We did this because we knew that a safer, more stable world was in the U.S.’s best interest. Even though the percussion of bombs had ceased and the last bullet was fired, America knew that the job wasn’t done if we just left Europe, Japan and other countries in the exact same condition that brought war to the entire globe. We knew that real strength comes when we use our resources to both tear down dictators and build up crumbling infrastructures and fragile economies.  This foresight lead to the economic boom we enjoyed for the next 50 years and made many of our former enemies now our strongest allies.  This is the American legacy proudly portrayed in this latest ad from our friends at the Truman Project.  Watch the powerful ad below and learn more at MakeUsStrong.com.

We’re facing many of the same challenges today that the Greatest Generation did over sixty years ago. Our troops and country are making many sacrifices to root out terrorism across the globe and keep the nation safe. But it isn’t enough to kill bin Laden or track down the Taliban if we ignore the conditions that allowed them to take hold and flourish in the first place. We know what contributes to regional instability and the kind of desperation that erupts in to violence. We know that when people lack access to the basic necessities of food and water, when they are denied the opportunity to get a good education and to make a make a better life for themselves, those with evil intent can prey on the resulting hopelessness and desperation and throw whole regions in to crisis.  We need to do now what we did then, root out terrorists, extremists, and war lords and then help the people left behind rebuild their countries and create economic growth and development that benefits us all.

There are some who want to make foreign aid a bleeding heart charity issue, others who say we can’t afford to be investing in global development and security. But the truth is, we can’t afford not to. And to turn our backs on the conditions of drought, famine, disease, and extreme poverty not only puts our country at great risk, but it is turning out back on everything our nation was built upon. The world is now to dangerous for America to start taking our eye of the ball and retreating from a job undone.

Perhaps the cold spell we’re experiencing in DC originated from a realm much farther down beneath the earth that just froze over today. Glenn Beck just changed his mind on Ayn Rand! This was Beck back in June 2010: “Ayn Rand, you’ve got to love Ayn Rand. She’s great.” And this was Glenn Beck Monday, June 13: “I think Ayn Rand… because she hated religion so much — became a bigot.” He also agreed with his guest who said, “the problem with Ayn Rand, what bothers me… she becomes self centered. She becomes selfish.”

So why the change in heart… or at least in tone? Beck had just watched and was talking about AVN’s “Rand & GOP vs. Jesus” ad that has been getting so much buzz and over 70K views on YouTube last week alone!

And lest you were so shocked by Glenn Beck’s about-face on Rand that you missed the implications of what he said — the political philosopher he is calling a bigot is the same one whose “morality” and “thinking” Rep. Paul Ryan said we need so much more of and the author of the book Sen. Ron Johnson said is his political “foundation.” Do you see why I’ve been saying this could be a game changer?

Lest folks get too excited (or worried) by all this agreement from Glenn Beck with our position, he’s only taking baby steps and hasn’t come fully around. He went on to bash AVN for being liberal and supporting social justice and called us a bunch of other names. And instead of following Conservative Christian icon Chuck Colson’s advice and telling Christian listeners to “stay away” from fans and supporters of Ayn Rand, Beck concluded by warning his listeners not to be taken in by our slick ploys: “They are trying to separate us from each other. Don’t be fooled!” “United we stand, divided we fall.”

So true! United they stand, and divided — with their Christian base’s eyes open to how much they actually disagree with the Tea Party folks GOP leaders are asking them to follow and march beside — they will fall. There are obvious political implications to all of this, and one would think that if Ralph Reed is dedicating an entire conference to covering up divides between the Tea Party and Christian Right, Democrats and Progressives might want to look at why that is. When Tony Perkins urges conservatives to stop “endless squabbling over priorities” and Haley Barbour “implores social conservatives to unite behind the eventual nominee instead of splintering or staying at home,” don’t you think we should be paying attention to this divide they are trying to mend (thanks to Amy Sullivan’s great Twitter feed @SullivanAmy from Ralph Reed’s “Faith and Freedom” Convention for both those quotes)?

But there is another and more important reason to highlight this hypocrisy, which is why AVN took on this issue. The debate around Ayn Rand directly addresses the question of where we are headed as a country and the kind of America we want our kids to grow up in. As a Christian, I think this conversation will lead to a more honest, open, and effective discourse about how we apply faith in the public square. And with that, a better Christian witness that is truer to Christ. But whether someone is part of the Judeo-Christian tradition or not, whether they have faith or not, I think the vast majority of us will agree that Rand’s vision of America where selfishness is the greatest virtue and compassion and love of neighbor are some of the worst evils… this is not the America we want.

In the Bible, we’re taught to look at the “fruits” of a person’s action to decide whether they are to be trusted or not. For many, it’s obvious that the fruits of the Ryan budget are rotten. But what our ad highlights is that it is not just the fruits of the Ryan budget but also its roots that are bad. Ryan’s political inspiration was a deeply troubled and shriveled soul who taught a political philosophy anathema to so much that has made America great and what we aspire to become as a nation. To some voters, they will recognize this by seeing the fruits of her teaching when it serves as the basis for policy. But to others, especially moderates and many in the GOP Christian base, it’ll take them seeing that the “roots” are bad to open their eyes to the problem with the rest. That is why this ad is getting so much attention and why the Right is so worried about this issue. And it’s why we need to get this ad up on TV!

Cross posted from the Huffington Post

I recently wrote on why Democrats and progressives need to take some time studying Ayn Rand to fully understand the political significance of all the GOP leaders lining up to praise her. The GOP has a huge problem if their conservative religious base finds out what Rand really believed and how influential she is within senior GOP circles. Amy Sullivan published a piece in TIME last week highlighting this disconnect and American Values Network’s (AVN) memo on it. There is a great piece in the Louisville Courier-Journal. Rev. Jen Butler at Faith in Public Life (FPL) did a piece last week pointing out the problem Rep. Paul Ryan has trying to reconcile Catholic social teaching and Rand. And FPL affiliate, Faithful America, just put up a Rand vs. Bible website.

But perhaps the most damning of all was the statement put out by Conservative Christian icon, Chuck Colson. Chuck Colson is one of the lions of the Christian right and the head of Prison Fellowship, which, all politics aside, is the best thing coming from the Christian right and a powerful ministry to a segment of society even progressives often ignore. But Colson condemned the strong support of Rand in Republican and conservative circles and urged his followers not only to stay away from the new film of Rand’s book Atlas Shrugged, but to “stay away from anyone who intends to watch the film.” Colson goes on to say Rand and her followers were precisely the types of “cranks” and “crypto-cultists” that his friend Bill Buckley had fought to purge from conservative ranks. He says the “real problem with Rand is the world view her novels and other writings sought to inculcate in her readers… it’s hard to imagine a world view more antithetical to Christianity.”

So what is Colson talking about? A week before his statement, American Values Network released a damning memo with a large number of Rand quotes where she says she is out to destroy the Church and Judeo-Christian morality. She argued that people had to choose between following her teachings or those of Christianity and other religious traditions. Rand said religion was “evil,” called the message of John 3:16 “monstrous,” argued that the weak are beyond love and undeserving of it, that loving your neighbor was immoral and impossible and that she was out to undermine the idea that charity was a moral duty and virtue.

She must have been a real joy at cocktail parties, huh? And that is just a sampling.

So what was the GOP response to this attack on Judeo-Christian and family values, not to mention on Christ himself?

“Ayn Rand, you’ve got to love Ayn Rand. She’s great.” — Glenn Beck

“Rand more than anyone else did a fantastic job of explaining the morality of capitalism, the morality of individualism… It’s that kind of thinking, that kind of writing that is sorely needed right now.” — Author of the GOP Budget, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI)

“I am a fan of Ayn Rand, and I’ve read all her novels.” — Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)

“The brilliant writer and novelist, Ayn Rand.”– Rush Limbaugh

Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) said Atlas Shrugged is his “foundational book.” [click here to read more quotes and find citations].

And despite Colson’s warnings, FOX spent weeks promoting Rand’s new movie and encouraging viewers to go see it… advice most every member of the GOP leadership took to heart!

Hard to reconcile leaders of “God’s Own Party” praising someone who is about as anti Christ as one can get, huh? That is exactly what we thought, and so AVN created a video highlighting exactly that contrast.

You really need to watch the video. Trust me…it’s damning. Tweet it. Like it. Blog it. And spread the word.

This is issue could be a game-changer. It uncovers the heartless GOP and Tea Party wolves who’ve been parading around in sheep’s clothing among the Christian flock, leading them astray. Christians, especially conservative ones, know what to look out for. We need to expose it.

Reposted from the Huffington Post.

It’s a tried and true adage that politics makes for strange bedfellows. Often this can lead to creative collaborations and innovative problem solving that is laudable (and too rare) in politics. But there’s a sordid side to this reality as well, when strange bedfellows cross over into unholy alliances, and intellectual honesty and moral integrity are sacrificed for consolidation of power. That is what is happening right now within certain circles in the GOP with the resurgence in popularity of atheist philosopher and patron saint of selfishness Ayn Rand.

The American Values Network (AVN) just released a video exposing Rand’s teachings and the influence she has had on prominent Republican leaders and conservative pundits. Paul Ryan, author of the Republican budget, cites Rand as the reason he got in to politics and has said that hers is the “kind of thinking that is sorely needed right now.” Sen. Rand Paul frequently cites Rand’s novels in committee hearings. Sen. Ron Johnson has called Atlas Shrugged his “foundation book.” Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh, and Fox News personalities have all also heaped on the praise for her. Here is the problem. For years GOP leaders have purposefully invoked the language of faith and moral values to justify their policies and court religious voters. Ayn Rand’s philosophy stands in direct contradiction to those values and the teachings of Jesus.

It’s not just that Rand is an atheist who considers Christianity’s central narrative of the cross to be “monstrous” (the cross has been called foolishness before and will again). Rand advocates a morality of selfishness and a worldview based on individualism that is fundamentally incompatible with the teachings of Jesus. Where Jesus says, “love your neighbor as you love yourself,” Rand says, “love only those who deserve it.” Where Jesus says, “Give to any that asks of you,” Rand says, “I am challenging the moral code of altruism.” Instead of Jesus’ command to “feed my sheep,” in Rand’s world “men [are] perishing by their attempt to be their brothers’ keeper.” Rand herself has stated in no uncertain terms that one cannot follow her and Christ.

In an attempt to hold together the disparate constituencies of social conservative Christians and libertarian Tea Partiers, Paul Ryan and other Republican leaders have attempted to create an unholy trinity of Ayn Rand, Jesus Christ, and the GOP. But, as the classic children’s song goes, “One of these things is not like the other. One of these things does not belong.” Nothing about the philosophy of Ayn Rand and the teaching of Jesus Christ is like the other. So the GOP must decide – who doesn’t belong? They can’t have both.

Reposted from Recovering Evangelical

Dear President Obama,

I just finished watching your remarks on the death of Osama bin Laden.  I am grateful for your leadership and for everything that you, the national security community, and the brave women and men in uniform do everyday (so much of it unknown) to keep me and my loved ones safe.  Your remarks were an eloquent balance of compassion, strength, equanimity, and understanding.  You brought us back to that dark day that changed our world forever, and reminded us of the better angels of our character that emerged.  But when I think of all that has happened in the world in the nearly ten years that have passed, it is not the morning the towers fell that I return to, but the day after.  It is 9/12 that I long for with the aching question of “what if?” As I remember, I am filled with the yearning that you stand up and ask of us now what was not asked of us then.

Mr. President, you spoke tonight of the compassion and unity we all felt on that day – as Americans, but more importantly, as brothers and sisters with a shared humanity.  We said prayers of lament, gave blood, and embraced one another with steady flowing tears.  But we would have done more.  We would have done anything our leaders asked of us.  If our leaders had told us that in the wake of 9/11, the world is now too dangerous to pursue a path of isolationism, that only love and relationship can overcome fear and hate, we would have joined the Peace Corp at rates to rival army enlistment after the bombing of Pearl Harbor.  If our leaders had told us that it is abject poverty, global hunger, disease, and changing climates that create the conditions of desperation that allow extremism and terrorism to flourish, we would have launched a War on Poverty to dwarf LBJ’s vision.  We would have propelled our country into an initiative for energy independence that would have broken our addiction to oil within ten years – the very point in time where we find ourselves now.  Instead, we were told to go shopping.  Today we bemoan the divisiveness of our politics and apathy toward the political process.  But we didn’t get to this state because unity is too great a challenge to ask of us.  We got here because we have not been asked enough.

As I watch thousands flood Pennsylvania Avenue, press toward Ground Zero, and pour out onto college campuses, I see again that feeling of unity and hope.  It’s the kind of hope you speak of Mr. President, hope that stands in the midst of ruin and dares to say that a different world is possible.  As a person of faith, this is the hope to which I cling.  And I believe that it is the hope that defines my generation.  Millennials, especially those of faith, may reject politics as too divisive, but we are not apathetic.  September 11 shattered our illusions of security and limitless optimism, but in the wreckage was born a burning desire to heal the brokenness of our world.  We are Isaiah in want of a call, Jeremiah with a fire in our bones that we are weary of holding in.   We are ready to serve, but we are in need of leadership.

The world is still a dangerous place.  Though Osama bin Laden may be gone, the conditions that created him are not, and there are still many bent on destruction.  Now is the time to demand more of us, Mr. President.  History has given us an opportunity to return to that 9/12 moment and do things differently.  Tell us to shine our light in the darkness, to not return evil for evil, but overcome evil with good.  Tell us to house the homeless, feed the hungry, free the oppressed, and strengthen the bonds between ourselves and our brothers and sisters the world over.  Do not allow this night to become a fleeting moment.  Use it to make the world a place where not only the body of Osama bin Laden is absent, but the hatred he preached is erased from memory as well.  Demand more of us.  And if you do, you will hear us respond, “Here I am, send me.”

The piece originally appeared on the Huffington Post.

Written with my brother David Sapp, who was one of the ACLU staff attorneys in the meetings that resulted in this policy change.

Imagine that you’re running late to school — maybe you forgot your lunch, maybe you had to help your younger siblings get ready for school, or maybe you just overslept.

You hear the late bell ring just as you’re approaching campus, but you’re met right outside the school gate by a squad of police officers, who detain you for 45 minutes and give you a daytime curfew ticket that carries a $250 fine before letting you go to class. And then you have to miss a full school day several weeks later to go to court to deal with the ticket.

That has been the reality for thousands of students in Los Angeles, which has a daytime curfew that makes it illegal for basically any youth under the age of 18 to be in public while school is in session. Until recently, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) routinely conducted enforcement sweeps around schools first thing in the morning, so that students who were trying to get to school were the ones most likely to be ticketed.

This approach had the perverse effect of slamming the schoolhouse door in the face of students, even when they are doing their best to get to school. Countless students like Christopher Padilla and Rachel Ferreira were stopped for being a few minutes late and then missed additional class time as they were processed and ticketed. And, like every student who receives a citation, they had to miss at least a day of school for the court hearing to resolve the ticket. Some students actually miss several school days because their cases are not resolved at the first hearing. And at least one parent must miss work to accompany the student to each court hearing.

Surprise, surprise — students of color were also cited at rates far outpacing their representation in the population. According to LA school police data, none of the more than 13,000 tickets they issued from 2005 to 2009 went to a white student. Apparently white students are never late for school.

Thankfully, after meeting with advocates from the Community Rights Campaign, Public Counsel, and the ACLU of Southern California, LAPD Chief Charlie Beck recently issued a new policy that makes several important changes in how LAPD will enforce Los Angeles’ daytime curfew, including:

• Coordinated curfew enforcement sweeps cannot occur during the first hour of classes;
• Officers are discouraged from issuing a ticket if a student is clearly headed toward school; and
• Supervisors must identify objective indicators of a pattern of criminal activity by youth before coordinated curfew enforcement sweeps are approved.

Figuring out effective strategies to keep students in school is no simple task. Many factors contribute to low attendance rates, ranging from emotional and mental health problems to hostile school environment and lack of appropriate academic supports, from economic pressures and lack of adequate transportation to family issues. But, as Gara LaMarche recently argued on HuffPost, the lack of a simple solution is no excuse for defaulting to punitive law enforcement tactics, especially when so much data and research confirm that they are not just ineffective, but actually harmful to students.

Instead, the real solution is for law enforcement and school officials to put in hard work to collaborate with the community to figure out the best path forward. To LAPD’s credit, that is what happened here, and it should serve as an example as we all continue working to improve student attendance in LA and around the country.

Cross posted from Huffington Post

ARLINGTON, VA – The American Values Network (AVN) today announced that it received the top national award for best Public Affairs (non-political campaign) TV ad of 2010. AVN’s “Daisy Ad” helped secure passage of the New START Treaty and has now received the gold Pollie from the American Association of Political Consultants.

“Out of the thousands of submissions, AVN’s “Daisy Ad” was named the best,” stated AVN Executive Director, Eric Sapp. “This comes during our first full year of existence so we are indeed honored and especially appreciative of our supporters who make this work possible.”

Also, AVN’s email campaign around New START was recognized as one of the five best political and non-profit email campaigns of the year. AVN won a silver for Best Contrast Public Affairs TV ad for critiquing Senator Lindsay Graham for his flip-flop on climate. And AVN won a bronze for Best Public Affairs Newspaper Ad featuring local NV pastors encouraging Senator Harry Reid to push climate legislation and ensure any bill included funding to help the “least of these” around the world adapt to climate challenges.

Pollies are given each year by the bi-partisan American Association of Political Consultants in recognition of the best political and non-profit ads and campaigns from the previous year.

“These awards make clear that in a year where progressives often struggled, AVN’s unique approach to messaging, mobilization, and advocacy worked,” added AVN President, Burns Strider. “AVN was one of the most recognized non-profits during the 2010 Pollies, an accomplishment all the more significant for a new and small organization. Our commitment to get the facts out to the American public in ways that resonate and connect is working.”

View the “Daisy Ad” at http://americanvaluesnetwork.org/nuclearweapons/ads/

The upcoming McCarthyesque hearings by Rep. King into whether American Muslims are anti-American have been met with cheers from racists/xenophobic elements within the Tea Party/GOP base and with cries of outrage from the left. There is value in the unified voice being lifted by progressives, faith leaders, and others of good will against these hearings, but we also have to realize that Rep. King and the GOP leadership don’t care what we say. It’s important to stand for what is right, but it’s also important to win … something our side often loses track of.

If we want to ensure these sort of hearings and strategy of fear mongering is not repeated, critiques from the left — especially since they tend to sound PC and focus on fairness, interfaith cooperation, and other laudable but ideologically limited messages — are not going to accomplish that goal. King is doing this to appeal to the far right, and the GOP leadership is allowing the hearings to proceed because they energize a part of the GOP base. Attacks from the left only strengthen that response. We won’t stop this hate by telling GOP leaders who benefit from it that they are wrong. We can stop it, however, by preventing the outcome they are hoping for and making them face the danger of unleashing a hateful mob.

If King, Fox, and GOP leaders want a witch hunt, let’s make them defend their own witches too, which have actually been standing a little closer to the flames of late. Red State’s home page lead during CPAC was how CPAC was funded by the Muslim Brotherhood, and basically every single GOP presidential candidate and a bunch of other conservative leaders spoke at that event. After a short statement on how these hearings are a bad idea, Democrats should say that if we’re going to head down this road, we need to hold a uniform standard and force King’s witnesses to answer questions about whether those associations between GOP candidates and “Muslim extremists” are things we should be concerned about. Should we be concerned that basically every candidate from one of our political parties is attending at an event that their side claims is funded by Muslim extremists? What does that say about the integrity of their decision-making and possibly influence of these extremists if they did win the White House?

One would have to craft the question carefully, but it would definitely get the press’ attention, focus coverage on GOP hypocrisy, and mess up their narrative. This would be a lot harder debate for Fox to spin because it’s no longer a clean right vs left where they attack and pick the battle ground and then we charge up the hill into their fortified positions.

It would also turn these anti-Muslim haters on their own. These folks are crazy enough — and the GOP is divided enough — that they very well might indict GOP candidates as being overly-influenced by Muslims. If that happened, the GOP candidates under attack would be forced to defend themselves and side with us on how these hearings are a farce. And if the witnesses tried to cover for the GOP candidates, the only way they could do so would be with arguments that would undermine all their other attacks.

Remember, it’s their people who care about this stuff. So that means complaints by the left do little to change their minds, but it also means that these wackos can do real damage within GOP circles if they set their sights on their own and start demanding more vocal and public support of their racist and xenophobic positions from those leaders. It would put GOP primary candidates in a bind. And whether they went after their own or tried to backtrack and created an easy story for the media about the hypocrisy of these charges, it would make the GOP look bad. And that is how we get the GOP leadership to pull their support or at least think twice about heading down this road in the future. And best case scenario, this line of questioning could lead to a real blood bath on the Right.

I know this approach may make some uncomfortable. But the point is not to use their tactics, but to use their arguments to highlight their hypocrisy and to prevent these tactics (and all the harm they cause) from being used in the future. We need to be going on the offensive. We can make them pay a high price, and we can make their ground troops face the fact that these same arguments Fox and others fire at the left also apply to some of their own leaders whom they respect and know to be “patriots.” That’s how we change minds too … hate wins when it is about an “other.” But once a person sees the hate directed at those they know and relate to, that is where empathy and introspection start to come into play.

To take a note from history, McCarthyism thrived as long as it was gays and liberals and Hollywood actors and producers being blacklisted. McCarthy fell when he turned on the Protestant clergy and military, which middle America related to and knew better. Americans didn’t abandon the witch hunt, despite it being so obviously un-American and unjust, until it was no longer about an enemy and “other” but instead affected people they knew and trusted. That may not be the way we wish things were, but it’s the reality of human nature. We need to accept that and ensure this hearing focuses not just on turban-clad Muslims but force witnesses to either defend CPAC and their GOP leaders or attack them. Either way, we win because the defense of CPAC will undermine all their other arguments, or the attacks will force GOP leaders to join us in condemning this hateful hearing to speak in defense of their own.

Reposted from the Huffington Post

At the end of February, talks are being held in New York for the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), the first ever attempt by countries to come together and set meaningful laws that could dramatically stem the flow of weapons onto the black market. To raise awareness about this treaty, the American Values Network created two ads. The first ad sought to highlight the human toll of illegal arms trade.

The second emphasized the hopes of southern Sudanese pastors for their country and the impact ATT can have on their nascent democracy.

As can be imagined (and as we planned), the first ad has gotten some strong responses. Simply put, the picture of the wailing mother is gut-wrenching. Witnessing raw emotion like that is powerful and strikes a chord deep within each of us, though a discordant one that makes us uncomfortable. It can seem indecent to enter into such a profound and private moment. As such, using this image comes with a responsibility. We’re walking a fine line between between enabling someone’s voice to be heard and falsely manufacturing that voice.

As we wrestled with this responsibility, and the concerns raised by some we showed it to before running, we found ourselves confronted by our own faith-based mission and the nature of Christian witness. Christians are an Easter people, but we live in a Holy Saturday tension: We inhabit the space between the brutality of the cross and the hope of the empty tomb. Therefore, ours is a dual witness. We witness to the promise that has been given to us, but we are also called to witness the suffering of God’s children and bear witness to the places in our world that fall short of God’s will for us. The theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer famously wrote, “only the suffering God can help.” What he meant was that part of what makes the Christian narrative so powerful is that at its center is the crucified Christ, the God who identifies with the suffering in our world. As Christians we are called to both witness Christ’s suffering and witness to others about its meaning. Since we cannot turn a blind eye from Calvary’s cross, we are not allowed to turn a blind eye to unjust suffering in our world.

And while this call forces us to confront hard situations, it is also empowering. Everyday our inboxes fill with pleas from good organizations asking for our support for good causes. It can be overwhelming and so often it seems there isn’t any meaningful way for us to have an impact on situations so much larger than ourselves. But our faith teaches us that to be a witness is no small act.

We’re seeing the power of this act all across the Middle East right now. Protesters in Egypt were able to peaceably topple a 30 year regime simply by saying, “We will no longer let injustice go unmarked.” Their actions were made possible because of what they saw happen in Tunisia. And now protests are spreading to Libya, Iran, Jordan, Bahrain, Yemen. No one can yet see the end of this ripple effect. All because enough people bore witness to injustice and forced a busy world to stop and pay attention. As this experience demonstrates, being a witness can take different forms. For some, it is standing in a crowded square and giving voice to victims of injustice. For others, it is hearing that voice and allowing ourselves to be stirred by it.

That is why we finally decided to make this ad. Because in order for a witness to be effective, it needs ears that are willing to hear and eyes that are willing to see. That is how we take suffering and turn it into a redemptive force in our world. Moral force can trump brute force, but it requires that injustice not be allowed to go unmarked. And it requires that we not shy away from raw pain, whether on the cross or in the eyes of a mother who has just found out her son was killed.

As talks for the ATT get underway, the head of the evangelical churches in Southern Sudan has written a plea to American Christians asking us to join him in a Day of Fasting and Prayer on Feb. 28. He has been joined by the head of all evangelical churches in Africa and a growing chorus around the world calling on those of us who live in peace to witness the consequences of violence. For most of us, the negotiations of an international arms treaty are as far removed from our lives as the genocide in Darfur or the killing fields of Cambodia. But our faith tells us that that does not mean we can remain silent. Our ad is an attempt to stand with the victims of illegal arms trade and say, “your suffering has not gone unmarked; we will be a witness.” That was our intent. We’d love to hear what you think.

“You shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free” (John 8:32).

“What is truth?” Pilate scoffed.  Two thousand years later, still that question rings in our ears.  It is the question with which the church must wrestle and strive to answer as best it can on this earth.  It is in the face of this question that the church is called to proclaim the liberating Gospel of Christ.  But how do we witness to this ancient message in a post-Google world?  How do we give life to the traditions that have been handed down to us in the age of Twitter and Facebook?

The post-Google world presents a number of challenges to the call of the church to proclaim truth.  Much word processor ink has been spilled over how churches should engage people of the technological revolution, what marketing techniques they can use, which new media best reach which demographics.  While examining how the church can best use these new tools is important, there is a more crucial question we must ask:  how are those tools impacting our ability to live out our call in the world?  We live in an age where lies can spread from BlackBerries to Facebook in the click of a track ball and anyone can follow three easy steps to set up a blog from which they spout their version of reality.  In a time when information is readily available to all, truth is becoming harder to unveil.  If the church is to have any hope of living into its call to proclaim the truth, these are the realities we must confront.

What does it mean to speak truth in a world where lies so easily become reality?

While the advent of Google democratized information in profound and wonderful ways, it also opened new avenues for anyone to sow seeds of deceit.  In the age of the 24 hour news cycle and a blogosphere that never sleeps, that which is true all too often gets sacrificed to that which is expedient.  Comedian and satirical prophet Steven Colbert – who famously coined the word “truthiness” – humorously demonstrated the power of the internet to spread falsehood when he took on the information giant Wikipedia.  Introducing the concept “wikiality” – as opposed to reality – Colbert asserted that anything can be true if enough people believe it is (metaphysical nominalism to the extreme).  He then challenged his audience to go to Wikipedia and edit the entry on elephants to state that the elephant population in Africa had tripled in six months.  Devoted fans immediately obeyed and suddenly a resource that millions turn to for information on any number of topics reflected “facts” that were untrue.  Colbert’s stunt was exactly that, a stunt.  And while there may be a few unfortunate people who are now gravely concerned with the growing elephant population, the gimmick was largely harmless.  In too many instances, however, the power of a few to alter “reality” for many is not.  In the post-Google world, lies told in one corner of cyberspace have the power to alter an entire nation’s public discourse.

In August 2010, a poll conducted by the Pew Research Center revealed that nearly 1 in 5 Americans incorrectly believe that President Barack Obama is a Muslim.  Only a third of the population was able to correctly identify his faith as Christianity, while 43% did not know the President’s religion at all.  The number of people who believe the President is a Muslim has increased from 11% in March 2009 up to18%.[1] This is despite the numerous occasions in which the President has spoken very openly about his conversion to Christianity and the impact of his faith on his daily life.  While there are many theories to explain this increase, what is undeniable is that these numbers are the result of persistent whisper campaigns, internet rumors, and outright lies only half-heartedly challenged on network news.  In a post-Google world, all it takes is for one internet story to be picked up by one unscrupulous public personality.  Then like wildfire, innuendo and falsehood spread from blog to Facebook to Twitter to email to radio to tv back to blog and immediately fiction is given an air of legitimacy.

It is not only the President’s faith that has been subject to this level of deliberate misrepresentation.  During the national debate over healthcare reform, prominent political leaders repeatedly and unashamedly bore false witness by saying that the bill would create “death panels” and provide for federal funding of abortions.  As a result, in September 2009 41% of the country incorrectly believed healthcare reform would institute government panels that would determine whether the elderly received medical care.[2] On the issue of climate change, for years scientific research has been ridiculed as hocus pocus and reasonable concerns derided as histrionics.   Any legitimate debate over how best to assess and address the problems we face is stymied when anyone can brush aside facts and create a new reality that better suits their ideological or political ends.  After all, why do we need to worry about the extinction of elephants when their population in Africa tripled in six months?

To be sure, the problem of deliberate misrepresentation and deceit is one our entire society faces, but it presents particular challenges to a body that claims to be the source of truth on earth and a people who are called to witness to it.  The prophet Isaiah proclaimed, “Woe unto those who call evil good and good evil” (Isa. 5:20).  It is easy to believe that in our modern age he would add, “Woe unto those who call lie fact and fact lie.”  Christians should be the first to call for honesty in our public discourse and hold all our leaders accountable to the standard of integrity and truthfulness.  The book of James states that the tongue can be like a small fire that sets a whole forest ablaze.  When we allow spin to distort truth, and ends to justify means our society becomes morally bankrupt.  There are enough honest disagreements over the best policies to benefit our nation and world without the construction of false debates that have been manufactured simply to sow division and increase ratings.

Christians have a duty to be upright and moral in our conduct, to have our “yes” be “yes” and our “no” be “no.” But there is another reason we must be concerned about the ability of the few to alter reality for the many.  Unless we challenge head on a culture that makes truth a relative term, we cannot faithfully witness to the Gospel of Christ.  It is not enough for us to only serve in soup kitchens and shelters, to dig wells and build homes because lies are like a small fire; while we are building homes, they are setting entire villages ablaze and real lives are impacted.  Our culture of deceit meets us in the very places the church is called to serve.  When a congregation of 50 can gain international attention by claiming that burning the Quran is a faithful expression of Christianity, human lives are endangered and the Christian witness is harmed.  When citizens are motivated to make political decisions out of fear and hate, it is the poor and vulnerable who suffer.  When reality becomes so distorted that lies appear facts and evil seems good, we have all lost our way.  Words are not just words.  Unless we directly confront falsehood in our public and private lives it threatens to undermine the church’s entire mission to proclaim Christ in word and deed.

So what is the church to do?  The first step is to be honest ourselves, to not be conformed to this new age in which we live, but to transform it.  In the age of Google, it is impossible to stop those bent on deceit and destruction from spreading their lies.  But the church can be a vanguard against falsehood, boldly speaking out wherever lies threaten us.  We do not need to agree on the particulars of policy, or share ideological leanings to say there is no room for lies or distortions in our public and private discourse.  We must speak words of truth everywhere we can  – from the pulpit, through Facebook, in personal blogs, and on interactive web pages.  We must be willing to call a lie a lie.  For, in a world desperate for the answer to the question “what is truth?” that is the only way we will ever fully be able to share the liberating love of Jesus Christ.

[2] Thrush, Glenn.  “Poll:  41% Believe in Death Panels.”  Politico.  14 September 2009.  Web.  1 October 2010.  http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0909/Poll_41_percent_believe_in_death_panels.html