Author: Pat Liberty

Brooding has gotten a bad name. Some dictionaries define it as a “dark mood, dwelling on an unfortunate situation or outcome, or a toxic kind of rumination.” There are other definitions that are a bit more positive, “daydream, grieve, meditate, deliberate and dream.” Under all the definitions is the question, “what meaning do we make out of this time?” It depends on the framework we use.

In Genesis 1, God broods over the water (the newer translations use the word “spirit,” but the original Hebrew is “broods”). Hens sit on their nests and brood. In both instances, something new comes out of it, either the created order or a bunch of baby chicks, both of which are pretty amazing.

I am choosing the framework of creativity. This is in no way Poly-Anna nonsense, nor is it intended to minimize the difficulty and pain many people are experiencing. There is much about this time that royally sucks. Depression and anxiety are real and need to be treated. There are emergency mental health services available by Skype, Facetime or other platforms. Watch your local news updates for information. That said, there are some things we tend to lose sight of when things are awful.

Here are some things to brood about this week. I hope they offer a word of encouragement and an opportunity for reflection as you find your way through this challenging and painful time.

• Grief is what comes in the space that is often beyond words. It has a place in these days and is not to be hurried by on the way to another easier feeling. Take the time to grieve what and who has been lost in these days and weeks.
• There is much that is not clear and it is ours to give some serious thought to what it means to live with ambiguity. Rainer Maria Rilke wrote, “Be patient toward all that is unresolved in you and try to love the questions themselves.…”
• There is little in this life over which we actually have control.
• Think about what is possible in these days of self-isolation. Get to know yourself in a deeper way through sitting quietly, if only for a few minutes. Ask yourself how you might want to be different when this is “over.”
• Give yourself permission to not function at the usual 110% we are programmed to put out.
• We are one global community. It is on us to be good citizens of the world, not just the little corner where we live.
• The people who keep this country going–grocers, truckers, trash collectors and other traditionally “low wage” earners–need and deserve to make a living wage. We cannot do without them. They deserve our thanks for the work they are doing. Instead of being grouchy about what the market doesn’t have, focus on thanking the person behind the register.
• Health care workers, first responders and others routinely put their own well-being and that of their families second to the needs of the sick. They deserve our unending thanks for their work.
• The place of the arts in our lives is not optional. We depend on beauty to make sense of everything else. Music, books, movies and television can feed us like nothing else.
• If CEOs can donate a chunk of their salaries to make sure their workers keep getting paid, what’s to stop them from taking a pay cut so workers making a living wage is the rule rather than the exception?
• There is so little that we need. Much of the stuff in our lives is extraneous; part of what we may discover is how little we really need.

Howard Thurman wrote, “There must be always remaining in every life some place for the singing of angels, some place for that which itself is breathtakingly beautiful.” May you find that beautiful place in your life as you live through these days.

 

 

Chinese Food: Not Racist

Italian Sausage: Not Racist

Swiss Cheese: Not Racist

Brazilian Wax: Not Racist

Belgian Waffle: Not Racist

Greek Salad: Not Racist

Cuban Sandwich: Not Racist

Irish Coffee: Not Racist

Chinese Virus RACIST

No one is flinging Belgian Waffles or Swiss Cheese at anyone. But people are spitting at, yelling at and being violent toward Asian Americans.  The difference between Belgian Waffles, Swiss Cheese and “Chinese Virus” is fear.  No one is afraid of a Belgian Waffle or an Italian Sausage. People are afraid of Covid-19. And fear makes people do funky things, like blame others and marginalize those they think are to blame. In the midst of a pandemic, fear is the least helpful emotion. It lies at the base of violence toward Asian Americans.

The occupant’s penchant for continuing to call it the “Chinese Virus” isn’t helping. Reading from notes Thursday at a press conference, the word Corona was crossed out and “Chinese” was inserted. When asked about it he said, “It is not racist at all, no.” The occupant is wrong. It is racist and unhelpful. This rhetoric is combined with his larger anti-immigrant stance where, in the last few months he has used the words predator, invasion, alien, killer, criminal and animal more than 500 times. The sum of it all contributes to xenophobia and division among the American people at a time when we need to be united against a common threat–the virus, not a particular people.

According to NBC news, the response from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs encouraged the United States to play a “constructive role” to safeguard international public health. Further, a spokesperson from the Ministry said, “We hope the United States will respect objective facts, respect international public opinion, do its own thing, stop constantly shifting its attitude and stop slandering other countries.”

Historically, the United States has blamed other countries for global pandemics. For example, the influenza epidemic of 1918 is commonly referred to as the Spanish Flu.  Scientists, however, are almost all in agreement that this flu actually started in the Midwest of the United States. Yet, the name persists. It reflects that blaming energy that wants to separate us from any responsibility for what is happening in the world.

There is, at our most base nature, a tendency to think of ourselves and our own first. We often gather more than what we need at the expense of others. We disregard directives from those whose perspective is far larger than our own puny desires. Witness the number of students on spring break in Florida who ignored directives to leave the beaches and continued their vacation festivities. They will come home to infect their parents, grandparents, and who knows who else. This will contribute to the inevitable second wave of Covid 19.

History shows that pandemics come in three waves. We are in the first wave right now and the current directives are aimed at minimizing the impact of the second wave. History shows that the second wave is often more serious than the first. As directives are loosened (usually by people who are bored with doing what they have been told) people return to their usual activities and the infection rates often rise precipitously.

The tendency to blame and shame does not summon the better angels of our nature. It comes from fear and leads to destructive thinking. This is a time to offer our best selves to the world in faithfulness and humility.  It is a time to recognize our global humanity and do what we can to stop the racist naming of Covid 19.  Take a risk, correct someone else. Explain why it is racist and not like Belgian Waffles. Perhaps you will give someone something to think about.

Walter Brueggeman, an Old Testament Scholar, writes that we have the opportunity and indeed the responsibility to “…shape our future and present in compassion and not hostility, not in abandonment, but in solidarity…not in estrangement but in wellbeing.” (A Way Other Than Our Own, Devotions for Lent)

We share a worldwide covenant with people of every nation and language and faith. We are one human community.  If this pandemic teaches us anything, it will be how connected we truly are. A virus that started in one specific place has become a global phenomenon in a very short amount of time.  We belong to one another. Let us belong with love and mercy.

This blog is a safe space. Comments that are on point and relevant are welcome; disrespectful, hateful and vulgar comments will be removed by the moderator.

Disclaimer as required by Facebook: This website is the sole property of the Rev. Patricia L. Liberty. She is the administrator and is solely responsible for its content. This website receives no remuneration from any individual or entity, foreign or domestic. This website charges no fee for any of its materials, and accepts no donations or advertisements.

Chinese Food: Not Racist

Italian Sausage: Not Racist

Swiss Cheese: Not Racist

Brazilian Wax: Not Racist

Belgian Waffle: Not Racist

Greek Salad: Not Racist

Cuban Sandwich: Not Racist

Irish Coffee: Not Racist

Chinese Virus RACIST

 

No one is flinging Belgian Waffles or Swiss Cheese at anyone. But people are spitting at, yelling at and being violent toward Asian Americans.  The difference between Belgian Waffles, Swiss Cheese and “Chinese Virus” is fear.  No one is afraid of a Belgian Waffle or an Italian Sausage. People are afraid of Covid-19. And fear makes people do funky things, like blame others and marginalize those they think are to blame. In the midst of a pandemic, fear is the least helpful emotion. It lies at the base of violence toward Asian Americans.

The occupant’s penchant for continuing to call it the “Chinese Virus” isn’t helping. Reading from notes Thursday at a press conference, the word Corona was crossed out and “Chinese” was inserted. When asked about it he said, “It is not racist at all, no.” The occupant is wrong. It is racist and unhelpful. This rhetoric is combined with his larger anti-immigrant stance where, in the last few months he has used the words predator, invasion, alien, killer, criminal and animal more than 500 times. The sum of it all contributes to xenophobia and division among the American people at a time when we need to be united against a common threat–the virus, not a particular people.

According to NBC news, the response from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs encouraged the United States to play a “constructive role” to safeguard international public health. Further, a spokesperson from the Ministry said, “We hope the United States will respect objective facts, respect international public opinion, do its own thing, stop constantly shifting its attitude and stop slandering other countries.”

Historically, the United States has blamed other countries for global pandemics. For example, the influenza epidemic of 1918 is commonly referred to as the Spanish Flu.  Scientists, however, are almost all in agreement that this flu actually started in the Midwest of the United States. Yet, the name persists. It reflects that blaming energy that wants to separate us from any responsibility for what is happening in the world.

There is, at our most base nature, a tendency to think of ourselves and our own first. We often gather more than what we need at the expense of others. We disregard directives from those whose perspective is far larger than our own puny desires. Witness the number of students on spring break in Florida who ignored directives to leave the beaches and continued their vacation festivities. They will come home to infect their parents, grandparents, and who knows who else. This will contribute to the inevitable second wave of Covid 19.

History shows that pandemics come in three waves. We are in the first wave right now and the current directives are aimed at minimizing the impact of the second wave. History shows that the second wave is often more serious than the first. As directives are loosened (usually by people who are bored with doing what they have been told) people return to their usual activities and the infection rates often rise precipitously.

The tendency to blame and shame does not summon the better angels of our nature. It comes from fear and leads to destructive thinking. This is a time to offer our best selves to the world in faithfulness and humility.  It is a time to recognize our global humanity and do what we can to stop the racist naming of Covid 19.  Take a risk, correct someone else. Explain why it is racist and not like Belgian Waffles. Perhaps you will give someone something to think about.

Walter Brueggeman, an Old Testament Scholar, writes that we have the opportunity and indeed the responsibility to “…shape our future and present in compassion and not hostility, not in abandonment, but in solidarity…not in estrangement but in wellbeing.” (A Way Other Than Our Own, Devotions for Lent)

We share a worldwide covenant with people of every nation and language and faith. We are one human community.  If this pandemic teaches us anything, it will be how connected we truly are. A virus that started in one specific place has become a global phenomenon in a very short amount of time.  We belong to one another. Let us belong with love and mercy.

For 80% of the world, the COVID 19 infection is not about you. If you are reasonably healthy and have no underlying medical conditions, your risk is low. Even if you do contract the virus, chances are good you will make a full recovery with no complications. It’s not about you.

It’s about:

• The 90 year old great-grandmother in frail health.
• The young cancer patient who needs access to treatment and care and who needs to not have the hospital overwhelmed and non-functioning.
• Workers in the service industry who were barely making it, and who now have no job and no income.
• People who will, for the first time, depend on the local food pantry for their food.
• Workers in the food pantry who need to remain well and who need extra donations to meet increased needs.
• People who depend on Meals on Wheels every day and who need to have people healthy enough to prepare and deliver their food.
• The immune-suppressed population who bring little to the table when it comes to fighting any infection.
• The car crash victim who needs access to immediate emergency care.
• Restaurants that are barely making it from which you can order take out.
• Self-employed people whose business has come to a screeching halt.

You are being asked to turn your life upside down and inside out for people you will never meet. You are being asked to drastically change your way of life for the foreseeable future to avert a crisis not fully understood. You are being asked to dig deep into your well of compassion and altruism and “take one for the team.”

Self-quarantine, staying out of crowds and public places is not about you.  It is about the greater good.  It is about slowing the spread of this potentially deadly virus on behalf of people who will always be strangers to you. It’s about doing for strangers what we normally do for our own families.

It’s about recognizing that we are part of one global community, one human family and that we are all in this together. It’s about recapturing a lost sense of community as we look beyond our own needs and interests for the sake of others. It’s about doing our part, and then doing a little more to assure that the most vulnerable in our midst have what they need.

This pandemic will be fought primarily on the front lines of social distancing, good hygiene practices and care for one another. This is a time for careful, but bold action. We are called to be careful in how we may be exposed and may expose others and bold in how we care for one another in our community.

The compliance and compassion we embody in this time is a pebble in a pond; the ripples go out in ways we cannot see.

People are depending on us to do our part. Let’s not let them down.

In the world of religious nut jobs where no opportunity to make a buck in the name of Jesus is missed, Jim Bakker is right on schedule peddling a colloidal silver concoction that he proclaims is a cure for Covid 19. For slightly over $100.00 you too can get this “cure.” The Centers for Disease Control issued a cease and desist order, but as of this writing, Bakker has not responded.

Of course, no public health crisis would be complete without the garden variety religious kooks blaming the LGBTQ community. Pat Robertson, that cheery little homophobe, is playing his old saw saying this epidemic is the fault of the LGBTQ community and society’s increased tolerance of immoral behavior. Right wing pastor EW Jackson states boldly, “The United States has become infected with the homovirus.”  Steven Andrew of the USA Christian church has proclaimed March as “Repent of LGBT Sin Month,” as a way of protecting the US from disease and pestilence. And then they throw abortion into the mix just to make sure everyone gets that this virus is “God’s punishment.”

Religious nut jobs are not the only ones peddling snake oil cures. Other companies that have been warned by the CDC include Herbal Army Inc., Guru Nanda LLC, N-ergetics, Quinessence Aromatherapy LTD, Vital Silver and Vivify Holistic Clinic.  In response to this overnight rip-off cottage industry, the CDC has established a cross agency task force to monitor the marketing of fake cures.

In another example of the bleaker side of human nature, health supplies are being hoarded by those who have no need of them. Retailers are price gouging for these products. It is a frenzy that makes it look like Armageddon is going to happen this Tuesday.  

There is, however, a religious and moral component to this epidemic. It looks nothing like what the televangelists are peddling. Throughout history, epidemics have shown the best and the worst of human nature. We have an opportunity to summon the better angels of our nature and show some moral backbone.

It begins with the basic assumption that we are all in this together. We are one human race and no human being is exempt from this outbreak. What is happening in Italy and China is our concern because we are part of the global community. Supporting Doctors Without Borders is a concrete way to care for those scattered across the world who are affected by Covid 19 and other disastrous health outbreaks.  

The global economy depends on a permanent underclass of the poor and disenfranchised. Low wage workers, who may have two or three jobs are most likely to bear a disproportionate burden of this epidemic. Often they have contact with the public which increases their exposure risk. They also have fewer options to seek appropriate health care and take time off if they become ill.  There is a class component to this epidemic.  During this time, an extra donation to your local food pantry is a concrete way to support those who may need an extra hand if they become ill.

The frail elderly and people with chronic illness are also at increased risk for infection. The best advice to avoid infection is to stay home. If you are aware of someone in your community who may need to stay home for their own wellbeing, you can offer to grocery shop and run errands. Pick up the phone and call as days of being homebound can be lonely.

In any epidemic there is a plethora of misinformation and stupidity. Be well informed. Facebook is not the best source for your education on Covid 19. Neither is the occupant, who has suddenly become an epidemiologist who “really gets this stuff.” Somehow that proclamation is less than inspiring. Instead, read from reputable sources like the CDC. Take reasonable precautions to protect yourself and others. So far the best advice is, “wash your hands.” This appears to be a new concept to some, which is almost as scary as an epidemic.

Since 2016, understanding why and how white Evangelicals can support the occupant, who clearly embodies NO characteristics of Christianity, has been a mystery. He has no church affiliation, shows a total ignorance of Scripture and is utterly unaware of the basic tenets and principles of the Christian faith. How this lying, cheating, narcissistic buffoon managed to capture 81% of the white Evangelical vote is mind boggling.

As it turns out, there are a few moving pieces to this bizarre jig saw puzzle known as US politics right now. It starts with the persistent myth that the religious right coalesced around the issue of abortion in the aftermath of Roe v Wade.

In a 2014 article in Politico, Randall Balmer from Dartmouth University clarifies why this is a myth. It was a full six years after Roe v Wade when Paul Weyrich, a conservative leader, seized on the abortion issue for one reason-to deny Jimmy Carter a second term as president.

Why conservative Christians abandoned one of their own in favor of a divorced and remarried Ronald Reagan, who incidentally signed the most liberal abortion bill in the United States as governor of California, has nothing to do with the issue of abortion.

It has to do with a grab for political power that needed a rallying cry to organize what could potentially be a powerful voting bloc. Abortion was a more palatable rallying cry than their real agenda which was maintaining school segregation in the south.

The roots go back to 1964 when a group of African American parents in Holm County, Mississippi, sued the Treasury Department to prevent three new k-12 whites-only private academies from securing tax exempt status. They argued that their discriminatory policies prevented them from being classified as charitable institutions. In January of 1970 a preliminary injunction denied the segregated academies tax exempt status. Later that same year then-president Nixon ordered the IRS to deny tax exempt status to all segregated schools in the US.

Bob Jones University and Jerry Falwell’s Lynchburg Christian School continued their whites-only admission policy in defiance of the order to integrate. Christian schools argued that they accepted no government funds so the government could not dictate how they conducted business. They did, however, continue to enjoy tax exempt status and the perks that come with it. The passage of the Civil Rights Act changed all that.

In January of 1976 the IRS rescinded Bob Jones University’s tax exempt status because of their refusal to integrate. Though it seems unconnected, it was the beginning of galvanizing the Evangelical community around the issue of abortion. Abortion was a far more palatable rallying cry than maintaining segregation.

By the late 1970’s there was some unrest about Roe v. Wade and several pro-life candidates won elections in Minnesota and Iowa. The galvanizing year for the religious right was 1978. Frances Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop produced a series of films, “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” and aimed them directly at evangelical audiences. The five part film series is a direct blow levied at Roe v Wade complete with over the top images of dolls with fake blood on their faces and hyperbolic dialogue that demonizes women who choose abortion. C. Everett Koop later became the surgeon general.

When President Carter refused to sign a constitutional amendment outlawing abortion his political fate was sealed. Abortion became the rallying cry but maintaining segregation was the goal. The case of Bob Jones University reached the Supreme Court in 1982. The Reagan administration supported Bob Jones University; however, in the face of public outcry the administration changed their position. On May 24, 1983 the Court voted 8-1 against Bob Jones University. The lone dissenter was William Rehnquist who later became chief justice of the Supreme Court.

It is important to note that the religious right was never about biblical values, but about state’s rights which is code language for maintaining segregation. Opposition to abortion was never a moral issue, but a political one.

This helps to explain, in part, why 81% of the white evangelical vote went to the occupant. It isn’t about personal piety or demonstrable faith. It is about political expediency. The real goals of the Evangelical hang on the hook of abortion, but clearly have a root in racism and segregation. In addition, this joke of an administration is also reviving debate about LGBTQ rights and transgender people in the military.

The political expedience of the occupant is that he talks a pro-life agenda and spouts the conservative party line. No one would argue that the occupant is a practitioner of the faith; rather he defends the faith through his rhetoric and his political stances. In other words, he talks the talk but doesn’t walk the talk. Sarah Diefendort recently wrote, “Today, US white Evangelicals do not necessarily need political candidates who are going to carry their understanding of Christian values into personal actions but instead want candidates who will help them defend their identities and cultural influence.”  

As long as the occupant continues to promulgate the conservative agenda, which at this point has coalesced around the issue of abortion, his political future is secure.

 

It is no secret that our elections are anything but free and fair. In addition to foreign meddling and phony social media accounts, there are also internal threats that divide groups within the United States. Groups that need to be unified end up pitted against each other and so weaken their corporate voice.

One such organization is ADOS which stands for American Descendants of Slavery. It was created in 2016 to describe and distinctly separate Black Americans/African Americans from Black immigrant communities from Africa, the Caribbean and Latino countries.

The central issue at stake, according to ADOS, is reparations for African American Blacks who are directly descended from slaves. William Darity, Professor of Economics at Duke University, writes extensively on the subject and supports the basic principles of ADOS. He argues that African American Blacks were subjected to a form of sustained, race based discrimination that is unique in American history.  

As Wesley Lowery of the Washington Post notes, the movement for reparations has gained support since the early 2000’s. It is, however, still widely rejected by a majority of Americans. The conversation about reparations cycles on a regular basis, especially in an election year.  There has been talk of reparations since the Reconstruction period following the Civil War.

The founders of ADOS, Antonio Moore and Yvette Carnell, are a cause for concern. Moore wrote for the right wing media outlet News Max. Carnell was on the board of a fake progressive organization, Progressives for Immigration Reform, which was aided by white supremacist and eugenics supporter John Tanton. These groups have a history of causing divisions in the Black Community.

While ADOS claims they will work for legal reparations, it is likely that the moniker will be used to create policies that will further marginalize and oppress Black communities.  ADOS is looking to influence the 2020 presidential election as well as the 2020 census.

With supporters like William Darity and Cornell West, ADOS has garnered legitimacy in various circles. The larger concern is that Black Americans who are concerned about reparations will be drawn into their disinformation and misinformation tactics.  Among critics of ADOS there is consensus that it is a highly sophisticated propaganda campaign that combines African American history with less savory motivations.

ADOS relies heavily on right-wing, anti-Black, anti-immigrant talking points, and a series of policy positions that rely on individuals’ ability to produce documentation that they are direct descendants of slaves. Absent that ability, they are excluded from further conversation about reparations.

The larger concern about ADOS is that it fractures the Black community and pits Blacks against Blacks. A further concern is that it begins the narrative with slavery when the Black experience has much more history than what happened four hundred years ago. Slavery is not a lineage, it was a condition foisted upon a group of human beings by oppressors and colonizers.

In addition, ADOS wants to split Black representation on the 2020 Census and make ADOS its own category, distinct from other Black groups. It would have a negative effect on the representation of Black communities, potentially impacting access to funding and other resources available to Black communities overall.

Sowing division in the Black community is reminiscent of the slave hierarchies that owners created to keep their slaves from organizing. By pitting slaves against each other, the hierarchy and the resulting animosity prevented any meaningful community or organizing among slaves.  ADOS does the same thing but in a different way.

ADOS co-founders claim to be proponents of reparations but refuse to support H.R.40-Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African-Americans Act. Further, ADOS refuses to work with established Black reparations organizations like the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations.

According to Jam Aiwuyor, ADOS members attack Black historians, scholars, activists and leaders through a variety of means, including social media. There is thinly veiled racism in the ADOS movement. The claim that African Americans are more closely connected genetically to white Americans is a cornerstone of their argument. This position serves to further alienate Black African Americans from other Black communities.

ADOS leaders co-opt the work of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and others to build trust within the Black community. They use their work out of context and exclude all references to African roots and global Black movements.

There is much that is distasteful, ahistorical and just plain wrong about ADOS. They masquerade as a progressive organization and advertise in liberal publications but really have an anti-immigrant stance that seeks to divide the Black community. Further, by limiting immigration by people of color, the movement could stall a Black and Brown majority population for an additional few years. This is a major goal of white supremacists.

There is a need for unity in the Black community. Yes, there is diversity within the Black community, but sowing divisions that exploit that diversity is in no one’s best interest except white supremacists. 

It is easy to fall prey to misinformation and disinformation. Desiring to be seen as progressive, the veneer of ADOS seems attractive. It’s only when you scratch below the surface that their true intentions and the potential for damage become clear.

 

 

History is written by the winners. There is always a dominant narrative that emerges and becomes the “official” history of any event or epoch. It means that the truths of those who “lost” are often lost to history. In any history, however, there is always a minority report.

It has been said that racism is America’s original sin. The Southern Poverty Law Center states that it is not America’s original sin but America’s origin. Every strand in the warp and woof of our country’s fabric is shot through with slavery and racism. In this election year it is especially important that we take a more honest look at our history because it is influencing our political process in disturbing ways. Over the next few weeks I will explore this in more depth. For this week I begin with some pieces of history that are not well known, but fill in crucial parts of the narrative that paint a more honest picture of who we are as Americans.  Warning: the stories we tell ourselves and the stories we were taught leave out a lot.

Most of us learned in US history in high school that the first slaves were brought to America in 1619 and landed in Jamestown, Virginia. The narrative that is left out is that the brutal slave trade was already thriving in the Americas. Portuguese and Spanish colonists in Central and South America began trafficking enslaved humans in the 1400’s. It is likely that Christopher Columbus transported the first enslaved Africans in the 1490’s to what is now the Dominican Republic.

The Spanish occupation of Florida in the early sixteenth century was the beginning of slavery in what was to become the United States. Linda Heywood and John Thornton of Boston University state that the earliest slaves arrived in 1526.

The reason any of this matters is because what we were taught truncates the narrative. The slave trade has a much broader history than the atrocities of the early colonies. Slavery was global. Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, Peru and Brazil, to name a few, were slave trading and slave holding areas. African people endured centuries of enslavement.

In 1663 a Virginia court set the precedent for generational slavery by declaring a child born to an enslaved mother was also a slave. This law made the slave trade in America unique in the world, a dubious distinction at best.

In 1661 Maryland was the first state to pass anti-miscegenation legislation. In the l960’s twenty-one states still had those laws in place. Alabama was the last state to repeal the ban on interracial marriage in 2000. Let that sink in a moment, just twenty years ago.

The date of 1776 as the date of American independence is celebrated and revered. What is less known is that all references to slaves were removed by Thomas Jefferson, himself a slave owner. Thomas Jefferson had six children by his house slave, Sally Heming. The truth is ugly; this woman endured years of rape and was forced to bear her rapist’s children. As the Southern Poverty Law Center notes, “We enjoy thinking about Thomas Jefferson proclaiming ‘all men are created equal.’ But we are deeply troubled by the prospect of enslaved woman Sally Heming declaring, ‘me too’.”

Eight of the first twelve presidents were slave owners. They had a deeply vested interest in the institution of slavery.

It is commonly believed the southern colonies were the only slave holders. In reality all the colonies held slaves. Massachusetts was the first colony to declare slavery an institution. In Rhode Island a law required the release of slaves after ten years of forced labor. Since the north was first to abolish slavery it is easy to think it never existed. Between 1774 and 1804 all the northern states abolished slavery.

The slave trade continued to grow in the south. The invention of the cotton gin in the late eighteenth century changed the face of the southern economy. Shifting from tobacco and rice crops to cotton was a turning point in the expansion of the slave trade in the south. It is estimated that enslaved people made up one-third of the population in the south. The growth of the colonies, westward territorial expansion and industrial growth were all dependent on the institution of slavery.

High school history teaches that the importing of slaves was outlawed in 1808. What it doesn’t teach is that it made the domestic slave trade boom. A slave was considered three-fifths of a human being. They were bought and sold like cattle at an auction.  

The Civil War was fought over the issue of slavery. The southern states wanted to secede so they could continue the institution of slavery. The northern colonies, having abolished slavery and the growing voices from Quaker and Mennonite communities protesting slavery all set the stage for a bloody and brutal war.

By the late 1800’s the Ku Klux Klan was thriving in the south. After the Civil War and the outlawing of slavery, the backlash to keep white supremacy in place was brutal. To this day the KKK, other hate groups and white supremacy groups keep the shameful legacy of racism alive and well.

In this election year, it is crucial that we learn our history, the whole story. It isn’t pretty but it is who we are. It is clear that the “official” end of slavery and efforts at reconstruction did little to improve the situation of African Americans. Efforts to legally redress discrimination have been minimally successful. In 1964 President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act. In 1965 the Voting Rights Act was passed to correct disparities in voter access.  That law was repealed by a 2013 court ruling.  Let that sink in, too.

A year or so ago I was in high school. Last week I graduated from college. Earlier this year I marked thirty-seven years of ordained ministry. I have just one question. What the hell happened?

How did so much time go by so fast? It’s a question we asked when I was gathered with a group of my friends from high school for the sad occasion of one of our mom’s death. She was like mom to us. We were in and out of each other’s houses at all hours of the day and night. We just showed up, browsed through the fridge if we were hungry and hung out like we lived there.

Most of us are blessed if we have one second home. I am lucky enough to have had four. We have been there for each other through thick and thin for over fifty years.

Over a few glasses of wine we shook our heads and wondered what the hell happened? How did life go flying by so fast?

I’ve had a lot of time to think this past week (it’s not always a good thing, but I’m giving it my best shot anyway), and here’s what’s been rolling around in my head.

I know time is time is time. I also know that my moms were right when they said time goes faster as you get older.

It is humbling to realize more of life has been lived than is yet to be lived.

Time is precious mostly because there is so little of it but also because of the people who make time count and make life worth living.

To have friends for over fifty years is pretty cool.

Wine is a good thing.

Finding a few laughs in the midst of sadness is okay. It’s part of what makes the sadness bearable.

Memory is a great gift. Sure, it makes the losses harder because of all the good times, but it also makes the present tolerable.

Telling stories is a cornerstone of grief and healing.

Tears are a gift when there are no words.

Time is promised to no one, so if you happen to get a bunch of it, be grateful. Even with the aches and pains and creaks and groans and the occasional breaking heart, it is a good thing.

Time is what keeps everything from happening at once. That’s a good thing, too.

One day at a time is good advice. I am discovering it is also about all I can handle.

Loss is inevitable. No one will ever fill the space left in your heart when someone you love dies. Still, loneliness is optional.

You can only do what you can do. Some things just have to go by without being tended to. Having limits is part of being human.

It is humbling and annoying when the limits aren’t as far out ahead as they used to be.

I’m still not sure what the hell happened, but figuring out seems less important than living in the moment and making sure it counts.

And did I mention wine is a good thing?

There are so many misconceptions about abortion. Women feel no loss related to the terminated pregnancy. There are no physical symptoms that accompany the procedure. It is an easy decision to make, like having a hang nail clipped off. Abortion is an acceptable method of birth control. It is a decision a woman will regret for the rest of her life. All religions are universally against a woman’s right to choose. Women who choose to terminate pregnancies have emotional problems for the rest of their lives. Women who have abortions will never have children in the future. Abortion requires her partner’s consent. The list goes on and on. In truth, laws vary from state to state and it is important to get accurate information for the geographic region where the procedure is being considered.

Ever since Roe v. Wade was passed in 1973, our society has defined abortion as something shameful and worthy of judgement.  I hasten to say it is mostly “religious” people who make the judgement.

Many people think the “church” has always believed that life begins at conception. Nothing could be further from the truth. Having accurate historical information is an appropriate place to begin if abortion is going to continue to be used as a political and religious football to control women’s bodies.

There are two major religious groups that dominate the conversation: the Roman Catholic Church and conservative Christian evangelicals.

The Roman Catholic Church has an inconsistent history with women’s reproductive health. In ancient times it was believed that women spontaneously formed a child from withheld menses. When it was discovered that men were half the equation, along with the rise of patriarchal religion, women’s private health care became men’s concern.

In the early Christian church, the Didache asked two questions about abortion: was it being used to conceal fornication or adultery and did the fetus have a rational soul from the moment of conception? The latter debate remains the cornerstone which fuels the anti-abortion movement, although there is no consensus on the answer.

Augustine wrote in the Encridion, that the fetus received its soul at some point in its growth but not at conception. The first official Canon recognized by the Church dates from 1140. It states, in part, that “he is not a murderer who brings about abortion before the soul is in the body.”

It became more complicated as Popes disagreed about the issue. The most consistent lines of reasoning regarding abortion were two fold. First, abortion as contraception was a sin; second, abortion was a sin against marriage. This had more to do with property rights concerning women than with morality. Neither, however, was considered murder.

Other Popes like Sixtus V and Gregory the XIV continued the disagreements back and forth. As late as the 18^th century there was theological agreement that the fetus did not develop a soul at conception, but rather at “quickening” when movement was first felt by the mother.

The argument took a radical turn in 1869 when Pope Pius IX stated that excommunication was required for abortion at any stage of pregnancy and that all abortion was murder. This was in direct opposition to the theological positions that predated that document.

For those who believe in Papal infallibility, it is important to note that this doctrine has as complicated a history as women’s reproductive health. To this day there is lack of consensus throughout the Roman Catholic Church worldwide concerning Papal infallibility.

Jump ahead to 1917 and the revised Church Canon required excommunication not only for women who aborted fetuses, but also for all who participated in the abortion.

Jump ahead again to the Second Vatican Council in 1965. The official church doctrine stated that “life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception; abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.” This shifted the argument to protecting life. In 1974 the Declaration on Procured Abortion declared that the fetus is a human life from the moment of conception.

So much for the doctrinal purity of the Roman Catholics Church through the centuries.

Protestant Christianity didn’t fare much better, although there was general consensus that abortion was a serious issue. Martin Luther and John Calvin promulgated varying degrees of interpretation regarding the “sin” of abortion. Conservative and fundamental churches held with Roman Catholic doctrine, an irony not lost on church historians.

Given that Protestants don’t agree on much of anything (hence the name Protest-ant), it was not surprising there were multiple views on the nature, purpose and morality of abortion.

What was significant in the Protestant/Evangelical/Fundamentalist debate was that abortion was permissible under certain circumstances. These circumstances included family welfare and social responsibility. “They affirmed that fetal life may have to be abandoned to maintain full and secure family life.”  This was radically different from Roman Catholic Doctrine of the same period.

Mainstream evangelical leaders’ liberal views on abortion shifted in 1968. Christianity Today and the Christian Medical Society hosted a gathering of evangelical leaders to set the “conservative, evangelical position within Protestantism.” Apparently they neglected the fact that they didn’t speak for ALL Protestants, conservative, evangelical or other.

In the ensuing decades multiple conservative Christian voices from seminaries to denominational judicatories weighed in on the abortion issue. There were as many opinions as there were Protestant voices.

The next major anti-abortion movement began when Jerry Falwell confidently declared that conception was the moment when human attributes were given to a fetus. His unparalleled social, theological and political platform gave opportunity for a rallying cry and united much of the conservative Christian movement. Arguing that he spoke the definitive voice on a biblical view of abortion was arrogant. He was also selectively literal in his interpretation of the Bible. Preying on the biblical illiteracy of many people in the United States and using his bully pulpit, he did more to galvanize an anti-abortion movement than any of his contemporaries.

The reason any of this matters is because the “authoritative” voices declaring the way and will of God regarding abortion are selectively biblical and largely politically motivated. The upshot is that men and the women they influence, as well as political affiliations, define the morality of abortion in a singular voice when there are many voices, each with their theological strengths and weaknesses.

For any church, Protestant or Catholic to claim a definitive voice on abortion flies in the face of either tradition’s history. If we are going to argue the “morality” of abortion, let’s at least be honest that the church is inconsistent at best.

It also matters because women carry shame and blame for their unwanted pregnancies and choice for abortion. What is a personal decision for a woman and her health care provider has become a political football used to assert moral superiority and the subjugation of women.

It is time we stopped allowing patriarchal Christianity to define the meaning of abortion for women. The women who have come into my office for pastoral care through the years have, for the most part, drunk the religious Kool-Aid that is all too willing to judge them to hell and back. And it needs to stop.

The only way to stop shaming women for making a perfectly legal choice is for women to shed the shame that is foisted upon them, and the men who impregnate them to take responsibility. When women begin to speak openly about their abortions without shame or self-blame the conversation will begin to change. When women hold men equally responsible for the pregnancies that result from intercourse the conversation will begin to change. When men are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law for taking advantage of women who are compromised by drugs or alcohol the conversation will begin to change.

And it is far beyond time for that to happen.