Category: Faith & Public Life

Tweets I never Tweeted

I left Twitter a couple years ago, but sometimes I have pithy thoughts that are roughly the length of a 280 character Tweet. Here are some of them, in no particular order. [WARNING: As tweets, they are not very nuanced and tend to be pretty black-and-white…so please don’t read too much into them. Any intelligent person, including myself, could probably rebut every single one of these Tweets if given enough time and thought. Moreover, I myself don’t necessarily fully agree with all of them. But I think some of them are interesting and hopefully they provide some food for thought.]

  • To have CONVICTION is to affirm that everything you believe right now is true. To have HUMILITY is to realize that you’ve been wrong in the past about some things, and thus are probably wrong about some things in the present. To be a healthy pursuer of truth is to have BOTH conviction AND humility, and thus to respect those you disagree with (even if you think they’re wrong—after all, you have also been wrong in the past).
  • The invasion of Ukraine has simultaneously illustrated the benefits of local nuclear energy (more dependable than oil and gas imports) and the potential danger (intentional or accident incidents threatening to spread radiation).
  • I’m generally not a fan of how “masculinity” is defined in American culture, but even if I were, it’s strange to me why so many people view Donald Trump as such a manly man. He doesn’t drink alcohol or coffee, doesn’t exercise, wears makeup, is unfaithful to his wife, doesn’t hunt, never served in the military, rarely laughs…
  • If your theology is far more similar to the theology found among elite, educated, wealthy white American liberals than it is to that found among impoverished, oppressed, and persecuted Christians in non-Western nations, then I have some bad news about how “decolonized” your theology actually is…
  • People may wonder what a Christian pacifist view of the Ukraine war would be: What would a pacifist (such as myself) do in the situation? Well, given that ~70% of Russians identify as Christian, it can be assumed that if all the Christians in the Russian army held to Jesus’ view on violence (“love your enemies”), they would immediately throw down their arms and return home, ending the war outright.
  • There are two deep ironies to the Trump presidency. The first is that his most significant historic achievement, Operation Warp Speed, is the one accomplishment that means nothing to his most loyal supporters. The second is that his biggest legacy, the overturn of Roe v. Wade, is destined to hinder his party’s political popularity for a generation.
  • If you are unwilling or unable to understand the appeal of an ideology that you disagree with, then at best your efforts to oppose it will be ineffective, and at worst they will actually encourage it all the more.
  • When Democrats lost an important election in 2016, they knitted ‘pussy’ hats, wore black, and cried. When Republicans lost an important election in 2020, they claimed the election was stolen, bought guns, and assaulted the US Capitol. One side is clearly more likely to start a civil war than the other. (Given that fact, there’s probably not a real need to worry about a domestic civil war until liberals start buying guns. That’s when you should start to worry.)
  • The solution to the age-old Euthryphro Dilemma is similar to the solution of asking , “which side of a quarter is more important?” While the question makes sense on a logical level, the answer is to simply point out that both sides are not just equally important, but inseparable from each other. Similarly for the Euthryphro problem the answer is that ‘God’ and ‘Justice’ are two sides of the same coin.
  • The sentiment that “I have a right to sex and if I’m not getting any, it’s society’s fault in some way” is a subtly broken sentiment on several levels. While it sounds deeply progressive on the surface, it is also the sentiment at the foundation of the misogynistic and far-right “incel” movement. No one has a fundamental right to sex that must be granted to them by others.
  • Cattails seeds are like the kingdom of God. They are spread by the wind, and especially after being pecked at by others.
  • What percentage of people does “The System” have to work for for that system to be worth keeping ? (Assuming that no system can work for everyone). 99% ? 51% ? Something else? We should be cautious before throwing out a system without having a good idea of whether the system that replaces it would work any better.
  • Putins biggest mistake was not invading Ukraine while Trump was still president. There’s no way the US under Trump would have marshaled the resources that have come through for the Ukrainians in the past year.
  • I saw a tweet that said that “Any reason to get an abortion is the right one.” But I disagree; I can think of many reasons that a person could get an abortion that don’t seem like great reasons. For ex: 1. Genetic testing shows that I’m pregnant with a female. 2. My boyfriend is telling me to get an abortion or he’s going to leave me. 3. I am afraid my baby is going to be gay. 4. My job doesn’t offer parental leave. Etc.
  • There’s a loophole in Jesus’ command to “love your neighbor as yourself” in that if you don’t feel like loving them, you can just deport them somewhere else… and then they’re not your neighbor anymore!
  • The Bible is a bit like an invitation to a wedding. It contains immense value not only because of the words on the page but especially because it points to a wondrous banquet and invites one to RSVP “yes” or “no.”
  • For many Christians , Jesus is their Savior but he is not their Lord.
  • To help white people divest from white supremacy, it is not enough to simply love people of color. You must also love white people.
  • One ironic difference between an unarmed, committed pacifist and, say, one of the heavily armed Uvalde SWAT police officers (who refused to storm the school building while the shooter was inside actively shooting people), is that the pacifist is willing to risk death for the sake of their convictions, and the SWAT officers weren’t. 
  • As we see women slowly gain equality to men in society, will we see an increase in certain rates, such as female murderers, female mass shooters, etc? If not, why not? I actually think the answer really matters, because in it lies the clue for how to help modern men.
  • I think you can be a pacifist without being a universalist, however I find it hard to believe one can be a universalist without being a pacifist. If you believe no one is unworthy of being in God’s perfect presence in heaven, then how could you believe it would ever be justified to use deadly violence against them on earth? To be a universalist but not a pacifist is essentially to say: “God wouldn’t ever hold any of your sins against you-but I might!”
    • Elite liberals fixating on school shooters’ access to assault rifles as the most important topic in gun control is an example of the gentrification of an important political issue. Handguns kill far more people through gang shootings, suicides, and accidents, but those get a lot less attention than the specter of a shooter with an AR-15 in a peaceful suburban town.
    • There’s a perspective among some Christians that hell is not about burning in fire, but is merely just about being separated from God. Well, sure, I could buy that. However, if you believe that being completely separated from God‘s entire is the worst thing in the world, then that is actually worse than being in a lake of fire. If God is who He says he is, it would be far better to burn in fire with God (like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego), than to live in paradise without him!
    • Arguments about arming teachers in schools are pretty hilarious to me. When I taught middle school in Baltimore, I safely and effectively broke up 22 fights between students by physically intervening. I also broke up a high school fight on my street in Carlisle two years ago. I cannot think of a single fight where the presence of a sidearm strapped to my side would have made the situation safer, and more likely it would have made it far more dangerous (e.g., if the gun had accidentally discharged, or a student grabbed it in the middle of the tussle.) I think an argument could be made for there to be one or two armed resource officers in a school, but arming teachers–even with training– is just asking for trouble.
    • There’s actually some key ways that one can use arguments from the perspective of “progressivism/CRT” (loosely defined) in order to defend certain core Christian doctrines. For example, “Oh, you don’t believe in a Judgment Day? That’s a very privileged stance, to believe that no matter what systems of oppression you participate in, that God ultimately just doesn’t care. Most marginalized and oppressed groups long for a day when God judges the righteous and unrighteous.” Or – “ oh, you believe that truth is relative and each individual should figure out what is right and wrong for themselves? That’s a very individualistic, white Western perspective on morality. Most non-white and non-Western cultures have a more group-oriented perspective that takes into consideration the needs of the entire community, and the most marginalized within it, not just whatever a privileged person decides on their own.”
    • When edgy progressivism becomes the norm and institutionalized, it ceases to feel edgy. Instead it is conservatism that begins to feel edgy. 
    • Christians–whether more progressive or conservative–who portray Jesus as entirely different from the “violent, strict, legalistic” God of the Old Testament are showing how little they understand Jesus’ teachings, and moreover are engaging in theological anti-Semitism. Jews have worshipped the “God of the Old Testament” for 5000+ years, and to simply write him off as a hateful has-been is to indict their entire religion. 
    • Republicans who think we should cut back support for Ukraine and instead “be tough on China” are hopelessly confused. China is watching carefully how the US responds to Russian aggression in Ukraine, and if we are perceived as weak in any way, that will further encourage China to attack Taiwan and other nations. In our broken world, the best way to deter a Chinese invasion is to prove to them that US weapons can defend any ally against any aggressor.

Carlisle Truth & Reconciliation Commission – Part 2.

About two years ago, I wrote a blog post regarding the proposal for a Carlisle Truth & Reconciliation Commission (TRC), generally advocating for the creation of this TRC and sharing a few potential concerns. Last week, the Commission released a 19-page report with a summary of their findings and a number of suggestions for moving forward. You can read more about the report by clicking here, and you can view the full 19-page report below.

TRC-Report-to-Carlisle-Borough-CouncilDownload

I have a few quick thoughts in response to the TRC’s report. I’ll start with the things that I think it does really well.

-I think the TRC did an excellent job with the report given the time and energy that they had available (and I’m not just saying that because my friend Raz was on the team). The level of detail, suggestions, and concepts covered in the document show the team worked hard and covered a lot of ground, despite having some turnover within the team.

-I think the Carlisle TRC also did a good job in not exceeding their mandate; the suggestions all seem fairly reasonable, doable, and germane to the limitations of a small town like Carlisle. It might have been tempting to get bogged down into bigger national political conversations like reparations for slavery, reproductive health, or voting rights access, but the TRC wisely focused on issues within the jurisdiction of Carlisle and within the purview of the Carlisle Borough Council.

-I think the suggestion that the TRC become a permanent standing committee (similar to the Climate Action Committee) is a also wise one. There is a lot more that could be said and suggested that isn’t in this report, and there will only continue to be more issues that arise in the coming years and decades in Carlisle. (For example, racial justice might demand a new lens as our Borough incorporates hundreds of new refugees from various countries, who may or may not fit into the major pre-existing racial categories).

-I am glad the TRC did take time and space to discuss the injustices suffered by Native Americans in Carlisle and at the Carlisle Indian School. As I wrote 2 years ago, it was one of my concerns that this issue would be neglected and I’m glad to see it was not.

Now, I do have a few small concerns/lingering questions with the TRC’s report.

-As a lover of history, one thing that is not as present as I might have expected is some of the historical data and/or anecdotes to illustrate the main points within the TRC report. Perhaps it would have been too lengthy to include, but for people who may not as familiar with the history of racism in America it can be really helpful to have a few key statistics or stories to really lock in the main points. To name one example, on pg. 12 the report references the divides on “the wrong side of the (railroad) tracks.” As someone who lives on the “wrong” side of the tracks, and because I know some of the history of red-lining, I understood what the report was implying, but I think some more explanation or history would have been helpful. Did red-lining happen in Carlisle the same way it did in other cities? Besides the neglected Union Cemetery in Memorial Park, are there instances where the Borough clearly underinvested in areas north of the tracks? Are there anecdotes that residents of this area can share of being underserved or neglected? I believe that all of this evidence probably exists, and it would strengthen the TRC report to include it. (Or at the very least, to make sure that these stories and evidence are made public in other venues, such as in the Sentinel, public gatherings, etc.). I imagine that it would be pretty easy to ask some Carlisle High school or Dickinson College students to work in gathering this data and summarizing it in an easy-to-digest format. Anti-racism work often involves building broad coalitions, and simple stories and anecdotes can really help in that regard.

-Given that the TRC was created by the Borough Council for the Borough Council, it makes sense that most of the recommendations center on things that the local government can do, whether through Borough programs, incentives, regulations, etc. It’s also possible that space in the report was limited and the decision was made to focus on the governmental side of things. However, for full progress to be made in our community we will also need to pay attention to and fully leverage the numerous other public, private, and non-profit institutions that operate in Carlisle on the front lines of equity work. Whether that’s the YWCA, the United Way, Rotary, Safe Harbors, etc., these institutions are on the front lines of caring for marginalized residents in Carlisle every day, and can thus have a disproportionate impact in the fight for justice. I also find it interesting that the only reference to Dickinson College or to “religious orders” in the TRC report are both somewhat negative, when both Dickinson and local communities of faith generally have an outsize role in our community–for better or for worse. They will inevitably need be a part of any further progress that is made in Carlisle. To put too much of the onus for anti-racism on local government officials and policies, without involving other entities –including ones that have historically been part of the problem!– could result in anti-racism efforts being hindered. To name just one example, efforts to create vibrant and affordable neighborhoods would benefit from open and honest conversations with institutions like Dickinson College or even the church I attend, New Life Community, which is currently hiring for a full-time position to work on housing access and affordability.

Now, as previously stated, overall I think the TRC did great work and my two concerns are not to detract from it, but rather just to elaborate on it some more. I hope and pray that the recommendations within this document are taken seriously in Carlisle and adopted (where possible) by the Borough Council.

Jesus’ Commands Don’t Always Feel Loving

As a Christian, I believe that 1. God is love, and 2. Jesus is God. As a corollary to those two beliefs, I believe that everything Jesus said and did on Earth was an act of love. Over and over Jesus expresses radical love to those around him, and that was illustrated most powerfully through his sacrificial death on the cross and resurrection three days later.

However, just because everything Jesus did was loving does not mean that every person around him experienced it as love. Sometimes they may have been offended, or angry, or mournful, or disheartened, etc. The love that Jesus expressed through his every action did not always feel like it was “good news,” even if it actually was! Sometimes following Jesus is extremely costly, hard, and burdensome. For example, take the following incidents found in the Gospels:

  • When Jesus commanded the rich young ruler to sell all his possessions and give it away to the poor, the young man went away very sad. He probably didn’t think this was a very loving thing for Jesus to command.
  • When Jesus initially ignored the Syrophonecian woman and referred to her as a dog, that does not sound very loving.
  • When Jesus defended the woman caught in adultery but then told her to go and sin no more, she might not have experienced that final statement as loving.
  • When Jesus told his disciples to pick up their cross and deny themselves, that does not sound very loving.
  • When Jesus told the Samaritan woman that her religious beliefs were wrong, and that salvation comes from the Jews, she might not have experienced that as loving.
  • When Jesus rebuked the Pharisees and his disciples, they may not have experienced it as love.
  • When Jesus told his followers to “hate” their father, mother, children, and even their own lives, for the sake of following him, that does not sound very loving.
  • When Jesus promised weeping and gnashing of teeth for those who do not care for the “least of these brothers and sisters of mine,” that does not sound loving.
  • When Jesus said that it is better not to marry and to live as a eunuch for the sake of the Kingdom of God, that does not sound very loving.
  • When Jesus said to love your enemies, and to do good to those who hurt you, that does not sound loving. It sounds like a recipe for disaster.
  • When Jesus told his disciples that he would need to die on the cross, that did not sound like a loving act of self-sacrifice, it sounded like foolishness. And when why Peter rebuked him for talking about such things, Jesus called him Satan! That doesn’t sound very loving.

These are just a few instances that I could think of the top of my head where the commands of Jesus don’t always feel loving to our modern ears. I’m sure there are many more. Depending on who you are and your life experiences, Jesus’ commands can feel challenging, risky, and potentially damaging to your mind, emotions, and body. Thus it can be incredibly tempting to reinterpret the words of Jesus through a hermeneutic wherein “only commands that feel loving are valid.” But to adopt that hermeneutic is to re-make Jesus into our own image, and to miss out on the potential liberation that may come through obedience. The rich young ruler may have kept his wealth and his security when he walked away from Jesus, but he missed out on the opportunity to do justice, experience God’s provision, and follow Jesus.

The question for Christians today is, which of God’s commands are we tempted to discount simply because they don’t feel loving? I would argue probably the most universally-ignored command is the one to love our enemies, but there are many others as well. Do we have the faith to believe that Jesus’ words are good news even if it doesn’t always feel like it?

A pro-family bill that both pro-life & pro-choice advocates could support

Abortion is perhaps the single most divisive and electorally important issue in American politics today. This fact is strange when you consider that study after study shows the vast majority of Americans neither want abortion to be 100% illegal in all circumstances nor 100% legal in all circumstances. Most Americans occupy a middle space with some level of discomfort with abortion but not wishing for a complete ban (similar to the majority opinion about firearms).

SO…what if I told you that there was a series of pro-family policies that could significantly decrease the number of abortions? That’d be a huge win for conservatives! But what if I told you that these also happen to be policies that progressives would also support? You probably wouldn’t believe me. But follow my logic.

To give some context, the top reasons women give for getting an abortion are as follows (respondents were allowed to select more than one):

  • 1. Not financially prepared: 40%
  • 2. Bad timing, not ready, or unplanned: 36%
  • 3. Partner-related reasons (including the relationship is bad or new, she doesn’t want to be a single mother, her partner is not supportive, does not want the baby, is abusive, or just the wrong guy): 31%
  • 4. Need to focus on her other children: 29%
  • 5. Interferes with educational or vocational plans: 20%
  • 6. Not emotionally or mentally prepared: 19%
  • 7. Health-related reasons (includes concern for own health or health of fetus, use of drugs, alcohol, or tobacco): 12%
  • 8. Want a better life for a baby than she could provide: 12%
  • 9. Not independent or mature enough for a baby: 7%
  • 10. Influence from family or friends: 5%
  • 11: Doesn’t want a baby or to place them for adoption: 4%

Now, imagine a legislative bill that included the following elements:

  • 6 month guaranteed paid leave for both parents, w/ a job guaranteed afterwards
  • Free short-term birth control (i.e. condoms) available to anyone in schools, corner stores, etc.
  • Free long-term birth control available to everyone over 18 (i.e. IUDs, vasectomy, etc)
  • Comprehensive sex education in high school, w/ emphasis on building healthy romantic relationships and not rushing into sex
  • Increased housing option and support services for women with children fleeing situations of domestic abuse
  • The recent Biden child tax credit ($300/month from birth to age 6) being expanded to last for 10 years, with a provision to increase annually according to inflation
  • Subsidies for daycare for low and middle class families.
  • Universal, affordable health care for all mothers and babies.
  • Counseling and support services for expectant and new mothers required to be provided through every insurance plan – including doulas and other delivery support
  • Additional research and support for women with risky pregnancies and/or babies with birth defects (Down syndrome, etc).
  • Increased funding into research into the causes and potential treatments for infertility (i.e. endometriosis, decreasing sperm counts in American men, etc).

If you pay any attention to politics, you would know that the policies listed above would be incredibly popular with progressives. But consider how drastically the abortion rate would plummet if these policies were put into place! If our society provided all of the financial, emotional, and healthcare supports listed above, there would be far fewer unplanned and unwanted pregnancies. Honestly, based on how fast the abortion rate plummeted when Obamacare was signed into law (which provided cheap access to birth control), I predict the abortion rate could be cut in half in 10 years or less! And if my estimates are correct, it could all be paid for just by reversing the 2017 Trump tax cuts (with plenty of money leftover).

So the obvious question is–if this is a win-win for both progressives and conservatives, why couldn’t the federal government (or a state, for that matter) pass the above policies tomorrow? And the obvious reason is: many Republicans in government don’t like spending government money unless it’s for defense or a tax cut. The rhetoric about abortion, for too many elected Republicans, is just rhetoric: it wins elections and gets conservative judges into power, but as for actually helping women avoid abortion in the first place…it doesn’t seem to matter.

I would argue, it’s time for pro-life politicians to put their money where their mouth is. If abortion is an existential problem facing American society, then partner with progressives to pass the policies I listed above. And if it’s not, then stop using it as a cudgel in the culture wars.