Do opponents of abortion really believe abortion is murder?

I have always had some respect for many opponents of abortion, even if I disagreed with their position on the issue, and even more with some of the tactics of their movement. If you believe abortion is murder, then I can certainly respect your decision to devote a fair portion of your life to ending the practice. Recently, however, I've been rethinking this respect, as the success of anti-abortion groups in states like South Dakota has begun to high-light the moral and political contradictions of the movement. If you believe abortion is murder, then why not favor more funding for contraception and sex education, two well-established ways to reduce abortion rates? And if abortion is murder, why are opponents of abortion, like US senate candidate Lynn Swann, and likely presidential candidate John McCain, cagey about what criminal penalties should apply to those responsible for the murder of fetuses? It just doesn't make any sense. This post from the blog 'Alas' puts such contradictions in a nice tabular format, and comes to the conclusion that opponents of abortion likely do not really believe abortion is murder. I'm agnostic on the author's contention that abortion opponents--or "people who favor forced childbirth," as he puts it (a nice bit of framing, I think)--are actually motivated by the desire to punish women for having sex, but I think the post lays out the issues involved pretty well. No one that I know of likes abortion, but at least those of us who believe the procedure should be a safe and legal option have some specific and morally consistent policy recommendations. Advocates of forced childbirth, perhaps closer now than ever to recriminalizing abortion, ought to be asked for the same. If they can't or won't come up with any, then I have to conclude that their stand is merely another example of shallow 'if it makes you feel righteous, do it' politics.

Thank You, Senator Feingold

I am pleased to support Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) in his effort to uphold the rule of law in the United States by censuring the President for wiretapping people without a court order. Bush is in direct and admitted violation of the law on this issue, and it is high time for people stand up and defend Constitutional principles.

The GOP and right-wing commentators seem to want more publicity for this than most D.C. Democrats. I find that a bit puzzling given that Feingold's charges are rock solid. Maybe over the short run, it looks like good PR for them to rally around the President, but in the long term it will be one bold step towards holding the President accountable for his actions. I predict that, in retrospect, Feingold will be applauded for his bold and principled stance, so different from the spin and cynical calculation that usually emanates from D.C. Thank you, Senator Feingold!

Flag Idolatry

As a U.S. citizen and committed Christian in troubled times, I've been thinking a lot about patriotism and the flag over the past few years. I just can't shake my growing unease with both. I know that the following comments will probably bother some readers (few though they may be), but I feel like I have been too long suppressing a call to speak out more clearly. So here I will try out my voice a little. Bits of this line of reflection have appeared in previous posts, but now I want to be more direct. I'm not sure if this will be the first of many posts on this issue or a one-time thing.

Now that Bush and his corrupt cronies are falling in popularity, it seems like maybe we have turned the corner as a country. Yet much of the patriotism and flag-waving that dominate American political culture continue unabated. We need a deep, spiritual revitalization in American that will call into question the linkage of Christain faith with these things. For it seems plain that America is burdened by the sin of flag idolatry.

Don't get me wrong. I totally support the traditional American ideals of liberty, democracy, equality, and so forth. Including the freedom of religion and the separation of Church and State that allow me to practice my faith as God calls me. But those political values are distinct from waving a flag or subscribing to the concept of patriotism. The flag is a false idol, to which Christians cannot be expected show any special allegiance (despite all the times I was instructed to "pledge allegiance" in school). Patriotism, likewise, is often a cover for sin and evil. If something is right, its "patriotism" is superfluous. More to the point: How can I believe in a universal God and in Jesus Christ who came to liberate the whole world from sin and yet claim that my country or "my people" deserve special treatment?

In the city I used to live in, I attended a very left-leaning church that was absolutely wonderful in many ways. We welcomed all people, regardless of sexual orientation, and we worked to challenge sexism, racism, and economic injustice. Our pastor wasn't afraid to preach sometimes even radical critiques against Empire. Yet there stood the American flag inside the sanctuary. (For any readers from overseas, strange as it may seem, there are American flags inside most U.S. church sanctuaries.) The more I thought about the idolatry of having any national flag in a Christian sacred space, the more uncomfortable I became. I couldn't even go to church some weeks because I could not in good conscience worship with such an idolatrous symbol there. I truly believe that the two great idols of modern society are the love of money (greed, materialism, etc.) and the love of nation, especially when that country is engaged in military aggression.

Now please don't misunderstand what I'm saying. In a certain sense, I "love my country" in an incredibly deep and thorough way. As much or more than most Americans, I think, I truly love and enjoy all the byways, small towns, landscapes, and diverse people that make up the United States. But I cannot see this love as anything other than a purely contingent result of my upbringing and background. I cannot grant my deep love of my country any moral status. I cannot let myself think that American people have any greater worth than people elsewhere or that U.S. decisions, especially military ones, deserve any more support because of their origin.

This brings me, at long last, to one of the big issues of the day: the Iraq war and occupation. And to deal with that, I have to revisit the thorny issue of "support the troops." Some progressives and liberals have come up with good arguments that supporting U.S. military men and women should involve bringing them home and providing them full veterans' benefits--positions I endorse. Still, like Robert Jensen and other dissenting voices, I cannot help also believing that we should call on U.S. troops (and potential enlistees) to exercise their own moral judgement. The troops are the victims of the decisions made by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al., to be sure, but they are also moral beings in their own right. (Another interesting question from a Christian point of view: Which troops? Whose ultimate welfare should people of God care about? Does God take sides? Is Jesus's love only for Americans?) If we think the war is wrong, we cannot support the choice of the troops to fight in it. So I would like all the U.S. troops to come home safe and sound, but I also want everyone else in the world to be safe and sound, including the people of Iraq.

But those of us who aren't in the military can't get off the hook. If anything, my reflections on patriotism and the flag make me think that those of us back home are often just as much or more stained with the blood of Iraqis. For we have created and sustained a climate of patriotic idolatry that makes soldiers believe that they are fighting for a worthy cause. How can I condemn a soldier for fighting in Iraq and believing that it is a noble thing, when all around her/him there are so many reinforcing messages that this is true? How can we expect the vast majority of the troops to make better moral decisions, to refuse to fight for Bush Administration lies, while we are waving flags and uttering patriotic platitudes? It may seem to many military families like I am trying to pull the rug out from underneath them. I am truly sorry for any pain that may cause. But I really believe that as a Christian I cannot stand by, brandishing a flag and chanting God bless America, for that would be to advance an idolatrous delusion that harms people.

Much as I remain a believer in the importance of economics to political issues, I have come to realize over the past few years that cultural symbols cannot be ignored. In fact, they are central to how we think of ourselves. They express who we are, deep down. I choose to believe in God first and foremost, and in the particular Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Christian God is for all people everywhere, not just Americans. Adhering to Christianity demands that we look beyond our own selfish interests and beyond our own national borders. If you are a secular person and choose to put your faith in your country's flag and the ideal of national patriotism, I can't stop you. But I challenge you to look inside yourself and ask what might make you change your mind. If you lived in Germany in the 1930s, would you choose patriotism and the flag? If the United States continues down its current path of suppressing civil liberties and invading other countries, would you keep on choosing patriotism and the flag? At some point, good Christians, people of other faith backgrounds, and people with no particular religious faith at all, must band together to save our country. And that means loving America as a matter of concern, not as a matter of faith.

Thinking About Cheney the Reckless Hunter

I've noticed a fair amount of debate among Progressives over the past week about how to deal with Cheney's reckless hunting mishap of last weekend. Some argue that it is distracting from more important issues, while others applaud any negative attention to Cheney's secrecy, arrogance, and bad decision-making style--especially if it can be tied metaphorically to larger public issues. (And Cheney can't exactly blame people for speculating about why he would delay publicly reporting the shooting for so long or for failing to submit to any serious scrutiny--such as blood alcohol testing--can he? Any prosecutor or jury would have to be suspicious about that...)

But I want to offer a new angle on the story. Wasn't it just a day or two before the ill-fated hunting trip when we learned that indicted Scooter Libby had claimed in grand jury testimony that he was authorized by his superiors to reveal Valerie Plame's CIA cover? And who was Libby's boss before his indictment? Why, Dick Cheney, of course. Everyone hearing Libby's statement knew that he meant Cheney.

It has become increasingly clear that Cheney is implicated in so much of the Bush Administration's malfeasance. Of all the top government officials making ridiculous and unsubstantiated claims before the invasion of Iraq about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction or his supposed ties to Al-Qaeda, it was Cheney who uttered some of the most cocksure and bold assertions (lies?) And Cheney has been at the center of speculation about who orchestrated the attempt to smear James Wilson, who debunked the crude forgeries that supposedly showed Iraq trying to obtain uranium from Africa.

We also know from numerous news reports that Cheney often uses his hunting trips as a way to deal with stress or blow of steam, to refresh himself after being under the pressure of public criticism or scrutiny. So it stands to reason that Libby's grand jury revelation implicating Cheney might have been weighing on his mind pretty heavily. Could it be that Cheney is under so much stress over possible prosecution--in this and other simmering scandals--that he was unable to focus as carefully while he was hunting? Could there actually be a closer link between this accident and other more public scandals? It is not unusual for people under great stress to have accidents. To make poor decisions. To have lapses in judgment.

I wonder if it might be better for Cheney to simply resign his office and try to get himself pulled back together. I'm serious. If the pressure over his involvement in scandals is making him a danger to friends and family, then it would be better for both the country as a whole and his personal life for him to focus on his own mental health. Perhaps we, the American people, should be demanding that he step down so he doesn't have the burden of so much public responsibility while dealing with all these crises and scandals.

Meanwhile, on a completely different subject, I would like to commend Senator Russ Feingold for his courageous, articulate, and passionate statement against the Patriot Act renewal "compromise." We cannot sacrifice our liberties and freedoms. No one in Congress is working harder than Russ Feingold to keep the USA from descending into the Orwellian land of "1984"...is it too early to endorse a Presidential candidate for 2008?

The #1 U.S. Domestic Issue to Address?

Obviously the war in Iraq remains a key issue for our political leaders in the U.S. to address. Meanwhile, on the domestic front, this recent posting at Donkey Rising argues that HEALTH CARE should perhaps be priority #1. I agree, and I hope that Democrats can take on the task of serious health care reform (and then get elected!), because the Republicans in power are completely dropping the ball on this one.

And let me add a moral (and a little bit religious) perspective to the poll and opinion survey analysis given in the link above. There are so many people in the U.S. suffering due to the spiraling costs of health care. It is hard for me to just stand by and watch while feeling strongly that Jesus would have wanted to do something about this. And this isn't something we can deal with through individual charity to poor people. There are millions of ordinary working people across America who simply can't afford adequate health care. We need to band together as a society and the only way we can truly deal with a problem of this magnitude is to demand that our government get involved. Whether you are a person of faith or not, I have a hard time imagining any moral system that would let such inequalities persist when it has to do with issues of basic human survival and health.

Of course, if you are yourself without health insurance, or are stuck on one of those really bad plans that can often inhibit health care more than provide it, or if you know somebody who has inadequate health coverage (which would be just about everyone except George Bush, Dick Cheney, and their elite cronies), then I don't need to convince you. You know that the system is broken. Let's have some compassion and work together to try to fix it. I hope some political leaders (are you listening, Democratic hopefuls?) will propose and truly fight for a universal health care plan with single-payer features to contain costs and provide coverage for everyone.