September 12, 2007
Early Thoughts on 2008
It’s after Labor Day, and I think every serious candidate who is going to get in is in; so it may be time to begin writing more about 2008. At least today.
As a conservative pragmatist, evangelical Christian, and an increasingly rare supporter of President Bush, what do I want in the next president?
I want sound conservative policy that seeks to limit the role of government, accentuates the value of personal accountability and responsibility, recognizes the values of the free market, and respects the role of spiritually infused moral character in the maintenance of a civil society--and in forging a balance between order and freedom.
One Nation, Speaking English
I want the president to seek to maintain the values and identity of America by addressing the central issue of domestic policy, the control of national borders, immigration—legal and illegal—and the return of the melting pot, not a cultural Balkanization that destroys nationhood. Making English the national language would be a nice touch, and important to this goal.
Keep Battling Jihadism
The new president must recognize that the central international issue is the isolation and discrediting of radical Islam and jihadism, and the defeat of the terrorists that emerge. My president should acknowledge that Iraq is a necessary part of that battle.
The president cannot shrink at the possibility that we must take solid, even military action, against Iran, which is clearly toxic and dangerous and the leading sponsor of international terrorism. We must show Iran strength; they think we are weak.
Total Life Ethic
I want the president to have a total life ethic. For me that starts with persuading people to stop choosing abortion. That is the most important priority, and it is separate from our need to reverse Roe v Wade, which I also believe needs to be done.
(Could just one national Democratic candidate mount a campaign to stop women from choosing abortions? The right to choose has to include the right to choose life. That would be a start; but no one has staked out that ground).
I believe part of a total life ethic is raising the standard for application of the death penalty. I like Romney’s standard of “no doubt” on death penalty, which I have written on.
We need to assure a healthy life for our children by reversing environmental degradation and resulting climate change. My favorite candidate will stop ignoring sound and widely accepted science--the overwhelming proof that human-induced global warming is a problem. Just what the solution should be can be debated; but to deny that it is a problem means the candidate is playing to what he thinks the based wants to hear; pure and simple. The Republicans need to talk more about climate; it is hard to discern their opinions, although from what I’ve seen, Guiliani and Huckabee seem the most open to finding solutions.
Marriage is the Sacred Union of a Man and Woman
I think the president should lead the nation to assure that marriage is protected as the sacred bonding of a man and woman, grounded in faith, history, tradition, all that we have known for all time.
But I also would support states’ rights to establish civil unions between any two consenting adults of any gender. If we give two homosexuals special rights in a civil union, however, we need to also provide them to two heterosexual men who establish households, or a man and woman who set up a household but don’t marry (perhaps aren’t even sleeping together). It provides some benefit to those who in some way establish a stable household.
Democrats Fail on Almost Every Measure
None of the Democrats qualify because they’ve all taken the wrong position on Iraq and on abortion.
On the Republicans
I don’t care if Romney is Mormon. I just want him to be more human. His reaction to the Larry Craig incident was heartless; he feels like a Dukakis automan at times. Is it the Massachusetts air? I like his business sense and his innovation. He just needs to loosen up and be real.
I was a supporter of John McCain in 2000 He is an American hero; I like his candor and passion; I know all of the conservative complaints. I just think he is too old. The presidency is too hard; it makes young men old; it makes old men senile.
There is something very attractive about Guiliani’s strength and honesty. I agree with him on far fewer issues than most of the others, but I feel like he’d be a good president.
Fred Thompson looks like the president of the United States, and I like that he has been in the D.C. trenches as counsel to the Watergate committee. I like that he’s shown partisan independence enough to make his own party mad, but that he’s got a great conservative voting record. I don’t think federalism is the answer to as many things as Fred thinks it is—but there are far worse things in a candidate. He’s formidable, and if he can let his personality come through on the stump, and during debates (remember Bob Dole, who couldn’t), he can beat Hillbama.
I like everything I’ve read about Huckabee, except that he comes from Hope, Arkansas, which is kind of weird, with Bill Clinton and all. His Christian faith resonates; I like his openness on the environment. He supports the Fair Tax, which would change America for the better. Anyone who can conquer obesity and stay thin, has shown great strength and courage. That means more than he’s being given credit for. I just don’t think he has enough gravitas to make it. As I’ve said, Romney or Guiliani should select him as VP—for regional balance and all that Huckabee is.
Maybe Brownback another year. He’s a good guy.
I think a lot of Newt Gingrich—he is smarter than all of the rest of them-- but I don’t he can overcome the baggage and I don’t think he’ll jump in.
Posted by Jim at 12:53 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
September 05, 2007
Another Giant of the Christian Right Passes: James Kennedy Dead at 76
D. James Kennedy died this morning. His greatest accomplishment was certainly Evangelicsm Explosion, credited with the conversion to Christianity of more than 50 million people. Not bad for a Presbyterian, eh?
Posted by Jim at 08:42 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Some Gems from a Very Old Blogroll
As I near the third anniversary of my personal blog, The Rooftop Blog, I’ve decided to clean up the Blogroll. There are blogs on there I haven't visited in months; well, years. If they’re no longer interesting to me, off they go. At the same time, I’ll spend some time mentioning some interesting posts. Here we go:
I Wonder if it’s Superstition
21st Century Reformation, which has a nice mix of serious spirituality and pop interest, says Steve Wonder’s Superstition is the best ever, and points to a fun YouTube clip of a performance. Remind me to tell you sometime about the free concert Stevie Wonder did for me years ago at the Baltimore Penitentiary that cost me $25,000.
If It Was Only Flatulence
A Red Mind in a Blue State muses
“Hearing all this green talk lately, Live Earth, etc. How delicious would it be if we eventually found out that global warming is caused by the flatulence of whales, manatees and baby seals, and that the only sure way to save the Earth is with a club?...”
That would make things a lot easier. But, alas, it’s us—which makes the club less desirable.
Blood and Fire
Adrian Warnock in the UK still appreciates great old hymns. Here’s one by William Booth, founder of The Salvation Army.
One stanza:
To make our weak hearts strong and brave: Send the fire! To live, a dying world to save: Send the fire today! Oh, see us on Your altar lay, We give our lives to you today, So crown the offering now we pray: Send the fire today! Send the fire today! Send the fire today!
Diamond in the Rough
For some reason, this actually brings tears to your eyes.
The Miracle of Grace, in Washington
Beyond the Rim cites Peggy Noonan’s call for grace in response to the Sept. Iraq report.
It will take something that miraculous to keep it from becoming just another political football.
Posted by Jim at 06:42 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 30, 2007
Green Evangelicals No One's Political Patsy: My Op-ed in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Those of you who have read my material over the last year know that our public relations firm, Rooftop MediaWorks, has been handling communications for the national Evangelical Climate Initiative. And during the last six months, I have been serving as Campaign Director for the ECI.
In that role, I wrote an op-ed on how mainstream media and Democratic pundits have been wrongly assuming that green evangelicals have become liberal Democrats.
The op-ed is appearing on August 31 in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (ECI is headquartered in the Atlanta area).
The piece reads in part:
The clearest way to explain the majority of American evangelicals, including the new — often young — evangelicals is that they are increasingly embracing a total life ethic.This new ethic still calls for protection of the unborn and of the unwanted through policies against abortion and euthanasia. But it also strives to protect the climate, and to help the poor and disadvantaged in the U.S. and in the vulnerable places of the world, such as Africa. The total life ethic seeks to protect the incubator and divinely designed cradle of human life, the family; but it also calls for human rights, freedom and the rewards of hard work. New evangelicals are reaching into new areas, but they don't stop preaching and demonstrating that fullness of life comes only through lives surrendered to and transformed by Jesus Christ.
Posted by Jim at 10:14 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
August 28, 2007
More on the Possible Aguilera Pro-Life Position
The Lurking Canary has discovered some inconsistencies in the Aguilera versus Amnesty's pro-abortion stance.
Posted by Jim at 02:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Big Decline in Poverty Rate: Good for Compassionate Conservatism; Bad for Edwards Campaign
Let's see how the liberals explain away this Bush success story.
Posted by Jim at 02:04 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 27, 2007
Pro-life Activism from Unexpected Quarters: Artists Slam Amnesty’s Abortion Shift
The last place I’d expect to look for pro-life activism is among musicians outside of the Christian music world. But this article discusses the disgust of two singers, Christina Aguilera and Avril Lavigne over Amnesty International’s decision to support women’s access to abortion. Both singers have made statements against abortion, but are among contributors to an Amnesty CD released to raise money for survivors of the atrocities in Darfur.
Aguilera, 26, is a devout American Catholic. She is reportedly expecting her first child and has taken part in a television show in which she interviewed a teenager who had kept her baby rather than have an abortion.Lavigne, 22, is a French-Canadian from a tight-knit Christian family. Her song Keep Holding On is the backing track to a pro-life video on YouTube that declares “abortion is murder”.
Posted by Jim at 12:07 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 22, 2007
Inspiring Speeches: Washington, Bush, Colson and Cuomo
I love soaring, poetic speeches, and I particularly appreciate beautifully written short speeches that inspire. I blogged on inspiring short speeches in November 2004
I’m thinking today of great speeches I’ve witnessed in person.
First, a speech by Charles Colson on September 2, 1993 after he was awarded the $1 million Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion, which he donated to the ministry of Prison Fellowship. Now defunct Moody magazine described (Nov. 8, 1993) the setting:
“Prison Fellowship chairman Charles Colson faced a situation that mirrors what the church as a whole faces. People of several faiths, many of whom were attending the Parliament of the World's Religions, gathered at Rockefeller Chapel on the campus of the University of Chicago to hear an address on religious liberty. What do evangelicals have to say in a pluralistic setting? How do we talk about the cultural role of religion with those who worship other gods? As the winner of the 1993 Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion, Mr. Colson had earned the right to stand on the platform. The speech, titled The Enduring Revolution, is what he said when he got there."
An excerpt:
We stand at a pivotal moment in history, when nations around the world are looking westward. In the past five years, the balance of world power shifted dramatically. Suddenly, remarkably, almost inexplicably, one of history's most sustained assaults on freedom collapsed before our eyes.The world was changed, not through the militant dialectic of communism, but through the power of unarmed truth. It found revolution in the highest hopes of common men. Love of liberty steeled under the weight of tyranny; the path of the future was charted in prison cells.
This revolution's symbolic moment was May Day 1990. Protesters followed the tanks, missiles, and troops rumbling across Red Square. One, a bearded Orthodox monk, darted under the reviewing stand where Gorbachev and other Soviet leaders stood. He thrust a huge crucifix into the air, shouting above the crowd, "Mikhail Sergeyevich! Christ is risen!"
Gorbachev turned and walked off the platform.
Across a continent the signal went. In defiant hope a spell was broken. The lies of decades were exposed. Fear and terror fled. And millions awoke as from a long nightmare.
Their waking dream is a world revolution. Almost overnight the western model of economic, political, and social liberty has captured the imagination of reformers and given hope to the oppressed. We saw it at Tiananmen Square, where a replica of the Statue of Liberty, an icon of western freedom, became a symbol of Chinese hope. We saw it in Czechoslovakia when a worker stood before a desolate factory and read to a crowd, with tears in his eyes, the American Declaration of Independence.
This is one of history's defining moments. The faults of the West are evident -- but equally evident are the extraordinary gifts it has to offer the world. The gift of markets that increase living standards and choices. The gift of political institutions where power flows from the consent of the governed, not the barrel of a gun. The gift of social beliefs that encourage tolerance and individual autonomy.
Free markets. Free governments. Free minds.
Read the full speech, especially the masterful description of the Four Horsemen of the Modern Apocalypse.
A personal note: Jonathan Aitken related in his biography Charles Colson: A Life Redeemed, how I—as Colson’s executive assistant—employed some harmless yet somewhat Colsonian means to fill the Rockefeller Chapel for Chuck’s speech.
The Second Inaugural
The second speech on today’s list is George W. Bush’s 2nd Inaugural Address. My wife and I were on the Capitol lawn, close enough to be part of the event and see the participants, but honestly not close enough to see facial expressions, except on the big screen.
It was, I believe, every bit as masterful and soaring as Kennedy’s famous inaugural. Once people are done hating Bush, his second inaugural will be listed as one of the greatest presidential inaugurals in American history:
Excerpt:
We go forward with complete confidence in the eventual triumph of freedom. Not because history runs on the wheels of inevitability; it is human choices that move events. Not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation; God moves and chooses as He wills. We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind, the hunger in dark places, the longing of the soul. When our Founders declared a new order of the ages; when soldiers died in wave upon wave for a union based on liberty; when citizens marched in peaceful outrage under the banner "Freedom Now" - they were acting on an ancient hope that is meant to be fulfilled. History has an ebb and flow of justice, but history also has a visible direction, set by liberty and the Author of Liberty.
Notice how Bush tapped Lincoln’s second inaugural for some language.
(Other than the fact that I heard both of these speeches in person, what do these two speeches have in common? This answer to this question is at the end of the post.)
Now for some speeches I didn't see in person:
Edwards/Cuomo
There’s been a lot of talk about the strength of John Edwards' Two Americas speech (regardless of what you think of encouraging class warfare) But notice how he tapped what many see as one of the finest political speeches of our era, Mario Cuomo’s Two Cities speech at the 1984 Democratic convention.
Excerpt:
Ten days ago, President Reagan admitted that although some people in this country seemed to be doing well nowadays, others were unhappy, even worried, about themselves, their families, and their futures. The President said that he didn't understand that fear. He said, "Why, this country is a shining city on a hill." And the President is right. In many ways we are a shining city on a hill. But the hard truth is that not everyone is sharing in this city's splendor and glory. A shining city is perhaps all the President sees from the portico of the White House and the veranda of his ranch, where everyone seems to be doing well. But there's another city; there's another part to the shining the city; the part where some people can't pay their mortgages, and most young people can't afford one; where students can't afford the education they need, and middle-class parents watch the dreams they hold for their children evaporate. In this part of the city there are more poor than ever, more families in trouble, more and more people who need help but can't find it. Even worse: There are elderly people who tremble in the basements of the houses there. And there are people who sleep in the city streets, in the gutter, where the glitter doesn't show. There are ghettos where thousands of young people, without a job or an education, give their lives away to drug dealers every day. There is despair, Mr. President, in the faces that you don't see, in the places that you don't visit in your shining city.In fact, Mr. President, this is a nation -- Mr. President you ought to know that this nation is more a "Tale of Two Cities" than it is just a "Shining City on a Hill."
The Most Important Forgotten Words of George Washington
The first George W. saved a young nation with the power of his words and his presence prior to the signing of the peace treaty of 1783. Restless American troops, unhappy with Congress, were scheming a military coup. Washington heard the rumors and surprised a room full of gathered officers, striding to the front of the room and speaking to them. The speech was evidently unremarkable, but what happened next was not:
Following his address Washington studied the faces of his audience. He could see that they were still confused, uncertain, not quite appreciating or comprehending what he had tried to impart in his speech. With a sigh, he removed from his pocket a letter and announced it was from a member of Congress, and that he now wished to read it to them. He produced the letter, gazed upon it, manipulated it without speaking. What was wrong, some of the men wondered. Why did he delay? Washington now reached into a pocket and brought out a pair of new reading glasses. Only those nearest to him knew he lately required them, and he had never worn them in public. Then he spoke: "Gentlemen, you will permit me to put on my spectacles, for I have not only grown gray but almost blind in the service of my country." This simple act and statement by their venerated commander, coupled with remembrances of battles and privations shared together with him, and their sense of shame at their present approach to the threshold of treason, was more effective than the most eloquent oratory. As he read the letter to their unlistening ears, many were in tears from the recollections and emotions which flooded their memories. As Maj. Samuel Shaw, who was present, put it in his journal, " There was something so natural, so unaffected in this appeal as rendered it superior to the most studied oratory. It forced its way to the heart, and you might see sensibility moisten every eye."Finishing, Washington carefully and deliberately folded the letter, took off his glasses, and exited briskly from the hall. Immediately, Knox and others faithful to Washington offered resolutions affirming their appreciation for their commander in chief, and pledging their patriotism and loyalty to the Congress, deploring and regretting those threats and actions which had been uttered and suggested. What support Gates and his group may have enjoyed at the outset of the meeting now completely disintegrated, and the Newburgh conspiracy collapsed.
American Rhetoric has its ranking of the Top 100 American speeches
Answer to the earlier question about Colson’s Templeton Address and Bush’s Second Inaugural: Both speeches were drafted by speechwriter Michael Gerson, who began his career as a writer for Colson immediately following his graduation from Wheaton College, and went on to write for the president. Any question about who wrote much of the tremendous, spiritually rich prose for Bush will be put to rest if you read The Enduring Revolution.
Posted by Jim at 11:00 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Early Michigan Primary Should Help Romney
I would think the Romney camp would celebrate the news that Michigan is trying to move its primary to January. With a good chance of winning in Iowa and New Hampshire, favorite-son Romney could sweep the first three with an early Michigan primary.
Posted by Jim at 04:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Use the Vick Dogfighting Case to Prompt the End of the Blood Sport in America
I can't think of much of anything more disgusting than organized dogfighting, except for humans being forced to kill or be killed as gladiators (or in modern day, as child soldiers).
I'm not a big animal rights guy, but senseless cruelty to animals is despicable and often a precursor to further violence.
So it's hard to feel a lot of compassion for multimillionaire Michael Vick who has squandered his career and reputation for a cruel blood sport. Even as an Atlantan, I've never been much of a Vick fan anyway. He has never demonstrated either class or character, even before the dogfighting debacle.
However, I've seen a lot of coverage that singles Vick out as a rare perpetrator of a weird and vicious crime. Unfortunately, as this article explains, dogfighting is widespread and as deeply rooted historically as it is troubling and nauseating.
The best outcome of this case would be a fresh focus on dogfighting and real enforcement of the laws against it. I'm not much on prison time for something like this, by the way. I'd like to see a more creative sanction for Vick, perhaps scooping dog poop at the pound for a year or two.
Posted by Jim at 08:31 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 20, 2007
A Review of Arctic Tale
Here's a review of the new film Arctic Tale by Rusty Pritchard, who I work with on creation care issues. He makes it clear in his review that this kid-friendly film is not an environmentalist screed, and that:
this is a documentary without the usual constant droning about the "work of evolution" (as though such inspiring ecologies could arise by accident). At the start of the film is a comment about the way these creatures are "designed" for their habitat, but the film doesn't make a big deal about that either.If you have kids whose appreciation for Creation has not been diluted yet, you'll probably want the DVD when it comes out. But see it in the theater to fully appreciate the grandeur of the icy handiwork of God.
Posted by Jim at 02:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 16, 2007
A Republican Woman for Vice President 2008
The two Democratic frontrunners for President and the four Republican frontrunners all have traits or histories that would have made them untenable in elections past: A former first lady, a Kenyan-American novice, a thrice married mayor, a Mormon, a septuagenarian, and a playboy actor. If Huckabee continues to ascend--a candidate for The Biggest Loser. Interesting times.
On the Republican side, there is one thing we know the candidate will be: a white male. From the standpoint of governing, the Republican running mate needs to be the best qualified public servant available. Of course, politics comes before governing—you have to get elected to have a chance to govern. So it is possible if not likely that the Republicans will need to balance their ticket to compete against a Dem ticket that is likely to be Hillary, or perhaps even Hillary and Obama.
Regional balance is one thing, and as I’ve said before, I’d love to see Rudy or Mitt select Mike Huckabee as VP. I like Huckabee very much, and the northeasterns need a southerner.
But do the Republicans need a woman, a black, or a black woman to balance Hillbama? If there was a clear selection among Republican women, “yes” would be an easy answer.
The first name on many tongues is Condoleezza Rice; first for president, which she apparently is not interested in; and now for VP, in which she probably is less interested
So where do the Republicans turn? Here are three possibilities:
Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Also here.
Sarah Palin, governor of Alaska. And here.
What women would you recommend as a Republican vice presidential candidate?
Posted by Jim at 10:40 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Democrats Failing on the Religion Front; Candidates Trying God Talk
White House hopeful Joe Biden said that Democrats lost the last two presidential elections in part because they let themselves be portrayed as anti-God, FoxNews reports.
"Democrats have been too afraid to talk about faith, Biden said at a Rotary Club luncheon. But what voters really want to know is whether a president believes in something bigger than themselves and whether he or she respects the faith of others," he said.
This was discussed on Hardball by Chris Matthews and Time magazine's Michael Duffy.
MATTHEWS: Joe Biden, who tends to be very honest, whatever you think of him as the next president, although I think he‘s a fine guy, he very clearly said the other day, yesterday, that the people like Al Gore and John Kerry, the last two Democratic candidate for president, said—created an image that they were somehow—we‘re looking at it right now—that if they were—as he put it, when they‘re sitting next to the pew, that maybe he really doesn‘t respect your view.In other words, they are not really religious people. They don‘t share your evangelical views and your deeply religious views. They are too secular.
DUFFY: Yes. Well, I think, for the last 25 years, Democrats have done everything they can to alienate religious voters, faith-minded voters. And the...
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: Not a smart move politically.
DUFFY: Oh, no. And it seemed to be part of the program. They did it to woo a secular left that they thought didn‘t want to have anything to do with that.
MATTHEWS: Was turned off by the religious people, yeah.
DUFFY: Starting with Jimmy Carter and...
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: I hear it.
DUFFY: Yes.
MATTHEWS: I have heard it years of...
DUFFY: Right. Absolutely.
MATTHEWS: ... people making fun of Jimmy—or Jerry Falwell and people like that. But you knew it was a broader brush than that.
DUFFY: Of course.
MATTHEWS: They were really making fun of the people in the churches, in the tents, in the mega-churches.
DUFFY: Right. It was a really stupid thing to do. And they have begun to realize that.
An important distinction is between political efforts to be seen as responsive to God's leading and respectful to people of genuine faith, and actually having those attributes. In this year's presidential debates and discussions, you can tell the candidates who have actively sought a relationship with God and those who have had a conversion--not on the way to Damascus, but on the way to Des Moines (as one candidate quipped).
Among those I've heard, Huckabee, Brownback, Romney and Obama (and maybe Edwards) are the only candidates who seem comfortable discussing spiritual matters. Great awkwardness from most other frontrunners: Clinton, Guiliani, Thompson, McCain.
Posted by Jim at 01:20 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 14, 2007
Michael Gerson is Not Only a Great Writer But a Man of Character
I former Bush chief speech writer Michael Gerson welll. He was on my staff (I was the chairman's chief of staff at Prison Fellowship when we hired Gerson out of Wheaton to write for Chuck Colson), and his exquisite writing skill is surpassed only by his intellect, strength of moral character, and devotion to God.
I don't believe any of Matthew Scully's complaints about Gerson; perhaps he wanted the Washington Post job Gerson got.
Reading this I remember how Colson would explain that when you work in the White House you're very careful to move along the hallways with your back to the wall--so your apparent friends and political allies don't stab you in the back.
Mike has figured out that the back stabbing can continue after you leave the White House.
Posted by Jim at 01:47 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 13, 2007
Are Hispanics the New Republicans?
Democrats hold an edge with Hispanics in national elections, but Latinos' growing tendency to register as independents and split their vote between parties is buoying Republican prospects for 2008, according to Fox News.
This is a nightmare for Democrats, but it is likely that Hispanics will move toward conservatism as they grow older, own property, and raise children. So if the Republicans don’t alienate the entire demographic group with careless rhetoric in the immigration debate, they will benefit. Don’t forget that the strongest foe of illegal immigration is a legal immigrant, so those trying to control the influx of illegals won’t lose Hispanic immigrants if they aren’t abusive and vindictive.
I'm finishing The Right Nation, by two Brits, John Micklethwait and Adrian Woodridge (2004). This related paragraph:
"[Republican optimists say] that Latinos are worthy strivers--hard working, God-fearing, family-oriented and upwardly mobile. They have the highest male workforce participation rate of any measured group--and one of the lowest incidences of trade union membership and welfare dependency (only 17 percent of immigrant Latinos in poverty collect welfare and 65 percent of poor blacks). Latinos are arguably the most family-oriented ethnic group in American society. They also have a marked propensity to start their own businesses and buy their own homes--both incubators of Republicanism."
Could be a good trend for Republicans...
Or Republicans could be dead right on all aspects of the illegal immigrant debate, and perhaps even win on many fronts--and end up giving the Democrats a New Deal type lock on an entire segment of the population, and being out of power for the next couple of generations.
Something to think about.
Posted by Jim at 08:57 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Can Guiliani Find Middle Ground in Abortion Debate?
The Brody File has CBN video of Rudy Guiliani at an Iowa diner waxing on his NYC program to increase adoptions, and postulating that advancing adoption is fertile middle ground for abortion opponents and abortion proponents. As a father of two adopted children, I’m a fan of adoption, and I think it should be advanced, promoted and make a priority for people of all political stripes. Can a president advance adoption, beyond the bully pulpit? On the other hand, can a president stop abortions, beyond Supreme Court appointments?
I’m not sure there is middle ground in the abortion debate. Do enough Republicans think there is to give Guiliani a foothold here?
Posted by Jim at 09:44 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
August 11, 2007
Actions Are Better Than Offsets
In the category Walk the Talk, or Actions are Bettter than Offsets, or Politicians Make Bad Crusaders, or as Snopes titles it: Glass Houses (h/t: Dad Payton). Also here.
HOUSE # 1

House #1 A 20 room mansion ( not including 8 bathrooms ) heated by
natural gas. Add on a pool ( and a pool house) and a separate guest
house, all heated by gas. In one month this residence consumes more
energy than the average American household does in a year. The
average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2400. In
natural gas alone, this property consumes more than 20 times the
national average for an American home. This house is not situated
in a Northern or Midwester n 'snow belt' area. It's in the South.
HOUSE # 2

House #2 Designed by an architecture professor at a
leading national university. This house incorporates every
'green' feature current home construction can provide. The house is
4,000 square feet ( 4 bedrooms ) and is nestled on a high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat-pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F. ) heats the house in the winter and cools it in the summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas and it consumes one-quarter electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Surrounding flowers and shrubs native to the area enable the property to blend into the surrounding rural landscape.
Now the interesting payoff:
House #1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore. House #2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as "the Texas White House," it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.
The lesson: clean up your act before becoming a international spokesman for a cause to avoid the appearance of hyprocisy. Also: simplify, then buy offsets (and don't talk about it).
Posted by Jim at 09:53 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 09, 2007
Washington Post Understates Evangelical Movement on Climate
An article titled "Warming Draws Evangelicals Into Environmental Fold" by Juliet Eilperin in the Aug. 8 Washington Post is a welcome look at Rev. Joel Hunter and his role in the growing consensus among evangelicals that Christian faithfulness must include responsible stewardship and protection of God's creation. But Eilperin's effort to tell a compelling story and to outline evangelical creation care quickly, leaves the impression that Rev. Hunter is walking this road alone, and that he's followig only British religious leaders.
In fact, Hunter became involved in climate policy as a signatory of the Evangelical Climate Initiative, a group of now 106 senior evangelical leaders who as a result of their commitment to Jesus Christ are calling for sound climate policy that will express a concern for the health and well being of our families today and for many generations. Here is the ECI statement that has captured this sentiment and was signed by 106 leaders.
(The public relations firm I head, Rooftop MediaWorks, is a partner with the Evangelical Climate Initiative and has handled the group's communications campaign.)
I regret that the article did not mention that the signatories of the ECI included perhaps the best known evangelical pastor in America, Rick Warren (Saddleback), as well as megachurch pastor Bill Hybels (Willowcreek), the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, Leith Anderson, the presidents of many Christian colleges and evangelical relief and development organizations, and several denominational leaders (here is a complete list of ECI Signatories).
Because the article is anecdotal, I've already seen blog responses that call this an indication of thin evangelical support for Christian action on climate and creation care. That impression is wrong. A national Ellison Research poll of evangelicals to be released next month (the top line results of which were part of a testimony by Jim Ball, president of the Evangelical Environmental Network, before the Senate Energy and Public Works Committee in June), showed that 70% of the evangelical population believes global warming will pose a serious threat to future generations, and 64% believe action should be taken immediately to curb global warming.
The Washington Post's coverage of evangelical movement on environmental issues may reveal its sympathy for the cause. But the Juliet Eilperin article actually understated the extent and momentum of evangelical action on climate and creation care. Today, evangelical leaders and the community are embracing biblically based creation care without abandoning their worldview and speaking on environmental issues with a unique evangelical voice.
Posted by Jim at 12:11 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Helpful News: Sunni Fighters Seeking Alliances with U.S. Troops
Another news report--in the Washington Post-- with good news from Iraq, where Sunni fighters are recognizing the self interest in cooperating with U.S. troops and working toward influence in the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government.
Posted by Jim at 10:04 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 08, 2007
A Summertime Iraq Bombshell from Brookings
I spent the last two weeks vacationing in the Finger Lakes region of upstate New York and on the Ohio shore of Lake Erie, doing all I could to keep my body in the sand, my face in a book, and my mind away from the worries of the workaday world.
So I'm just catching up with some of the news, and amazed by the source and content of the New York Times op-ed piece "A War We Just Might Win" on July 30 by Michael E. O'Hanlon and Kenneth M. Pollack of Brookings Institution.
(Much of my professional history was working with Prison Fellowship chairman Chuck Colson, who was accused by other Watergate defendants of conspiring or considering the bombing of Brookings Instition as a solution to its criticism of Nixon--or something like that. Colson is famous for quips that get him in trouble. I'm sure the Brookings comments was one of these. Today, I'm sure he's pleased by the report from Brookings).
The O'Hanlon and Pollack report is wonderful news, and it has great credibility because it comes from a think tank that leans left and from writers who have been critical of the war effort.
It would be fabulous for America and the world if they are right, and if the positive military news in Iraq continues. It is inconvenient for politicians and presidential candidates who have based their campaigns on bad war news and the call for withdrawal.
For me, the potential that the good news in Iraq could be enduring is far more important then the political embarassment for the (mostly) Democrats who are relying on failure in the Middle East.
Almost worth returning from vacation to see this good report. Almost.
Posted by Jim at 08:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 07, 2007
More on Olympian Pressure on China
More, in the Washington Post, on efforts to pressure China as the Beijing Olympics create a world stage.
Posted by Jim at 07:02 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 06, 2007
Calling for an Evangelical Voice at the Beijing Olympics
The Beijing Olympics may provide a prime target for protest for evangelical Christians, according to the International Herald Tribune. Three issues should be high on the Christian grievance agenda when athletes gather in a revitalized and polished Beijing in 2008.
--China must end its state sponsored persecution of Christian and grant total religious liberty if it is to be respected member of the international community.
--China should use its oil-buying leverage to pressure Sudan to end its sponsoring of bloodshed in Darfur.
--China must restrict its emission of CO2, which is contributing to global warming. China is now the leader CO2 polluter (the U.S. is 2nd).
Posted by Jim at 10:21 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 19, 2007
Compassionate Common Sense on Immigration
In a recent post about the broadening of the evangelical agenda I listed a number of legitimate concerns that have come to new prominence among evangelicals, including climate change, international aid, human rights and compassionate common sense in immigration.
It was that last one that got a response. (I’ve learned through my work with the Evangelical Climate Initiative it is usually climate change that stirs the pot). But immigration is one of the issues where the ideological purity police are prepared to attack if the exact formulation of concern is not expressed.
I cannot believe how badly the politicians and bureaucrats have allowed de facto open immigration to change our nation. I cannot be strong enough in my view that our borders should be the most secure in the world. If we are to continue to be the most generous world citizens (by far), our nation must be economically strong and safe from attack. Those who purposefully look the other way because they believe we owe charity to our poorer neighbors have lost sight of the fact that without strong and secure foundations we will become more vulnerable in every way, and our provision of aid and protection to much of the world will be in jeopardy.
Just do whatever is necessary to stop illegal immigration. Everyone knows it can be done; only some have the will to make it happen,
I do not believe it is reasonable, however, to send every illegal alien home; that is an unworkable solution. We have to recognize that a massive new “trail of tears” to Mexico will not happen and would be a tragedy of monumental proportions.
Yes, I am in favor of some path to permanence, even citizenship, for the illegals in our country. Many should be sent to their home countries because they are a menace to our nation. But most are hardworking, industrious and law-abiding. (I know, being here illegally is not legal; but we are a nation of law-breakers, and we all know it. (Oh, you drive 55?)
We do need to focus on both humanity and nationality. To do so is Christian, and for politicians it is also wise. As Michael Gerson wrote in the Washington Post, nativism will not win elections.
It’s a mess that has no ideal solutions. Seal the borders and keep them that way, or nothing else makes sense. With serious security in place, we can be free to show compassion and common sense.
Posted by Jim at 10:17 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
July 17, 2007
Evangelicals at a Crossroads?
David Brody at The Brody File is thinking about the passions and political influence of evangelicals. He writes:
The bread and butter issues of abortion and traditional marriage have started to become watered down. Now, all indications are that Evangelicals are becoming passionate about other issues too. Immigration, the environment and maybe, most of all terrorism.
I'm working with a number of the leaders who are what the New York Times called recently "the new breed of evangelicals," and I do not believe that this new breed is any less passionate about the strong issues of the last 25 years--abortion and traditional marriage. They are now also passionate about new issues--such as the environment and international aid--that broaden the agenda. But it is wrong to assume that their new interests in any way change their passion on abortion and family. That's like saying that a new baby in the family lessens a parent's love for the other children.
However, there are very few evangelicals who are going to vote for a pro-abortion candidate because of of his or her stance on climate or action on Darfur. Simple as that. There are some, but not enough to make a political difference.
But candidates who are pro-life and protect the traditional family, and are concerned about climate change, genocide in Africa, and compassionate common sense on immigration and other issues--they can count on the passionate support of a whole new breed of evangelicals. And it is a breed that is growing, including the next generation of voters.
Posted by Jim at 07:25 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
July 16, 2007
Tell North Korea to Free Son Jong Nam, A Christian Marked for Death Because He Shared His Faith
International inspectors reported this weekend that North Korea has shut down a key nuclear reactor, making it eligible for international economic aid. But the world should insist that the North Koreans show progress in another area--religious liberty. Voice of the Martyrs, a ministry on behalf of persecuted Christians, is publicizing the case of Son Jong Nam, a North Korean who faces possible execution for sharing his faith. (h/t: FRC) Last week, Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) joined Mr. Son's brother at a press conference at the National Press Club here in Washington to draw attention to the case. (News release here). In 1998, Mr. Son defected from North Korea to China, where he became a Christian after meeting a South Korean missionary. But in 2001 the Chinese deported him back to North Korea because of his evangelistic work. He was imprisoned and tortured for three years, paroled in 2004, but then re-arrested in January 2006. Mr. Son has reportedly been sentenced to public execution as an example to the North Korean people.
Posted by Jim at 03:52 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 15, 2007
What’s Next for Iraq? Breaking the Deadlock
The United States isn’t going to withdraw from Iraq. We be there for generations, just as we still have troops in Germany, Japan, and Korea. Vietnam was an exception, and only Ted Kennedy’s crowd wants to see a repeat of the horror of post-war Vietnam.
Unless we end up with an irresponsible Democratic administration that will bail at any cost, we will define our ongoing national interests in Iraq and adjust troop levels to accomplish them.
There are only about 20 Senators, all Democrats—including Clinton, Obama—who want to get out of Iraq as quickly as the trucks can roll. Actually, there are more Democratic candidates for president who support immediate withdrawal at any cost than there are Senators who are not presidential candidates .
This says something about the choice presented with the 15 Democratic wannabes line up for one of their endless debates. No reasonable choice for a constructive plan in Iraq.
David Brooks July column in the New York Times (subscription only, but you can read it here) describes the deadlock in the Senate on Iraq policy:
To simplify a bit, roughly 20 senators, led by John McCain and Joe Lieberman, believe in Gen. David Petraeus and the surge. There are roughly 30 Republicans, led by Dick Lugar, John Warner and Lamar Alexander, who believe that the U.S. should scale back its mission and adopt the Iraq Study Group’s recommendations. There are roughly 30 Democrats, led by Carl Levin and Jack Reed, who also want to scale back and adopt the study group’s approach. And finally, there are roughly 20 Democrats, led by Ted Kennedy and Russ Feingold, who just want to get out as quickly as possible.In theory, it should be possible to get the 30 Republicans and the 30 Democrats who support the study group’s framework together to embrace a common plan. But Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader, is doing everything he can to prevent a bipartisan consensus. It’s much better politically for the Democrats to stay united and force the Republicans to vote with the president.
“Is there a middle way? Brooks asks. Is there a way that will protect U.S. interests with a solution that can be maintained for as long as necessary—as we have done in most previous conflicts.
Brooks suggests:
The U.S. will still have vital interests in Iraq, like preventing a terror state and stopping an Iranian takeover. Military planners believe a reduced force is viable: 20,000 troops to protect the Iraqi government, 10,000 to train and advise, 10,000 in headquarters and a smaller number of special forces to chase terrorists.
That’s not something you’ll hear in a Democratic presidential debate, but it may be close to where we need to be.
Posted by Jim at 09:14 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 13, 2007
The Democrats Find GodTalk
The Time magazine article Leveling the Praying Field is both encouraging—because of its recognition of the importance of faith and the discussion of faith in the public square—and frightening—because there are plenty of people dull enough to be excited just because a politician is throwing in the word God from time to time like a newfound adjective.
Note this paragraph:
The revival comes at a time when the entire religious-political landscape is changing shape. A new generation of evangelical leaders is rejecting old labels; now an alliance of religious activists that runs from the crunchy left across to the National Association of Evangelicals has called for action to address global warming, citing the biblical imperative of caring for creation. Mainline, evangelical and Roman Catholic organizations have united to push for immigration reform. The possibility that there is common ground to be colonized by those willing to look for it offers a tantalizing prospect of alliances to come, but only if Democrats can overcome concerns within their party. "One-third gets it," says a Democratic values pioneer, talking about the rank and file. "A second third understands that this can help us win. And another third is positively terrified."
I’m heartened that the evangelical community is broadening its agenda and my firm has clients that are in the middle of this transformation. But I’m not impressed with Democrats who hire consultants to learn how to say things Christianly. Its not about the right image; its about the right action
I agree with Tony Perkins here:
"It's a positive thing that Democrats are willing to talk about faith and values," says Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. "But they are aligned with organizations that sue to stop kids from praying and block the Ten Commandments." Only when the policies evolve, he argues, as opposed to the rhetoric, will the party have a chance to make real gains with Evangelicals."
Posted by Jim at 08:38 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
July 12, 2007
Disappearing Deficit
Look what is happening to the federal deficit. As unpopular as this is today, how about a little credit to President Bush? Can anyone spell t-a-x c-u-t.
Posted by Jim at 07:18 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Limit Involvement in Beijing Olympics?
Just after executing the former head of the government food and drug administration for corruption, the Chinese government “announced steps to safeguard food at next summer’s Olympic Games.” Hurray for them. If you’ve visited Beijing recently, or have been following things, China is creating a showcase city for the world to see when it visits Beijing for the 2008 Games, or watch it on the tube.
At the same time, there a troubling development: the government clean-up includes foreign Christian missionaries. According to China Aid Association, from April to June China expelled more than 100 suspected foreign missionaries to prevent evangelistic efforts at the Olympics (Assist News).
It should also be troubling to Christians that the Chinese are now the worst CO2 polluters in the world. China’s output of greenhouse gasses surpassed those of the U.S. last month. Business is booming at the expenses of the global climate.
Nothing would upset the Chinese more than suggestions that the world consider Beijing games to be anything less than a total success. They are pouring everything into making the Olympics a Chinese public relations wonder. That means the world has some bargaining power now. It would be a good time to suggest that Chinese preparation include human rights, religious liberty, and limitation of toxic emissions.
Protecting the food is fine, too.
Posted by Jim at 07:04 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
July 11, 2007
Biking for Dollars (for a very important ministry)
In the category of really good and important stuff, please check out the innovative fundraising effort to assist the former child soldiers of northern Uganda. ChildVoice International, which is developing strong long-range and Christ-centered program for these kids in Uganda (we were part of an exploratory team last July in Uganda), has brought three former child soldiers to participate in the terrific RAGBRAI--Register’s Annual Great Bicycle Ride Across Iowa--later this month.
Check out the Campaign Website It's www.3-7-1.com--three riders, seven days, one million dollars--which gives you the chance to participate.
Posted by Jim at 11:13 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Fred Thompson: Lean, Tanned, and (Apparently) Read for the Long Distance Run
Because we’re active in the Republican Party in Georgia, my wife and I have had the opportunity to see the most likely Republican contenders—Rudy, Mitt, and Fred—up close and personal. The latest was last night at a meet-and-greet with Fred Thompson at the Gwinnett County Chamber of Commerce. He demonstrated all the southern charm, dignified presence, and conservative common sense that will make him formidable when he joins the race. He told the activists at the reception to “be patient” but to “keep your powder dry.” Barring a scandal or medical bombshell, he is undoubtedly in. It’s just a question of how many Law and Order episodes he’s promised to allow before they have to be pulled.
Thompson looked tall, tanned, and far thinner than he looks on television. Or maybe he’s dropped some weight for the long distance run.
In photo below, the writer is peering admiringly from the far right.
Posted by Jim at 11:04 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
The One True Church? Guess Who the Pope Chooses.
To build on Doug’s Pope post below: I’m a generally an evangelical enthusiast of the Vatican, which since the reign of John Paul II has been a bulwark against cultural, moral, and theological freefall, and a friend of conservative Christians of all stripes. I really can’t envision JP issuing the document released by Benedict yesterday, reaffirming that the Roman Catholic Church is the One True Church. I really had no thought that the head of the Catholic Church would be mixed on this question, but no one seems sure why the edict was released, and why now. I’m having lunch tomorrow with a friend and business associate who has spent he career with the U.S. Catholic Bishops office. I can’t wait to chide him about eating with this apostate. And the bit about other Christian groups not having the “means of salvation.” That’s the One True Jesus, the last time I checked. Honestly, the other Christian denominations aren’t the enemy of the Catholic church or of Christianity. How about saving the stronger words for radical Islam and surging secularism?
Posted by Jim at 10:50 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
July 10, 2007
Don't Miss Southern Baptist Trending on Global Warming
Despite the usual sound of the Southern Baptist Convention's resolution on global warming last month, there are clear indications that Southern Baptists in the pew--including many of the messengers to the San Antonio convention--recognize the need for stronger action on climate change.
As Rusty Pritchard notes at The Earth is the Lord's:
We ought to note that the Southern Baptist resolution as originally introduced included much stronger language, and noted the need for urgent government action on global warming. When some proposed weakening the resolution by removing the stronger language on global warming, 40 percent of the messengers voted to keep the original version! That shows much stronger support for action on global warming than some Southern Baptist leaders are willing to admit.
Rusty cites other evidences that the rank and file Baptists are moving as readily as other evangelicals on environmental issues.
That's good news for the evangelical community and for our nation.
Posted by Jim at 09:19 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 09, 2007
Huckabee for Vice President?
While I don’t think Mick Huckabee will be able generate enough national support to rise to the top tier of Republican candidates, I haven’t read or seen him say anything I disagree with. His faith seems genuine, and his convictions sound. There’s an interesting column on Huckabee by Terry Mattingly. Huckabee says:
"I sometimes marvel when people running for office are asked about faith and their answer is, 'Oh, I don't get into that. I keep that completely separate. My faith is completely immaterial to how I think and how I govern,' " he said. "To me, that is really tantamount to saying that one's faith is so marginal, so insignificant and so inconsequential that it really doesn't impact the way one lives. I would consider it an extraordinarily shallow faith that does not really impact the way we think about other human beings and the way we respond to them."
If a northeasterner such as Romney or Guiliani gets the nomination, Huckabee would provide wonderful regional balance as a running mate. And a clearer understanding of the blending of faith and policy than any of the other candidates.
Posted by Jim at 09:00 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 08, 2007
Evangelicals and Moslems Together?
It would be good if a relationship would flourish between evangelical Christians and moderate Arabs, something that would seem unlikely in the current atmosphere. A remarkable meeting occurred at the Egyptian embassy in Washington last month, with a number of evangelical leaders and the ambassadors from several Arab nations.
Jonathan Falwell wrote in WorldNetDaily:
On Monday, July 2, I attended what I can only pray may become a historic meeting. Several weeks ago, I received a call about attending a meeting at the Egyptian Embassy in Washington, D.C. I was told this meeting would be hosted by the ambassador from Egypt and might be attended by representatives of other Arab nations, as well as by 10-15 pastors, evangelists and Christian media representatives. My interest stirred, I agreed to attend the meeting even though I was not quite sure of its purpose. I asked Dr. Ron Godwin, Liberty University's executive vice president, to attend with me. When we arrived at the Embassy, we were greeted by Evangelist Benny Hinn and introduced to several other pastors, evangelists, Christian TV producers and representatives of Christian organizations. Among them were Gordon Robertson of the 700 Club, Paul Crouch Jr. of Trinity Broadcasting Network, Christian lobbyist Ralph Reed, Richard Cizik of the National Association of Evangelicals, Vernon Brewer of WorldHelp and several others.Within a period of no more than 10 minutes, the ambassadors from Algeria, Morocco, Libya, Kuwait, Yemen, Iraq, Bahrain and the ambassador from the Arab League of Nations all arrived. I now realized that this meeting was far more than a social gathering. Soon thereafter, we sat down at a large table – evangelicals all on one side and Arab representatives on the other, about 24 of us – for lunch.
And I received this in personal correspondence from Richard Cizik at NAE:
The most interesting person there? None other than Hinn, who I found to be extremely gracious. He was born in Egypt, and is part Jordanian, etc., and helped organize the event. He wanted to know if we'd help him organize successive events. No harm, as I see it, and could do a lot of good, that is, if they could get general agreement by certain leaders who have exclaimed, for example, "50 million Muslims want to kill us," that this language endangers evangelical missionaries and relief workers around the world. It also fosters the impression that evangelical Christians want to provoke a religious war with Muslims, something everyone at the luncheon disputed.It was a positive event, with real potential for good. I spoke of the need to make sure Samuel Huntington's "Conflict of Civilizations" doesn't occur, and that the NAE had issued a call to "respect" and "dialogue" a number of years ago, followed up by our "Islam Initiative" calling for humanitarian missions in the name of Jesus, as well as dialogue here and abroad. I lauded our friendship with Amb. Aziz Mekouar and the Moroccans, and said that we all need some "moral imagination" to see our way through the current difficulties, saying it "could well be the most important thing we set our minds to at this time in history."
Posted by Jim at 02:14 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
May 23, 2007
Evangelical Leaders Issue Global Warming Policy Principles
The Evangelical Climate Initiative is at it again, suggesting that good Christians can care about the environment, and even sound some alarms about global warming.
As some of you know if you've followed this blog for some time, the ECI is a client of my public relations firm. So I have a self interest in this cause. Nonetheless, I love to bring a little havoc into the world of my brethren who are still flat earthers, and provide a glimpse into the reasoned world of a group that is both Christian and working against global warming.
Today, leaders with the Evangelical Climate Initiative called on public officials to draw on traditional, conservative perspectives to address the challenge of climate change facing the United States and the world. They said, federal policy must maximize the free market, care for the most vulnerable, assure national security, and protect personal freedom, evangelical leaders said in a document of principles that “should guide government officials as they establish policies at the federal level to begin to solve global warming.”
Hey wait, this doesn't sound like a bunch of liberals!
In the paper released today and announced in print ads that will run Thursday in the Washington Times and Roll Call on May 24, the ECI outlined 10 principles for policymakers, including a call for the “scope of the free market to be maximized to allow innovation, ingenuity, and entrepreneurship to generate climate solutions, and to ensure that U.S. businesses can compete internationally in clean technologies.”
See the full document: Principles for Federal Policy on Climate Change
The principles document reads: “We are in favor of climate policies that reduce our dependence on foreign oil (e.g. increasing fuel economy) and thereby enhance our energy security and our advocacy of religious freedom and human rights.”
The 10 principles read in part:
1. The Problem is Real, the Objective Clear
We believe that human-induced global warming is real and, based on nearly universal agreement in the scientific community, we encourage policy-makers to accept this fact.
2. Maximize Freedom in Solving the Problem
When government deals with global warming, a proper policy framework will establish the “rules of the road” and what businesses call “regulatory certainty,” which can enhance freedom by allowing us to begin to solve a problem whose impacts will severely limit that freedom in the future if not addressed.
3. Maximize Protection from Harm from Generation to Generation
A primary function of government is to protect all of its citizens from undue harm, be it from foreign invaders, criminals, or pollution that impacts human health.
4. Take Special Care to Protect the Most Vulnerable
The most important way that federal government policy can protect the poor here and around the world from the impacts of global warming is to begin to solve the problem by reducing CO2 emissions 80 percent by 2050.
5. Enhance National and Energy Security, International Religious Freedom, & Rural Economic Development
American reliance on foreign oil also undermines our national security, and makes us
dependent on undemocratic, despotic foreign regimes that restrict the religious liberty of their peoples, and threaten the stability of democratic allies such as Israel.
6. Disburse Decision-making Authority to the Lowest Possible Level
A robust response to the threat of global warming will involve individuals, families, churches, businesses, and governments at multiple levels. In particular, we believe in states’ rights and responsibilities as the laboratories of democracy.
7. Solve the Problem through the Free Market and Protection of Property Rights
To help ensure competitiveness, climate policy should provide: (1) a stable, long-term, substantial research and development program; (2) long-term regulatory certainty, and; (3) a robust price signal that reflects the true social cost of greenhouse gas pollution.
8. Start Now and Solve the Problem in the Most Cost-Effective, Least-Disruptive Way Possible
Significant reductions in global warming pollution should start sooner rather than later in order to minimize disruption to the economy, and to avoid the necessity of drastic, steep reductions in the future.
9. Lead by Example
Regardless of whether all nations agree to be part of the solution, America must do the right thing.
10. Learn from the Future
Our understanding will continue to grow, and we may find that we must accelerate steps that address climate change.
(The Evangelical Climate Initiative, by the way, is a group of more than 100 evangelical leaders who are—-as a result of their commitment to Jesus Christ and concern for His creation—-encouraging action by evangelical Christians and all Americans to make life changes necessary to help solve the global warming crisis and to advance public policy that will limit global warming pollution, while respecting economic and business concerns.)
Posted by Jim at 07:03 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
May 15, 2007
Remembering Jerry Falwell
Jerry Falwell lived life large and he dies well-loved by many and much-maligned by most. Unlike the many who feel free to mock him even as his friends and family are in the hours of their immediate grief, I knew Rev. Falwell. I served as one of his public relations counselors during some of his best and worst moments. I choose to remember him fondly and to honor his faithfulness, even as I recognize—more than most—the flaws that taint his memory and embolden his critics to dishonor the dead.
Falwell’s greatest accomplishment was his leadership of a large and expansive church, Thomas Road Baptist Church, where many are saved and served. The church’s outreach extends to many, such as unwed mothers and the down and out; many that those who saw the familiar visage of fundamentalists only on talk shows would never believe he had any care for at all.
His message of unwavering fundamentalism became unpopular and easily criticized in modern America, but Falwell never changed. That served him well as a bellwether of the right. His downfall was his more than occasional public carelessness, and his inability to stay away from a microphone or a camera when he could do no good for himself, his cause, or the God he served.
Unfortunately, by the late 1990s it was nearly impossible for any moderation or substance to penetrate his caricature as a southern, overstuffed, intolerant buffoon.
I’ll remember Rev. Falwell as a kind and generous man with an easy laugh and a better vision for America than the nation seemed to have for itself. I was never his primary counselor or a close friend, but I was nearby and involved when media relished reports in one of his publications on Tinky Winky, the gay Teletubbie (blown out of context, but he deserved the firestorm because he refused our counsel to ignore media requests for comment).
And I helped him write his late apology for his callous comments following the attacks of 9/11, when he failed to see that it was time for a pastor’s voice, not a prophet’s rage.
I remember his willingness to reach out to Mel White, his former ghostwriter who began an organization to extend the voice of gay Christians. It was hard for him to stretch toward this natural adversary, but he did so when many others would not.
I disagreed with the reverend on many things, but I appreciated his faithful engagement and the substance behind the bluster. He was an American original and an important voice in our times. I extend my sympathies to his family, and the many families of Thomas Road, Liberty University and beyond that lived happily in his shadow and flourished because of his inspiration.
Posted by Jim at 08:34 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
December 29, 2006
Getting Out of the Wild and Into a Mission
Christian men need all of the help they can get staying true to the high calling of the Gospel and staying faithful. Just as important, says Matt Lobel of Out of the Wild, is for men to find the mission God has for them. It's a message profound in its simplicity.

As Jake and Elwood famously said: "We're on a mission from God."
Posted by Jim at 04:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
December 28, 2006
Top Religion Stories of 2006 Include the Evangelical Climate Initiative
Observing the news of faith and values—what some call religion news—as a professional discipline for more than 28 years, perhaps the most enduring truth is that in the spiritual realm, very little is truly breaking news.
Matters of the spirit--coming to faith, spiritual conversion and formation, and the movement of God in the lives of his people—are rarely headline news. Although matters of faith can at times be personally dramatic, and there are certainly moments of change and first steps in spiritual journeys, these journeys are usually slow and sure. The most important matters of the heart are quiet, personal, and usually quite deliberate.
Which makes our job in the Christian communications business challenging. Most of the really important stuff isn’t news at all. It is God quietly at work in the hearts and minds of people.
But from time to time, God’s people make a difference in a notable way, stand against the culture in bold ways, and—yes—mess up in embarrassing ways.
These are all reflected in Christianity Today ‘s top religion stories of 2006. They include the sad Haggard free fall, the evangelical response to The DaVinci Code, and the story that our firm helped bring to the world—the Evangelical Climate Initiative. (ECI also made Grist’s list of top ten green stories).
CT on ECI:
“Observers say global warming debate signifies broadening political agenda.”
Grist on ECI:
“It was the most public episode in what's been a building drama among evangelicals, pitting the old guard, which plans to keep flogging gay marriage until the checks stop coming, against the new guard, which is pushing to broaden the agenda to issues that involve fewer clear villains but actual, widespread suffering: global warming, poverty, and AIDS.”
Posted by Jim at 01:21 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
December 06, 2006
The Nanny City Watching Your Diet
Welcome to New York City, where we watch your diet, even if you won't. Jenny Craig, mayor.
NYC's effort to ban trans fat has been in the works for a while, but it's hard to believe that anyone believes it is the job of government to determine what we eat. I love that Wendy's and others are taking corporate responsibility and removing trans fats from their products. That makes it far easier for consumers to make wise decisions. But how does anyone find a role for government in these personal decisions?
Posted by Jim at 09:17 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
December 04, 2006
Take a Look at Mitt Romney for President
The last midterm vote was still being counted when the nascent 2008 presidential candidates put their exploratory committees into action. So here we go. I want to reiterate (from this summer) my early interest in Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts.
I’ve liked his creativity and dexterity in acting on his conservatism in the alligator pond of Massachusetts. He elevated life over self-interest, and I liked his formulation on the standards for the death penalty. And he’s tried to roll back the advances of the same-sex marriages folks in his state.
Would Republican evangelicals support Romney? More than Guiliani or McCain, I think.
Evangelical Republicans out there: How about a conservative who has learned how to get things done in the midst of liberalism? How about Romney?
Posted by Jim at 01:26 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack
December 01, 2006
Conservatives and Christians Give More to Charities, ABC says
As Doug explores in his post below, people of faith give far more to charities than non-religious people, and conservatives give more to the poor than do liberals. That’s the finding of a study by author Arthur Brooks and the conclusion trumpeted by a John Stossel report on ABC this week.
The report says:
“The single biggest predictor of whether someone will be charitable is his or her religious participation. Religious people are more likely to give to charity, and when they give, they give more money: four times as much. And Arthur Brooks told me that giving goes beyond their own religious organization: "Actually, the truth is that they're giving to more than their churches," he says. "The religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly non-religious charities."
Christian conviction and conservative ideology increases the likelihood that an individual will give to charities—and not just to their churches, but to a variety of religious and secular causes.
As Christians, we give out of obligation—Scripture tells us to help the poor—but even more out of gratitude to God for his goodness.
Liberals who see care for the poor as a government responsibility, give far less as individuals. At the same time, they describe conservatives as non-caring, and Christians as exclusionary and hypocritical. This could not be further from the truth, and these findings document it.
Posted by Jim at 08:26 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack
November 29, 2006
Ten Ways Media Leaders Can Keep Media Ethics from Becoming an Oxymoron
After reading a list of oxymorons, beginning with George Carlin’s famous “jumbo shrimp” and “military intelligence, I got a minor laugh in my college course on writing for public communication by introducing as the next oxymoron, Media Ethics. It introduced a section on the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, and I suggested the following list of ten ways the national media could restore its reputation.
1. Accuracy: Attention to detail; accuracy at all costs.
2. Thoroughness: Emphasize thoroughness over speed; getting the story right is more important than getting it first.
3. Humility: demonstrate humility through preparation, broad and vigorous research, and by seeking out experts.
4. Real Affirmative Action in news operations: ideological, religious, regional, and socio-economic, as well as racial and ethnic.
5. Journalism not Opposition: Reaffirm journalists as reporters of news, not the opposition party.
6. Historic Values: Reflect traditional values of the nation—ethics, historic teachings of faith groups.
7. Thinking: Recover the serious and critical mind—beyond the sound bite.
8. Rediscover Shame: wrongdoers should not be honored, they should be dishonored.
9. Self Cleansing: Restore credibility by cleaning up your own house so that journalists are trusted to present news fairly and professionally.
10. Leave NYC: Build national media competence and presence outside New York City and Washington, D.C. It would be good if the major networks moved to Des Moines, or Kansas City, or perhaps Indianapolis.
These were my thoughts for one group of future journalists.
Posted by Jim at 08:49 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
November 27, 2006
Mocking Religion, Happy Feet is Not a Friendly Little Film
I can't remember coming out of movie theater more furious than I did this Thanksgiving holiday after watching the animated and PG-rated Happy Feet. With relatives visiting from around the country, how could we go wrong taking both kids and adults to a cute little penguin story with lots of singing and dancing, with warm and fuzzy animal themes?
I'm not a movie prude; we check out many kinds of movies. And I expect most anything coming out of Hollywood, with any rating, to include something contrary to my values. I let most of it roll off my back. But with Happy Feet, I didn't expect my conservative Christian family to be assaulted with what we all recognized as a anti-Christian screed, with open mockery of traditional Christian preaching against values and lifestyles contrary to church teachings. It was abundantly clear that Happy Feet substituted homosexuality with dancing as the "different" lifestyle that was the unfair target of an Inquisition on ice. It was Dirty Dancing and Footloose all over again, but with the rhetoric and situation developed to make religious criticism of homosexuality counter to everything good and pleasing.
Did they think Christians wouldn’t notice? I suppose the creators just didn’t care. We had four families attending Happy Feet, with children of all ages. Independently, parents concluded during the film that they would walk out if it wouldn’t be a disruption to others in the large group of family members who had come to the movies together.
Clearly, we should have all left together.
The creators of Happy Feet should have taken less time mocking Christians and more time making sense out of the wild leaps at the end of the film, when the dancing penguin so impresses crowds in the aquarium that they release him back into the wild. And when the community of penguins gets happy feet, the commentators of the world decide its time to stop disrupting their food supply. (Of course the humans are to blame for all the animal woes; a long movie-making tradition that goes back to Bambi).
Wild leaps, even with happy feet.
For Christians who have not seen Happy Feet and are considering it as a friendly, family film—make another choice. This film is not good for children or families, and it is another Hollywood example of open mockery of Christian traditions.
Posted by Jim at 09:04 AM | Comments (46) | TrackBack
November 20, 2006
Getting Personal About Global Warming
I've been at the heart of the evangelical initiatives to engage the Christian community in an effort to combat human-induced global warming. For my conservative friends who still believe that all climate change we're seeing is simply cyclical, keep reading, because I'm not writing to argue that point (you wouldn't be convinced anyway, although the huge majority of scientists are). For my fundamentalist friends who belive there is no global warming, I'm not sure what world you're living in, but I hope you are enjoying it there.
I've found that most evangelical Christians have come to believe that effective care of God's creation is a moral and spiritual obligation. Not because nature is above human beings, or that the created are above the Creator, but because the earth and all that is within it is the Lord's and we, his children, have been given it as a temporary home, and we've been given the responsibility to care for it.
And if you believe that climate change is impacting the most vulnerable people in the world, as I do, and that it will be deadly for many of these people who live on the margins in the years ahead--then Christians have a deep moral responsibility to stem global warming.
You may not see the solution as government taking responsibility. That's fine, but it is a personal reponsiblity.
As evangelicals we are all about getting personal. We believe in a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ. We believe in personal transformation and personal responsibility. We can also address problems such as environmental degradation and dependence on foreign oil not only through government action but through personal responsibility.
This personal responsibility can include reducing our own use of fossil fuels.
Choose to do this for a variety of reasons. You may be keenly concerned about global warming. Others of you may see environmental conservation as a driving force. Still others of us believe that reducing our personal use of energy is a commitment to national security because it will reduce our reliance on oil from often-hostile sources.
Regardless of your reasons, I encourage you to consider using a tool created by the Evangelical Climate Initiative to participate in a program called Cooling Creation, which will show you the steps to reducing your global warming pollution to zero. Because few of us in the West want to live in grass huts and grow our own food and walk everywhere, we can reduce but not eliminate this personal pollution.
The Cooling Creation program offers an annual offset investment in alternative energies.
Check it out. Forget the arguments about the role of government and the threats to the economy. Is there a good reason why you should not take this personal responsiblity?
Posted by Jim at 08:14 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
November 10, 2006
New Bloggers on the Election
In addition to my work as a public relations consultant, I am an adjunct professor of communications at Kennesaw State University, the third largest university in Georgia, in suburban Atlanta.
In two of my Writing for Public Communication classes on Tuesday, Election Day, I used a session on Writing for the Web to guide the approximately 40 students in using Blogger to set up personal blogs. It was my attempt to teach about blogs and to add a number of new voices to the blogosphere.
The assignment for students this week was to write and post an article on their reactions to the election (the assignment was made before we knew it was going to be a bloodbath). I’m using this post to introduce these new blogs and students’ analyses of the election.
For my students reading this, links to the blogs from the 3:30 and 5 p.m. classes are combined here.
Danielle at Dani B. Fly doesn’t expect much from the change in Congressional leadership.
Ken at Random Cactus says the Democrats won because they dressed themselves up like conservatives.
Laura called her blog For Com 1135 and writes that she doesn’t like all the arguing.
Holly at Poof U fears that the Democrats are going to use their new power to create the embarrassments of Vietnam.
Kori at a blog she called Communications 1135 is nervous about the many voting problems she still hears about.
Kathy writes at Kute Kathy about evidences of election fever.
Jonathan at Elbows wants political reform but doesn’t see it happening in his lifetime.
Adam at What’s On Peace’s Mind? is going to get more involved in the political process.
Victoria at Victoria’s Blog says that without the Republicans in control of Congress, the job in Iraq will never be completed.
Paul Stippich at Vote for the Man celebrates the right we have as citizens to vote.
Danielle at Faerie's Journey into Public Communication muses about the impact of split government.
Erin at The Story of the Year bemoans the impact of Democratic control of Congress.
Curtis at Me and My Blog is hoping for a new direction in Iraq.
Jennifer at Sobes 1st calls for a big hallelujah.
The negative advertising turned Catlin at Merry Belle Love You against the election.
Monique at Fairie’s Thoughts sees the political landscape changing.
Jeff at Elections sees supeona power taking over the Washington atmosphere.
Matt at My Thoughts 4 U sees America as the perfect working democracy, but he doesn’t vote.
Jeffrey at The Wonderful World of Life is disenchanted
Dustin at Budz Blog is leaving politics to the politicians
Danielle at TFC for Life blames the war.
Rebecca talks in Comm Class about the President’s use of the word “thumpin” in his press conference.
Rachel at Ramblings of RKL has a rare agreement with the President: The people have spoken and its time to move on.
Endia at Endia’s Blog is excited about a new direction
Bunmi at Express Yourself likes the idea of a female Speaker
Jennifer at J.P. Blog analyzes the Sonny Perdue victory over Mark Taylor in the Georgia gubernatorial race.
Tiffanie at some days you feel like a bug, some days you feel like the windshield says the war has been a windshield to the American bug.
Casey at Voting celebrates the the right to vote.
The title of Nate's blog, Long Live the new Flesh, vividly describes his reaction to the election.
Rania at Nia's Thoughts hopes the sea change will bring more attention to domestic problems.
Posted by Jim at 12:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 23, 2006
A Story of Forgiveness from Africa
I searched for answers in the eyes of the three Acholi men huddled with me in the corner of an outdoor café on the leafy outskirts of Lira, a major city in northern Uganda. I had met the youngest of the three, Patrick, three days earlier and knew him to be a former child soldier, abducted at nine and in the ranks of the LRA rebels for ten years. Patrick, I learned, was piecing together a new life in the grip of Christian faith and good friends.
Patrick had brought me to the café in the early light of a July day to meet with the other two. Charles was a tall, handsome man with remarkably troubled eyes that I figured must be partially explained by the events that led to amputation of one of his legs below the knee. I had met Charles the day before but hadn’t found out how he’d lost his leg. I was trying to talk with a young woman named Janet, one of the “famous” Aboke girls who had been abducted by the LRA from St. Mary’s Boarding School ten years ago. She had spent most of the past decade in captivity. Charles was introduced to me as Janet’s husband, and as the first person I needed to talk to in order to meet her.
Now, with his crutches propped against the wall behind his chair, Charles leaned toward the man we had all gathered to see, known to me only as Mark.
Mark is a large, imposing man resembling James Earl Jones in stature and visage, particularly Jones’ role as Rev Stephen Kumalo in the movie version of the South African classic on reconciliation, Cry, the Beloved Country. Like Kumalo, he is a pastor. He is also Janet’s father, who Charles had explained mysteriously “held me responsible for what had happened to her.” That mystery was one of many to be unfolded around the table.
Mark was understandably protective of his daughter, no longer a young girl, but one who had begun to see too much of the dark side of life before her 13th birthday, when she was enslaved by the LRA and forced into a life of servitude.
As the café brightened, Mark explained his protective instinct, and much more.
Charles, the pastor said, had himself been abducted nearly 20 years ago, in the early days of the twisted rebellion. He was 17 at the time, and like an early adopter of a pyramid marketing scheme, he was soon one of the commanders in what was to become a ferocious and by any standard evil force that continually increased its ranks with abducted children, some 30,000 over the years.
As young abducted girls came of age, they were given to commanders as—you pick the term--wives, concubines, sexual slaves. It was a privilege soon afforded young Charles, and over the years he was presented with four women; a harem that bore him 10 children.
Janet, Mark’s daughter abducted at Aboke, was one of these young women, and by Charles she had two children in captivity, in the bush--as they say in Uganda.
“When Janet was rescued with her children by the military, and she came home, I wanted to kill the man who had forced himself on her; I wanted to kill him with my teeth, I was so angry,” Mark told me, with Charles, that man, sitting beside him.
Then Charles was captured in a firefight with the Ugandan military, by that time already having lost his leg in an earlier battle.
“Then something strange happened,” Mark continued. “God made it clear to me that I was to forgive Charles for what he had done to my daughter. And only God can give you the strength to forgive such terrible acts.”
Charles produced two wallet photos, one of he and Janet with their two children smiling with a white background, looking very much like the young family that went to JC Penney for family photos in a coupon deal. The other photo had the family, with Charles and Mark shaking hands.
“Not only did God tell me to forgive, he told me to reconcile, to make this man, the husband to my daughter, my son. I have done that.”
Charles looked admiringly at the imposing man and told how Mark meets with him regularly and gives him regular counsel and admonition.
“I’ve told him that he must give his life to Christ,” Mark emphasized.
I marveled at his ability to reconcile so decisively and at how this seemed to come easily to the Acholi, who are offering amnesty to the vilest rebels. Mark agreed that it was remarkable, but said it was also extremely difficult. “It is tough. Only in God’s power can you look beyond such offense and agree to love.”
I talked briefly with Patrick, as Mark and Charles discussed plans for later that evening. Patrick continued the description of the reconciliation between the respected gentleman and his son-in-law.
Mark stopped our conversation mid-sentence: “What is this that I hear you saying? My son-in-law? That is not right. No,” he said looking intently at Charles, “this is my son.”
Posted by Jim at 02:03 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 22, 2006
Possible Peace, Little Trust in Northern Uganda
Since my return from Uganda in late July, I've been following the sitution in northern Uganda with interest.
It is difficult to get reliable reports out of Uganda about the peace talks with the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). While there have been reports of a peace deal, and even indications that up to 1,800 rebels have moved to designated areas, the talks continue. One hang up to total resolution is the international court indictments of rebel leader Joseph Kony and his commanders. Uganda is willing to grant amnesty, but the ICC hasn't agreed.
Today, there are indications that Museveni (president of Uganda) is going to attend the peace talks in Juba.
While peace talks continue between the Ugandan government and the LRA, the Acholi people of northern Uganda, 90 percent of whom are displaced by 20 years of terror, pray for peace but find little reason for concrete hope.
There have been at least seven unsuccessful attempts over two decades to secure a peace agreement, and many were followed by spasms of LRA violence.
“People will stay in the protected internal refugee camps until they have enough confidence that the attacks won’t begin again, and that hasn’t happened yet,” said Doreen Achieng , a program director with Action for Children, a Ugandan social service agency.
Some residents are leaving the camps during the day to farm their land near their abandoned or ruined homes. But almost no one has enough trust that the current lull in attacks will last to live in their villages and face nights that so often have been filled with horror.
For now, most of the villages remain empty, the land dotted with the graves of more than 12,000 friends and family members killed by the LRA.
The challenge for the church is enormous.
“Ugandan church leaders struggle today to assure their flocks of God’s love when many cannot remember a time without deep sorrow,” said Conrad Mandsager, executive director of ChildVoice International, one Christian organization that is providing aid to child victims in the Gulu district. “The scope of the horror and death that the people of northern Uganda have seen and experienced is unfathomable.”
The government of Uganda, recognizing the fundamental victimization of the child soldiers, offered them amnesty last year, which made it more attractive for even long-time rebels to escape. Prior to the peace talks, the government extended the amnesty to Joseph Kony and senior rebel commanders who would abandon their rebellion. The offer, although not yet accepted by the senior rebels, is in accord with a traditional Acholi heart for forgiveness.
Most church leaders support the principle of Kony and his commanders being offered amnesty, viewing it as their Christian duty to forgive.
"In fact, we want them to return home and live a normal life like everybody else,” said Rev. Willy Akena, information officer for the Anglican Diocese of Northern Uganda in Gulu. “It would also be a testimony to those in the communities to know about reconciliation, and I believe many people will be changed as we expect that upon their return, they will publicly denounce their previous atrocities."
Nonetheless, some churchmen don’t see the desire for peace as a reason for pardoning the ring leaders.
“The amnesty is not right for Kony and the commanders,” said one Acholi lay leader now in Kampala. “They are international criminals who the U.N. should apprehend in Congo, where the LRA has set up their camps.”
As in most areas of Uganda, there are Anglican, Catholic, Baptist, and Pentecostal churches in most communities. But in the north most stand empty, since almost all families have been forced by the violence to move to one of 60 protected internal displacement camps (IDP).
All families in a village do not move to the same IDP camp, however, so church and social communities are shattered, not just moved. Many pastors do their best to gather new congregations in or near a camp, but they are usually starting from scratch.
Spiritual interest remains high, and many small non-affiliated churches are being established in the camps. The lack of accountability and theological training has resulted in false teaching. “For example, part of the teaching is that people who are victims of atrocities are sinners and that the rebel activity is God's way of removing sinners,” Rev. Akena said.
Posted by Jim at 08:34 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 20, 2006
Believe Pictures and The Last Sin Eater
There is a notable development in Hollywood that should be of interest to Christians. There is a new interest in things of faith and in products that reflect faith and values. Although many believers in the entertainment industry are now involved, the impetus is the millions of dollars that Mel Gibson made on The Passion of the Christ. People in Hollywood like to make money, even if it means advancing the Gospel.
The New York Times noticed this yesterday.
My former World Vision colleageue Brian Bird , who went on to become executive producer of Touched by an Angel, and Michael Landon Jr. are in the middle of this good news, and their new Believe Pictures has signed a deal with Rupert Murdoch's new Fox Faith division for six films that will highlight faith.
The first film from Believe Pictures will be The Last Sin Eater, based on the novel by Francine Rivers, which was terrific.
Jan at A View from Her has more to say on this.
Posted by Jim at 09:42 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Chavez and the Iranian Thug at the UN
There is really only one thing to say after listening to clownish behavior of Venezuela's Hugo Chavez. "Say No to Citgo." I think I would push my car before I'd stop at a Venezuela-owned Citgo station. Citgo has been owned by Petróleos de Venezuela, the national oil company of Venezuela, since 1990.
The beauty of America is that Hugo and the Iranian president--whose name I don't even want to learn how to spell--can come onto our soil and verbally soil our nation and its leader--and leave again without being thrown in prison or taken hostage.
Try it in either of their countries.
There is part of me that would like to make it a little difficult for them while they're here. Maybe just a U.S. fighter squadron escort out of our airspace, with no invitation to return.
Posted by Jim at 03:25 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 16, 2006
The Return of McGovernism
I remember George McGovern. He came to the University of Iowa during my freshman year in 1972 in the last throes of his presidential candidacy. The crowd packed the quadrangle, with students hanging out the windows of the surrounding classroom buildings. The crowds were friendly and supportive, anxious for an end to the Vietnam War and the draft (my selective service number was 11, which meant I would be packing my bags for 'Nam if the war didn't end).
There weren't many happy moments for McGovern thereafter, as he was crushed by Nixon at the ballot box and faded into anti-war history.
Evidently the Democrats of 2006 are nostalgic for the '70s. I miss Crosby, Stills and Nash and the music of the times. But I can't understand why the Democrats don't recognize where the McGovern road leads.
At the Conservative Outpost, Drew McKissick revisits and parallels the era of McGovern with the anti-war radical of our day, in a post titled The New McGovernism.
Posted by Jim at 04:15 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 15, 2006
When the Messenger Falls
It was tragic when the man who is responsible for introducing Jesus Christ to more people than anyone else in our generation demonstrated great public sin and enormous personal problems.
That man, of course, is Mel Gibson, the film star, director of The Passion of the Christ, and evangelist, who accomplished a late night trifeckta—-public drunkenness, driving under the influence, and scapegoating an ethnic group, the Jewish people.
I grieve for Mel Gibson, because he clearly has deep personal issues that have now destroyed his reputation. And I grieve for the impact this has on the fine work he has done bringing the message of Jesus through the thicket of Hollywood opposition to millions of people. When God’s messengers prove to have feet of clay, it gives courage to those who would tramper upon the message.
But much has been written about this incident. I appreciated a column from Terry Mattingly, which included this thought from film critic Michael Medved, an Orthodox Jew.
"When a long-married, 50-year-old father of seven gets arrested for drunk driving at nearly twice the speed limit at 2:30 in the morning," noted Medved, "it's safe to assume that he faces even more serious problems than exposing his anti-Semitic attitudes."
I like Mel Gibson and I honor him for his courage. I pray for his restoration and healing. He found a way to bring the story of Christ to the big screen; perhaps he’ll find a way creatively to help diminish the anti-Semitism that is a curse in the world and a unsavory legacy of Gibson’s own family.
Posted by Jim at 08:12 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 14, 2006
Reuters Photo Fraud to Bring Sympathy to Hezbullah
Here is fascinating evidence of photo fraud by Reuters and other media organizations in their coverage of the war against Hezbullah terrorists.
Posted by Jim at 12:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Journalistic Balance and Moral Equivalence
Photos and TV images are the most difficult to balance in journalistic reports, according to an article in the NY TImes, and the Hezbullah/Israel conflict has been among the most difficult, the article says.
But the attempt to balance the photo of a dead Israeli child with that of a dead Lebanese child is seen by some as "a dereliction of journalistic duty.:
"Some critics of Israel argue that because the death tolls and destruction are greater in Lebanon, a proportionality of sorts should inform the resulting reports; anything else betrays a pro-Israeli stance. But supporters of Israel say such an approach bestows a misguided moral equivalence. Israel is a democratic nation exercising its right to self-defense, they argue, while Hezbollah is a terrorist organization that uses the Lebanese people as human shields."
Certainly there is no moral equivalence here, with the Hezbollah terrorists responsible for attacking a legitimate and democratic nation. But journalistic balance should not infer moral equivalence, although it takes some wisdom by the reader/viewer (always a risk) to separate the morality from the equivalence of human tragedy.
It's an interesting article on a tough daily struggle for responsbile news organizations.
Posted by Jim at 07:25 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 09, 2006
Northern Uganda: A Journey to the Edge of Darkness
This is Crisis
Occasionally, God puts us in situations where we are forced to realize that we are truly fortunate, and that the events and challenges that we call problems, are truly minor inconveniences in a sea of ease.
We returned several days ago from two weeks in Africa, mostly in northern Uganda, with a few days in Nairobi, Kenya. We were working with Child Voice International, a new Christian organization focusing on the child victims of war.
Although I’ve traveled extensively throughout the world, including a fair amount of time in the poorest countries, the time in Uganda provided a fresh dose of reality, of perspective, of gratitude, and of conviction.
Uganda
Uganda shares with most of Africa the tragic legacy of post-colonial cultural and economic freefall. Actually, the nation has been doing a little better in recent years than many of its neighbors, and because of the influence of the Christian church, it has a better record in its battle with AIDS than much of Africa. (You see abstinence posters everywhere. It’s not a bad word in Uganda).
Thirty years ago, Idi Amin brutalized the nation. When we flew into Entebbe, the world was observing the 30-year anniversary of the successful Israeli rescue of its citizens who were hijacked to Entebbe. Our Uganda guide and friend, however, did not want to talk about it. It is not a proud chapter in Ugandan history.
But now another madman has taken a severe toll on the nation. A deranged rebel spiritualist/terrorist, Joseph Kony, has killed thousands, adducted and enslaved some 30,000 children, and displaced most of the population of two million in the northern provinces of the nation.
One formerly abducted child we met at a transit center, James, had been forced by the rebels to bite his brother until nearly dead, then to beat him to death. At one point in the bush, James took some corn because he was hungry, and a rebel cut off part of his ear because he had not been given permission.
These stories are everywhere. Most families in northern Ugandan have lost a loved one.
When Will They Be Able to Go Home?
There shouldn't be malnutrition in northern Uganda, where the soil is fine and the rains are plentiful. But the murderous attacks of the oddly named Lord's Resistance Army have caused most of the two million people in this region to leave their homes and farmland to live in protected internal refugee camps. While these camps are relatively safe, people are crowded into them and diseases are killing thousands of people. And there is no land there for these people to grow their crops. They are kept alive through the help of international aid agencies.
Once the LRA rebels are subdued or give up, it should be safe for these refugees to return to their homes. But will they feel safe? Will they want to return to homes that have often been scenes of horrible crimes?
Thousands of Children Still Enslaved
According to one source who was abducted at the age of nine and served 10 years as a child soldier, during the which time he became a high-level LRA operative, there are still more than 3,000 child soldiers held by the LRA.
There are peace talks grinding on in Sudan between the LRA and the Ugandan government. Pray for this peace.
The government has offered amnesty to the butchers of the LRA. It blows your mind, but it fits into a culture of forgiveness, which I’ll talk about another day.
Posted by Jim at 01:55 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 06, 2006
To Uganda
We leave tomorrow to visit the children of war and those who care for them in northern Uganda. We’ll spend the next two weeks in Kampala and in remote towns in the north that have suffered much at the hands of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA).
With peace talks possible this next week, it is a good time, it seems, to visit. We go with a group from ChildVoice International, which is seeking to respond to the horrific brutality of the LRA. The group has terrorized the nation of Uganda for 19 years and has abducted children to serve as child soldiers.
ChildVoice wants to raise awareness in the international community about child victims of war. Currently, the organization is planning to build a village in Uganda where children can live after escaping from their LRA captors.

I hope to write along the way and to report when I can on the road, or when I return.
In addition to being beaten, raped, and forced to march until exhausted, abducted children are routinely forced to participate in the killing of other children who attempt to escape. In addition to the thousands who have been abducted, thousands more have been killed, maimed, brutalized, and used to undertake the worst atrocities imaginable, including murder, rape, theft, and the like, and often on the very communities from which the children had lived.
Children who succeed in escaping from the LRA find their ordeal far from over. Fearing rebel reprisals against themselves or their families if they return to their villages, most escaped children are afraid to go home. Many others have nowhere to return to, as their villages have been decimated and are left abandoned when inhabitants are forcibly evacuated and sent to internment camps.
Posted by Jim at 09:53 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Serve God, Save the Planet
Former emergency room doctor J. Matthew Sleeth has seen much trauma and heartache in his day, but if you want to see him get really agitated, tell him that the environment is not a valid topic of concern for evangelical Christians.
Dr. Sleeth is bold about his Christian faith and sees as his primary responsibility to bring others to faith in Jesus Christ. He is also one of the emerging leaders in the creation care movement, a position that is growing with the publication this month of his new book Serve God, Save the Planet(Chelsea Green).
On the heels of the Evangelical Climate Initiative that came out with its statement on global warming in Feb. - a statement signed by 86 prominent evangelical leaders - Sleeth's book provides an alternative to big-government "solutions," and shows how voluntary, reasonable creation care can save money in the family budget (Sleeth's monthly electric bill is around $20), limit environmental damage, and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
Sleeth also takes to task hypocritical environmentalists whose actions do not match their words.
He writes in Serve God, Save the Planet:
“There is plenty of hypocrisy among environmentalists. I was invited to visit a woman who writes about the effects of fossil fuel consumption. I pulled up to her rural Maine home one day. Two SUV's were parked in the drive. The Maine house is one of three that she owns. All are heated year-round...As we talked, I thought to myself, 'May the Lord save us from well intended, wealthy environmentalists who want to save the planet.'"Serve God, Save the Planet is not about politics or the political battles over global warming. It is a deeply personal book with far-reaching ramifications for evangelical Christians and all those who take their devotion to God seriously. A moving personal story that is practical, the book presents a gripping account of Dr. Sleeth’s personal and spiritual journey to creation care. It lays out sobering rationale for life changes, a “how-to” guide for lifestyle adjustments that will help protect God’s creation, and a greater understanding how creation care serves others whose life and health are affected by our pollution.
Sleeth’s unique book tackles this divisive issue from a conservative evangelical perspective – one that urges the reader to focus on small changes each person can make that will have a substantial impact on the environment, rather than waiting for the government to devise “solutions” that intrude on personal freedom.
Ø "It's tempting to point to a self-serving lobbyist or a power-hungry elected official and blame him for one of the sixty-four thousands annual deaths from airborne soot,” Sleeth writes. “ But what about me and what about us? By changing light bulbs,... carpooling, and owning more modest homes, Christians can save lives."
Earlier this year, 86 evangelical leaders released a Call to Action on climate change, signaling a notable shift in the Christian community and a growing concern among evangelicals about the moral questions surrounding environmental stewardship. A poll released in Feb. 2006 by Ellison Research showed that 84% of evangelicals agreed that reducing pollution is a form of obedience to the biblical command to love your neighbor.
Now, they have a handbook they can trust to guide their steps.
Rather than using the environment as an excuse to increase government's role in our lives, Sleeth discusses how reasonable measures taken by each of us can help us practice good stewardship of the creation God gave us as a gift. In the process, Sleeth’s solutions save money in the family budget (Sleeth's monthly electric bill is around $20), limit environmental damage, and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
Five years ago, Dr. Sleeth and his family lived in a big house on the Maine coast, had two luxury cars and many material possessions. As chief of the medical staff at a large hospital, Sleeth was living the American dream. As he saw patient after patient suffering from cancer, asthma, and other chronic diseases, he began to understand that the earth and its inhabitants were in trouble. Feeling helpless, he turned to his faith for guidance, and he discovered how the Scriptural lessons of personal responsibility, simplicity, and stewardship could be utilized to help alleviate these health problems. The Sleeths have since sold their big home and discarded more than half of what they once owned.
Sleeth writes:
"The changes we have made [in our lifestyle] will not earn our way into heaven, but they do two important things for our souls. They connect us with the family of man around the world, and, more important, they bring us closer to God. If he asks us to give up everything we have and follow him, I now know with certainty that each member of my family would gladly do so."
In Serve God, Save the Planet, Dr. Sleeth shares what was easy and what was hard about the changes his family has made, and how material downscaling led his family to healthier lifestyles, stronger relationships, and richer spiritual lives. He writes: “Serve God, Save the Planet is meant to elicit personal accountability rather than political change. Its lessons are meant to teach individuals, families, and communities not much larger than a congregation; and yet it looks at larger issues because they profoundly affect each of us.”
Posted by Jim at 03:13 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
July 03, 2006
Freedom
Freedom isn’t free, the now common slogan says, and true freedom isn’t just physical freedom. As we celebrate 130 years of American independence, it is good to remember these principles.
Our freedom has been costly, but the price has been paid, and is being paid daily. That is true spiritually and politically, although humanists and many liberals will deny both.
To the humanist, people are inherently good unless driven toward bad or deprived in some way, and people are naturally free from sinfulness. As Christians, we understand that people are inherently sinful, even depraved, and that freedom from the oppression that comes with sin has to be purchased. Our souls must be purchased, but we have nothing to pay the price. The only currency that God will accept is the blood of the lamb without blemish, the Lamb of God. The price of spiritual freedom is the blood of Christ.
Politically, liberals believe that if we are nice to everyone and meet their needs, everyone will get along and all the people of the world will be free. The price of freedom, they say, is for people to give up their selfishness and be good to each other. The only reason there is war, the liberals say, is because nations such as the United States are selfish bullies that want to impose themselves on others.
Those who understand human nature recognize that we can never give enough away to deal with the evil in the dark hearts of the world (and in our own country). Freedom has to be protected, at times at a heavy price of blood and life.
In our free nation, however, we are surrounded by people who are not free. Walk through the mall and count the people who appear to have free spirits, who demonstrate joy. Turn on the television and watch for people who appreciate a free nation. Consider your family and think about relatives who are free in the midst of the burdens of life.
Freedom is not a physical position as much as it is a spiritual condition. This came to mind again during Sunday services yesterday when a soloist sang the great song “Free,” by Steven Curtis Chapman. One of the joys of my career was working for and achieving an agreement between Chapman and Prison Fellowship—where I was an executive at the time—for Chapman to visit prisons and promote Prison Fellowship’s ministry, and for PF to help support his Heaven in the Real World album and tour (1996). As a result of this agreement and after one of Chapman’s visits to death row, he wrote Free. It reflects the truth you see often among death row inmates—they are free while under the sentence of physical death.
FREE, by Steven Curtis Chapman
The sun was beating down inside the walls of stone and razor wire
As we made our way across the prison yard
I felt my heart begin to race as we drew nearer to the place
Where they say that death is waiting in the dark
The slamming doors of iron echoed through the halls
Where despair holds life within its cruel claws
But then I met a man who's face seemed so strangely out of place
A blinding light of hope was shining in his eyes
And with repentance in his voice he told me of his tragic choice
That led him to this place where he must pay the price
But then his voice grew strong as he began to tell
About the One he said had rescued him from hell, he said...
I'm free, yeah, oh, I have been forgiven
God's love has taken off my chains and given me these wings
And I'm free, yeah, yeah, and the freedom I've been given
Is something that not even death can take away from me
Because I'm free
Jesus set me free
We said a prayed and said goodbye and tears began to fill my eyes
As I stepped back out into the blinding sun
And even as I drove away I found that I could not escape
The way he spoke of what the grace of God had done
I thought about how sin had sentenced us to die
And how God gave His only Son so you and I could say...
And if the Son has set you free,
Oh, if the Son has set you free
Then you are free indeed,
Oh, You are really free
If the Son has set you free,
Oh, if the Son has set you free
Then you are free, really, really free
Oh, we're free, yearh, oh, we have been forgiven
God's grace has broken every chain and given us these wings
And we're free, yeah, yeah, and the freedom we've been given
Is something that not even death can take from you and me
Because we're free, yeah, the freedom we've been given
Is something that not even death can take from you and me
Because we're free, oh, we're free
We are free, we are free
The Son has set us free
If the Son has set you free
You are free indeed
Posted by Jim at 10:11 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack
July 01, 2006
The Southern Baptist’s Lame Statement on the Environment
I was perplexed by the resolution passed by the Southern Baptists in Convention earlier this month on the environment. It is not unusual for me to be perplexed by the odd resolutions that are the usual gurgitation of these conventions, but because I’ve been active on the issue of evangelical environmentalism over the last year, I was particularly interested in the 2006 SBC Resolution No. 8 on environmentalism and evangelicals.
Apparently the resolution is attacking the Evangelical Climate Initiative, of which my firm was a part, but I can’t say for sure because there is too much nuance in the document for the actual purpose to be understood (perhaps someone who attended the conference would know if the floor discussion clarified this), and climate change or global warming isn’t specifically mentioned.
But the climate change politics aren’t interesting to me anyway, because I know where the conservative leadership of the SBC stands. While I think the SBC’s previous statements on global warming demonstrated an antiquated pack mentality, the question of the personal, moral responsibility of the follower of Christ is much more important. That’s what I’m most interested in now.
The Resolution acknowledges sinful man’s culpability when it comes to environmental degradation:
“WHEREAS, Since the fall into sin, humans have often ignored the Creator, shirked their stewardship of the environment, and further defiled the good creation.”
And the Resolution calls on Southern Baptists to protect the environment.
“RESOLVED, That the messengers to the Southern Baptist Convention meeting in Greensboro, North Carolina, June 13-14, 2006, renew our commitment to God’s command to exercise caring stewardship and wise dominion over the creation (Genesis 1:28); and be it furtherRESOLVED, That we urge all Southern Baptists toward the conservation and preservation of our natural resources for future generations while respecting ownership and property rights; and be it further
RESOLVED, That we encourage public policy and private enterprise efforts that seek to improve the environment based on sound scientific and technological research.”
OK, that’s all good, in my view. Unfortunately, I have no idea what the Resolution is encouraging SBC adherents to do.
Let’s summarize: Baptists should.
1. exercise caring stewardship and wise dominion over the creation
2. conserve and preserve natural resources for future generations
3. encourage public policy and private enterprise to improve the environment.
I just don’t understand what any of this will mean to the Baptists in the pew without more specific directives.
To the drafters, what is caring stewardship? Does that mean establishing habits in your home that will use less non-renewable energy, or carpooling to the Golden Corral after church on Sunday?
How are Baptists asked to conserve or preserve natural resources? What is step one? And is it conserve or preserve—two very different approaches (there was argument between John Muir and Ansel Adams on this point). Do the Baptists really support any significant preservation?
And what legislation will the Baptists now support to improve the environment? What will they encourage private enterprise to do? Could they give us one clue?
The Resolution is useless because it is so vague. The criticisms are lame and the instructions are simply nice words.
There is one other point in the Resolution:
“RESOLVED, That we not only reaffirm our God-given responsibility of caring for the creation, but above all, that we continue to commit ourselves to the Great Commission to take the Good News of Jesus Christ to people of every tribe, tongue, and nation thus bringing glory to the One who will make all things new at His coming (Revelation 21:1).”
So the bottom line for the Baptists on the environment is for us to get more people saved. That’s wonderful; it really is. But when it comes to the environment, what good are more Christians who don’t know how to live their lives in a way that will truly care for God’s creation.
The Southern Baptists don’t know or they can’t say.
In another post I’ll tell you about some folks who can help.
Posted by Jim at 08:10 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Most Christians Consume Some Christian Media, Just Not Much of It
Christian clergy and laypeople tap into a fair amount of Christian media, but it is a minor part of their daily intake, and the mostly commonly accessed Christian media are music and radio (actually music radio). This, according to a new study by Ellison Research.
The study doesn’t reveal anything particularly surprising. Why would Christians, or anyone, rely on Christian media for news and information when Christian media don’t follow the minimal standards for journalism. Exclusively Christian media are advocates, not journalists, with very few exceptions. World magazine and Christianity Today have laudable journalistic standards, and there may be a few others.
So Christians turn to mainstream media for most of their news, and these days they turn more and more to Fox News Channel, talk radio, and the blogs.
There is no such thing as Christian journalism. There is journalism practiced by followers of Christ. And journalistic treatment of the Christian world. And journalism that exhibits Christian virtues. But news reporting and writing that tries to advocate for the faith isn’t journalism, although it may pretend to be.
Ron Sellers, president of Ellison Research, points out that although the numbers for Christian media are limited, they are still great enough to get the attention of the business community, which has begun putting big money into Christian films, books, and music.
“Although Christian media of some type reaches the vast majority of Protestants,” Sellers wrote, “for the average person it still represents a fraction of the media they consume.”
Posted by Jim at 12:26 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
May 26, 2006
Enron’s Criminals Should Not Go To Prison; They Should Make Money for Their Victims
Former Enron Corp. executives Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling were convicted of conspiracy and fraud yesterday, providing the government a major success in one a of the largest business scandals in U.S. history. (Fox News)
Lay, who founded Enron, was convicted of all six counts of conspiracy and fraud. He was also convicted of bank fraud and making false statements to banks in a separate trial related to his personal banking.
Skilling was found guilty of 19 counts of conspiracy, fraud, insider trading and making false statements. He was found not guilty on nine criminal counts.
Now the futility of the American criminal justice system will come into full view, as two extremely bright men who allowed greed to turn their talent into tragedy will be sentenced to long prison terms. Lay faces a maximum of 45 years in prison, and Skilling’s crimes carry a maximum sentence of 185 years.
Neither man should go to prison. While they have both caused severe damage to individuals who lost millions of dollars in personal pensions and holdings, and they had a terrible impact on the American economy and in national trust in American business, imprisonment is the wrong sanction.
Their punishment should be severe, but prisons are designed to warehouse people who are dangerous. These two men, and others like them, should be punished in ways that will enable them to help repay their victims and heal and restore their communities.
This is called restorative justice.
“Restorative Justice equates toughness on crime with holding offenders accountable for making their victims whole again or "making things right", to the degree possible. Specifically, restorative justice sees the need to provide victims with a sense of fairness and access to a justice system that has few formal obligations to make things right for them. It does this through programs such as restitution, victim- offender mediation and policies that promote victims' rights.Similarly, restorative justice recognizes that communities are hurt by crime. It seeks to involve communities in the solutions to crime and holds communities accountable for accepting the offending party back into the community once his/her debt is paid, as well as providing an environment for victims of crime to feel safe and secure.
Offenders are held accountable to their victims, communities and families under restorative justice. They are held responsible for making their victims whole again, to the degree possible. Offenders make community restitution to repair the harm caused to their community. By working to repair the damage done to both victims and communities, criminal offenders earn the self-respect essential to leading a productive life upon their eventual return to society.”
As a society, we want revenge, not restorative justice, so the Enron economic-thugs will do time. But they spend the rest of their lives helping to make things better. What a shame.
Posted by Jim at 09:13 AM | Comments (9) | TrackBack
May 25, 2006
A Polar Cap is Not a Presidential Platform
I’m part of the renegade (although becoming more mainstream) movement known as the Evangelical Climate Initiative that is working to rally evangelical action against global warming (See posts on this here, here and here). Scripps Howard distributed a Providence Journal editorial on the ECI today.
But does anyone seriously think that a strong position on the environment is going to propel Al Gore back into presidential politics. What’s his campaign slogan, “It’s the Polar Caps, Stupid!” or “Making the World Safe for Environmentalists.”
Not the platform to launch a presidential run.
Posted by Jim at 07:39 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 24, 2006
Press Bungling of Katrina Coverage
Press bungling of Katrina coverage and complicity with Democrats in trashing the Administration is explored by Jonah Goldberg at NRO.
This excerpt from Instapundit:
Where to begin? As I’ve written before, virtually all of the gripping stories from Katrina were untrue. All of those stories about, in Paula Zahn’s words, “bands of rapists, going block to block”? Not true. The tales of snipers firing on medevac helicopters? Bogus. The yarns, peddled on Oprah by New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin and the New Orleans police chief, that “little babies” were getting raped in the Superdome and that the bodies of the murdered were piling up? Completely false. The stories about poor blacks dying in comparatively huge numbers because American society “left them behind”? Nah-ah. While most outlets limited themselves to taking Nagin’s estimate of 10,000 dead at face value, Editor and Publisher—the watchdog of the media—ran the headline, “Mortuary Director Tells Local Paper 40,000 Could Be Lost in Hurricane.”In all of Louisiana, not just New Orleans, the total dead from Katrina was roughly 1,500. Blacks did not die disproportionately, nor did the poor. The only group truly singled out in terms of mortality was the elderly. According to a Knight-Ridder study, while only 15 percent of the population of New Orleans was over the age of 60, some 74 percent of the dead were 60 or older, and almost half were older than 75. Blacks were, if anything, slightly underrepresented among the dead given their share of the population.
This barely captures how badly the press bungled Katrina coverage. . . . And yet, an ubiquitous media chorus claims simultaneously that Katrina was Bush’s worst hour and the press’s best.
Posted by Jim at 01:51 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
May 23, 2006
Bush’s Belief in Good and Evil
What we need is a president with flexible principles who has a personal faith that does not affect his public policy decisions. That, it seems, is the position of former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who told Reuters: "I worked for two presidents who were men of faith, and they did not make their religious views part of American policy.” Albright was, referring, of course, to Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.
"President Bush's certitude about what he believes in, and the division between good and evil, is, I think, different," said Albright, who has written a book about faith and foreign policy titled The Mighty and the Almighty.
Albright said, "The absolute truth is what makes Bush so worrying to some of us." You’d prefer absolute lies? Or maybe relativism and situational truth?
This all reminds me of William Wilberforce, who we’ll probably be talking a lot about next year, or at least that’s what the people at Walden Media (“Narnia”) hope. In Spring 2007, Walden will be releasing “Amazing Grace,” the true story of William Wilberforce, a British statesman and reformer from the early part of the 19th century who led a twenty-year fight to abolish the British slave trade.
During the years that I traveled with Chuck Colson as his chief of staff and public relations VP, he often cited Wilberforce as a model (and, in fact, we established the annual William Wilberforce Award). And he would quote Lord Melbourne, who sounded quite a lot like Ms. Albright in his criticism of Wilberforce’s actions:
"Things have come to a pretty pass when religion is allowed to invade public life."
I dread the day when people such as Albright prevail and speaking truth is seen as a form of hate speech.
Posted by Jim at 07:57 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
May 22, 2006
Bible Brawl: Group Disses a Stellar Textbook as Georgia Adopts High School Classes on the Bible
In April, Georgia became the first state to enact legislation that calls for public high school courses about the Bible. The state school board is to develop the curriculum by February 2007, and local school districts, teachers, and even students will decide what version of the Bible to use as a textbook. My Christianity Today article on Georgia’s move is now posted at Christianity Today.
Here’s a bit more.
In Georgia, where it is sometimes difficult to distinguish party affiliation, four Democratic state senators spurred the Bible curriculum legislation. Sen. Tim Golden (D-Valdosta), Sen. Doug Stoner (D-Smyrna), and others proposed the concept behind Senate Bill 79, which was passed overwhelming in late March and signed by Gov. Sonny Perdue on April 20. Republicans—who now control both houses of the Georgia legislature—put their mark on the law by requiring that the Bible be used as the textbook, rather than the text The Bible and Its Influence, which was earmarked for use in the Democratic version of the bill.
The Georgia tussle is an extension of wrestling by national evangelicals over the reliability of The Bible and Its Influence for teaching the Bible in the public schools. Released last September by the Bible Literacy Project, The Bible and Its Influence is a textbook to be used with a Bible of the student’s choice. It is designed to meet constitutional standards for public school use as an elective in English or Social Studies programs for 9th to 12th grades. The National Association of Evangelicals and leaders such as Charles Colson of Prison Fellowship, Joseph Stowell of Moody Bible Institute, and Os Guinness of The Trinity Forum support the text.
I have the textbook. It’s excellent. I want to take a course using this book to explore the Bible as literature and historical record. Although The Bible and Its Influence was sadly dropped from the Georgia legislation, there is still a chance the state school board will use it. That would go against the legislation, which requires that the Bible itself be used—because the text is designed to be used with the Bible. Not instead of the Bible, which was some of the misinformation used in the campaign against it in Georgia and Alabama.
D. James Kennedy of Coral Ridge and John Hagee of Cornerstone Church are among those campaigning against it, and they are looking silly doing it. They are lonely voices and they’re hitting a sour, discordant note at that. Hagee does a lot of odd things, but I’m surprised by Kennedy—who may have received bad information from someone.
Colson said: “[The Bible and Its Influence] is not meant to be a substitute for the teachings of the church, but rather a means of furthering the foundational knowledge of students.”
Alabama, Tennessee, and Missouri are also considering legislation this session to teach courses about the Bible in public schools. Randy Brinson, head of Alabama-based Redeem the Vote, suggested the Bible curriculum laws to legislators in Alabama and Georgia and recommended The Bible and Its Influence as a textbook that would withstand legal challenges.
“As we’ve worked to register Christian young people to vote, we’ve polled them about their concerns,” Brinson explained. “Religious liberty and education are at the top of the list, which prompted us to look at ways to bring the study of the Bible into public schools.”
But when Tommie Williams, the Republican majority leader in the Georgia senate, prepared the Republican version of the legislation, he consulted with Elizabeth Ridenour, president of the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools.
Ridenour says believes that it is important that the Bible be used as the main textbook in public schools so it is taught from a position of neutrality. She is opposed to the use of The Bible and Its Influence and may have done more to keep it out of the Georgia legislation than anyone is saying. It is revealing that the legislation opens the possibility of the state using the curriculum that her organization offers.
The National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools is featuring the strongly worded condemnation by Kennedy and Hagee on its Website. There seems to be some political games being played by Ridenour, and she clearly has a conflict of interest.
While welcoming a new law that will allow instruction on the Bible, Brinson calls the political jockeying tinged by evangelical in-fighting “looking for wedges in an area where common ground should be easy to find.”
In 1963, the Supreme Court prohibited the devotional use of the Bible in public school classrooms but ruled that academic study of the Bible is constitutional. The court said that teaching about the Bible is acceptable, but teaching what to believe is not.
The new Georgia law seeks to meet this standard, requiring that courses be taught “in an objective and non-devotional manner with no attempt made to indoctrinate students." But the use of the Bible itself as a textbook takes the law to untested ground. Georgia Senator Doug Stoner said he and his colleagues recommended use of The Bible and its Influence in the original legislation for this reason.
As to why there shouldn’t be similar courses on other religious works, such as the Koran, Stoner said: “In his works, Shakespeare has 1300 references to the Bible, not the Koran. Students need to know the Bible to understand western civilization and western literature.”
Posted by Jim at 05:24 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
May 02, 2006
Some DaVinci Thoughts
Walking from meeting to meeting in New York City last Friday—-it was a beautiful Spring day in the city and I preferred walking to a taxi or the subway—-I passed St. Patrick’s Cathedral. It is a stunning site at any time, but what stunned me was the sight of a bus stop placard adjacent to the Cathedral for the movie The DaVinci Code. It was a vivid symbol of Dan Brown and his sponsors “flipping the bird” in the face of the Church.
I read the DaVinci Code last year because it was being discussed so widely by non-Christians, and being so thoroughly criticized by Christian believers who hadn’t read it.
Now the movie is about to apppear, and those of us who are followers of Jesus have to deal with the question of how to react and what to do. Do we know how to answer those who come away from the book and movie with deep doubts and new, false information about the foundations of our faith?
Does the church have the moral authority or societal relationships to effectively respond to this great cultural affront to the fundamentals of historic Christianity?
I found the novel to be fine, about on par with dozens of Robert Ludlum novels, and not as good as most Tom Clancy stories. I found the ending disappointing—if you’re going to be bold enough to make the claims about Mary Magdalene, have the guts to find her grave.
But it is, of course, profoundly blasphemous, and historically inaccurate on so many counts. Christianity is based on many empirically proven facts and accounts, but it also requires what Francis Schaeffer called “the leap of faith.” But rather than find a basis of doubt in that leaping area, Dan Brown based the blasphemy on the wrong telling of known facts.
But Brown’s supposedly bold effort simply reminds me of being in 6th grade. During that year, north of Boston, I pursued grade-school rebellions of that time—-the mid-1960s—-sneaking off behind the big house on the hill with other prepubescent friends to smoke a pack of Kents from the purse of a friend’s mother. Pulling a fire alarm and running. And a variety of other stupid acts that were made delicious because they were so wrong according the rules my parents had communicated so clearly.
And so it is with Mr. Brown. He can call Jesus names and get away with it. He can say that the church made up all that stuff about Jesus Christ being God, and the church can’t touch him. He can make God Incarnate sexually active, and the culture will snicker and sneak off into dark theaters to watch the revelation, because Christians won’t declare a jihad against writers like others would.
There is much being written and said to equip Christians to confront the lies that have been presented as the truth behind Brown’s fiction.
CNN Online has a good roundup of some opposition.
Included are these examples:
To give just one example, Ben Witherington III of Asbury Theological Seminary is following up the criticisms of the novel in "The Gospel Code" with lectures in Singapore, Turkey and 30 U.S. cities. He's given 55 broadcast interviews.Assaults on "Da Vinci" don't just come from evangelicals like Witherington. A senior Vatican official, Archbishop Angelo Amato, called for a boycott of the film Friday, saying it contained slanderous offenses against Christianity.
Among more liberal thinkers, Harold Attridge, dean of Yale's Divinity School, says Brown has "wildly misinterpreted" early Christianity. Ehrman details Brown's "numerous mistakes" in "Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code" and asks: "Why didn't he simply get his facts straight?"
The whole "Da Vinci" hubbub, Witherington says, shows "we are a Jesus-haunted culture that's biblically illiterate" and harbors general "disaffection from traditional answers."
But he and others also see a chance to inform people about the beliefs of Christianity through the "Da Vinci" controversy.
"If people are intrigued by the historical questions, there are plenty of materials out there," Yale's Attridge says.
And that may be the book and movie’s greatest contribution. We welcome the honest inquirer who asks: Who is this Jesus?
Posted by Jim at 09:09 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
April 30, 2006
A Voice for the Child Victims of War
In a sharply tailored suit with long braided hair and an easy smile, Akallo Grace Grall is thousands of miles away from the African bush and 10 years removed from the living hell in which she was trapped as a child victim of war—a child soldier of Uganda.
Now a communications student of Gordon College and an associate with the new advocacy and aid group ChildVoice International, Grace testified on Wed., April 26, at the House Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations, chaired by Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ), in an appearance arranged by World Vision.
Her testimony was unimaginably chilling, as she outlined the horror that no woman, no child, no human being should go through, abducted with dozens of other girls from a boarding school in northern Uganda in 1996, and forced to kill or be killed by the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA). She face was subjugated in pure terror, with children killed for offenses ranging from attempted escape to crying. Grace was forced to kill two other children, was given to a LRA officer as a sex slave, and once passed out from exhaustion and buried alive.
She survived and escaped to safety. Today, she recounts the horror and mourns those she left behind, those who died, those who have never escaped and are part of the 30,000 children conscripted by the LRA. They remain the fighters, child shields, and slaves of Joseph Kony and his LRA thugs. Her testimony not only gripped the members of Congress who attended, but provided a chilling illustration of pure evil in the 21st Century.
The children of Uganda are part of the international shame of child soldiers and only one example of the slavery that remains in our world.
ChildVoice International is one group that is committed to shining a light on the problem, and restoring the voices and the vitality of these children, in Uganda and around the world. Others are laboring in Uganda, including World Vision and Refugees International, who were represented at the hearing.
Our own inconveniences of life fade away in the shadow of such horrible images, provided by a soft-spoken and courageous young woman who escaped from hell and has made it her mission to work for the peace of Uganda and the rescue of others who remain in evil’s grasp.
Posted by Jim at 04:38 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
February 27, 2006
New Poll Indicates Evangelical Shift on Climate Change, Environmental Concerns
As I mentioned last week, I have been providing public relations and communications counsel to the Evangelical Climate Initiative, in its national release of Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action.
The pronouncement has received significant attention in the media, most of which has pondered the variance in evangelical opinion on the issue of global warming, and weighed the influence of the 86 evangelical leaders who signed the Call to Action against traditional stalwarts who have not accepted scientific findings on climate change--such as James Dobson and Chuck Colson.
There are some indications that there is, indeed, changes in evangelical attitudes on climate.
Fortune magazine (Feb. 8, 2006): “With publications ranging from The Economist to Christianity Today urging action to curb global warming, there's little doubt about which way the winds are blowing, in both the business and evangelical worlds.”
The Associated Press referred to the initiative as "a historic tipping point" (Los Angeles Times, Feb 10) in evangelical response to climate change.
Ted Haggard, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, said in the New York Times (Feb. 8): “There is no doubt about it in my mind that climate change is happening, and there is no doubt about it that it would be wise for us to stop doing the foolish things we're doing that could potentially be causing this. In my mind there is no downside to being cautious."
New Poll Results
And now details from a new poll of evangelical Christians seem to strengthen the call made the group of 86 evangelical leaders for action to reduce global warming.
In the poll, conducted by Ellison Research—-which frequently surveys church leaders—-70 percent of evangelicals said they believed global warming will pose a serious threat to future generations. Sixty-three percent of evangelicals believed that although global warming may be a long-term problem, since it is being caused today, the nation must start addressing it immediately.
In other findings from the Ellison Research poll, 95 percent of evangelical respondents agreed that “God gave us dominion over His creation, so we have a responsibility to care for it.”
--In the poll, 84 percent of evangelicals agreed that reducing pollution is a form of obedience to the biblical command to love your neighbor.
--92 percent agreed that “in the long run, it will be cheaper to protect the environment now than to fix it later.”
--95 percent agreed that “a healthy environment helps to keep your family healthy.”
--A majority of evangelicals—51 percent—said the U.S. should take steps to address global warming, even if there is a high economic cost.
--Two-thirds of evangelicals are either completely or mostly convinced that global warming is actually taking place.
The study was conducted in September 2005 by Ellison Research, a marketing research company located in Phoenix, Ariz. The study’s total sample is accurate to within ±3.1 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence level with a 50 percent response distribution. The study was designed independently by Ellison Research and funded by the Evangelical Environmental Network.
Posted by Jim at 07:37 AM | Comments (12) | TrackBack
February 23, 2006
Evangelical Climate Initiative TV & Radio Campaign
The Evangelical Climate Initiative begins its two week television and radio campaign today, with spots tonight on Fox News Channel, and startly shortly on CNN and ABC Family, and on local television in eight markets. The radio spots will be aired on Salem Radio Networks talk stations, and on about 50 Christian radio stations nationally.
Here is a link to the television spot, featuring Orlando-area megachurch pastor Joel Hunter.
The signers of the evangelical intitiative on global warming include:
Rev. Dr. Leith Anderson, Former President, National Association of Evangelicals (NAE); Senior Pastor, Wooddale Church, Eden Prairie, MN
Robert Andringa, Ph.D., President, Council for Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU), Vienna, VA
Rev. Jim Ball, Ph.D., Executive Director, Evangelical Environmental Network; Wynnewood, PA
Commissioner W. Todd Bassett, National Commander, The Salvation Army; Alexandria, VA
Dr. Jay A. Barber, Jr., President, Warner Pacific College, Portland, OR
Gary P. Bergel, President, Intercessors for America; Purcellville, VA
David Black, Ph.D., President, Eastern University, St. Davids, PA
Bishop Charles E. Blake, Sr., West Angeles Church of God in Christ, Los Angeles, CA
Rev. Dr. Dan Boone, President, Trevecca Nazarene University, Nashville, TN
Bishop Wellington Boone, The Father’s House & Wellington Boone Ministries, Norcross, GA
Rev. Dr. Peter Borgdorff, Executive Director, Christian Reformed Church, Grand Rapids, MI
H. David Brandt, Ph.D., President, George Fox University, Newberg, OR
Rev. George K. Brushaber, Ph.D., President, Bethel University; Senior Advisor, Christianity Today; St. Paul, MN
Rev. Dwight Burchett, President, Northern California Association of Evangelicals; Sacramento, CA
Gaylen Byker, Ph.D., President, Calvin College, Grand Rapids, MI
Rev. Dr. Jerry B. Cain, President, Judson College, Elgin, IL
Rev. Dr. Clive Calver, Senior Pastor, Walnut Hill Community Church; Former President, World Relief; Bethel, CT
R. Judson Carlberg, Ph.D., President, Gordon College, Wenham, MA
Rev. Dr. Paul Cedar, Chair, Mission America Coalition; Palm Desert, CA
David Clark, Ph.D., President, Palm Beach Atlantic University; Former Chair/CEO, Nat. Rel. Broadcasters; Founding Dean, Regent University; West Palm Beach, FL
Rev. Luis Cortes, President & CEO, Esperanza USA; Host, National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast; Philadelphia, PA
Andy Crouch, Columnist, Christianity Today magazine; Swarthmore, PA
Rev. Paul de Vries, Ph.D., President, New York Divinity School; New York, NY
Rev. David S. Dockery, Ph.D., Chairman of the Board, Council for Christian Colleges and Universities; President, Union University, Jackson, TN
Larry R. Donnithorne, Ed.D., President, Colorado Christian University, Lakewood, CO
Blair Dowden, Ed.D., President, Huntington University, Huntington, IN
Rev. Robert P. Dugan, Jr., Former VP of Governmental Affairs, National Association of Evangelicals; Palm Desert, CA
Craig Hilton Dyer, President, Bright Hope International, Hoffman Estates, IL
D. Merrill Ewert, Ed.D., President, Fresno Pacific University, Fresno, CA
Rev. Dr. LeBron Fairbanks, President, Mount Vernon Nazarene University, Mount Vernon, OH
Rev. Myles Fish, President/CEO, International Aid, Spring Lake, MI
Rev. Dr. Floyd Flake, Senior Pastor, Greater Allen AME Cathedral; President, Wilberforce University; Jamaica, NY
Rev. Timothy George, Ph.D., Founding Dean, Beeson Divinity School, Samford University, Executive Editor, Christianity Today; Birmingham, AL
Rev. Michael J. Glodo, Stated Clerk, Evangelical Presbyterian Church , Livonia , MI
Rev. James M. Grant, Ph.D., President, Simpson University, Redding, CA
Rev. Dr. Jeffrey E. Greenway, President, Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, KY
Rev. David Gushee, Professor of Moral Philosophy, Union University; columnist, Religion News Service; Jackson, TN
Gregory V. Hall, President, Warner Southern College, Lake Wales, FL
Brent Hample, Executive Director, India Partners, Eugene OR
Rev. Dr. Jack Hayford, President, International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, Los Angeles, CA
Rev. Steve Hayner, Ph.D., Former President, InterVarsity; Prof. of Evangelism, Columbia Theological Sem., Decatur, GA
E. Douglas Hodo, Ph.D., President, Houston Baptist University, Houston, TX
Ben Homan, President, Food for the Hungry; President, Association of Evangelical Relief and Development Organizations (AERDO); Phoenix, AZ
Rev. Dr. Joel Hunter, Senior Pastor, Northland, A Church Distributed; Longwood, FL
Bryce Jessup, President, William Jessup University, Rocklin, CA
Ronald G. Johnson, Ph.D., President, Malone College, Canton, OH
Rev. Dr. Phillip Charles Joubert, Sr., Pastor, Community Baptist Church, Bayside, NY
Jennifer Jukanovich, Founder, The Vine, Seattle, WA
Rev. Brian Kluth, Senior Pastor, First Evangelical Free Church; Founder, MAXIMUM Generosity; Colorado Springs, CO
Bishop James D. Leggett, General Superintendent, International Pentecostal Holiness Church; Chair, Pentecostal World Fellowship; Oklahoma City, OK
Duane Litfin, Ph.D., President, Wheaton College, Wheaton IL
Rev. Dr. Larry Lloyd, President, Crichton College, Memphis, TN
Rev. Dr. Jo Anne Lyon, Executive Director, World Hope; Alexandria, VA
Sammy Mah, President and CEO, World Relief; Baltimore, MD
Jim Mannoia, Ph.D., President, Greenville College, Greenville, IL
Bishop George D. McKinney, Ph.D., D.D., St. Stephens Church Of God In Christ, San Diego, CA
Rev. Brian McLaren, Senior Pastor, Cedar Ridge Community Church; Emergent leader; Spencerville, MD
Rev. Dr. Daniel Mercaldo, Senior Pastor & Founder, Gateway Cathedral; Staten Island, NY
Rev. Dr. Jesse Miranda, President, AMEN, Costa Mesa, CA
Royce Money, Ph.D., President, Abilene Christian University, Abilene, TX
Dr. Bruce Murphy, President, Northwestern University, Orange City, IA
Rev. George W. Murray, D.Miss., President, Columbia International University, Columbia SC
David Neff, Editor, Christianity Today; Carol Stream, IL
Larry Nikkel, President, Tabor College, Hillsboro, KS
Michael Nyenhuis, President, MAP International; Brunswick, GA
Brian O’Connell, President, REACT Services; Founder and Former Executive Director, Religious Liberty Commission, World Evangelical Alliance; Mill Creek, WA
Roger Parrott, Ph.D., President, Belhaven College, Jackson, MS
Charles W. Pollard, Ph.D., J.D., President, John Brown University, Siloam Springs, AR
Paul A. Rader, D.Miss., President, Asbury College, Wilmore, KY
Rev. Edwin H. Robinson, Ph.D., President, MidAmerica Nazarene University, Olathe , KS
William P. Robinson, Ph.D., President, Whitworth College, Spokane, WA
Lee Royce, Ph.D., President, Mississippi College, Clinton, MS
Andy Ryskamp, Executive Director, Christian Reformed World Relief Committee, Grand Rapids, MI
Rev. Ron Sider, Ph.D., President, Evangelicals for Social Action, Philadelphia, PA
Richard Stearns, President, World Vision, Federal Way, WA
Rev. Jewelle Stewart, Ex. Dir., Women’s Ministries, International Pentecostal Holiness Church; Oklahoma City, OK
Rev. Dr. Loren Swartzendruber, President, Eastern Mennonite University, Harrisonburg VA
C. Pat Taylor, Ph.D., President, Southwest Baptist University, Bolivar, MO
Rev. Berten A. Waggoner, National Director, Vineyard, USA; Sugar Land, TX
Jon R. Wallace, DBA, President, Azusa Pacific University, Azusa, CA
Rev. Dr. Thomas Yung-Hsin Wang, former International Director of Lausanne II, Sunnyvale, CA
Rev. Dr. Rick Warren, Senior Pastor, Saddleback Church; author of The Purpose Driven Life; Lake Forest, CA
John Warton, President, Business Professional Network, Portland, OR
Robert W. Yarbrough, Ph.D., New Testament Dept. Chair, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Deerfield, IL
John D. Yordy, Ph. D., Interim President, Goshen College, Goshen, IN
Adm. Tim Ziemer, Director of Programs, World Relief, Baltimore, MD
Posted by Jim at 04:57 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Winds of Change in the Evangelical Response to Global Warming?
On page A9 of the February 9 New York Times, a full page ad began with the words: “Our commitment to Jesus Christ compels us…” It’s unusual to see these words so prominently in the Times, even in an ad. But what was to follow sent shock waves through official Washington and much of the country focused on the issues of the day.
The following was the full headline of the ad:
“Our commitment to Jesus Christ compels us to solve the global warming crisis.” A little bold for the liberals, readers may have thought. But reading further they discovered that this was an advocacy advertisement from a group of 86 evangelical leaders operating under the banner of The Evangelical Climate Initiative.
The group, which signed a document called Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action , is not easily classified. It includes individuals from the right, the center, and the left; from the Reformed, Wesleyan, Charismatic traditions; old and young; all regions of the nation. The list is heavily academic—the presidents of some 40 Christian colleges and seminaries; with many leaders of evangelical relief and development agencies.
(Disclosure: My public relations firm managed the communications campaign for The Evangelical Climate Initiative, and although we are no means disinterested, we have not been part of the evangelical environmental movement to date).
The evangelicals participating in the initiative made it clear that their passion aligned with the mainstream of the evangelical community. The ad and other materials read:
“With the same love of God and neighbor that compels us to preach salvation through Jesus Christ, protect unborn life, preserve the family and the sanctity of marriage, defend religious freedom and human dignity, and take the whole Gospel to a hurting world, we the undersigned evangelical leaders resolve to come together with others of like mind to pray and to work to stop global warming.”
The document calls on the federal government to impose economy-wide limitations on CO2 emissions, and it is complementary of the Domenici-sponsored “will of the Senate” resolution on emissions.
National media jumped all over this story, and it continues to pile up the column inches. Beginning with The New York Times, the Initiative was covered by the Associated Press,
ABC World News Tonight, NBC Evening News, Fox and Friends, CNN American Morning, hundreds of local newspapers, Christianity Today, World, Charisma, and still counting.
A group called the Interfaith Stewardship Alliance issued a rebuttal, and engineered a letter from James Dobson, Chuck Colson, D. James Kennedy and about 15 others, successfully urging the NAE not to allow its staff to sign the documents (signatories participated as individuals, not as representatives of their organizations).
Operation Rescue launched a scathing missive that cited funding of this Initiative as “blood money,” and Joseph Farah questioned the spiritual integrity—indeed, the very regeneration--of the participants. But most evangelical leaders have kept any disagreements fairly muted, although it may build.
But as the AP said in one of its articles: The winds may be shifting on the evangelical response to global warming. William F. Buckley wrote in his newspaper column:
“We hear now (in full-page ads) from the Evangelical Climate Initiative. Their summons, signed by 80-odd evangelical leaders, is to address the global-warming crisis .... We are indeed stewards of nature, and calls to conjoin our concern with a sense of Christian mission are noteworthy.”
There are new polls, and new ads, which I’ll cover in another post.
Posted by Jim at 09:25 AM | Comments (21) | TrackBack
February 22, 2006
Returning in a Time of Strange Alliances
It is difficult to support the Administration's decision to allow the sale of major port operations to the United Arab Emirates. But it is even stranger to see Democrats such as Charles Schumer reborn as defense hawks. Now the President is in a corner, because it appears he was not in the know when the decision was approved, and although he is now probably inclined to reverse the decision, it would appear that he is caving to critics on the left. That would enable them to beef up pathetic national defense credentials with a contention that they've protected the ports from Bush and his Middle Eastern friends.
It can't believe that my last entry at Stones Cry Out was in November 2005. What can I say? I've been busy. But now I'm back to write in a time strange bedfellows and unlikely alliances.
More on some of those in the days ahead.
Posted by Jim at 04:59 PM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
November 08, 2005
Rebuilding a Seminary in New Orleans
New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary is one of the largest seminaries in the world (about 2200 on campus and 1800 by extension), and by some accounts the largest Southern Baptist seminary. But none of that counted for much when Hurricane Katrina made the urban seminary campus part of Lake Pontchartrain. When the waters receded, the NOBPTS was facing some $20 million in damage, and many thought it was time to move to a more comfortable and safer setting. But the trustees voted to rebuild and return. Posted today is my story from the new issue of Christianity Today on the seminary's struggle to recover from Katrina.
Posted by Jim at 07:55 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
October 25, 2005
My Story of Persusion, Ralph Reed and a Most Favored China
Information can be power, and the use and practice of persuasion at a public relations agency includes many layers of decisions and choices unseen and usually unappreciated by those outside of the industry.
This is certainly true when the agency is involved primarily in the Christian community, and is seeking to make decisions that are in concert with Christian ethics.
I say all this because my name was in the newspaper Sunday. A long investigative story on the front page of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, includes references to my role in using the skills and persuasion of the agency I was with at the time—The DeMoss Group—to help gain Christian and conservative support of Most Favored Nation status for China in 1998.
It’s a long story, and I think an interesting story, about Ralph Reed, former head of the Christian Coalition, former chairman of the Georgia Republican Party, and now a political consultant and candidate for Lt. Governor of Georgia. The AJC is writing a lot about Reed these days; this article is about his stealthy ways and use of connections in the Christian community.
In 1998, Reed was our client for a campaign, in which I pulled together a group of missionary organizations who were working in China and would also agree with a statement that it was better for mission work in China if it was open to world trade instead of closed and isolated.
I named this group the Alliance of Christian Ministries in China (ACMC), and used the group’s identity for some hard-ball publicity, advertising, and lobbying.
I don’t have time to tell you the whole story now, but the AJC article looks at a lot of the details. And it reports on the full-page ad that Reed ran with the ACMC name without telling us—-arousing the ire of the Dalai Lama and effectively ending our professional relationship.
It was a long time ago. It’s now hard to imagine China as an isolated giant. And there are still layers of decisions about the use of persuasion and stealthy—-some would say deceptive—-means to accomplish a laudable mission.
Posted by Jim at 11:18 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
October 21, 2005
Evangelicalism Broadens Its View and Its Impact
There’s a marvelous article by John Cochran this week in Congressional Quarterly (CQ Weekly; subscription needed) that captures the maturing and broadening of the evangelical public agenda. It is a refreshing consideration of the issues of evangelicals concern, in addition to pro-life and pro-family (anti-homosexual rights) matters.
The article takes a closer look at the emerging evangelical environmentalists, who are making a significant contribution in this area, but one that is different than the agenda of the secular crowd that has dominated this issue.
At a time when the evangelicals’ bargain with fiscal and movement conservatives in the Republican Party has been shaken by opposition to the Miers nomination, they are increasing their interest and activities in issues such as creation care, global poverty, and international human and religious rights, while maintaining their orthodoxy of faith and pro-business spontaneity.
CQ asks if the covenant will crack:
“The bargain that brought evangelical activists into the Republican Party was this: They would support the low-tax, small-government agenda of fiscal conservatives, who had long been the bedrock of the GOP, and fiscal conservatives would support evangelicals on the cultural and social issues that matter most to them. There’s lots of interplay between the two camps, but at its most basic, what they had in common was that the Democratic Party was not addressing their agendas, says University of Texas at Austin political historian Lewis L. Gould, author of “Grand Old Party: A History of Republicans.” That arrangement made the GOP the majority party. But nothing is forever in politics.And that’s the big reason why the gradual shift in the debate under way among evangelicals is potentially significant, even disconcerting for politicians: Evangelicals are thinking beyond their traditional set of issues, and it’s not clear where it will lead them.”
But unless the national Democrats shift dramatically away from the left margins on a number of issues, it’s not likely a significant number of evangelicals will switch party support. It is more likely that the alliance that has produced majorities will lose its potency and the Republican Party will lose its edge.
The criticism by some conservatives of evangelical support of Miers as one-issue, soft heartedness is doing nothing to prevent this break. And the move by the evangelical middle to embrace the issues in this article may further cook the goose that laid the golden egg.
Posted by Jim at 12:04 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
October 07, 2005
An Eloquent Speech on The Bush Doctrine
I agree with Matt.
The President's speech yesterday was one of the bold and important speeches of his presidency, and an eloquent presentation of the Bush Doctrine. I watched it on Fox and I'm reading it again now. It is terrific.
Posted by Jim at 11:28 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
October 06, 2005
The Split of the Evangelicals and the Conservative Elite Over Miers
The reinforced cord of ideological conservatives and Catholic and evangelical Christians that helped elect George W. Bush is fraying over the Harriet Miers nomination, to the delight of Democrats.
Although there are many people with feet in both camps, the shots taken at Harriet Miers by the conservative elite rejects any loyalty to their coalition partners, the evangelicals, and shows the natural strains that have been hidden by political common cause.
At its root, visceral opposition by the ideologues of the right isn’t about Miers’ credentials or paper trail, as they would have you believe. It is about the prescription drug bill, irresponsible post-Katrina spending, and others actions that have shown that George Bush is a big government Republican who shows no signs of backing up language that paints him as a fiscal conservative.
The conservatives have been getting madder about that as Bush strays from good fiscal principles, as the war on terror grinds on, and as their support for the President seems less necessary.
They wanted President Bush to nominate a true blue, in-your-face, conservative with a track record that would drive Ted Kennedy crazy; they wanted Bush to prove to the Democrats that they are not in charge.
Instead they got a longtime friend of Bush, a President who they believe has strayed too far off the conservative ranch to be trusted anymore. And they got someone very much like Bush—someone who became a follower of Jesus Christ in midlife.
The President’s plan to nominate someone he knows to be a social conservative, but who won’t have to defend past judicial decisions, was a sound plan. But he didn’t count on the conservative elite calling in its debts and kicking a President who they have come to dislike.
We can’t fall for the nonsense that the nominee should have been the best legal mind in the country, or the very best qualified jurist. In a perfect world, that’s how Supreme Court justices would be chosen. But we’re talking about politics. We’re talking about Washington, D.C.
The Democrats are loving it. The right is taking shots at their favorite target. What an unexpected pleasure.
The evangelicals, on the other hand, have one of their own as a nominee. We don’t know how she is going to come down on eminent domain or the commerce clause. But we have a better sense than anyone that’s come along in a long time that she is going to have a genuine, faith-based interest in protecting life--from conception to natural death. Miers’ Christian faith also will guide her protection of religious freedoms.
The elite has abandoned the evangelicals, whom they consider to be their weak-minded cousins. After all, Bush is one of those evangelical types, and he’s left the fiscally responsible farm. What good are they?
It’s time for the evangelical community to rally support for Harriet Miers. James Dobson was the first to endorse her nomination, but he’s not alone.
Charles Colson issued this statement on Monday:
“I enthusiastically support the nomination of Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court. It is a surprising, but inspiring choice. She is a woman of great integrity, remarkable accomplishment, with a fine legal mind. Ms. Miers will be a great addition to the Roberts court.”
Jay Sekulow, chief counsel of the ACLJ, who argues regularly before the high court and has a pro-life protest case at the high court this term, went even further in his support: .
“Once again, President Bush showed exceptional judgment in naming Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court to replace Justice O’Connor. At a time when the high court is facing some of the most critical issues of the day, including a number of cases dealing directly with abortion and life issues, the person who replaces Justice O’Connor is critical.“Harriet Miers is an excellent choice with an extraordinary record of service in the legal community and is certain to approach her work on the high court with a firm commitment to follow the Constitution and the rule of law. I have been privileged to work with her in her capacity as White House counsel. She is bright, thoughtful, and a consummate professional and I enthusiastically endorse her nomination.”
Don’t miss the subtlety in Bush’s nomination of Miers. She has plenty of experience and know-how. But he knows her heart, as well. This nomination was for the pro-life evangelicals. He can’t say that, or they’d both be crucified on Capitol Hill. Bush choose a closet pro-lifer. The conservative elite hates it, and the left is going to hate her, the more they dig into her Christian conversion and quiet pro-life activities.
It’s time for the evangelicals to throw their weight behind Miers, or go back to their happy churches and shut up about having a social agenda.
Posted by Jim at 08:05 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
October 05, 2005
Standing by Miers and her Evangelical Conscience
I am unabashedly enthusiastic that Harriet Miers has come to faith in Jesus Christ in midlife, and that her evangelical belief will be part of what she brings to her role as a Supreme Court justice, if confirmed. But I do not want to be misunderstood as a Pollyanna Christian who celebrates faith but ignores ability and ideology.
I don’t use the Christian Yellow Pages and, like Martin Luther, I’d rather be ruled by a “competent Turk” than an incompetent Christian. And after working for nearly 30 years in the very bowels of the evangelical community, I know that a person’s Christian faith does not assure competence. Trust me, I know that well.
Anymore than a person’s conservative orthodoxy assures sound moral character.
Those who worship at the feet of William Buckley and see conservatism as life’s guiding light, and particularly those who are more comfortable inside the beltway that inside a church, have decried Miers’ selection and dismissed personal relationships—that the President has with the nominee, and that the nominee has with Jesus Christ—as inferior to a judicial record or a paper trail.
I do not think the evidence of Miers’ evangelical belief is enough to provide comfort to those who want to be assured that she will not slide to liberalism as part of the court. But when I add that to my belief that the President understands the stakes, and he has known Miers as a close colleague for more than 10 years, I am far more comfortable than I am with others who were less known by the Presidents who appointed them (they say Bush 41 couldn’t pick David Souter out of a lineup). [I incorrectly wrote Reagan in an earlier version]
There’s more certainty on some key issues—such as life issues--with Miers than with Roberts, or many others who could have been chosen. How many Republican evangelicals that you have known for 10 years are pro-abortion?
Posted by Jim at 09:38 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
October 04, 2005
Trusting the President on Miers, the Evangelical
The nomination of Harriet Miers has created an amusing bipartisan pout in Washington. She has no record that pegs her judicial philosophy, and nothing has surfaced that assures either conservatives or liberals.
That’s disturbing to David Frum at NRO, who expresses a common sentiment among conservatives in the last 24 hours.
“But there is no reason at all to believe either that she is a legal conservative or--and more importantly--that she has the spine and steel necessary to resist the pressures that constantly bend the American legal system toward the left. . . .I am not saying that Harriet Miers is not a legal conservative. I am not saying that she is not steely.”
What disturbs Frum and other conservative leaders is that they are being asked to trust the President.
History prevents any bold predictions about what men and women will become when they put on the august robes of the nation’s highest court. Unfortunately, it may be impossible to think of an instance when a justice has drifted to the right.
But I’m choosing to trust President Bush on this, for three reasons:
First, because I believe he understands the importance of righting the Court; and second, because he knows nominee Miers very well. This is not a new face to Bush, vetted by the staff and subjected to a getting-to-know-you session in the Oval Office. Miers has been Bush’s personal attorney, and she’s been a close associate for more than a decade.
Finally, and most intriguing, there are reports that Miers is an evangelical.
J. Grant Swank, Jr writes at the ArriveNet blog:
"Harriet Miers is said to be a conscientious church-going single. She’s also a workaholic. She’s a determined career woman. She’s trusted by US President George W. Bush. And now she’s been nominated for the highest court in the land. But what is particularly significant is the give-away secret. She’s an "evangelical."
Focus on the Family CitizenLink includes this:
Former Texas Supreme Court Justice Raul Gonzalez has known the nominee for more than two decades."Harriet is an outstanding individual," he told CitzenLink. "She is a born-again Christian and goes to an evangelical church in Dallas. She is a very, very compassionate and able person."
And this from the NY Times:
One thing Ms. Miers shares with her boss is a deep faith. She was introduced to Valley View Christian Church in Dallas by Justice Hecht, of the Texas Supreme Court. He was an elder at the church and often plays the organ during Sunday services."Harriet has placed her faith in Jesus," said the Rev. Ron Key, who was the longtime pastor there until recently. "She may have been religious before, but it's become more of a priority, more of a focus of her life. She has become a strong example of what happens in a person's life when they come to the faith."
I’ve heard this from several sources during the last day, but it isn’t something that the White House or Miers will talk up during the confirmation process. It would reassure Christian conservatives, but disturb the secularists who dominate the Democratic Party.
For these reasons, I’m willing to trust Bush on this one.
Posted by Jim at 07:56 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
October 03, 2005
What’s That in Blogyears?
October 1 marked the one-year anniversary of my foray into the blogging world. On that day in 2004 I began The Rooftop Blog with the following mission statement:
“Exploring the news and interplay of the Four Estates--family, church, government, and the media--and the moral imagination of a culture informed by the Judeo-Christian tradition.”
I’ve been able to devote much of the space to materials within these parameters, although at times I’ve written purely on the passion of the day, and in times of political drama, on the politics of the moment.
In February, I joined four others to begin this blog, Stones Cry Out. I cross-post the majority of my posts, but because Stones Cry Out has good contributions from (now eight) others, most of those who enjoy what I write read it here—and The Rooftop Blog has become somewhat of a compilation of just my works, with occasional posts that are too personal for the more august air of SCO.
I enjoy any opportunity to write, and would welcome more time to devote to the blog. As our public relations business has picked up, I have had to chisel the amount of time I spend on the blog. When I began supplementing the PR business by teaching three college courses this semester, my blogging time has decreased more.
I have found blogging immensely satisfying and interesting, and I believe it helps my work because it keeps my nose in the news. I share the frustration of so many bloggers: There is not enough time to pour into the ever-hungry blog There is always more material than time. Until we find a way to drive the economic part of “the tail,” blogging will remain for many of us a tantalyzing but frequently frustrating attempt to speak to the world.
Posted by Jim at 07:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 28, 2005
Superdome Reporting: Fair, Balanced, and False
Many journalists put themselves in potentially dangerous situations and worked beyond their physical limits to provide round-the-clock coverage of hurricanes Katrina and Rita. But now it is becoming clear that courage, tousled hair, breathlessness, and good work ethic are no substitutes for journalistic standards. It is also clear that rumor posing as fact resulted in egregious charges and vastly sensationalized reports throughout the media.
As Doug reported below, The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday that the serious and most alarming reports from the Superdome and the Convention Center—of bodies piled high, mass rapes, children with slit throats—were simply not true. They were rumors that initially broadcast media, and then without further investigation, print media reported as fact.
As further evidence that Mayor Nagin and other Louisiana officials are criminally incompetent, one media excuse is that the mayor and others were making public statements about the horrendous—-but evidently fictional—-abuses. The public officials may have picked up some of their information from media reports; some media outlets took courage in reporting on the conditions because of what officials said.
The Associated Press said today:
The ugliest reports — children with slit throats, women dragged off and raped, corpses piling up in the basement — soon became a searing image of post-Katrina New Orleans.The stories were told by residents trapped inside the Superdome and convention center and were repeated by public officials. Many news organizations, including The Associated Press, carried the witness accounts and official pronouncements, and in some cases later repeated the claims as fact, without attribution.
But now, a month after the chaos subsided, police are re-examining the reports and finding that many of them have little or no basis in fact.
They have no official reports of rape and no eyewitnesses to sexual assault. The state Department of Health and Hospitals counted 10 dead at the Superdome and four at the convention center. Only two of those are believed to have been murdered.
So there is mutual culpability. However, it is the responsibility of journalists to ferret out the truth; those who failed to do so bear primary responsibility in the reporting of terrible atrocities that did not occur; reporting that damaged the international image of the United States, that prompted FEMA’s refusal to send its volunteers with aid into what was being reported as a war zone, and that began the slanders against the President.
It is a great example of the importance in modern society of accurate and independent reporting. I teach college journalism classes and I have a wonderful example for tonight’s classes of why we drill the importance of fundamentals in reporting—multiple sources, constant attribution of unsubstantiated statements, remaining personally uninvolved in the stories. These and many other principles were ignored by overly tired, alarmed, and emotionally distraught reporters who were fed bad information and broadcast it to the world.
Posted by Jim at 07:44 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
September 27, 2005
Foursquare Kingdom Building
One of the interesting characters in American church history of the last century was Aimee Semple McPherson, founder of the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel, the first prominent Pentecostal denomination.
McPherson was reportedly the first woman in America to be granted a radio license by the FCC. The station she began in 1924, operated by the church ever since, was sold earlier this year for a whopping $200 million. Foursquare has used these funds primarily as the corpus of a grant-making foundation. The most interesting aspect of the foundation’s policies, which I reported on in Christianity Today, is that at least 10 percent of the annual grants will be given to causes outside of the denomination.
That’s Kingdom thinking that is not commonly found in denominational decision-making. A hat tip to the spiritual heirs of McPherson.
Posted by Jim at 10:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Snow Daze
President Bush singled out Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue for praise yesterday because the chief executive of our state called on all of the public schools in the state to use two of its snow days, Monday and Tuesday, in order to conserve diesel fuel.
This decision was communicated to the schools at 3:45 p.m. on Friday, so the kids came home for the weekend with a slip of paper announcing their great news and an unexpected two-day vacation.
There weren’t many people in Georgia singing Perdue’s praises, however, except the school children. Although the governor was no doubt trying to exert leadership and preempt shortages, when Rita failed to destroy as it was expected to, the snow days looked silly. And for parents who had to miss work because there wasn’t time to make other arrangements, the decision was maddening.
The irony is even greater when you know that Georgia’s public schools are routinely ranked #49 or #50 in the country (sometimes the state can brag: We beat Alabama!) What does it say about education priorities when sending the kids home is the first line of conservation.
Perdue gained some political capital earlier in the month when he lifted the state gasoline tax, to bring post-Katrina gasoline price back below $3 a gallon. He’s mismanaged that good will away.
This is all an exercise in controlling perceptions and panics. Two days off school or the Governor carpooling to the State House are not going to make a significant difference. The President suggested a number of similar “band-aid” measures yesterday.
We need more leadership to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, on all fossil fuels, and on one region of the country for refining oil. We need more refineries. And we need to fast track the moribund nuclear power industry.
In the meantime, just calm down. And let the kids go back to school.
Posted by Jim at 08:37 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
September 23, 2005
Vegetable Power: An Alternative to Gasoline Guzzling
With reports that the price of gasoline will hit $4.00 a gallon if the Texas refineries are closed very long because of Rita, I found this article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution quite interesting.
With very little modification, a local Gwinnett County fellow has converted his VW Jetta diesel to run on vegetable oil. Nothing fancy, just vegetable oil that is being discarded by an area Thai restaurant.
We certainly need to be heading this way, to far greater use of renewable fuels to run our engines.
The article is a bit tongue-in-cheek, but the story is real. And it really does make one hopeful that there are alternatives to our dependence on fossil fuels.
Posted by Jim at 09:46 PM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
September 22, 2005
Democrats Dazed and Confused on Roberts
The transparent duplicity of the Senate's Democratic leadership emasculates whatever strategy they had in mind regarding their verdict on Chief Justice nominee John Roberts.
Do they expect anyone to believe that the liberal warhorse Patrick Leahy measured John Roberts and found him worthy, while Harry Reid, the anti-abortion Democratic Leader from a conservative-leaning state, found the judge wanting?
Strange indeed.
I understand the eagerness of the Democrats to look reasonable regarding Roberts, now that their opposition is doomed. If they can look thoughtful now, perhaps Americans will remember their thoughtfulness when they become rapid in their attacks on the next nominee.
But is Reid, and by proxy the Democratic Party itself, so weak and beholden to the liberal interests groups of the left that have marched through his office that he had to become the designated symbol of opposition to the impressive but conservative jurist.
And with the first signals from these two leading Democratic senators, with others making far less news as they lined up for or against Roberts, the Democrats botched their message.
Reid looks pathetic, and the Democrats look dazed and confused.
Wait, that’s not news, is it?
Posted by Jim at 07:21 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
September 20, 2005
Punish Executive Crooks Without Punishing Ourselves
In what is becoming common treatment of senior executives who abuse the public trust, the ex-Tyco leaders were given long prison sentences of 8-25 years. What is different about these convictions is that they are state cases, not federal, and because of the length of the sentences, prison time is likely to be served at the terrible Attica prison in western New York.
There is a tendency to relish the harsh punishment of arrogant leaders who have hurt many people financially; who thought they were above the law, and who had no regard for the damage they were causing others.
But as I have explained before, prisons should be used to punish violent and dangerous offenders, not people we dislike. There is a range of severe and appropriate punishments that do not use expensive prison space, and do not mix non-violent lawbreakers with murderers and other thugs.
Community-based punishments would be appropriate for the Tyco rascals. Sending them to a maximum-security prison is cruel and unusual punishment.
There a biblical sense of justice, however, that points to the need to be merciful, as God has been merciful to us, with an ironic twist not unlike a reverse reading of Matthew 18:21-32:
In perhaps the most dramatic moment of the hearing, [the prosecutor] read aloud from a letter [Tyco executive] Kozlowski had written in 1995 to a Houston judge overseeing the sentencing of a Tyco employee who had been convicted of stealing from the company; Mr. Kozlowski urged that a maximum sentence be imposed.(Source)[The prosecutor] said of Mr. Kozlowski, "What the defendant said on that occasion applies on this occasion."
Posted by Jim at 07:23 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 19, 2005
A Great Speech Moment
While we’ve debated in this space the merits of President Bush’s recovery proposals, and how they should be funded, I can’t let the time pass without noting a great moment of speechmaking.
The closing of the President’s speech in New Orleans last week was brilliant, and it illuminated the crisis with imagery well known to the New Orleans community, and to many of us who are familiar only with the caricatures of the city and its culture:
In this place, there is a custom for the funerals of jazz musicians. The funeral procession parades slowly through the streets, followed by a band playing a mournful dirge as it moves to the cemetery. Once the casket has been laid in place, the band breaks into a joyful "second line" -- symbolizing the triumph of the spirit over death. Tonight the Gulf Coast is still coming through the dirge, yet we will live to see the second line.
Perfect.
Posted by Jim at 07:20 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Reality Check
I spend a few hours a week sitting at a table in the student union at Kennesaw State University, preparing for two news writing courses I teach at the Atlanta-area school. Overhearing conversations around the table gives me raw exposure to the thoughts and passions of the next generation, as frightening as that may be.
Last week I picked up from the gaggle of students next to me the following sentiment: “I am sooooo tired of hearing about this hurricane stuff that is, like, on all the time.”
The adult response, of course, is that the only thing more tiring would be to be living in a Red Cross shelter hundreds of miles away from home for weeks, then piecing together a life in an apartment nowhere near any of your friends and family, attending a school where you don’t know anyone, and trying to figure out how to stretch the food you picked up at The Salvation Army recovery center.
But, yes, these are college students. It takes people with real life experiences to connect them to reality. I guess that’s why I’m there.
Posted by Jim at 07:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
September 18, 2005
We Combat Natural Disasters with Acts of God.
Yesterday, my wife and business partner, Debbie, read me the best headline for the recovery from Hurricane Katrina, from her work with a client who is responding to the tragedy: We Combat Natural Disasters with Acts of God.
The hands and feet and smiles and heart of God are seen everywhere, as the acts of God’s people bring life, food, shelter, reunion, and hope to the victims of wind, water, and folly. Fundraising for hurricane relief is ubiquitous—in nearly every store, every club, and every church. Everywhere you turn.
Americans are caring for their own, just as they care for the victims of disasters and tragedies around the world. Why?
While it perturbs those of other faiths and no faith when I point this out, it is our Judeo-Christian heritage that prompts the faith and heart of modern-day believers, and that informs, inspires, and compels this pluralistic nation to reach out to others--out of bounty, or for some, with great sacrifice.
It was the God of Abraham who told his people “not to reap all the way to the edge of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor” (Lev. 23:22)
He promised them that “if you offer yourself [a] to the hungry, and satisfy the afflicted one, then your light will shine in the darkness, and your night will be like noonday” (Isaiah 58:10).
Jesus equated caring for the sick, hungry, thirsty, and imprisoned to caring for Him, (Matthew 25:31-46), and from the early days of the Christian church goods were “distributed to anyone as he had need” (Acts 4:35).
History demonstrates that it was the followers of God, the God of the Jews and Christians, who were the first demonstrate generosity and philanthropy as a part of their philosophy and practice.
The American culture, steeped in the Judeo-Christian tradition, is the most generous in the world. The Christian churches have led the way in giving to not only Katrina victims, but also to the victims of famine, war, earthquake, and pestilence around the world.
In many of its expressions, beliefs, and practices, America “has forgotten God” (to quote an old Russian saying). But the teachings of the Scriptures and the words and practices of generations still inspire us to give to others in need.
There are Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, secular humanists, and atheists in our midst who have joined in reaching out to hurricane victims. But they do so as part of an American culture whose roots are still drawing from the wellspring of historic Judaism and Christianity.
Last winter, Debbie and I traveled to northern Mongolia to observe the work of LifeQwest rescuing the street and sewer children of a nation still suffering from some 80 years under the Soviet boot and centuries in godless misery. I wrote about this in Christianity Today.
It is one of the colder spots on earth, and during our January stay we took a day trip to a small village about an hour from Darkhan--I believe it was called Orhan--a gathering of round teepees call “ger’s” and small shacks.
We took food and supplies to a family headed by a widowed grandmother of about 70 (she looked 90), her widowed daughter, and four or five small children. We crowded into their home, happy to be out of the below-zero cold.
As we walked in, we noticed that there was ice on the inside walls, and all of the children were still in their jackets. A very small fire was burning in the oven/stove/firebox, but it could not keep the home warm. “Why don’t you have a larger fire,” LifeQwest’s Jerry Smith asked. “Didn’t we bring you firewood?”
Yes, there was firewood, but no one in the home was strong enough to split it, so it could fit in the firebox.
Soon, members of our team were chopping wood. But as we worked and visited, we noticed a man at the next house, hearty and healthy, bringing his wood into his home.
His home was no more than 30 feet away, but he hadn’t lifted a finger to help two widows and their children stay warm during the coldest time of the winter.
We were furious about this uncaring neighbor. Jerry shared our disgust, but explained that it was not just this man, but the culture. Everyone looked out for himself and his family. There was no culture of giving and caring. No history of helping neighbors.
Religious heritage and cultural foundations do make a difference. And acts of God can help us recover from the very worst disasters.
Posted by Jim at 08:59 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
September 07, 2005
No Excuse for Feeding Racial Hatred
It is fair and appropriate to debate the competence and conduct of public officials in the response to the hurricane, broken levees, and urban anarchy. But there is no excuse for contentions by politicians, celebrities, and some journalists that delays and malfeasance were in any way related to the race of hurricane victims. These claims have absolutely no basis in fact, and they dreg up stereotypes and prejudices that have been steadily declined in American public life. Worse, they feed racial hatred and put us on a dangerous path to the assent of racial warfare.
This political cartoon by Mike Luckovich in today's Atlanta Journal-Constitution represents this irresponsible public discourse. It is beyond the pale; although playing the race card is a common political ploy, even today, to advance the charge that the federal government is purposefully allowing black victims of a natural disaster to die is beyond irresponsible. It is morally reprehensible.

Many of the bodies floating in the New Orleans sludge are there because the mayor of the city--a black man--did not forcefully and effectively evacuate his majority-black city. An anti-black policy? Of course not.
Critique the efficacy of the response, but stop questioning the morality of federal officials. They are fighting words, and there is no place for them in 21st Century America.
Posted by Jim at 11:22 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
A Dozen Thoughts on the Katrina Crisis Thus Far
The commentary on the hurricane here at SCO has been excellent; although I’ve been paying attention, I have been too busy to write much, partially because I have clients that are responding to the Katrina devastation.
Here are 12 thoughts on the hurricane-force disaster, responses, and politics.
1. Recognize Personal Responsibility: Perhaps the most important lesson of the last week is that we are all responsible for ourselves and for our families, and in a society that works people take care of their neighbors. We should not expect the government to come to our rescue; although it may be able to, it is by nature a slow-moving bureaucracy.
It will be years before people ignore hurricane warnings again. The people in New Orleans who were the greatest victims were those who chose not to act responsibly, and those who were unable to leave. The fact that friends and relatives did not help the old and disabled-—and that there were more looters than good neighbors--reflects the utter failure of community.
2. Make Changes at FEMA: FEMA chief Mike Brown must resign because he is now a symbol of a bureaucracy caught acting like one. I’m sure he’s a fine guy and that he didn’t intend to harm anyone, but he is in now as politically toxic as the New Orleans sludge. Politics is largely perception. The foot-dragging at FEMA costs lives--this reality is heartbreaking and the political perception is even worse. Brown’s resignation should be on Bush’s desk shortly; and Bush should accept it with all the right regrets. There is no reasonable alternative.
3. Look to the Private Sector. Salvation for the victims of Katrina will come from the good people of the nation driven by a moral impulse to help those in need, and from the private institutions they support—-from local churches to large agencies such as The Salvation Army and Samaritan’s Purse. These private groups can pull together the “little platoons” of compassion and head to the gulf for a weekend of building or a decade of support.
4. Don’t Forget Mississippi: The most old-fashioned hurricane devastation is not in Louisiana, but the Gulf Coast of Mississippi. Biloxi and Gulfport are virtually destroyed and need massive assistance.
5. Impeach the Governor: Although the electoral process has a way of taking care of incompetence, it would be good for the Governor of Louisiana to resign in the next few weeks. Her delays and political turf games are probably the closest to criminal negligence of any public official involved in this crisis. It may be that the Mayor of New Orleans should do likewise. His failure to call for a general evacuation on Saturday, and his mysterious refusal to follow the city’s own crisis plan are mind boggling, at least in hindsight.
6. Call for Leadership: With the Governor and Mayor paralyzed by the crisis and FEMA contemplating its collective belly button, there was no one who stood tall and acted “Guilianian.” There needed to be a figure of grass roots leadership in the first hours and days of the crisis. There wasn’t then, but the recovery and rebuilding is going to take years, and it isn’t too late for someone to step forward and lead. The President will have a role, but there needs to be someone focused just on this problem.
7. A Regional New Deal: The aftermath of Katrina may be more akin to a regional version of the Depression than a southern 9/11. We may need to establish work corps similar to Roosevelt’s—-to rebuild an entire region and to put thousands of people to work.
8. Lay Off President Bush: Despite the political opportunism of Bush opponents, Bush has done fine, although he has to take responsibility for incompetence anywhere in his Administration. He has done that--his recognition of the slow response and his strong efforts to fix it changed everything. He couldn’t go back and fix the slow response, but he’s rallied the troops since then (and still needs to accept Mike Brown’s resignation). Bush is a naturally genuine and compassionate man, and that comes through when he addresses the suffering of others.
9. Put the Reporters to Bed: Television reporters got a kick out of using their broadcasts to direct the relief and military efforts, which was OK at times, but it went beyond the confines of journalism and got out of hand. Also, a lot of reporters became “Geraldo-like” (including Geraldo), with histrionics that did little to inform the public and made the reporters look like they needed a nap (most did).
10. Condemn Irresponsible Rhetoric: While the politicizing of everything has become commonplace, the most damaging rhetoric of the week was the charge of racial prejudice in the slow response to the crisis. That was irresponsible and terribly dangerous--also obviously false. Are we trying to promote tribalism, where the whites and blacks of America become the Tutsi and the Hutus? Also the remarks by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. were as insensitive as Jerry Falwell’s after 9/11.
11. Unpredictable Predictability: There’s a lot of coulda, shoulda, and woulda going around—-but seriously, on Monday afternoon the word was that New Orleans had averted the bullet and the hurricane’s fury had turned to Mississippi. No one was sending National Guardsmen to New Orleans at that time. The levee's breach wasn’t a surprise in an emergency scenario-planning sort of a way, but it was a “late breaking” surprise on Monday. Second, who could have predicted that the inmates would gain control of the asylum; that thugs would create an atmosphere of total anarchy, requiring troops to protect relief workers. What is this, the Democratic Republic of Congo? (international relief workers have faced menacing rebels and marauding bands in that nation).
12. Les Miserables: New Orleans is a miserable city. I’m sure there are a lot of great people there, but it is not a great city. It’s not just the decadence of Bourbon Street; it’s the broad absence of moral strength and civic vision. New Orleans was such a depressed and dysfunctional city that it did not have strength to rise above the challenges of the week. We wouldn’t be having a debate about when the federal government should use its force if there was any semblance of competence in the New Orleans or Louisiana government.
Posted by Jim at 10:49 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
September 02, 2005
The Very Best and the Very Worst
The destruction of a hurricane that transformed over the gulf from another summer storm into a category 5 murderer has sucked the life from thousands of people, destroyed countless homes, rendered a major American city uninhabitable for the foreseeable future, and unleashed immense suffering, utter despair and absolutely putrid evil. And as the generosity and compassion of the American spirit flourish and produce responses from every corner of the nation, there’s an outcry because the pipeline of help can’t move fast enough through the destruction and flood waters to produce the pictures of healing that we so desperately long to see.
Disasters are terribly inconvenient, and many people seek only to name the perpetrators, cast blame, write a few checks, and expect the government to fix the problems. We want to see happy images on our televisions, and we want to see them quickly.
But instead, with the civil structures of New Orleans flooded away, it is a heart of darkness in the longtime troubled city that has filled the vacuum and produced the environment of a prison riot, with the inmates in control of major sectors. The collapse of civil authority has exposed the dark depravity of the city’s underside.
And yet, goodness will prevail. The void of hope has touched our hearts, and there will be help for the thousands upon thousands of families who find themselves homeless and with no idea how they will rebuild their lives. Massive amounts of aid are streaming to the areas of need, even as the coastal refugees are making their way to Houston and Dallas, Birmingham and Memphis, even to Atlanta and beyond.
It is a dizzying conflict of good-hearted generosity and positive action seeking to replace the pictures of devastation and sheer evil.
Posted by Jim at 07:43 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 30, 2005
God, When They Need Him
The Air Force issued new directives yesterday that limit the expression of faith by its officers, while seeking to maintain the spiritual life of its academy and forces. However, the guidelines are rife with contradictions, and are unlikely to be unworkable in the highly charged military environment.
The military pays for chaplains from more than 100 denominations and faith groups. The evangelicals have made it a priority to provide chaplains to the military, and as a result their numbers have grown. However, the number of mainline Protestant and Catholic clergy has sagged, because of the declines of available clergy in those groups. There are smaller numbers of non-Christian clergy available to troops.
The new orders are a response largely to vocal 1977 Air Force Academy graduate Mikey Weinsten, and a desire for political correctness that is seeping into the military from the larger culture. This has resulted in a push for vapid generic faith that contradicts decades of military tradition and is unsatisfying in the life and death realities of war and preparations for war.
Military chaplains have a long history:
The tradition of chaplains in the U.S. military goes back to George Washington, who first sought a minister for his Virginia regiment in 1756. In the early days of the republic, commanders simply chose a chaplain who shared their beliefs. But with the expansion of the military in World War II, the armed services set quotas for chaplains of various faiths, attempting to match the proportion of each denomination in the general population.
There’s great irony in the new set of guidelines:
The guidelines discourage public prayers at official Air Force events or meetings other than worship services, one of the most contentious issues for many commanders. But they allow for "a brief nonsectarian prayer" at special ceremonies like those honoring promotions, or in "extraordinary circumstances" like "mass casualties, preparation for imminent combat and natural disasters."
Inherent in this directive is recognition that in extraordinary circumstances, and there are many when our armed forces are in harm's way, there is a desire to turn to God for help or solace. The tidy boxes that officials can put God in for military ceremonies and friendly events are naturally ripped open when soldiers are bleeding, dying, afraid, or grieving.
Regardless of the limitations military brass may put on their forces, there have never been and never will be atheists in foxholes, and our men and women in uniform will continue to be politically incorrect in their search for vibrant faith as they fight our battles and risks their lives.
As one soldier preparing to go to Iraq, Spec. Scott Higgins, 20, said in an interview:
"God will definitely help out, especially if he's deployed to a battle zone. It'll help me cope with what I'll see on a daily basis."
Posted by Jim at 07:35 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
August 25, 2005
An Embarrassing Retraction by Robertson
“Do you realize,” syndicated radio host Neal Boortz said to evangelicals in his audience yesterday with some. Emphasis. “Do you realize how much damage Pat Robertson has done to evangelical influence in this country?”
He was speaking, of course, about Robertson’s call for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Boortz also remarked that MSM headline interest in Robertson’s bluster was a purposeful attempt to diminish the influence of evangelical Christians.
I’ve made my views clear on Robertson unconscionable comments, and I called for him to apologize and then “go silent.” Yesterday, he sputtered in his attempt to extract himself from the morass, when he first said: “I was misinterpreted by the AP. But that happens all the time.”
But then when clip of Robertson’s clear endorsement of assassination circulated, he issued a still-nuanced apology. Two reports: here and here.
Since I’m involved professionally in public relations work for Christian clients, including a fair amount of crisis communications, I cringed not only at his careless and, in my view, unChristian call for murder, but at his fumbling of the damage control. An immediate apology and clarification were the only appropriate and wise responses. What a mess.
I find it additionally distressing to read of Robertson’s attempt to wrap himself in Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s cloak. Bonhoeffer’s Christian conscience resulted in his returning to the dangers of Germany, his decision to conspire in the [obviously unsuccessful] assassination of Adolf Hitler, and in his eventual execution in a German prison.
Unless your beliefs result in complete pacifism, it is clear the Christians often must support killing as a part of war. That is quite a bit different than calling for the assassination of a foreign leader who is ideologically at odds with America.
It’s lousy theological logic and amazingly stupid politics by the former presidential candidate.
But back to Boortz’s comments that Robertson has done terrible damage to evangelicals, and that the MSM love it.
He’s probably right about both, although more and more people are realizing that the blowhards of evangelicalism don’t represent the rank and file, and that evangelicalism is diverse and not represented by one or few leaders. Unfortunately, there are too many who do not make those distinctions; enough that comments such as Robertson’s can indeed diminish evangelical influence in the public square.
That’s why it is important for evangelicals to condemn of this sort of recklessly, something they did not do this week, as far as I can tell
Ted Haggard of NAE is trying to arrange a meeting with Chavez, which seems like a tremendous move. Other evangelical leaders have remained mostly silent:
“evangelical leaders and conservative groups declined to comment on Robertson's remarks, including Focus on the Family; evangelist Franklin Graham; the National Association of Religious Broadcasters; and the Family Research Council.” (source)
And again, it’s time for Robertson to hang up his spurs.
Posted by Jim at 07:54 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
August 23, 2005
What’s that you say, Mr. Robertson?
Please Mr. Robertson, I beg of you. Please stop talking. Smile at the camera. Hug people. Say a silent prayer. Direct your empire. Bounce your grandchildren on your knee. But stop moving your lips when a microphone is in the same zip code.
Pat, what where you thinking as you flippantly called for the assassination of a foreign leader whose policies are distinctly un-American? On what Scripture, what teaching of the church, what Christian principle did you base your call for the elimination of a political leader?
In case you missed it, Robertson said on The 700 Club:
``We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability,'' Robertson said yesterday on the television program. “ [Robertson said] Killing Chavez, who is visiting Cuba, would be cheaper than starting a war.The U.S. can't allow Venezuela to become a ``launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism,'' Robertson said, according to AP.
This is probably the first pronouncement of this sort by a Christian leader since some Pope in the middle ages, and it is a total embarrassment to the American evangelical community.
I agree with The Conservative Voice that Robertson is free to say what he wants in a free country. I just pray that he won’t, and I’m disappointed by the Voice’s weak response to this outrage.
Redstate.org’s opinion is closer to mine, wondering if Robertson is insane.
The last public pronouncement by Robertson should be a series of apologies. One to the fellow Christians, whose witness he has serverely diminished. And to the President. The State Department. Oh, Mr. Chavez, too.
Then, go silent. Please.
Posted by Jim at 12:54 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
August 22, 2005
Intelligent Design in the Crosshairs of the Mainstream
After listening last night with a great deal of fascination to my Bible study leader advancing the merits of the Gap Theory relating to the Genesis creation account, I was interested to read in the NY Times today that proponents of Intelligent Design recognize the gap between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2, and agree that the earth is billions of years old.
A long, skeptical article on the emergence of the intelligence design scientists reads:
“Unlike creationists, design proponents accept many of the conclusions of modern science. They agree with cosmologists that the age of the universe is 13.6 billion years, not fewer than 10,000 years, as a literal reading of the Bible would suggest. They accept that mutation and natural selection, the central mechanisms of evolution, have acted on the natural world in small ways, for example, leading to the decay of eyes in certain salamanders that live underground.”
This article and yesterday's are worth reading. The mainstream scientific community is trying their best to diminish the efforts of scientists who start with the supposition of a master designer. Those opposing intelligent design are facing still opposition from well-funded groups such as The Discovery Institute.
With the proper support and willingness to avoid wild rhetoric and short-term gains that will hurt the long-term effort, we may see tremendous progress in the teaching of ID alongside the theory of evolution in the nation's public schools.
Posted by Jim at 07:59 AM | Comments (7) | TrackBack
August 19, 2005
Friday Blog Review: The NCC, Porous Borders, Condotels, and more
A quick look around the blogosphere:
The Church of the Latter-Day Leftists: Jacob Laksin at OrthodoxyToday.com writes about the leftist agenda of the National Council Churches. (h/t: Father John)
A sample:
This should not be taken to mean that the NCC has been wholly silent on the issue of human rights. The organization continues to issue press releases decrying abhorrent human rights conditions around the world. However, the countries that the NCC chooses to single out for opprobrium show the extent to which the organization's religious mission has been corrupted by its radical leftist politics. One study, conducted by the Institute of Religion and Democracy in September 2004, found that "of the seven human rights criticisms it issued from 2000-2003, Israel received four, the United States two, and Sudan one." Moreover, the study noted, "Fully 80 percent of the NCC resolutions targeting foreign nations for human rights abuses were aimed at Israel."
An Entryway for Terrorists: LaShawn Barber is discouraged by the Bush Administration’s inability or unwillingness to deal decisively with illegal immigration and the vulnerability it creates against the very threat we’re fighting in Iraq. She writes:
Even more mysterious is Bush’s “fair” immigration policy that allows terrorists, the very people we’re fighting in Iraq, to walk right across the southern border. Every time an American is killed for “freedom” in that stinking desert, I wonder how better served our country would be if he’d been here at home guarding his borders.
Broken Masterpieces is also writing on the porous borders invites terrorists theme, citing Chuck Colson and introducing a further Christian perspective.
Mark Steyn on The Hugh Hewitt Show: Hugh has the text of his interview with British blogger Mark Steyn today.
They touched on the NY Times story on CBS’ ideas for revamping its evening newscast:
HH: Last story. CBS moving to find a new look for news is the headline in the New York Times today, Mark Steyn. It's a lengthy kind of inside baseball of what's ABC going to do, and what CBS is going to do. I compared it to Edsel versus Studebaker, and was upbraided by Studebaker club members for insulting Studebaker. Does it really matter? Does this stuff have any impact at all? MS: No. I think the days when you had one distinguished man in late middle age, who pontificated for half and hour, and basically told you what you should think about what had happened in the world that day, I think those days are over. And it doesn't really matter whether you hire another distinguished man in late middle age, or a couple of sock puppets to do it. Those days are over. And Americans are more diverse sources of news, and they're also more engaged in finding out for themselves. That's the great thing about a lot of what's happened on the internet. You can actually read the Pakistani papers before you go to bed each night. That's the new world.
The New Wave of Condotels: Interesting post at The American Scene on the popularity of “condotels.” Quoting from the Wall Street Journal:
The hotel industry has gotten into the act, bringing about the rise of the "condotel," a hybrid of a hotel and condo where people buy what are effectively hotel rooms. Smith Travel Research, a hotel-research firm based in Hendersonville, Tenn., last week released a new database tracking the nascent segment. Their research shows a boom with 227 projects under way nationwide representing 93,425 units. A little more than 24,000 of those are hotel rooms.Condotels tend to be in prime second-home destinations, though many are popping up in other urban areas in part because condo owners are attracted to the hotel services they can access, such as room service.
Posted by Jim at 07:54 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 18, 2005
How Much Steam Does the Fair Tax Train Have?
Enough to run over some politicians, says Matt Towery at Town Hall.
(There’s a new blog coalition forming for the fair tax called Fair Tax Fans. You can sign up here.)
Towery writes of the impact of The Fair Tax Book by Neal Boortz and John Linder:
Republicans and just about everybody else in the Washington establishment have been scared to touch this proposal in the past. The reason is simply that most of them are afraid of radical change of any sort.After all, there are plenty of big government bureaucracies as well as law and accounting firms that potentially could be wiped out by a fundamental simplification of the revenue system.
Another impediment will be those who view a fair tax as some sort of right-wing attack on the nation's middle class and the poor.
But the book and its concept have arrived at a perfect time. The Republican-led Congress is viewed right now as having few, if any, new ideas. The president is taking a five-week vacation while Iraq simmers closer to a boiling point.
I've witnessed and even been a modest player in some of those rare moments when a set of key political players seized on the nation's sense of frustration and turned it into a gain.
The effort I participated in was led by a man named Newt Gingrich, and it was called the "Contract with America." Much of what Gingrich and his pals passed in the spring of 1995 had at one time been viewed as radical, too.
Already critics of the FairTax are using sleight-of-hand tactics to shoot it down before it takes off. To confuse the public, they are using artificially low rates under the current tax system and comparing them favorably to the FairTax.
Doomsday scenarios to frighten those with lower incomes are another anti-FairTax move, even though the FairTax would provide rebates to families with modest incomes.
We've yet to fully poll this issue because first it needs to get some much-deserved attention. But let me assure both Republicans and Democrats that once these red herrings are put aside and the public understands the FairTax, the train will be pulling out of the station. Our elected leaders can either be on it or get run over by it.
Posted by Jim at 07:28 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
What will be Enough for the Palestinians?
It is so difficult to generate genuine optimism about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, because hope has always been dashed in some way. And perhaps that is the way it will always be. I believe the establishment of an independent Palestinian is right and just, and this move toward autonomy for Gaza a worthwhile move. However, the Palestinians have not failed to disappoint in the past, and I will be surprised if the Israeli action is treated as anything but an insignificant gesture.
Peter Glover has a thoughtful piece on Gaza, the West Bank, and ultimately, Jerusalem. He writes:
Now I am well aware that many take differing views on this process and these critical issues. Some views are coloured by particular theological interpretations, others are along historic lines, others are based on purely pragmatic considerations to achieve peace.
”Whatever our theological views however, God also calls each one of us to pursue justice for all peoples. That is why I, like Premier Sharon, perceive settling the Palestinian in a re-enfranchised state may be just. However, like many Christians, I have watched the Palestinian leaders squander opportunity after opportunity (including the amazingly one-sided 'give away' offer of Ehud Barak's Israeli government at Camp David just a few years ago - an offer Yasser Araft incredibly refused) to settle the dispute. They have today another real opportunity. But I predict it will not be enough for them in the long run.Sharon is taking a massive political risk for himself and for Israel. While Palestinians are free to live almost anywhere in the Arab or Jewish world the same cannot be said for the Jews, who would be persecuted mercilously in most Arab countries. The situation of the two peoples then are not synonymous. The Israelis are however prepared to relinquish land and give the Palestinians their state. By doing so, Sharon has calculated there is at least a chance for a permanent peace. Gaza and the West Bank make up those lands. Jerusalem, currently, does not. And there is the rub.”
Posted by Jim at 07:05 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
August 16, 2005
Media Voyeurism and the Grieving Mother
The reason the grieving mother in Crawford can create such a media firestorm is that the notion that “there is nothing worth dying for” has gained such acceptance in popular culture that media find its expression by a sympathetic figure to be an ideal staging for political theatre.
War should never be a popular pastime, but until the advent of this—my—generation, a nation of patriots understood that it was necessary for young men and women to sacrifice their lives to confront palpable evil and dictatorial belligerence that threatened civilization.
As Nick wrote at Redstate.org: “Can anyone even imagine the media giving voice to a distraught, grieving mother who lost her son at Normandy, demanding that the war be ended? The bunch of them would have been shot.”
I can understand the pain of a parent losing a child in the prime of his life, and I do not question the sincerity of the grief nor the desperate measures that unanswered grief can cause. And while it seems clear that the anti-war militants have taken Sheehan under their wing and given her boldness and camaraderie, I find the assassination of her character to be unseemly.
But even more repulsive is the voyeurism by national media, championing a mother’s grief that has led her to an embarrassing undressing of patriotism and family, and belittling of the sacrifice of one of America’s gallant sons. We will, in good taste, look away from the unsavory spectacle.
Posted by Jim at 08:12 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
August 15, 2005
Justice Sunday II: Wrong Place, Off Target?
The only real news from Justice Sunday II was logistical: who spoke, who sang, how crowded the church was, where media sat, and prominence of bloggers.
The messages were the same. Arrogant judges. Judicial activism. As important as all of this is, it all seems rather secondary at the moment, since the President has nominated Judge Roberts to the High Court. Presumably Roberts will not be arrogant and will prove to be an originalist.
Evidently Roberts wasn’t mentioned all that much at JSII because his credentials are in question, because—for this crowd—he may have been on the wrong side of protecting homosexual rights.
Soon there will be another Supreme Court vacancy, and maybe a third by the end of the Bush presidency. I’m not sure JSII had any bearing on any of these matters.
Family Research Council paid close attention to bloggers, inviting 12 to the event. They’re listed on the event homepage. They included Captains Quarters, Voluntarily Conservative, Reasoned Audacity, and Yeah Right, Whatever, among others.
Unfortunately, too much of the blog coverage is of the “Gee whiz, I can’t believe I’m here variety.” Joe Carter has the best coverage that I’ve seen so far.
My strongest reaction to JSII: I am totally opposed to conducting this kind of political event in a church. God’s house should be a place a prayer, but you have made it a den of politicians.
We know better. Rent a convention center and have Christian activists gather and organize. Keep these political rabbles out of the places of worship.
Posted by Jim at 07:12 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
August 14, 2005
Pay Attention: A Fair Tax for America
The book on a national consumption-based tax to replace the income tax is out, and it is #1 on the New York Times bestseller list. The new book is by Congressman John Linder—sponsor of fair tax legislation—and Atlanta-based syndicated radio guy Neal Boortz.
We’ve talked about the fair tax a few times this year, here, here, and here.
The proposed change would be an enormous boost for America and it would be remarkably fair to individuals at all parts of the socio-economic spectrum. But it would put a lot of lobbyists out of work, so it is going to continue to face great opposition.
Boortz is on a huge book tour, and surprisingly the idea seems to be gaining some steam, at least among real people. We’ll see what it does in Congress.

Posted by Jim at 07:34 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 12, 2005
Friday Blogview: Profiling, Baking Cookies, Intelligent Design, Ad Nauseam and More
The Crusader makes a compelling argument for profiling with his farcical history test
Bill Hobbs and others are going to attend and live blog Justice Sunday II, this Sunday, August 14. They’re looking for recommendations on how to best cover this for the blogosphere.
Zach at ITA looks inwardly and to the Republicans to share blame in the growth of the Nanny State. He writes:
The core principle Republicans need to return to the most is honoring non-governmental action within society. The government is a leviathan because too many of its citizens have become dependent and comfortable with the extent to which it has intruded into our lives. As I wrote in February: While politicians found appealing rhetoric based upon small government and budgetary discipline, there's no underlying cultural fortitude. People (myself included) still can't bring themselves to say to Uncle Sam, "No sir, I want to do this myself," for a large number or programs.
Dory is understanding God by baking cookies.
Al Capp's journey out of liberalism is described by Roy in Dispatches from Outland.
Dawn Treader has some evidence that Intelligent Design may have reach a Tipping Point in the American public square.
Dan at Elected Blogline visits the coming out of Senate candidate Jeanine Pirro and wonders if this is a bump in the road for Hillary. I wonder if there’s ever been a Senator whose spouse has done prison time. (Not if there are any Senators who should have done prison time!)
Midwest Mugwump takes a look at Christians at Yale and other places.
I love new marketing ideas, like General Motors’ employee discount, but hate when the rest of the world parrots the idea. Ad infinitum, ad nauseam. Intolerant Elle says its happening.
Posted by Jim at 08:02 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 11, 2005
Evangelical Muscle and Elite Embarrassment
It is often a surprise to the casual observer of the evangelical Christian community that there are deep concerns in matters of social and foreign policy ranging far beyond the issues of abortion or homosexuality that dominate public discussion of evangelical involvement.
Stan Guthrie, a senior editor at Christianity Today, writes of this surprise, but also of the elitism that decries the Christians beating the lions in the arena. Guthrie posts on his personal blog:
[NY Times columnist Nicholas] Kristof writes in his July 24 column, for example, “[T]hese days liberals should be embarrassed that it’s the Christian Right that is taking the lead in spotlighting repression in North Korea.” Two days later, Kristof wrote, “Time magazine gets credit for putting Darfur on its cover—but the newsweeklies should be embarrassed that better magazine coverage of Darfur has often been in Christianity Today.” (Disclosure: As an editor at CT, I’ve played a small role in coordinating some of that embarrassing coverage.)Do you detect a pattern here? Acknowledging that theologically conservative Christians have been pivotal in fighting and spotlighting human rights abuses worldwide, Kristof nevertheless expresses an unconscious elitism. Being beaten by a presumed equal is no shame. But losing to an inferior is necessarily an embarrassment.
The good coverage in CT may have been a reflection of the consistent, and apparently effective, efforts of evangelical groups maintaining pressure on the Administration on hotspots such as North Korea and Sudan.
There’s a recent effort of this type at a Christian festival in Midland, Texas.
The displays were part of a growing movement by conservative Christian groups to press the White House on human rights in North Korea, much the way they drew attention to the civil war in Sudan and kept pressure on Mr. Bush after his first days in office.
These are not rare, only under-publicized by MSM. Instead, the MSM is trying to create a frenzy around the protests of the grieving mother who lost a son in Iraq and is now camped in Crawford .
Posted by Jim at 05:33 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 09, 2005
Still Savoring Summer
In Georgia it feels like the middle of summer, but the kids went back to school yesterday. Assuming it is still summer in most of the country, as it should be, here’s a new blog called Points of Light by my friend Jim Jordan, who is still savoring summer. He and his wife spend a lot of down time in Wisconsin and his descriptions and photos will help you understand why.

Posted by Jim at 07:06 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Defining Evangelicals
Joe Carter at Evangelical Outpost, who just took the job as managing editor of the World Magazine blog (don’t’ know what that means for EO), is defining evangelical for us.
There was a very interesting 2004 conversation on this topic, conducted by the Ethics and Public Policy Center. Titled Understanding American Evangelicals: A Conversation with Mark Noll and Jay Tolson, it includes comments by the two principals and questions from selected journalists.
Mark Noll is particularly good and fascinating on the history of evangelicalism. He has a level head in fitting the modern church into the sweep of history.
Noll uses a David Bebbington recipe in identifying the following ingredients of evangelicalism:
(1) conversion, "the belief that lives need to be changed"; (2) the Bible, the "belief that all spiritual truth is to be found in its pages"; (3) activism, the dedication of all believers, including laypeople, to lives of service for God, especially as manifest in evangelism (spreading the good news) and mission (taking the gospel to other societies); and (4) crucicentrism, the conviction that Christ’s death on the Cross (Latin crux) provided the means of reconciliation between a holy God and sinful human beings.
Noll said in the dialogue:
Since the mid-eighteenth century evangelicals have played a significant role in the history of Christianity, especially on the North American continent and wherever else the British or American empire has spread.3 For much of the nineteenth century, white evangelical Protestants constituted the largest and most influential body of religious adherents in the United States (as also in Britain and Canada). Today groups descended from those eighteenth- and nineteenth-century movements are more visible than they had been for several decades. A majority of those in full-time preparation for the ministry in the Church of Eng-land have, for some years, been trained in evangelical colleges. In Canada, a majority of the Protestants in church on any given Sunday are in evangelical congregations. And throughout the world, Pentecostal and charismatic movements, which trace their lineage to developments within Anglo-American evangelicalism early in the twentieth century, are far and away the fastest-growing segments of world-wide Christianity.
Posted by Jim at 06:52 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
A Peter Jennings Moment
What I remember Peter Jennings for is that he was the driving force behind hiring Peggy Wehmeyer at ABCNEWS in 1994 as the first correspondent to report for a network on religious and spiritual issues. Peggy served in that role for a number of years.
Based in the ABCNEWS' Dallas bureau, she reported for World News Tonight with Peter Jennings, 20/20 and PrimeTime Live. As an evangelical, she was anguished by maintaining her Christian faith while listening to the pleas of fellow evangelicals and the accusations that she was favoring them. Wehmeyer said consistently that Jennings was her biggest ally
Posted by Jim at 06:36 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 08, 2005
The Mainline Breaks Toward the Terrorists
The Presbyterian Church USA voted at its convention last week to threaten a handful of corporations that provide military-related equipment to Israel. Listen to this statement. The NY Times reported:
“The Presbyterian committee said in its announcement that it included United Technologies Corporation, a military contractor, because a subsidiary provides helicopters used by the Israeli military “in attacks in the occupied territories against suspected Palestinian terrorists.”And the problem with that is? (As a side note, does any really believe that Mossad doesn’t know who the Palestinian leaders are? They’re not suspected; they’re identified and eliminated).
The divestment threats of the mainline denominations against corporations that provide selected products to Israel underscores the moral bankruptcy of these religious groups. It would be of more concern if these fading bodies had a vibrant, growing presence, but they are shrinking in size and influence.
The Stop Divestment from Israel blog has a good compilation on the efforts by mainline churches to hurt Israel. FrontPageMag.com says these groups may be violating U.S. law
My friend Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews said of the divestment actions:
“At the same time that we’re seeing the results of 25 years of efforts in bringing together Jewish and evangelical groups in support of Israel, we’re also facing the sobering reality of mainline denominations not only turning their backs on Israel, but lining up to viciously attack the only Middle Eastern country with democratic values and practices.”
Although I have never supported the Christian leaders and groups that blindly approve every action of the modern state of Israel as though it is led by Moses himself, the actions by the UCC, the Presbyterian Church USA and others to undermine the only stable democracy in the Middle East and an ally of the United States are unconscionable.
The liberal gaggle of mainline churches, the National Council of Churches, took another blow last week, when the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America withdrew its membership. According to Scripps Howard columnist Terry Mattingly:
“The Antiochian archdiocese quit the council, in large part, because of what he called an "almost a politicized agenda" under [executive director Bob] Edgar -- with a strong emphasis on sexual liberation and opposition to conservative Christianity.”
I am not without sympathy for the Palestinian people, but not for the terrorists who have been killing Israeli citizens for years.
I have been to Israel twice; not as a tourist, but to work with a client called Nazareth Village that runs a First Century Village and an interactive center on the life of Jesus—in his hometown. It is a wonderful multi-denominational Christian group that is a great source of inspiration and reconciliation in the largest Arab town in Israel.
During those visits I met with and came to love a number of Palestinian Christians, many whose families have been Christians for many generations. They have no love for the Israeli government, but neither do they support Palestinian terrorism. They are in a difficult place, and I think of them whenever I read of trouble in northern Israel.
I pray for the peace of Jerusalem. But trying to disable Israel and prevent it from protecting its people is a foolish and naïve way for Christians to work for that peace.
Posted by Jim at 06:31 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
August 06, 2005
Evangelicals Within Denomination Endure Actions of UCC Synod
My reporting on the United Church of Christ convention in Atlanta is online now at ChristianityToday.com.
Although evangelicals remaining in the United Church of Christ have grown accustomed to scenes at the national synod like the cross-dressed Transgender Gospel Choir singing Amazing Grace, decisions at the July meeting in Atlanta were disturbing to the theologically conservative remnant in the most liberal Christian denomination in America.
The UCC Synod passed resolutions endorsing gay marriage and supporting divestment of funds involving Israel.
Jesus is Lord Resolution Seen as Bright Spot
At the same time, the Synod passed a resolution affirming the person and work of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, while refusing to add the affirmation to ordination vows.
Rev. David Runnion-Bareford, director of the Biblical Witness Fellowship, a voice for evangelical renewal in the UCC, is disappointed in the gay marriage and divestment decisions but not surprised by actions of the Synod, which he says is out of touch with UCC churches.
“We draw encouragement from resurgence in hundreds of UCC-affiliated local churches where the Gospel is being preached for the first time in years,” Runnion-Bareford said. “In an internal survey, 27 percent of people who attend UCC churches identify themselves as evangelical. And two-thirds of the local churches in the UCC send no funds to the national group.”
Rev. Brent Becker of St. Paul United Church of Christ in Cibolo, Texas, who wrote an unsuccessful counter-resolution affirming marriage as the union of a man and woman, said: “The leadership hailed the July 4 resolution endorsing gay marriage as some kind of independence for the denomination. I believe it signaled the Synod’s independence from the clear teaching of Jesus in Matthew 19: 4-6, and the counsel of the rest of Scripture. It established UCC independence from every other Christian group, and from the beliefs and scholarship of 2000 years of church history.”
Posted by Jim at 10:54 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 05, 2005
Something Stinks in Louisiana
We spent the day yesterday at the Louisiana State Penitentiary at Angola, where 5,108 men with life sentences (at least 66 years) are spending the remainder of their days. It’s a farm, really, 116,000 acres surrounded on three sides by the Mississippi Rivers, scattered with low building filled with men and surrounded by razor wire and towers with armed guards.
Life in prison has a character all its own when prisoners know their last days will be there. While time in a southern work camp is rarely easy, the experience of prisoners at Angola is really what they make of it. If they have years of good conduct, they see a lot more of the acreage and they experience remarkable freedom within the confines of the farm. Screw up and they'll spend 23 hours a day looking at the walls of 6 X 9 cell.
There’s much to say about Angola and much has, indeed, been written about this unique place. We were there to discuss the plans of the children’s ministry called Awana to connect children with their incarcerated fathers in a remarkable event on September 10 , and to get them memorizing Scripture together, even though they will spend almost all of their days apart.
But I came away with a grinding, insipid sickness about the most obvious reality of Angola, which has nothing to do with the way the fine warden and his staff run the place: 80% of the men at Angola are African-American. Yes, 80% of the men sentenced to life in the state of Louisiana are black.
I spent the day in prison seeing results, not studying causes. But as I drove the two plus hours back to New Orleans, there was the recurring thought that something here is screwed up in a big way. Something stinks, and it's coming from Louisiana.
It may be that the black culture is producing thugs. It may be that poverty is a great predictor of criminal behavior and poverty besets the black publication far more in Louisiana. It may be that the criminal justice system in the state is far more likely to arrest and convict a black man than a white man, and far more likely to sentence a black man to life in prison than a white man. And it may be all of these things.
Angola is a remarkable place with a lot of bad people and a lot of rather good ones. You can sense that God is at work in there, where the sins are grievous and well-known, where there is little hope aside from the hope God provides, and where redemption is strikingly obvious.
But something needs to be done to address the problem of this state throwing so many black bodies into a farm of bondage with too many cement walls.
Posted by Jim at 06:43 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 04, 2005
Christians In Danger on the Horn of Africa
Christians in Eritrea are being arrested and detained without trial for no apparent reason other than the government’s desire to limit surging growth of the evangelical church. Eritrea’s constitution calls for freedom of religion, and there is religious plurality, with the nation split largely between Sunni Muslim and the Eritrean Orthodox church, with lesser numbers of Catholics and evangelicals.
But Christianity Today reports that recent growth by the evangelical church is of concern to the Marxist-tinged government, which has begun to brutalize, intimidate, and imprison these believers.
The U.S. State Department has designated Eritrea as a Country of Particular Concern for severe violations of religious freedom. But this designation requires that further action be taken by our government if Eritrea failed to improve its record (by March 2005). CT says that nothing has been done by the U.S., despite continuing persecution of Christians.
Speak up for the Christians of tiny Eritrea. Urge the Bush Administration to take action against the oppressive North African government if its does not release these prisoners of conscience and stop harassment of followers of Christ.
There’s more information at Compass Direct .
Posted by Jim at 09:16 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
August 03, 2005
Heirs of the Sixties
While Jesus said that the peacemakers are blessed, today’s supposed peace movement is no place for the followers of Christ. For those who criticize America’s involvement in Iraq—not strategic or tactical decisions, but the right and need for action—are not seeking to make peace but to make nice. And to alter evil by taking its hand.
While pacifism is a legitimate theological template, although difficult for me to understand in the face of the vile evil of our age, I do not believe Christians can defend identification with and verbal support of the enemies of freedom and faith. How can we understand the Left’s utter fascination with and sympathy for Islamic terrorists and the ideology of oppression that is at its core?
It is reminiscent of the Religious Left’s alignment with the Marxists of earlier decades. The self-described “penitent former liberal” who writes thoughtfully at the Blue Goldfish blog said:
“The evil spirit demanding a response of that age in the early 1970s was that of the Marxist tyranny known as communism. And from the Christian Left, there was - indeed - enabling, useful foolishness, appeasement, apologies, and complete denial.”
And this quote from Richard John Neuhaus:
At the height of Mao’s cultural revolution in which as many as thirty million died, the National Council of Churches published a booklet hailing China as an admirably “Christian” society. In 1981, 60 Minutes did an hour-long program on the National Council of Churches’ support for Marxist causes, and I spoke with Morley Safer about religious leaders who had become “apologists for oppression.” That was the end of some important friendships, or at least I thought they were friends. I was then a much younger man, learning slowly and painfully what many had learned before. Allegiance to the left, however variously defined, was a religion, and dissent was punished by excommunication.
Today, the liberals desire to oppose the Republican administration has morphed into the absurdity of defending and excusing the utter evil of Saddam and al Queda and developing an apologetic for addressing the oppression of poor Middle Eastern Muslims as the way to stop the ideology of terror that is producing the bomb throwers of our time.
The anti-war activists of today’s Religious Left are the heirs of yesterday’s NCC Marxist sympathizers. They have no footing in the church of Jesus Christ.
Posted by Jim at 07:54 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
August 02, 2005
The Sounds of Repositioning
As Congress slips out of the August Washington swamp and John Bolton slips into the United Nations, that other sound you hear this summer is that of potential presidential candidates re-positioning themselves for an election that is still three years away.
Hillary Clinton has been doing the sidestroke to the right all year, and last week it appeared that Bill Frist was paddling slightly to the left. I’m not certain the Senate Majority Leader was doing anything but staking out a position on stem cell research that should not be surprising, given his urging of President Bush to consider federal funding of the research in the past.
But the criticism of Frist from conservatives has been bitter and despondent, as if they’d been betrayed by a friend.
Frist’s position, though, is not all that radical, and it is close to that of Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. Although opposing the creation of embryos for the purposes of research, embryos that would be destroyed by fertility clinics could instead be used for research.
I agree with Romney and Frist on that proposal. It would not result in the creation of human life for the purpose of destroying it—even for laudatory research. But rather than embryos being destroyed with no further benefit, they could be used to advance science and the quality of life.
There’s more on Romney’s repositioning in a NY Times article today.
On many social issues, Mr. Romney has recently appeared to stake out ground to the right of many constituents but slightly to the left of the country's most conservative Republicans.Instead of taking the pure conservative position of opposing all embryonic stem cell research, Mr. Romney, whose state is full of leading scientists, has said he supports using embryos if they are leftovers from fertility clinics, but not if they were created solely for research.
Mr. Romney wants to reinstate capital punishment in Massachusetts, but his proposal for a "foolproof" death penalty restricts when it can be applied to the point that some conservatives say it would make executions exceedingly rare.
Even on gay marriage, which Mr. Romney has consistently opposed, his record is not universally praised by conservatives. They applaud that he invoked a 1913 law to prohibit same-sex couples residing outside Massachusetts from getting married in the state. But Mr. Romney's support of a constitutional amendment last year to ban gay marriage but also create civil unions upset some conservatives.
Posted by Jim at 08:26 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
August 01, 2005
Road Trip
The ribbons of Interstate highway from central Florida to upstate New York have been our home for much of the last two weeks, on a road trip that included family time at theme parks and amusement parks, picnic lunches, a lot of natural beauty, and too much fast food. Here are a few observations from traveling:
--Upstate New York, particularly the Finger Lakes region, is among the most beautiful and interesting that I’ve seen in the country. The region around Ithaca, with it soaring hills, gorges, water falls and the town descending to Cayuga Lake, is dramatic and gorgeous (or “gorges” as the local t-shirts say). The drive on Highway 14 from Watkins Glen to Geneva along Seneca Lake, with vineyards on rolling hills down to the long, seemingly endless lake, felt like a trip along the Mediterranean.
--The first drop on the Superman roller coaster at Six Flags Darien Lake is the biggest and fastest I’ve even been on. What a great thrill ride, even without the loops and corkscrews common to the other thrillers.
--We paid from $2.099 in Atlanta to $2.499 once in New York for gasoline, but the high prices did not keep people off the roads. The Interstates were packed much of the time; the roads were full yesterday through Virginia on I-81 and through the Carolinas, with frustrating delays.
--I believe it was Charles Kuralt who said that because of the Interstate Highway System you could now drive from coast to coast in America and see absolutely nothing. The same is generally true from Florida to the Canadian border. Certainly if a visitor to America was to take the drive we did this week, it would seem obvious that the nation is forested, agrarian, and underpopulated. It does make me wonder why most of us crowd into cities, when there is so much open land and beautiful vistas, even along the east coast.
--How did we as families take long trips without DVD players in the back seats, not to mention Gameboys and CD players with headphones. The license plate and alphabet games only went so far.
--Returning from long, fast travel on crowded roads, I realize how vulnerable we have been every mile and on every turn, and I'm so grateful to God for a safe trip, free from mishap, illness, or breakdown.
The drive was worthwhile to see family and to create new memories for the kids, and for us, but it certainly is good to be home, even if I’d rather be looking out over the Finger Lakes rather than suburban Atlanta.
Now, to figure out what happened in the world while we were gone.
Posted by Jim at 07:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 15, 2005
Ebbers Should Not Go To Prison
The 25-year prison sentence for 63-year-old former WorldCom CEO Bernie Ebbers is a tragic example of how criminal justice has failed to mature and respond creatively to differing crimes and the needs of society.
Ebbers' crimes were staggering in scope and financial impact and he should be punished severely. But we should not send to prison a retirement-aged financial and management expert—-probably a genius without sufficient moral character. Find a better punishment that is relentless, long-lasting, and difficult, but redemptive for society and for Mr. Ebbers.
We should not be using precious and expensive prison space for non-violent, non-dangerous offenders. Alternatives to incarceration, if creatively developed and effectively enforced, are a way to punish wrongdoers without punishing ourselves.
It was right for the court to take nearly all of Ebbers assets and to leave a small amount of money in his account. Instead of placing him in a prison cell because we’re mad at him, for the next 25 years Ebbers could be forced to earn little more than minimum wage, and to serve the community in a way that would use his skills, benefit the poorest of the poor in the community, and in no way enrich him or his family or enable them to prepare for retirement. This is one thing he stole from many people.
Non-prison punishments can be quite taxing, would enable more restitution, and would have a positive impact on all involved, rather than simply tossing an older man in prison to rot for the rest of his days.
There’s more information on restorative justice here.
We need to hold offenders responsible and be sure that punishment is sure and swift. But punishment is not necessarily prison. We’d all be better off if we learned that and encouraged enlightened legislators and judges to be more creative and restorative as they deal with crime and punishment.
Posted by Jim at 09:03 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 12, 2005
The Republican Coalition
Guest columnist Ed Stephan at the liberal blog, The Carpetbagger Report, discusses 19th century author Herbert Spencer, who he calls the granddaddy of conservatives.
Stephan writes:
Spencer's philosophy highlights the fundamental conflict in today's Republican Party. Business must, he says, ultimately come into conflict with both Government and Religion. For Business to triumph, Government must be reduced to its "protective functions" only — protection of life, property and contracts. He obviously opposed any scheme involving government direction of the marketplace, much less such "promotive functions" as health, education, welfare, any forms of the pursuit of happiness. And even regarding simple protection of life, he favored a drastic reduction in spending on military adventures which he regarded as nearly always harmful to Business. There should be no interference by Religion in the marketplace either. If I want to hire a prostitute, or consume tainted horse meat, or hire someone our society disapproves of … so be it; it's no one else's business what I do, so long as I threaten no else (pretty radical thinking for a conservative).This is clearly the fundamental three-way contradiction in today's GOP — laissez faire (or "Log Cabin") Libertarians vs. neo-con (often chickenhawk) Militarists vs. parochial (and pharisaic) Theocrats. Wall Street vs. the Pentagon vs. Evangelical Fundamentalism. Greed vs. Guns vs. God. Cheney vs. Rumsfeld vs. Dobson.
Stephan presents the hope of the Democrats that these are warring factions within the Republican party, and that the conflict of these ideas will accomplish what the Democratic party cannot without ideas.
The Republican Party is a coalition of interests, although the groups’ battles are largely on the field of debate and discussion not the ballot box, because the Democratic Party presents an alternative too far a field, and the Libertarian Party is an expression of principle not a viable voting option.
The libertarians, neo-cons, and evangelicals will rally around a reasonably conservative Republican against nearly any Democrat that can be nominated with the Party's current leftist lean.
There is a fourth faction of Republicans that represent many of those currently in Washington—-the big-government Republicans. This group is odds with the libertarians, to be sure, but they are also on a course away from traditional limited-government conservatism.
This analysis also breaks down because there are a large number of libertarian-minded, national defense obsessed, moral values Republicans.
A possible rupture among the Republicans will come if the President nominates an individual for the Supreme Court who has the social libertarian impulses of O’Connor, rather than the moral conservatism of Thomas. Then we’ll see a fracture led by the evangelicals and conservative Catholics that may endanger the Republicans in the 2006 elections.
Posted by Jim at 08:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 11, 2005
Relgious Right to Work More Quietly on SCOTUS Nomination
The religious right will allow President Bush to make his choice for a nominee to replace Sandra Day O’Connor on the Supreme Court without any further threats or bashing of Alberto Gonzales, we learned late last week. Although there may be some mavericks who wander off the farm, the key leaders of the conservative Christian movement whose primary passion is opposition to abortion have agreed privately that their public criticism of the President is likely to be counterproductive.
The opposition to the nomination of Alberto Gonzales is nearly unanimous among these leaders, and although they’ve agreed to hold fire, their greatest fear is that with a second opening on the court, which is likely with Rehnquist’s apparently imminent departure, they will get their original intent strict constructionist conservative on the one hand, and Gonzales on the other. That would leave the court essentially unchanged, in their view, and would leave the movement disheartened and probably on the sidelines for a number of years.
Although a minority of these leaders is anxious for a fight and are fearful that to remain silent at this point is to be unfaithful to the spiritually charged cause, they have agreed to stay in line at the urging of a number of the key leaders whose caution would surprise most observers.
Posted by Jim at 07:53 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 08, 2005
The Center of the World

The center of the world for a moment is not Washington or Paris or New York, but London. Rarely do such divergent events converge on a city and a people, the British, and on a leader who grows in stature by the day, Prime Minister Tony Blair.
The British have a history of resolve, or steady, stoic, unwavering backbone. At its worst it is the stiff upper lip of obstinacy, and at its best it is a Churchill-rallied island withstanding Nazi bombardment.
And now, in a two-day span, Londoners have celebrated victory in landing the 2012 Olympic Summer Games and mourned the death and destruction of terrorist horror in the Tube. All the while, UK hosting the G8 in Scotland.
At the center of it all is Blair. In response to the terror, Bair addressed the nation from 10 Downing Street, sounding Churchillian:
“When they try to intimidate us, we will not be intimidated. When they seek to change our country or our way of life by these methods, we will not be changed. When they try to divide our people or weaken our resolve, we will not be divided and our resolve will hold firm."
Certainly that is the nation’s historic posture and it seems to have captured the steadiness of modern Brits.
And while the most important deliberations and decisions will fall to the Gleneagles summit, where Blair is driving the agenda and probably cashing in debts from President Bush, my favorite Blair moment came earlier in the week in Singapore, remembered for Japanese humiliation of the British in WWII, where the Prime Minister personally lobbied for London and won. This is most enjoyable because it came at the expense of the French.
Here’s the NY Times account of this beautiful moment:
London organizers arrived in Singapore with their bid still the expected runner-up to Paris, the longtime favorite. But while the Parisian organizers, including Mayor Bertrand Delanoë, could often be found during the past week in the hotel lobby bar, conferring among themselves instead of lobbying for their bid, Mr. Blair enthusiastically met with International Olympic Committee members until Tuesday, when he flew to Scotland to act as the host for the Group of 8 Summit.When President Jacques Chirac of France was quoted earlier in the week insulting British food, Mr. Blair remained the statesman, refusing to be drawn into a spat.
Day by day, the London bid appeared to gain momentum, members said, and Wednesday, the city defeated its longtime European rival, 54 to 50, on the final ballot to bring the Olympics back to Britain for the first time since 1948.
"If it hadn't been for him," Dick Pound, an I.O.C. member from Canada, said of Mr. Blair, "we'd be holding a press conference in French."
But sport is sport, although with the Olympics it also represents great economic momentum and even urban renewal, and terror is the hard reality of our day. We pray for our true allies, the British, and for the loss of any sense of innocence or protection they may have felt from extremist butchery.
With Tony Blair at the helm they are demonstrating that their heritage lives on and that when joy and tragedy collide, it is the center course of determination and steady resolve that helps a nation to endure.
Posted by Jim at 09:01 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 07, 2005
A Nation of Young Therapeutic Deists?
George Barna has done extensive research on the faith of young America and the task of bringing children and youth to faith in Christ, which he has summarized in the book Transforming Children into Spiritual Champions.
A group of Christian leaders and ministries in the U.S. and Canada--called The 4-14 Forum-led by Barna and Awana Clubs International has been grappling with how to better deal with the task of child evangelism.
In a report to The 4-14 Forum, Barna writes:
The research reinforces one simple but profound truth, over and over again: if you want to have a lasting influence upon the world you must invest in peoples lives; and if you want to maximize your investment, then you must invest in those lives while they are young. The research simply crystallizes lessons that we can observe through history and personal experience: if you connect with children today, effectively teaching them biblical principles and foundations from the start, then you will see the fruit of that effort blossom for decades to come. The more diligent we are in these efforts, the more prodigious a harvest we will reap. Alternately, the more lackadaisical we are in our efforts to raise up children as moral and spiritual champions, the less healthy will the Church and society of the future be.
The difficulty and complexity of the task has become more evident.
Researchers with the National Study of Youth and Religion at the University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill) and have written up findings from a recent study in a new book: Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers (Oxford University Press).
Gene Edward Veith writes about the findings here, in an article reprinted from World magazine.
After interviewing over 3,000 teenagers, the social scientists summed up their beliefs:(1) “A god exists who created and ordered the world and watches over human life on earth.”
(2) “God wants people to be good, nice, and fair to each other, as taught in the Bible and by most world religions.”
(3) “The central goal of life is to be happy and to feel good about oneself.”
(4) “God does not need to be particularly involved in one’s life except when God is needed to resolve a problem.”
(5) “Good people go to heaven when they die.”Even these secular researchers recognized that this creed is a far cry from Christianity, with no place for sin, judgment, salvation, or Christ. Instead, most teenagers believe in a combination of works righteousness, religion as psychological well-being, and a distant non-interfering god. Or, to use a technical term, “Moralistic Therapeutic Deism.”
Ironically, many of these young deists are active in their churches. “Most religious teenagers either do not really comprehend what their own religious traditions say they are supposed to believe,” conclude Mr. Smith and Ms. Denton, “or they do understand it and simply do not care to believe it.”
Another possibility is that they have learned what their churches are teaching all too well. It is not just teenagers who are moralistic therapeutic deists. This describes the beliefs of many adults too, and even what is taught in many supposedly evangelical churches.
Clearly many churches are not teaching young people the deep truths of the Christian faith. I’m beginning to fear that even evangelical churches are striving so much to be relevant to the culture and to attract seekers that they are not digging deep into the marrow of Christianity—-leaving their parishioners young and old with a thin and ultimately inadequate set of beliefs.
Posted by Jim at 07:48 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 06, 2005
The Speech: "Your fighting sons ...they are splendid in every way"
The excerpts in this post are from this speech, known as the Old Soldiers Never Die speech, delivered on April 19, 1951 before a joint session of Congress by General Douglas Macarthur, upon his retirement and to defend his conduct of the war in Korea.
Kyle Bruns emailed me with the right answer and received the top prize of the complete satisfaction of being the first smart person to respond.
I was struck by how timely much of what Macarthur said is to modern day.
Posted by Jim at 05:58 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Africa’s Fate Will Be Determined By Africans
America gets a bad rap on international aid. As a nation, first we’re pressured or shamed into making massive loans to African nations, then pressured to forgive the loans, while all along being cajoled to make outright aid grants to help African children and families.
As Doug pointed out, America is the most generous nation in the world, and the American people—informed and inspired by their Christian ethic to help those in need—give more to address international poverty, hunger, disease than any other group in the world. Hands down.
Now the leaders meeting at the G8 Summit are being called on to give more, forgive more, and even make long term commitments of aid.
Americans will continue to aid Africa, both through our government’s international aid programs and largely through our Christian churches, missions, and aid organizations. But there needs to be more strings attached to aid, if Africa is ever to become something more than a continent of nation beggars.
Africa can solve their own problems in the long run, but only through deep spiritual and moral regeneration, a commitment to capitalism, the ultimate rule of law, and broadly adopted sexual ethics.
Aid must be tied to progress in all of these areas, or we will continue to be co-dependents in the continent’s cultural suicide.
The NY Times editorializes today that Africa’s fate will be determined by the eight men at the G8. That’s nonsense. Africans and the decisions they make on the fundamental foundations of their nations and people groups will determine Africa’s fate.
Posted by Jim at 08:11 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 05, 2005
"Your fighting sons ...they are splendid in every way"
As the appeasers and 21st Century peaceniks and their liberal comrades snipe at the Administration for staying the course in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is good to consider the words of one of the nation’s great speeches. Its themes suggest not only persevering but intensifying the War on Terror and its vital corollaries.
Who will be the first informed SCO reader to correctly identify the speaker and the speech?
“Military alliances, balances of power, leagues of nations, all in turn failed, leaving the only path to be by way of the crucible of war.We have had our last chance. If we will not devise some greater and more equitable system, our Armageddon will be at our door. The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence, an improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of the past two thousand years.
It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh." But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end. War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision.
In war there is no substitute for victory.
There are some who for varying reasons would appease. They are blind to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement but begets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement had led to more than a sham peace.
Like blackmail, it lays the basis for new and successively greater demands until, as in blackmail, violence becomes the only alternative.”
Posted by Jim at 01:38 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
How to Shrink a Denomination: The UCC Endorses Gay Marriage
The United Church of Christ took a stand for homosexual marriage at its national convention yesterday, which the networks touted as a move by one of the large Christian denominations.
But the UCC is not large at all, and it--as well as other mainline denominations--is shrinking because of its biblical unfaithfulness. Whereas the church must open its arms to homosexuals, it cannot do so at the price of ignoring Scripture’s clear teaching against homosexuality and for marriage as a union of man and a woman.
The UCC is not among the top ten religious groups in America. And it's sinking like a rock.
Posted by Jim at 11:10 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
July 01, 2005
Responding to Kelo
Before we dive headlong into the SCOTUS vacancy debates, let's ask: After Kelo, what’s next on property rights?
Senator John Cornyn of Texas, already has introduced a bill called "The Protection of Homes, Small Businesses, and Private Property Act of 2005" Cornyn's legislation would prohibit transfers of private property without the owner's consent if federal funds were used - and if the transfer was for purposes of economic development rather than public use.
To help call for swift passage of the Protection of Homes, Small Businesses, and Private Property Act of 2005, you can sign a petition at ACLJ.
Posted by Jim at 12:20 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
I’m Glad We Have That Cleared Up
Norman Pearlstine, Time Inc.'s editor in chief, said that he concluded after much reflection that, "We are not above the law."
[This as Time Inc. said] that it would provide documents concerning the reporter's confidential sources to a grand jury investigating the disclosure of the identity of a covert C.I.A. operative, Valerie Plame.The magazine's decision to give in to the demands of federal prosecutors followed the Supreme Court's decision on Monday to reject appeals by the agazine and its reporter, Matthew Cooper, as well as a reporter for The New York Times, Judith Miller. (NY Times).
While this is clearly the right decision by Time Inc., it is not without consequences.
The ability of the media to use sources that wish to remain anonymous is paramount to the freedom and the capabilities of the press.
I was trained as a journalist and although I have spent most of my career in public relations, I have also been a reporter. Most stories with any bite to them at all rely on background, off the record, and unattributed quotes and information. If sources cannot trust that you will keep their identity hidden, much of this information will dry up.
I also understand the decision by reporters to go to jail rather than reveal confidential sources. Their word is central not only to their ongoing ability to get information from sources, but it is also part of their journalistic soul. To yield would be akin to the abortion protester getting up off the sidewalk and going home when the police arrive and threaten arrest. Their civil disobedience has a purpose beyond the parameters of any one case.
But in matters of life and death and national security, a corporation such as Time Inc. must obey the courts. Appeal it as far as possible, which they did, but when all avenues are blocked, obey the law.
I sympathize with the journalists, but if we don’t have rule of law we lose everything.
As a side note, I believe the whole anonymous source thing is out of control and in many cases has gone from a vital part of reporting to lazy even dishonest reporting. Every source should assume that a reporter will keep his or her confidence, but that in America the law is king and if the courts require a media company to disclose a source, their confidentiality will be forfeited.
Courts should exercise this power with great caution, because anonymity does allow the tongue to way, but no one should be above the law.
Posted by Jim at 08:21 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 30, 2005
A Sad Day in Our Home
There is deep sadness in our home today that many homes have known, but never this one. After a short pregnancy that still had the freshness and vibrancy of an early spring day, our baby has died. There is no good reason at such an early stage, just six weeks old, and there will be no great physical trauma. But the new trajectory that we had just been planning for our lives must now be recalibrated without this child, who we resisted naming even as my other children reveled in the process of coming up with new names and possibilities.
The joy, which I described in an earlier post, was strong and heartfelt, but it was not the opposite of this bitter taste of death. For the joy was mitigated with the view of danger—we knew this was a high-risk pregnancy—and the anticipation of the hard process of bearing and birthing a child. In this world there is little that can mitigate the terrible finality of the death of such promise, the end of a life before it can be truly celebrated.
Because we believe in life and know beyond doubt that human life begins when it is conceived as such, we also know that God took home this young addition to our family, who we had not even named except to call it our “little pumpkin seed,” and He has a name for it that is listed in his book of life.
Almost everyone we have talked to has suffered similar pain, and we know the loss is a common one. We don’t mean to heighten our own sorrow as something special or even unique. But we mourn the loss of this child and the suspension of this hope and the darkening of the light that this growing baby was already bringing to our lives.
We’ve prayed long and hard about all of this, and we don’t have any thought that God lost control. No, we recognize His hand, and we are sad that today His plan was for our home to suffer this loss.
Goodbye little pumpkin seed, until we meet again.
Posted by Jim at 08:09 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
Writing on Celebrity and True Stardom
Ben Stein, in his last column for E Online in December 2003, asked some very important questions, such as “Who is a star?”, “What is my purpose here?”, and “Who is in charge of the universe?”, and comes up with some very good answers.
On the latter he writes:
“We are not responsible for the operation of the universe, and what happens to us is not terribly important. God is real, not a fiction, and when we turn over our lives to Him, he takes far better care of us than we could ever do for ourselves.In a word, we make ourselves sane when we fire ourselves as the directors of the movie of our lives and turn the power over to Him.”
(Hat tip: Broken Masterpieces)
Posted by Jim at 07:31 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 29, 2005
Rite of Passage
Last week I finally took the big step with my son. He’s 10 and I thought it was time. Why wait any longer for the important rite of passage.
I took him to Starbucks.
I had my usual coffee of the day with cream. He had some health bar thing, which he found lacking.
While there he asked: "Why is there a girl on the Starbucks logo?" I did not know. Here are some explanations.
(It’s a mermaid. But I still haven’t figured out what this has to do with coffee).
Posted by Jim at 07:56 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
Denominating
Just what flavor of Christian are you? MediaCulpa is trying to help you with his latest quiz, and Joe Carter at Evangelical Outpost has a tongue-in-cheek tool called The Denominator.
Posted by Jim at 07:40 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 28, 2005
The Forgotten Emergencies
Either by sheer magnitude, access by the world’s communicators, or political prominence, some humanitarian crises grab international attention, appearing on the evening news or in the morning papers, and staying there for some time.
Even then, the attention moves elsewhere as people focus on their own lives and the daily pressures and problems that face anyone, whether the residents of affluent cities or squatters in refugee camps. Life goes on, and even the horror of a natural disaster, war, or genocide disappears into crowded memories.
The tsunami is no longer news and last year’s Caribbean hurricanes have blown by. Buried even more are the lingering multi-year crises that never made it to page one and have never been of major concern to the world’s powers or the media gatekeepers.
Humanitarians call these The Forgotten Emergencies.
Reuters AlertNet asked more than 100 humanitarian professionals, media personalities, academics and activists which of the world's "forgotten" emergencies they wanted the global media to focus on in 2005. Among them are eight regions that have been in crisis for many years. Conflicts in Congo, Uganda and Sudan are the three biggest forgotten emergencies, dwarfing the Asian tsunami's death toll but attracting scant media interest.
Top forgotten crises include:
o Congo
o North Uganda
o Sudan
o West Africa
o Colombia
o Chechnya
o Haiti
o Nepal
Reuters also found AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa and infectious diseases worldwide to be of paramount concern but relatively uncovered by the world’s media.
Posted by Jim at 05:15 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
June 27, 2005
Finish the Job in Iraq
The Democratic Party is ratcheting up the anti-war rhetoric of retreat. For those of us old enough to remember the retreat from Vietnam, the voices sound eerily familiar.
As Hugh Hewitt points out, the unintended consequences were devastating:
The Democratic Party and its liberal/left supporters negligence with regard to southeast Asia in the '70s bought about the deaths of millions and the enduring communist governments of Vietnam and Laos and the desperate circumstances of Cambodia. They did not intend that result.
Unlike South Vietnam, there is a credible and viable political solution. But this solution is possible only if the coalition maintains a strong military presence. Because the insurgency shows no sign of folding, it is time to escalate, not retreat. Unleash the troops; allow our military leaders to take the actions necessary to defeat the enemy.
As David Brooks wrote last week, ignore the polls and finish the job.
Posted by Jim at 07:58 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
It's OK, Dr. Graham
Billy Graham’s last crusade in New York City has become a media love fest, and it is really great to see the admiration for Dr Graham and the way the Crusade is pulling together the Christian church in the city. But please don’t pay attention to anything Dr. Graham says these days, except in his prepared sermon. He has lost his political discretion, but it’s OK. He deserves a little senility late in life. Don’t condemn him, as some have. Just smile when it sounds as though he’s endorsing Hillary Clinton for president (when Bill Clinton joined him on stage, Graham "quipp[ed] that the former president should become an evangelist and allow 'his wife to run the country'”). This wasn’t politics; just a good-natured quip at an evangelistic crusade. We need to read in the discretion the grand old man of evangelicalism is now lacking.
Posted by Jim at 07:42 AM | Comments (3) | TrackBack
Examining the Joel Osteen Cult
The teaching of Joel Osteen has great appeal because of its sunny prescription for good times. It’s the epitome of the froth that is bubbling up in pulpits throughout the nation. Ken Silva has a sobering look at Osteen and the Word/Faith movement:
As one looks deeper into this “feel-good” message of Joel Osteen, however, it becomes clear that his doctrine is actually far worse than junk-food, for it is indeed the spiritual poison of the metaphysical Mind Science cults which is the actual root of W/F.
Posted by Jim at 07:27 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
June 23, 2005
More Stones to Cry Out
On April 29, 2002, when most of us still thought a blog was the result of a spill or computer term that remained beyond us, an Atlanta-based blogger cited bias in the media as it related to the homosexual elements of the molestation crisis in the Catholic church. He has been blogging regularly ever since.
During the blog explosion of 2004, a Virginia-based baseball fan, homeschool advocate, and prolific reader launched his blog in the run up to the election and called John Kerry’s hypocrisy as a goose hunter.
On behalf of the Stones Cry Out team, I am pleased to announce that these two bloggers, Doug Payton—the pioneer, and multi-faceted and well-read Tom Parsons, have agreed to join the SCO team of contributors.
If you’ve had an eye on our blogroll—-which probably isn’t all that likely—-you would have noticed that we’ve been fans of Doug’s Considerettes, and Tom’s Daddypundit for some time. (Doug is also my brother-in-law—-he coined the term, blogger-in-law; and the person who launched me into the blogosphere).
The Stones Cry Out vision statement reads in part:
We believe the role of a blog produced by followers of Christ is to--like Paul at Mars Hill--"reason in the marketplace day by day with those who happen to be there" (Acts 17:17). As we contend for the faith, we seek to bring glory to Jesus Christ (Luke 19:40), and advance His kingdom.
We firmly believe these two talented bloggers will help us advance this mission.
We’ll be getting their biographies and photos up shortly. In the meantime, please join us in welcoming the newest Stones.
Posted by Jim at 03:37 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
What’s in Domain Name? This Eminent Domain is Called Tyranny
Stay tuned for Rick's post on the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision today to allow governments to use eminent domain to seize the land of private landowners for the purpose of giving the land to other private interests, for economic purposes. He has professional expertise that will inform his analysis.
From my standpoint, this is one of the worst Court decisions since Roe v. Wade.
Property ownership is a pillar of our free society, is it not? Not according to the liberals on the Supreme Court. We’re not talking about taking private land to build a road or put in a river levee or a power plant. We’re talking about seizing land so Wal-Mart can add a store, or a land developer can put in a multi-use development, office park, or hotel complex.
Why is it that the liberals want every kind of freedom, except the freedom to buy and own land?
The battle to put conservatives on the Court gains in importance as each day passes. Especially today--a bad day for freedom in America.
Posted by Jim at 01:34 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Oh, the Boycott Hadn’t Already Ended?
The Southern Baptist Convention, which kick-started a widespread conservative religious boycott of Walt Disney Co. eight years ago, voted Wednesday to end the action but warned Disney that it was keeping its eye on the company (MSNBC).
I’m not against boycotts, but they just invite derision if they have absolutely no impact. It seems to me the boycott by the Southern Baptists and others had no effect on Disney, either because not enough conservative Christians participated or because Disney’s size and popularity could sustain the loss of a small portion of its business.
Next time, it would be good to do an impact study before sticking out our necks.
Posted by Jim at 07:52 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
“It Can Never Forget What They Did Here”
We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of it as a final resting place for those who died here that the nation might live. This we may, in all propriety do. But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave men, living and dead who struggled here have hallowed it far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. (A. Lincoln, Gettysburg Address, Nov. 19, 1863)
We are met to build a casino on this hallow ground? Is there nothing in our history sacred enough to shield it from the developer's shovels. A casino by the Gettysburg battlefield? A bad idea.
A group of developers proposing to build a casino, hotel and spa near the Gettysburg battlefield call the plan synergy that would benefit the national park, the community and the state of Pennsylvania, but a local citizens' group that opposes the plan says it is just a sin."This is a desecration. They're bringing in a product. They're saying we want to sell this product in your town and we're saying that product is fundamentally exploitation, and it's a product we don't want here," said Susan Star Paddock, a spokeswoman for No Casino Gettysburg, a group that formed in the town after the investors' group announced its plan on April 26.
The plan needs to die at this hallowed resting place.
Posted by Jim at 07:40 AM | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Air Force Academy Findings
A Pentagon panel investigating charges of improper religious pressure at the Air Force Academy found zealotry and what it called “insensitivity” by Christians sharing their faith, but no overt religious discrimination. (Source)
Of course this wasn’t good enough for the likes of the NY Times, which editorialized that the findings were a whitewash, evidently because they didn’t agree with a Yale University investigation.
Let’s see, who do a go with on issues of Christian expression, the Pentagon or a liberal east coast university? I’m supporting the men in uniform. This was a witchhunt from the start, which took advantage of the whines of a handful of cadets and tried to smear Christians preparing men and women who will put their lives on the line.
Posted by Jim at 07:24 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 22, 2005
How Are We Doing? A Mid-Year Look at 2005
In December 2004, in the afterglow of a Bush victory and solid Congressional gains fueled by a coalition of values-voters, I made my predictions for this New Year. While only a few of the predictions were off-track, somewhat unrealistic optimism is clear in the timetables for change. Meaningful social, political, and geopolitical change is slow cooking. While we see some of the predicted advancements brewing, it appears that it will be some time before they are possible. Many will depend on the mid-term elections of 2006, the 2008 presidential election, and the effectiveness with which the conservative evangelicals use their supposed political power.
Let’s take a look at mid-year progress on these predictions:
1. Iraq: There will be no meaningful reduction in the number of U.S. troops in Iraq during 2005, and there may be an increase. However, the insurgency will begin losing its popular support and violence will decline.
I did not envision the dramatic success of the Iraqi election, or its impact on the movement of democracy throughout the Middle East and the world. There is no sign of troop reduction and solving the insurgency remains a mystery. But I still predict that by year’s end the Iraqi political progress will take some of the wind out of the insurgents sails.
2. Iran: The opposition in Iran will grow in strength and the government will accelerate meaningful reforms rather than face upheaval. There will be a thaw in U.S.-Iranian relations.
The protests prior to the election, and the election itself, suggests that there is, indeed, a meaningful move toward reform. I believe this prediction is on the right track, but that it is unlikely that there will be signficant reform during this year.
3. Palestinians: There will be significant progress on an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, with Egypt and Jordan exercising a strong hand. A firm timetable will be set for the establishment of a Palestinian State.
Things are relatively quiet and there are more positive signs than negative. I’m optimistic about continuing progess, but don’t see a firm timetable for a Palestinian state this year. Hope can be dashed so easily here.
4. Attack on the U.S.: As a result of the progress in the Middle East, those who do not benefit from the advance of democracy will turn to additional terror in the U.S. and attempt another major attack in 2005.
Not yet, praise theLord. Although I’m grateful, I honestly don’t know why. Our homeland security isn’t that good; we know that. Border security? All a Middle Eastern terrorist has to do is learn Spanish and swim the Rio Grande disguised as a Mexican peasant.
5. Deaths: There will be major losses in evangelical leadership, as key leaders die. As I’ve mentioned in this space, there is a generational shift in the evangelical community, with the entrepreneurs of the 1950’s passing or fading from active involvement. (Who will die in 2005, and what will the impact be? I’ve provided my 15 names to the morbid Dead Pool, competing to predict the most of those who will pass to the next life during 2005. Mine are a combination of religious leaders, statesmen, and heads of state, among others.)
Here are the 15 that I predicted will pass in 2005:1. Rev. Billy Graham, evangelist, born November 7, 1918
2. Pope John Paul II, Bishop of Rome, (Karol Józef Wojtyła), born May 18, 1920
3. William Rehnquist. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, born October 1, 1924
4. Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State, born May 27, 1923
5. Rev. Robert Schuller, TV pastor, born September 16, 1926
6. Gerald Ford, former President, born July 14, 1913
7. Hamid Karzai, President of Afghanistan born December 24, 1957,
8. Dr. Iyad Allawi, interim Prime Minister of Iraq, born in 1945
9. Margaret Thatcher, former British Prime Minister, born October 13, 1925
10. General Pervez Musharraf, president of Pakistan, born August 11, 1943
11. Fidel Castro, dictator of Cuba, born August 13, 1926
12. Nelson Mandela, former President of South Africa, born July 18, 1918
13. Rosa Parks, civil rights hero, born February 4, 1913
14. Muhammad Ali, American boxer, born January 17, 1942
15. Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (Philip Mountbatten), born June 10, 1921I’m failing miserably. Only the Pope has died,which is great news for these other folks, and really for all of us. In fact, Billy Graham is preaching a New York City Crusade this week. Never say die.
6. Conservatives: Bush will begin falling out of favor with the most conservative groups, as more focus returns to domestic issues and he fails to deliver on their social priorities.
More than anything, the President has been falling out of sight, with the focus on Congressional Republicans. Conservatives seem to hanging with the President, but largely in support of his war against terror. Hard to find a rock-ribbed conservative with any enthusiasm for Bush’s domestic policy. The greatest disappointment may be in his failure to lead in stopping illegal immigration. This prediction is on track; the disenchanment will deepen..
7. Evangelical Politics: The political high water mark will soon pass for the evangelicals, as leading evangelicals overplay their hand and politicians calculate that they will succeed in 2006 with more moderated positions.
The high water mark probably passed when the Senate Moderate Club dictated how the filibuster issue would be handled, which left First hanging out in church with the suddenly emasculated religious right. The evangelicals seem more comfortable in the opposition. In power, they find ways to eat their own young. This prediction seems to be on track.
8. Network Change: At least one of the major networks will make an attempt to bring more conservative viewpoints to its reports, but in a way that will be more showcasing than meaningful change.
Anyone see any evidence of this? This prediction now looks like wishful thinking.
9. Blogosphere: Blogging will explode, but there will be efforts to organize the blogosphere to create categories of bloggers, and to further separate types of blogs and degrees of professionalism.
The explosion continues, although we feel as though the fever has broken in the post-election months. The organization is yet to come. I have no idea when this may happen, but if the growth continues, it must.
10. Charity Scandal: There will be a major legal case against one or more charities, probably Trinity Broadcasting Network, but perhaps elsewhere. This will have a slight negative impact on charitable giving.
Might be TBN, or perhaps Benny Hinn. Could happen at any moment, or might not be part of the 2005 story.
11. Supreme Court: Two Supreme Court seats vacancies will be created, one at Chief Justice. Bush will want only two confirmation battles, so he will nominate two new justices—a conservative for Chief Justice, and a moderate for Associate Justice. This will enrage just about everyone, but both will be confirmed.
Renquist should retire soon, which will set up the battle everyone has been preparing for. I don’t think Bush will try to move Clarence Thomas to Chief Justice, facing that confrmation battle, and then another to fill Thomas’ post. The White House must already know who they’ll nominate as Chief. This selection and the battle that ensues will frame the relationships and effectiveness of the White House and Senate over the remainder of the Bush presidency.
12. Bin Laden: Osama Bin Laden will be captured or more likely killed, but the impact will be largely symbolic, since he has been ineffective hiding in a cave anyway.
This may or may not happen in 2005. At some point, Bin Laden will be history, as will al Zawari. But the inevitability of these captures no longer captivates the public as much as the question of when the insurgency will be defanged in Iraq. That won’t happen in 2005, but if the situation in Iraq is not greatly improved by November 2006, the nation may be seeing blue.
13. Fair Tax: The Fair Tax movement will grow and progress will be made in the Congress, although passage is years away.
There’s good momentum for the Fair Tax legislation, but right now it appears impossible to get much of anything done in Congress. Still waiting for the new book on the fair tax by John Linder and Neal Boortz, which should be out any day.
14. Radio: Democrats will push for a return of the Fairness Doctrine, as an attempt to defang the Republican advantage on talk radio. The effort will not succeed.
At the moment, the liberals are still playing with a competitive radio network, but it’s failing, so an attempt for legislative remedies can’t be far behind.
15. China: The growing business class in China will push for more civil freedoms as their economic power grows, and the Communist government will yield some ground.
This is going to happen, but no news yet.
16. Same-Sex Marriage: The homosexual community in America will change tactics, backing away from the same-sex marriage initiatives and seeking equal rights for homosexual couples without using “marriage” language. This will not raise the same red flags among many groups across the country.
Except for a few localcourt rulings, there isn’t much happening on this front. Mitt Romney is trying to reverse the Massachusetts measures. And it does appear that the homosexual community is laying low on this for now, looking for a fight they can win.
17. Economics: There will be steady economic growth, and the stock market will continue its climb and end the year over 11,000.
We’re over 10,500, and with a little good news out of Iraq or Israel, or a significant drop in gasoline prices, we’re reach 11,000 this year.
18. Pharmaceuticals: The positive economic trends will be marred by the collapse of major pharmaceutical companies, fueled by massive class action suits.
If a pharmaceutical company can come up with vaccines for the bird flu, it will give them some air to breath.
19. Social Security: Social security restructuring will see some progress in 2005 because of a relentless campaign by the Bush administration. Fear of demagoguery will prevent meaningful reform, but the steps taken will be seen—in retrospect—as the beginning of serious change.
I think I got this one wrong. Social security reform is probably dead for now, and I’m sure Bush is wishing he hadn’t burned so much political capital to fight for the private accounts. The groundwork by this Adminsitration may payoff in the long run, however.
20. EU: The European Union will seek to flex its muscle and establish itself as a major economic and political competitor to the United States—opposing the U.S. on key international and trade policies. The U.S. will shrug and turn to the Far East.
The death of the EU constitution makes it more difficult for the EU to be a unified competitor. Until the Europeans work as hard as the Americans, the Japanese, and Chinese, they’ll never pose a serious economic threat.
What is most striking about making any predictions for a new year, is that other events overtake those that seems so important at a previous time. Who could have predicted that Terri Schiavo and the filibuster would dominate political news in the New Year. Or that the Democrats would let Howard Dean push their national rhetoric further to the left.
Posted by Jim at 07:30 AM | Comments (5) | TrackBack
June 20, 2005
Bloggers Could Have Told Them It Would Be a Problem
Frank Barnako relates that:
“The Los Angeles Times' experiment with readers' comments on editorials came to a crashing halt over the weekend. Trouble occurred soon after the newspaper, owned by Tribune Co. (TRB), posted an editorial about the Iraq war, and opened it for comments, additions and corrections. "Unfortunately, we have had to remove this feature, at least temporarily, because a few readers were flooding the site with inappropriate material," said a message on the Times' Web site. Michael Kinsley, the newspaper's editorial and opinion editor, was pleased that hundreds of people did respond to the invitation to add their two cents to the paper's opinion. However, he added, the mischief was "quite a strange thing."
At SCO, like many other blogs, we know all about inappropriate commenters spamming up our site.
Posted by Jim at 01:41 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
PCA Rejects Anti-Public School Resolution
Last week the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) wisely rejected a resolution that would encourage Christian parents to remove their children from public schools. It was proposed by a Tennessee minister who does not believe any subject can be taught separate from a intentional Christian worldview.
The PCA stated:
"We strongly affirm that it is the responsibility of Christian parents to raise their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord; it is not appropriate for the General Assembly to make such a recommendation as contained in [the] Personal Resolution to all the members of the PCA,” stated the Bills and Overture Committee.
Those who have made the legitimate choices of Christian schools and homeschooling often unfairly criticize those who make the choice to sent their children to public schools. Well-grounded Christian children who received proper training and care at home can thrive in public school settings. And they can be salt and light in school. Who is going to do that if all the Christian kids are pulled out of school?
And many families cannot make the choice to send their kids to private schools of any kind, and cannot teach them at home. Nothing but public schools are available for families who can barely make ends meet with both mother and father working.
Instead of demeaning their brethren who either choose to mainstream their children or don’t have any choice at all, Christians are better served engaging the system, tackling the structures and policies of public education, and seeking to make a difference in this very public square.
Posted by Jim at 09:28 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
Romney: The Right Stuff?
There’s a nice post on Mitt Romney at Homocon, which also links to SCO.
Posted by Jim at 09:22 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Study Skewed Facts on Sexual Conduct of Virginity Pledgers
The results of a study on sexual activity by young people who have taken a virginity pledge were purposely skewed, according to an analysis by the Heritage Foundation.
[Heritage researchers Rector and Johnson] conclude that virginity pledgers are substantially more likely to not engage in risky sexual behaviours, and that those who do break the pledge are still less likely than non-pledgers to engage in more risky anal or oral sex – a direct contradiction to the supposed conclusions reached by [the study’s researchers Bearman and Bruckner.]
“The centerpiece of their argument about pledgers and heightened sexual risk activity is a small group of pledgers who engaged in anal sex without vaginal sex,” Rector and Johnson explain. “This ‘risk group’ consists of 21 persons out of a sample of 14,116. Bearman and Bruckner focus on this microscopic group while deliberately failing to inform their audience of the obvious and critical fact that pledgers as a whole are substantially less likely to engage in anal sex when compared to non-pledgers.”“This tactic is akin to finding a small rocky island in the middle of the ocean, describing the island in detail without describing the surrounding ocean, and then suggesting that the ocean is dry and rocky,” they add. “It is junk science, a willful deception of the American public.”
Posted by Jim at 08:57 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack
June 19, 2005
For Father’s Day: Portrait of a Great Day
June 9 was a great day.
I awoke in a cabin on the shore of Lake Michigan a few miles west of the Mackinac Bridge on the northern most tip of lower Michigan to the sound of light waves breaking on the gentle shore. After a big breakfast fit for a male outing, my 10-year old son, Michael, and I were standing in our waders, with brother-in-law Dave and nephews Caleb and Enoch, in the shallows of Sturgeon Bay, lazily urging the bass to bite. It was a bright morning, and although we caught very little, there was cool breeze on a warm day, with the expansive clear waters stretching to the shores of Upper Peninsula. The only concerns were keeping bait on the hook and finding the rock refuges of the reticent fish. I doesn’t get any better, it seemed to me.
It was the final day on our fishing expedition, and after an ice cream and coffee in quaint Mackinaw City, and buying fudge for the women in our lives, we headed south to my sister’s house in Grand Rapids, where our families were gathered.
Amazingly, the best part of my day was yet to come. An exuberant wife, happy to see me, noticeably even more happy than usual, greeted me. After pleasantries, Debbie took me by the hand and we went to our downstairs room, and she urged me to kneel with her by the bed, where she began to pray.
“Thank you, Lord, for bringing back safely to me my husband. . . and the father of our new child.”
As I’m processing what she’s prayed, she leaps to her feet and grasps a positive pregnancy test indicator, with all the right lines. We’re going to have a baby. We embraced and kissed and tears rolled down my cheeks. We plotted an announcement to the family, and spent the rest of the evening sharing the good news.
A great day, indeed.
Posted by Jim at 07:30 AM | Comments (4) | TrackBack
June 18, 2005
The American Way: Mocking Dads On Television
Can you think of one consistent positive portrayal of a father on prime time television since Bill Cosby’s Huxtable?
We can make our share of mistakes, but fathers aren’t nearly as stupid as we are made out to be on television. The decades-long campaign to emasculate men and to demean fathers has been remarkably successful. Its part of the devastating trend of the great disappearing father and the resulting delinquency, teenage pregnancy, increasing drug use, and much more.
Here’s one group, the National Fatherhood Initiative, whose mission is to restore the proud role of fathers.
Posted by Jim at 08:07 AM | Comments (2) | TrackBack
June 17, 2005
Why Won’t the Christians Play Nice?
Former Senator John Danforth, now an Episcopal minister, boils down the Christian relationship with the state to an expression of the “Love Commandment,” in an op-ed today in the Times.
But the lovefest Danforth prescribed for moderate Christian is one where we don’t advance meaningful public positions on issues such as the Terri Schiavo case, embryonic stem cell res
.jpg)
