budget units among the various choices listed or fill in the blanks with headings you prefer. (Don't worry if the individual budgeted units don't add up to the total indicated in step B.)

D. Add any comments you may like and turn in your completed form to a member of the Rainbow Peace & Justice Committee AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

Thank you!

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Imaginary Budget: ____________ (hours or dollars), allotted as follows:

1 * Civil Rights & Civil Liberties __________
Reforming the USA Patriot Act __________
Hospitality __________
Accompaniment __________
____________________________________________________ __________

2 * Criminal Justice __________
Restorative Justice __________
Victim-Offender Reconciliation __________
Death Penalty __________
Gun Violence Prevention __________
Juvenile Justice __________
Prison reform __________
____________________________________________________ __________

3 * Environment __________
Climate Change __________
Renewable Energy __________
Air & Water Pollution __________
Eco-Justice __________
Water Privatization __________
____________________________________________________ __________

4 * Global Economic Justice __________
Economic Globalization __________
____________________________________________________ __________

5 * HIV/AIDS __________
Global AIDS __________
____________________________________________________ __________

6 * Immigration __________
New Sanctuary Movement __________
____________________________________________________ __________

7 * Militarism __________
Nuclear Weapons Control __________
Depleted Uranium Weapons __________
National Missile Shield __________
Military Recruitment __________
Veterans Affairs __________
____________________________________________________ __________

8 * Peace Issues __________
Iraq War __________
Threats Against Iran __________
____________________________________________________ __________

9 * U.S. Economic Justice __________
Nutrition/Hunger Relief __________
Housing __________
Accesss to Healthcare __________
____________________________________________________ __________

10 * Africa __________
HIV/AIDS __________
Uganda __________
Congo __________
Sudan __________
____________________________________________________ __________

11 * Asia __________
HIV/AIDS __________
Land Mines __________
North Korea __________
Vietnam __________
Laos __________
Burma __________
____________________________________________________ __________

12 * Latin America __________
Colombia __________
Haiti __________
____________________________________________________ __________

13 * Middle East __________
Israeli-Palestinian Conflict __________
Iraq War __________
Threats Against Syria __________
Lebanon __________
Jordan __________
Egypt __________
Sabeel __________
____________________________________________________ __________

14 * Rainbow High School Essay Contest __________
Similar rules to the MCC H.S. Essay Contest (see attached)

15 * Other ______________________________________________ __________
____________________________________________________ __________
____________________________________________________ __________

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Comments______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________

2007 MCC H.S. Essay Contest

2007-08-31T12:23:00.000-07:00

http://mcc.org/us/washington/programs/essays/2007/

Purpose

To promote church-wide awareness of significant public policy issues by highlighting Mennonite and Brethren in Christ (BIC) youth perspectives
To promote youth understanding of the relationship of faith to public policy
To promote greater awareness of the work of MCC’s Washington Office and expand the base of Mennonite/BIC policy advocates

Guidelines

Contest is open to all Mennonite and Brethren in Christ youth of high school age in private or public schools, and to all youth who attend Mennonite high schools.
Immediate family members of current MCC staff or board members are not eligible for the contest.
Essays should be 1,500 - 2,000 words in length, typewritten and double-spaced. Essays must be on one of the four listed topics.
Each student may submit only one essay. Please keep an electronic copy of your essay.
A list of resources is provided with each essay topic.
Essays must be postmarked by November 30, 2007 and submitted to the nearest MCC U.S. regional office.
Each region will submit the top three essays to the MCC Washington Office for selection of the winners.
Prizes will be awarded as follows: 1st place essay $500; 2nd place $250 and 3rd place $100
The MCC Washington Office will announce winners by February 8, 2008.
Entries will be judged on content (demonstrated understanding of the issues), clarity (writing style) and creativity (imaginative and thoughtful policy positions).
Portions of the winning essays will be published in the Washington Memo.

2007 Topics

Sudan: How Should Christians Respond to Violent Conflict?

http://mcc.org/us/washington/programs/essays/2007/sudan.html

Crime & Justice: Restorative Justice v. Retributive Justice: Should Christians Take a Side?

http://mcc.org/us/washington/programs/essays/2007/crime.html

Economic Justice & Immigration: How should Christians respond to U.S. trade policy in light of its direct connection with immigration to the United States?

http://mcc.org/us/washington/programs/essays/2007/economic.html

Faith & Politics: Faith, Values and Voting: Christians and the 2008 Elections

http://mcc.org/us/washington/programs/essays/2007/faithpol.html

MCC Regional Offices
Entries must be postmarked by November 30, 2007 and submitted to nearest MCC office:

MCC Central States
121 East 30th Street
PO Box 235
North Newton, KS, 67117
(316) 283-2720

~ ~ ~

2006 Essay Contest Winners

First Place
“Have Dominion Over the Earth”
http://mcc.org/us/washington/programs/essays/2006/first.html

Matt Thomas, Bethany Christian High School (Goshen, IN)

“God gave us these things to use. After the last tree is felled, Christ will come back.” James Watt made this famous statement regarding the use of natural resources. This Christian belief is erroneous and . . .

~ ~ ~

Second Place

The Heavens Declare the Glory of God
http://mcc.org/us/washington/programs/essays/2006/second.html

Meg Kennell, Bethany Christian High School (Goshen, IN)

In the beginning, there was an endless void -- a ceaseless expanse of emptiness, a vacuum devoid of any living creature. And then God spoke. . . . But God took the risk of untying the puppet strings . . .

~ ~ ~

Third Place (Tie)

A Poverty Draft vs. Reinstatement of the Draft: Solving the Issue of Unjust Military Recruiting
http://mcc.org/us/washington/programs/essays/2006/thirda.html

Rachel Lanctot, Bethany Christian High School (Goshen, IN)

It is a common practice for Mennonites to view certain issues dealing with war or violence from a strictly pacifist mindset. . . . However, when it comes to specific issues . . .

~ ~ ~

Immigration and the American Border Policy: A Christian Response
http://mcc.org/us/washington/programs/essays/2006/thirdb.html

Hannah Roth, Bethany Christian High School (Goshen, IN)

In an age when millions of people celebrate Diversity Day as a national holiday and recognize the March on Washington as an honorable moment in history, it seems incongruous that the growing number of immigrants to the United States continue to face animosity. Today, immigration is near the top . . .

~ ~ ~

Knowing too much

2007-03-07T13:53:00.000-08:00

Working as a volunteer with inmates at a prison, sometimes it's best to not know too much. You know they are in prison, but you don't know what they did or what were the circumstances. You can just accept them at face value. No labels except they are in prison.

As you get to know each other through your volunteer organization, in my case, a men's chorus, you begin to form an image of each person based on your own personal interaction with them. Are they serious, are they always joking around, are they distant, are they too personal, etc.

Sometimes someone tells you more than you want to hear. Details about their mental health, episodes from their childhood, a vague or vivid description of their crime. What do you do with this information?

You are not trained as a priest or a counselor. You can not say, "Your sins are forgiven. Do this for penance. Go and sin no more." You can not say, "How did you feel when . . . ? Can you forgive yourself and move on with your life?"

Now a label forms in your mind. You have an easy way to describe your inmate: a bank robber, an alcoholic, a drug addict, a wife abuser, a murderer, a pedophile, a con artist, etc.

Can you ever go back and relate to your inmate as a human being, now that you have this label in your head? Must you move on to a new inmate, one you don't know as well?

Why can a little knowledge be such a dangerous thing?

Sometimes I think I would like to stay in a safe, naive, non-judgmental place. Jesus said, "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven" (Luke 6:37) and "I was in prison and you visited me" (Mt. 25:36).

But now I know too much. I need to grow into this knowledge and learn what to do with it.

Resiliency building and Peace building

2007-02-25T14:40:00.000-08:00

Last week on NPR Morning Edition, there was a series of interviews with Stephen Flynn, author of the new book, The Edge of Disaster: Rebuilding a Resilient Nation. His focus on preparing for the aftermath of a disaster, be it another Katrina, or another 9/11, made me think about the philosophy and theology behind the Mennonite Disaster Service (and the Church of the Brethren Disaster Response, and the Presbyterian Disaster Assistance, etc.).

Flynn’s approach is realistic, in that not all disasters are preventable, such as Katrina, and to put all our hopes in preemptive wars to protect us from another 9/11 (“fight them there so we don’t have to fight them here”) is misguided. As a pacifist, I would like to promote all the arguments against war, but it had not occurred to me that building resilience from disaster is a valid form of peace building, as well.

When we consider the links of Global Warming, Climate Change, economic development, fossil fuel consumption, etc., we are conscious of human activities which may have contributed to the intensity of Hurricane Katrina. And our neglect of the New Orleans levies, and a workable evacuation plan, exacerbated the loss of life and property from Katrina. So resiliency alone should not be our sole focus. Prevention has its place, in all things, as in using seat belts and driving sensibly, but when accidents happen, we need emergency rooms, ambulances, blood banks, etc.

Just because we have hospitals and ER’s, can we ignore driver education, stop enforcing speed limits, eliminate helmet laws, etc.? By the same token, just because we build our resiliency for another Katrina or another 9/11, can we stop working for Global Cooling, or withdraw from the United Nations, or (this is hard for me to consider) unilaterally disarm?

Christian pacifists by definition probably believe in disarmament, and even most would acknowledge the consistency of unilateral disarmament with Christ’s example and teachings. But just as most Christian pacifists oppose capital punishment, even though Christ himself submitted to it, it may be argued that maintaining a military for self-defense is a valid method for ensuring resiliency of the nation. To the extent that Christ’s teachings are pragmatic more than dogmatic, Christian pacifists may follow his example.

I am afraid my thinking about disarmament is still a little muddled, but I do think I have a clear idea about resiliency and printing. What do we have available if the internet and phone lines and radio/TV are disabled for a time? We might need to revert to an earlier technology for communication: printing. And what if the chemical industry is shut down, and the chemicals needed for modern offset printing are not available? We still have letterpress printing, which dates to Gutenberg in the 15th century and before. So the 20th century Heidelberg letterpress which I have in my garage, is my contribution to resiliency and available for use in certain future disasters. It would be nice to retrofit it for manual operation in case electricity is not available, but it can be used as is with a person simply turning the flywheel by hand. I have only a finite amount of paper and ink, but other printers (and offices with paper for copy machines) could be called on as sources for paper and ink.

Along this same line, we may think of earlier technologies as a general source for resiliency for many services and goods. The tools and knowledge for these earlier technologies need to be preserved. This, too, is resiliency building and thereby peace building.

Post-Traumatic Stress and Depleted Uranium

2007-02-08T11:45:00.000-08:00

Is there such a thing as Pre-Traumatic Non-Stress?

If we suspect the judgment of people who have experienced trauma, shouldn’t we also question those who have led a sheltered life?

Those who advocate for the use of force, who believe in the value of the death penalty, who believe that “sparing the rod spoils the child,” who having been victims of child abuse become child abusers themselves as adults, etc. — isn’t their judgment suspect by those of us who benefitted from a sheltered childhood and adulthood?

And likewise, those who advocate for non-violence, who oppose the death penalty, who believe in “time out” instead of spanking, who have never suffered abuse or witnessed it and whose relationships with other human beings are always peaceful and wholesome, etc. — isn’t their judgment suspect by the rest of society?

The point is, what is the ideal background and experience that confers wisdom and sound judgment on a person? We think we know what first-hand experiences we should avoid — child abuse, incest, kidnapping, rape, warfare, torture, auto accidents, plane crashes, fire, hurricanes, floods, earth quakes, etc. People that survive these traumas may be “damaged” and have impaired judgment the rest of their lives.

But doesn’t having been sheltered from everything make for naivete´? Can’t one be accused of “ivory tower” idealism and easily be dismissed from serious discussions about crime and punishment, ware and peace, deterrence and disarmament, negotiation and preconditions, regulations and privatization. Can a pacifist be taken seriously who objects to a particular weapon system? Can a recovering alcoholic have a legitimate opinion about prohibitionism? Can a gay person’s opinion about gay marriage carry weight with straight people?

I’m really interested in the impulse toward pacifism, and wonder if there is a peculiar environment which produces pacifists (like there may be which produces alcoholics or gays) which makes us discount their opinions. Do we say to ourselves, they can believe that way because they have the luxury of never having to defend themselves from a bully when they were growing up, or their fathers and uncles were never in the military, or their own experience in the military gave them post-traumatic stress, etc. We can always explain away why their opinion differs from ours, but can we say that we are right and they are wrong?

Trying to psychoanalyze those with whom we disagree can be an endless exercise of self-assurance, but what if we slip into analyzing ourselves? Don’t we see the same gaps or traumas in our own lives? Don’t we see why it looks suspicious to outsiders that we advocate something because it fits our experience and our desire for self-validation?

If we come from a background of pacifism and we oppose the use of depleted uranium in weapons, aren’t we immediately suspect as pacifists that, of course, we oppose all weapons anyway? Why would any “neutral” person take us seriously? But wouldn’t a neutral person admit that there may be “good” weapons and “bad” weapons, that even in warfare, there could be such things as “war crimes”? I think this neutral person would listen to the arguments, consider the facts, hear “both” sides, and make a neutral judgment.

It may be that advocates for a particular policy may be partisan and committed to their conclusions and shaped by their backgrounds and experiences (or from being sheltered from some experiences). And advocates for a different policy may be driven by selfish reasons, business or career reasons, desire for revenge, hatred for the “enemy,” etc. Still a neutral observer could sort this all out, and make a judgment on sheerly pragmatic grounds.

Seattle, in Heather & Barb's house

2003-03-21T22:00:00.000-08:00

The war has begun, and the U.S. fired the "first shot," actually, cruise missiles, in an attempt to "decapitate" Sadam Hussein and the leadership of his regime.

People at the rally last night here in Seattle compared it to the "days of infamy" - September 1, 1939 (Hitler's attack on Poland), December 7, 1941 (Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor), and March 19, 2003 (the U.S. attack on Iraq).

Seattle has seven days of protests scheduled, as possibly other cities have also. We will be glad to be back in K.C. to meet with our friends and join with them in our local protests. It is inspiring to see all the anti-war people at the rallies, but it is discouraging to hear the news that the war is continuing and in all likelihood will continue until complete victory by the stronger side.

What are realistic hopes for our side? That civilian casualties will be kept to a minimum, that acts of gratuitous violence will not be committed by our side, that world opinion will keep our leaders in check, that future pre-emptive wars will be outlawed and that neither George W. nor any future president will ever commit a pre-emptive strike again. To hope that this war is stopped before total victory is probably too much to hope, but these lesser goals are still worth striving for, and well-attended protests will help achieve these "realistic" goals.

Thoughts on Spring Break, 2003

2003-03-17T15:30:00.000-08:00

3/17/03 · 10:22 AM (CST)
To Congressman Dennis Moore,
Third district, Kansas

Dear Dennis,

I write to you today as my congressman and my friend since 1976. (I know you remember coming to my wedding to Marsha Myers in November, 1977).

Today my heart is very heavy that our government is about to launch missiles and bombs at Iraq, and attempt our first pre-emptive war.

I ask you to do all you can to oppose this action, and to support all efforts to stop it.

If a bill is introduced to impeach the president, I urge you to co-sponsor such a bill, to support it and to explain to the 3rd district constituents why this drastic step is necessary.

Please come to the peace rallies in our district and in Kansas City, Missouri. Hold town meetings to let experts and common citizens speak out about the illegality of this war. Let historians give us the context of pre-emptive violence and war, and the high ideals of America which are being eroded by this action.

Sincerely,

Phil Rhoads
March 17, 2003

All news broadcasts point to an imminent invasion of Iraq by US.

Here in Eugene, Oregon, we are scheduled to meet with the admissions director for "Duck Days" for Freddy to explore the possibility of enrolling at U of O for next year.

It seems almost surreal to have life continue as "business as usual" with talk of war so imminent.

I know that all communities have contingency plans for rallies and vigils on the day of the attack, and for the days following. But I know that some spontaneous actions will also occur - possibly student strikes, labor union strikes, civil disobedience of various types. And I hope there will be lawsuits filed with US courts to force the Executive Branch to get authority from the Legislative Branch (official declaration of war). And I hope that lawsuits will be filed with the World Court regarding war crimes against the US. And I hope that momentum will build for the impeachment of the president.

But the suffering of innocents in Iraq (caused by US forces), and possibly of innocents in America (caused by terrorists) will be on the conscience of all Americans who have been attending anti-war rallies all these months. Also the suffering of "enemy combatants" and US combatants will be a heavy weight on all of us, to the extent Jesus commanded us to "love our enemies."

My generation lived through the Viet Nam war as young adults, and learned to distrust our government and our "liberal" instincts to use force in defense of "democracy" against communism. Our fears of a world-wide conspiracy to take over the world on the part of communism led us to attempt to defeat an ideology with force in SE Asia. This was pre-emptive in the sense that communism was half a world away and not threatening our borders, but only our "interests."

Now we are afraid of terrorists, especially Muslim fundamentalists, who have been blamed for the suicide attacks on 9/11. And our fear has extended to Iraq who might supply such terrorists with weapons of mass destruction, even though only box cutters were used by the suicide terrorists.

Our fears, in short, have continued from Viet Nam until now, and our resort to force is our only respected method of response.

That we also like to call ourselves a Christian nation is so ironic, from a Christian pacifist's perspective, because we can find no parallel in Jesus life or teachings in relation to the Jewish people subjugated by the Roman Empire. Jesus specifically repudiated the Zealots of his day, and admonished Peter who used a sword to cut off the ear of a Roman soldier who was in the group that arrested Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane. Jesus healed the soldier's ear, as his last miracle before his crucifixion.

Janis Joplin's famous song, "Me and Bobby McGee" has a line about freedom meaning not having anything left to lose may be a lesson to us. We have so much material wealth as a nation that we can't contemplate not getting our way in the world. We don't have the freedom to be weak. It is dangerous to our souls to be so wealthy and powerful. We are like the Roman Empire of Jesus time, with very much to lose.

One Month "Anniversary"

2001-10-11T15:30:00.000-07:00

Mom is flying to San Diego this morning. Life in many ways is "back to normal." It just proves how we can mentally adjust ourselves to almost anything. We in Kansas City are not personally affected like people in New York or in Kabul. Those of us not in the reserves don't even think about being called to active duty. Even those who fly just have to pack differently and arrive for check-in an hour earlier.

Will this whole episode even be a "learning experience" for most of us? I am afraid that the potential lessons of being attacked by extremists who hate our "system" and/or our values and/or our behavior will be lost in the shuffle. Our main attention is on self-defense, closely followed by apprehending the culprits and accomplices, and finally by simple revenge.

Understanding what could drive people to hate us so much is barely attempted.

Tomorrow, October 12, will be the first Friday prayers for Muslims since we launched our military response against Afghanistan. There is much concern that Pakistani Muslims, sympathetic to the Taliban and to Osama Ben Laden, will institute violent protests in Pakistan against the recent positioning of US troops in their country. We can't just write these protestors off as "extremists" or as "demented." We should try to understand their sentiments and examine our motives.

If we just operate out of self-defense with a narrow definition, we will resort to the old tried-and-true method of proving to the "world" that might makes right. We have the most might, and what we say is right.

A broader definition of self-defense would include changing our behavior and our policies that provoke violent reactions from other people in the world. If we don't take these additional steps, we will undoubtedly face a resurgence of anti-US violence in the future.

The Day After our Bombing of Afghanistan

2001-10-08T15:32:00.000-07:00

We should have known it would happen sooner or later, but news came as a shock after church on Sunday. Bombing started at 11:30 AM Kansas City time, just while we were celebrating World Wide Communion Sunday. What can I say?

Instant polls show that 90% of Americans approve of the bombing. I am in the bottom (or top?) 10%. Osama Ben Laden calls us "infidels," supposedly because we are not Muslim. But as Christians can we say that we are really respecting the Sabbath to choose this day to drop our bombs? Maybe it had more to do with our capitalism than our Christianity, to choose Sunday rather than Monday to disrupt American life with hours of news broadcasts and press conferences and commentaries. Today we can get back to work to keep the economy humming.
Already we are being prepared (propagandized) that if there is a terrorist action, it won't really be in response to our attack: it must have already been in the works, planned weeks and months, even years, ago. As if that will make us feel more secure!

News photos of Sunday's football games show spectators holding "revenge" signs. How much can that sentiment go to explain our decision to bomb? There is a very prevalent attitude in American culture that is unchristian, that believes in the principle of an eye-for-an-eye, that ignores Christ's teachings to "Love thy neighbor" and "Love thine enemies." The fact that we have abandoned almost entirely one of the Ten Commandments to rest on the Sabbath seems so much more trivial than this.

Are we then Infidels? Is it really our punishment to feel insecurity? Are the terrorists merely delivering God's message to us?

Thirteen Days Out

2001-09-24T15:33:00.000-07:00

Flags are back to full staff. Troops are being moved closer to Afghanistan. Options are being discussed.

My mind is going back to December, 1941, after Pearl Harbor. What was life like then, in Kansas City? By November, 1943, I was born, and I received letters from my parents' friends and relatives around the country. My birth was announced in our church bulletin, along with this notice, "Lest we Forget . . ." which listed two servicemen from our congregation and their addresses. It had become a routine item by then, to encourage cards and letters from church members.

Will our lives become routine again like this again someday? The difference is that Pearl Harbor was not a terrorist attack on the contiguous 48 states. It was by a known enemy, and even though we may have overreacted by rounding up all residents in the U.S. with Japanese ancestry, we came to feel safe in our own borders, at least in Kansas City, far from any coast.
Will we ever feel safe again? How many days or weeks or months or years will it take for us to be "terror free" before we feel safe enough?

When we deal with more familiar threats - threats of tornadoes, or threats of getting cancer, or threats of being burglarized when we are away from home, or threats of having an automobile accident - we take reasonable precautions that do not really inconvenience our lives and then take our chances. Some of our relatives have died in automobile wreaks, or even playing high school football, or from industrial accidents. Many have died from cancer or heart disease.

Fewer have died in bad storms or from an act of crime.
We live in a state of "constructive denial" just so we can cope with the here and now and not get immobilized by limitless hypothetical threats out there.

Still, right now, not quite two weeks after that tragic day, we are still semi-immobilized. Long range projects are put on hold. All our commitments are "conditional" even if we don't say so out loud.

If even one more terrorist event occurs before Halloween, or before Thanksgiving, or before Christmas, what will happen to our ability to function? It seems so scary that just a few fanatics, showing just a small degree of coordination, could bring such a huge nation to its knees. Even if our army were twice as large, or our nuclear stockpile were ten times as big, we are vulnerable from this kind of disruption.

Where is the fault in this? Would our pioneer forebears have been so vulnerable to the Indians? Would our Minutemen have been so vulnerable to the Red Coats? Or for that matter, would present day Haiti be as vulnerable as the U.S. Our vulnerability may be the result of our advanced "development" wherein we are so interconnected, so dependent on maximum productivity and full capacity of our transportation systems and our communication systems, etc. We are potential victims of our own complexity, our choice to adopt "just in time delivery" on almost every necessity of life.

1941 was a simpler time, more hands-on. My birth in 1943 was announced to my out-of-town relatives by telegram, sent by my father, paid in cash. Their letters of congratulation were sent by airmail. The church bulletin that announced my birth was printed by mimeograph, and the stencil for the mimeograph was cut on a manual typewriter. Letterpress was used to print the front of church bulletins, and the photo of the church was reproduced with an 85-line screen.
What can we give up that will give us more security? Can we give up imported oil? Can we even discuss it? Why should we have to settle for telegrams and manual typewriters, even handwritten letters, and pay extra for airmail?

Our cold war with Russia for so many years seems so comfortable now, in retrospect. We could just have a nice arms race and as long as we were richer, we were sure to win in the end. As long as we could avoid a nuclear war.

Now, we aren't sure that increasing our FBI and our CIA and our INS and our Special Forces and our Rangers and our Seals tenfold or hundredfold will do the job. Maybe it is really a lot simpler: we just allow us all to have concealed weapons, on the ground or in the air. The terrorists won't know who is armed and who isn't! Let's go back to the days of the Wild West, to Wyatt Earp and Gunsmoke. No problem.

The Next Monday

2001-09-17T15:34:00.000-07:00

The New York Stock Exchange reopened today. Every community across the country held special prayer services and memorial services and some held interfaith dialogues with Muslims, Christians and Jews, from late last week through yesterday. The FBI is seeking broader wiretap authority. The military reserves are being called up. There is much "war" talk. Alliances are being announced. The use of ground troops, which has been taboo since Viet Nam, is seriously being discussed. There is much emphasis on defense of U.S. territory, with fighter pilots on high alert, and making routine patrols above Washington, DC, among other places.

The questions now involve how much privacy we must give up to increase our security to an acceptable level. And how much inconvenience we must expect when checking in at an airport. And how much ticket prices must increase to cover the costs of extra security. And how much the economy must suffer because of uncertainty and loss of investment and consumption. Will international trade decrease? If so, will domestic production increase?

All the talk about "evil" and the desire to eliminate it from the world seems very simplistic. I think we can understand this desire and its specific reference to terrorism and more specifically to violent acts against civilians. But what is evil to our side is good to the other side. And likewise, our acts of violence to our enemies may be seen as good to our side. "Good & evil" in the context on one country's legal system is translated into "legal and illegal." We avoid provocative labels like good and evil when we discuss income tax evasion or spouse abuse or even murder. And we believe implicitly in the rule of law to govern rules of evidence and rights of the accused and questions of procedure, etc. We provide for juries of our peers, and appeals to higher courts, etc. It would seem that when dealing with this "terrorist attack" we should avoid loaded language like "evil" and should not seek to build popular support for an attitude of "shooting first and asking questions later." We should look for courts where this case would have standing and follow the legal precedents to bring the accused to "justice."

One commentator has already made a strong case why our "prime suspect" should not be summarily executed or assassinated, but should be tried and convicted and sentenced to life in prison: we do not want him to become a martyr and to thereby give romantic justification to his followers and would be imitators.

The Day After

2001-09-12T15:36:00.000-07:00

School is open. People are going to work. Church services will be held this morning, or at noon, or this evening. The commentators are filling the airways. But most of us are numb, and every once in a while we hear a heart-rending interview with a family member of someone trapped in the debris.

Don't we owe it to one another to pull our own weight and to do our individual jobs to keep things going as smoothly as possible. Those of us not in the affected cities need to work even harder, maybe, to help take up the slack. For instance, if printers in NYC are being interrupted due to commuting problems or untimely delivery of supplies, won't part of their production shift to printers in other cities? Not that we want to profiteer from their hardships, just that we need to help out.

And the economy is so depressed, even before the events of yesterday, and seemingly even more so now and for the foreseeable future. How can we work harder if there is no work to do? Aren't we obligated to "make up" work for ourselves, to help "prime the pumps" and to keep ourselves in practice. When the going gets tough, the tough get going, they say.

September 11, 2001 - A Tragic Day for America

2001-09-11T15:37:00.000-07:00

The unspeakable horrors in today's news from New York and Washington and Pennsylvania have paralyzed America in so many ways, from grounding of all aircraft to businesses being closed to sports events being canceled.

Now we have to figure out what to do next. How can we go on with "business as usual"? How can we behave in front of our kids? How can we laugh or be an audience at a theater or cheer at a sports event? How can we focus our attention on the personal problems of ourselves or our friends? How can we continue working on projects we have started, or make up new projects for ourselves? How can we buy things when we can't work, can't make things or sell things ourselves?

We just want to go to sleep and wake up when the nightmare is over.
But some of us may want revenge. How can anyone oppose them? How can anyone offer forgiveness or pray for our enemies? How can we not defend ourselves? And if the best defense is a strong offense, how can we not invade someone and bomb someone?

Can the Canadians and Mexicans and Germans and British all feel smug in the safety of their countries that only America was attacked today? If the terrorists use only pinpoint accuracy in their attacks, can even we Americans who rarely fly and are not involved in world trade or the defense department and never visit New York or Washington feel safe?

It might be better if the water supply of 10 cities across the world, including at least one in the Midwest of the U.S.A. were attacked, then we could all feel like targets, and band together for our collective security. As it is, some of us can feel lucky and maybe even self-righteous that we could never be targets. We are harmless, unimportant, out-of-harms-way, and we are good people, not selfish, not violent, not powerful.

It will be hard for us to discuss this with one another. Those of us who have a "sure" plan will take over the discussion. There will be little patience for long deliberations, but much pressure for immediate "response." It makes one envious, in a twisted way, of the emergency workers in NY who do not have to think deeply, but can just put all their energy into coping with the crisis.

Thoughts on the deaths of 4 girls

1998-04-29T15:37:00.000-07:00

The death of a 3-year-old girl in KC whose apartment was hit by a run-away mail truck and
the deaths of three teenagers in Blue Valley whose convertible crashed while they were driving to a softball game

News reports from Kansas City this week told of two separate traffic accidents in which young people, in both cases, all female, were killed. The run-away mail truck raised questions about the training and and selection of people we assign the responsibility of driving large trucks in our community, whether they work for the postal service or any other organization. (more)

Also, questions were raised about the design of an off-ramp which channeled traffic toward an apartment building. Many have called for the destruction of the building which has been damaged, so that no future inhabitants will be injured by any future run-away vehicles. But the age of the apartment building and the age of the off-ramp shown in news photos indicates that the apartment building was there first. (more)

We have also been confronted, once again, with the consequences of too much speed and too little care for safety by the 15-year-old girls killed while driving to their softball game. News reports state that the girls in the back seat were sitting on top of the trunk of the Mustang convertible and that the driver was exceeding the speed limit on the 2-lane road. We middle-aged commentators wonder why teenagers never learn from the bad behavior of previous teenagers, and why parents give kids so much freedom when they should know better. (more)

On Assertiveness: Reflections on MLK, Jr.

1998-04-10T15:41:00.000-07:00

On the eve of the 30th anniversary of the assasination of Martin Luther King, Jr. (April 4, 1968), what can we say we have learned from having lived in the same generation and in the same country as this great human being?

For one thing, it does seem to matter that a person speak up for what he/she wants and not leave it to others to read one's mind. If ever one thought that the only kindnesses that are worthwhile are the ones that are freely offered without being asked for or demanded, surely the example of Martin Luther King, Jr., should convince us that the only real goals worth achieving are those that we have worked for and earned.

This is on my mind right now because of a group that I met with Wednesday night (April 1). We discussed the merits of ASSERTIVENESS vs. Passiveness or Aggressiveness. I think that Martin Luther King, Jr., was the quintessential example of assertiveness applied to large social issues.

The devastation from tornadoes in Alabama and the shootings in Arkansas and the crucifixion of Jesus

1998-04-10T15:40:00.000-07:00

News reports from Alabama inform us that many of the destroyed buildings (a school, a fire station, some of the houses) were constructed to withstand winds of 150 mph. This is evidence that the tornadoes that destroyed them must have had winds of at least 200 mph. Other news reports from the weather service indicate that tornadoes average winds from 100 to 300 mph.

One might conclude that the property destruction resulted from builders knowingly or unknowingly choosing to build structures not capable of withstanding the maximum known winds in the area. By economizing on the construction costs, they took a calculated risk of possible destruction. If the relative construction costs were to be made known and the chances of such a storm striking any given structure, most reasonable people would probably choose the cheaper construction costs and take their chances. To the extent that we just did not have enough information when these buildings were constructed, then we could conclude that as science learns more, we will be able to avoid this kind of destruction in the future. But if we already knew enough but chose to build more cheaply, then the destruction of these structures may have been the price of the decisions to use cheaper construction methods.

It was reported that one lineman was killed when a live wire blew over and hit him while he was attempting to restore power to a hospital. He was a victim of the decision of his dispatcher to send him out on emergency repairs while the storm was still active. Whether the hospital in question had back-up power available or was completely without power, we do not know. And whether any patients in the hospital were on critical life support and would die without immediate restoration of power, we do not know. We could conclude that the previous decisions to place patients on life support, and to not have back-up power available for the hospital contributed to the pressure on the dispatcher to send out a lineman to repair live wires during a wind storm. Again, this death may have resulted from too little information available to the right person at the right time, or his life may have been the price of a chain of decisions, some of which were based on relative costs.

Does this line of thinking help us in understanding the shootings in Arkansas? Some people say that these shootings could have been prevented if their parents/neighbors/teachers/classmates/acquaintances had properly observed and reported suspicious signs about the two boys who did the shooting. This implies that we should have a law requiring the reporting of any suspected mental health problems to a "Mental Health Hotline" similar to laws we have about suspected child abuse. And this further implies that we have a Mental Health bureaucracy in place ready to investigate and take action within 24 hours of notification, etc.

Others say that we should have a law restricting persons under 18 from owning or handling guns. Others say that we can selectively protect certain places like schools (or government buildings, e.g. the Oklahoma City Federal Building) with special construction, metal detectors, armed guards, barricades, etc.

There may be many more ideas about how this could have been prevented, but let us assume that these two examples are typical in that they imply that we need ADDITIONAL KNOWLEDGE and must accept ADDITIONAL COSTS to our society to avoid or prevent unwanted events. The fact that we have chosen not to do these things shows that we consider our present state of knowledge inconclusive and/or that these costs are unbearable. The lives of the four school girls and their teacher may be the price we pay to enjoy the kind of society we currently have. If we choose to impose additional costs on ourselves in the future to minimize (eliminate?) these types of shootings, we will test our current definition of Liberty. [One could imagine such a society — be in the Soviet Union during the Cold War, or Huxley's Brave New World or other disutopias.]

Regarding the crucifixion of Jesus, whose death we commemorate today (Good Friday), could one find any parallels in terms of Knowledge and Cost and Liberty?

Traditional Christian doctrine about Free Will and God's Will would explain that the execution of Jesus was inevitable because of man's sinfulness and God's Plan for the salvation of the world. The execution of Jesus is the price God paid to redeem the world. From this viewpoint, no more Knowledge would have made any difference. And the willingness to accept more Costs would not help, either. Finally, neither more nor less Liberty would matter. Thus, we get no guidance from this about how to deal with tornadoes or shootings.

The Christian heresy of anti-Semitism was an attempt to guard against future events like this by purging the world of the "guilty" parties. The intellectual roots of anti-Semitism can be traced to the Passion stories in the New Testament which blamed the Jewish high priests and Jews in general for the execution of Jesus. To the extent that Hitler developed this theory to its ultimate extent in Germany in the 1930's and 1940's, we can see the fallacy of this line of thinking. No matter how high the costs in Liberty and in human life, no utopia could be created. And as a matter of fact, the reverse occurred. The one thing we gained from this experiment is that our Knowledge increased and has cautioned us from proceeding down this path again.

From a secular understanding of Jesus's execution one might advocate the abolishment of Capital Punishment to prevent future events like this. Or if Pilate as representative of an authoritarian government were identified as the problem, then authoritarian governmental structure could be singled out as the basic evil. Democracy or anarchism might be advocated as solutions to avoid similar future executions. From this viewpoint, information and costs would make a difference in helping guide our decisions. Whether to increase or decrease our Liberty, or to manage it in a particular way, would in theory, make a difference.

Thinking in this way about the death of Jesus is new to me, and I imagine to many of us. If it doesn't make sense to think about Jesus in relation to tornadoes or shootings, then is it worth thinking about tragedies of any kind?

We have the expression, "not to die in vain." We hope that the victims of the tornadoes and the school girls and teacher in Arkansas have not died in vain. We also hope and believe that Jesus did not die in vain. But this implies that we do something to learn from their deaths and to make changes that will be better for humankind in the future. And the question remains, what have we learned, and what can we do to learn more?