Am I a right winger?

Skimming the articles, you might think I am. Please, friends, read more thoroughly, or at least leave questions, comments and criticisms. (Anything up to and perhaps including ”Go back to Nazi Germany” is welcome, really!) I believe in progressive taxation, not the flat tax. And, in spite of his scr*wing around, I think Bill Clinton was a pretty good President. I oppose overseas wars. I was a vehement critic of the Contra War in the 1980's, and still see that as the biggest blot on the Reagan Era. Wait, you say, wasn't the Reagan Era a huge, undifferentiated blot of right wing-ism, thus PROVING that joyfulreality should be RightWingTotality instead?! Gotcha, you say. I ask: have you noticed that Reagan has been kindly or at least respectfully spoken of by every Democratic Presidential candidate for decades? Are they sincere? If not, then you think Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and Barack Obama are liars.*(see note) That hardly makes you a loyal Democrat. If you are an extreme left winger, of course, you will have no problem criticizing any of these as “not liberal enough” But if you think 49 states were wrong in re-electing Reagan in 1984, then might I suggest that you think Americans are fools? Or perhaps you think as this Mondale voter thought way back then, that America was just fooled. Either way, it is dangerous ground on which you stand.
I agree with Susan B. Anthony that abortion is merely another tool by which men abuse women! Check it out—she was an abortion opponent. Does my agreement with her make me a right winger? Think about it! That's what this blog is about, I think ;-)
Blessings,
Witness For Peace (another blogging name of mine)
PS I didn't follow Obama closely enough to recall what he said about Reagan. But he clearly stated that he thinks marriage is between a man and a woman. He was just more tentative and apologetic about it. So, you think he was lying and is in fact is in favor of creating an entirely new, inalienable right to CHOOSE THE SEX of your marriage partners? You're calling a popular President a liar? You gotta choose, which is he? I believe in gay rights, very strongly. They should have, and already have, the same rights as everyone else. I think they, and polygamists, and all of us, should recognize the right of LEGISLATURES to determine the number of spouses we can have, their minimum age, degree of consanguinity, and yes, their sex. Which one of these limitations violates an inalienable right to marriage? They ALL do; it is not inalienable; it is regulated. Regulated not by unaccountable “justices” (many of whom are merely robed activists) but by elected officials in a democracy. Those who are accountable to voters are the ones who should decide.
When GLBT lobbyists (also unelected and unaccountable) chose to make the redefinition of marriage a “rights” issue, the ground for compromise was fatally undermined. I either agree with you completely, or I'm a despicable bigot. Go ahead, post my name on the Internet so people can spit on me!

Beware of what you wish for

Well, I'm back from Digestive Disease Week, and rather than transgastric drainage of pancreatic cysts, which I know nothing about, I'm thinking about the wisdom embedded in certain cliches and sayings, like: "What's the worst that could happen?"
Well, I missed my stop, so this train could drop me off in a bad neighborhood where I'll be robbed, mugged and murdered. My flesh will be devoured by rats and my bones gnawed by stray dogs. There will be nothing left except this name badge that says I was at http://www.ddw.org/ and took a wrong turn somewhere! I'll be digested!
And the best? Well, instead of simply riding the train to Indiana and then back to my stop, maybe someone will rescue me! I could beg a ride from my uncle, and both of us will spend all evening going nowhere, instead of just me. In other words, my rescue plan wasn't much better than just staying on the train, and I didn't trouble my uncle.
So, what happens when we get what we want? She falls in love with me, we carry on a long distance romance, and I have less time for my calling and my two adorable kids. "Uhh, that's your GOOD scenario?" Maybe what I already have is really good! This train is safe, God is taking me to just the right place, so don't whine about the detours! Hallelujah anyone?

Abortion and Genocide

from a thread comparing abortion today with the violence in the Old Testament:
http://blog.sojo.net/2009/05/21/discovering-common-ground/?dsq=9946314#comment-9946314
I don't think Hammerud or I are anywhere close to saying slaughter is something to be emulated today "in some circumstances". While Old Testament faith, like Gideon's, is clearly to be desired, the Holy Spirit empowers us to use Gideon-like faith in OUR situation, on this side of the Cross, in the third millennium, not to see how many soldiers we can cause to be slaughtered in one day. As for justifying it, I'm saying it's a mystery to me, while Hammerud seems to be throwing out one or the other of the various less than satisfactory explanations of “Why in the world did God command that?!” But command it He did! Am I to judge God? It is certainly OK for you and me to scratch our heads and say “I don't get it” and to ask God why He did so, either now or in Heaven!

Suffering and Education

I'm a wimp when it comes to pain—physical and mental. I won't bore you with examples. How can we avoid pain? Education, perhaps: Which sports are the most likely to cause painful injuries? Should I look both ways before crossing the street? [umm, where I live, that's a lifestyle choice, by the way—last week, while driving slowly and quietly through a residential area, a man stepped out between parked cars in front of me on a diagonal path, such that even his peripheral vision had no chance of including me. He finally noticed my car after I slammed on the brakes, and cast me an annoyed (or was it bored) look, as if I had no business driving on the street he intended to wander across. Perhaps I should commend his chivalry, as he took this risk rather than his wife/partner/girlfriend/sister/business associate/?, who was following him at a safe distance. I guess she's the smart one!] Should I smoke to look cool, taking on the distant risk of spending the last years of my life struggling desperately to breathe against my emphysema? Education is great, and answers all of the above questions rather definitively. I've been to grade school, middle school [ugh], high school, college, and even what some folks call a rather distinguished graduate school [see above comment about middle school.] More questions: what do my chromosomes say about the kind of children I might have? Amniocentesis anyone? Fetoscopy? Wow, I can avoid the pain of spending my life tending a dying child; just educate me! Now, I do not have a special needs child, and it is a dreadful prospect, this pain-avoider admits it. Check out www.pwsausa.org for some difficult yet hopeful details on the child two of my friends are raising. So, education will make sure Dean will never be taunted in school, right? Well, maybe—I'm an optimist. But kids also know that kids who are different can be aborted before they ever take up space in a classroom. For every adult who genuinely tries to appreciate human differences, there are a score who are “glad it's not me” or, worse still, wonder why the stupid parents didn't use amniocentesis to, well, nip this problem in the bud! Kids aren't stupid—they pick up these cues from adults. And the do-gooders that inevitably populate groups like my school's “Respect for Human Differences” committee may be sincere, but can they be effective? How many Prader-Willi babies and children are featured in Gap commercials? Abercrombie? American Eagle? Let's see, clothing stores and movie studios spend billions every year to promote “cool.” The Respect for Human Differences committee has a budget of, oh, a few hundred dollars—is that going to outweigh Hollywood and Madison Ave.? Now, there is common grace for every human of every religion. Some things are just wrong, and people know it. So there is a chance that the well-meaning RfHD folks will strike that cord of of grace and do some good. But they are fighting against original sin. Sadly, most RfHD committees are dominated by folks who deny sin, and have a totally unrealistic view of the power of education. In fact, they may be engaging in mis-education in that they promote lifestyle choices as genetic conditions. Or they may promote innate conditions as neutral or positive that are, in their own way, as damaging and destructive as Prader-Willi Syndrome. So, what makes my friend's child valuable? What makes those with poor lifestyle choices valuable? All are made in the image of God. Yes, that comes under “education”—sort of—but it's not a tenet of the ruling elites, so it won't be featured in any educational presentation by the “Respect for Human Differences” committee. And in the background is the not-so-subtle roar of “beautiful is better” “cool is cool” and “life begins when the baby is wanted.” Unwanted babies don't leave the hospital in car carriers festooned with balloons; they leave in medical waste containers.

More or less Priceless

In an online forum, I was taken to task vigorously for my initial posting, pointing to Planned Parenthood's origin in the eugenics movement. Finally, neuro_nurse asked what Planned Parenthood does that I oppose [not that whether or not I personally oppose something is particularly important]
Let me tell you a story first, from one of the many missionaries to Haiti supported by our church over the years. Her biggest challenge in preventing “risk taking” behavior among young women in Haiti is convincing them their life is worth preserving from the danger of AIDS! If your life is of little value, why not have fun while you can? How profoundly different from my friend's attitude is the raison d'etre of Planned Parenthood—their consistent purpose year in and year out is to measure the value of individual lives, created in the image of God, and to prolong or terminate that life based on a scale of worth that is inimical to my values and I suspect to yours as well. Nothing has changed except the increasing sophistication of their slogans. The main value that is placed on an unborn life is simply “is this baby wanted” and that, of course, correlates with everything BUT that child's value in the eyes of God. I'm glad rich parents decorate nurseries for their wanted babies, and pass around “baby's first picture” even if it's just an ultrasound. But the unplanned pregnancy looks the same to the baby whether it's wanted or not. We're told there will be less suffering if these lower class babies are “terminated”—that is, there is no intrinsic worth in the baby or ultimately in anyone. So the link to decades past is clear, with no repentance. “Every child a wanted child” “Family Planning” are just better slogans. So that's what I don't like about them—they seem to have fooled many well meaning folks, including you.
Blessings for peace, SHALOM—God's wholeness for all of his creation,
Witness_for_Peace
http://blog.sojo.net/2009/05/18/thoughts-on-obamas-notre-dame-address/#comment-9578078

Chubby cheeks or the horrible alternative

Suppose I am a female living inside another female's uterus in January 2009. Whether I end this year wearing a diaper and having my chubby cheeks kissed and nuzzled, or in a landfill having been incinerated as medical waste depends largely on how much money my mother and her family have. This seems a horrible case of injustice, yet most of the Robed Emperors don't allow themselves to look at it that way. It's not a matter of law or courts or legislatures even, it's whether I am “wanted.” If today I am unwanted, I can still end up the year being nuzzled by a family unrelated to my birth mom, bless her heart, through the gift of adoption.

The Radical Middle

Isn't there a Beatles song about dreaming about....please enlighten me with a comment, anonymous or otherwise. Anyway, my dream is buried in this exchange from sojourners
http://www.sojo.net/blog/godspolitics/2009/01/16/look-whos-praying-at-the-inauguration/?disqus_reply=5378002

A frequent problem is the oppressed becoming the oppressor. By framing gay issues as civil rights issues rather than religious disagreements, the trends you mention could well end up with me being despised as a bigot, much as many people now look down on a good 'ole boy with a Confederate flag on his pickup(i.e. assuming he's a racist). Legally, a sermon on the Ten Commandments could be viewed by a court sympathetic to GLBT issues as an incitement for a drunk to beat up a gay person in a bar nearby that evening. If such a crime actually occurred, the victim could sue and compel the pastor/church to spend a fortune on a legal defense. In California a fertility clinic was successfully sued for referring a lesbian couple to a different clinic for religious reasons. Also in California, people are being denied their right to vote in citizen petitions. So as fervently as I want you to be physically safe, I don't support much of what is now occurring. Your psychological well-being is important, but freedom and the democratic process are important to the nation as a whole.
A plea for Christians to work for the physical safety of GLBT folk overseas even as we oppose gay marriage here in the US for religious reasons. This is the sort of radical middle thing that should appeal to Sojourners Magazine; unfortunately they are more just the Christian left these days. Which is their right, of course, but a disappointment to folks like me who were big fans of Jim Wallis back in the 1980's

I would also like to affirm JamesM: "So many people dehumanize others and think that that is what they are called to do. Maybe if they had a real heart-to-heart with people who have experienced what you have, they would change their tune."///More on hate crimes:Perhaps you[a person I'm debating on sojo.net] support hate crimes legislation for honorable reasons. I oppose it from the reasons given by this Jewish letter writer, published in response to Cornel West: September 29, 2007
CORNEL WEST and Sylvia Rhue's arguments about hate crimes legislation border on hatred itself, such as when they accuse people who oppose this legislation as being guilty of "falsehoods and bigotry" ("Fabricated fears about hate crimes legislation," Op-ed, Sept. 25).
Hate crimes legislation is unnecessary. A crime is a crime. Hate is a motive. Making a motive a crime is legislating thought. Matthew Shepard was murdered. That was the crime. Perhaps hatred of homosexuals was the motive. Every crime has a motive. Greed can cause theft. Jealousy can cause people to kill the lovers of their mates. Anger can lead to assault and battery. Anger, jealousy, and greed are not crimes. Assault and battery, murder, and theft are crimes. Hate also should not be a crime. We need to keep our senses, even if we don't like the reason that someone commits a crime.
B. M. C.