The panel was entitled, “Common Values: Building Bridges with People of Faith to Win Progressive Change” and was led by the Rev. Dr. Janet Edwards of More Light Presbyterians, Elizabeth Denlinger of Sojourners, the Rev. George Hunsinger of Princeton Theological Seminary, the Rev. Rebecca Voelkel of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force in addition to Mr. Sapp.

In a country where 77 percent of citizens identify as Christians and 80 percent identify as religious, the project of building bridges between people of faith and the progressive movement cannot be neglected.  Mr. Sapp and the other panelists spoke with conference participants about the importance of faith outreach today, how to talk about progressive values in a way that will resonate with communities of faith, and what strategies are most effective in building faith community support for progressive priorities like immigration reform, environmental protection, and national security.  The panel discussion was well-attended and received by a room full of leaders and activists.

Should Christians reject the cross of Jesus Christ? Listen to Glenn Beck and it would be reasonable to think that the answer is yes. In his latest tirade against Christians who devote their lives to justice, Mr. Beck distorted the symbol that stands at the very heart of Christianity by arguing that it is a perversion for victims of oppression to look for liberation from the crucified Christ. This alone is enough to merit a rebuttal — and people such as Jim Wallis have already done an excellent job in responding to Beck’s attacks on the gospel. But given Glenn Beck’s affinity for invoking the Nazis (watch this clip for a comedic take on that particular tendency), his most recent words take on a layer of irony and deserve a specific critique.

Not only are the sufferings of Christ and the message of liberation central to the gospel, but they are at the heart of the theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Christian theologian who was executed for his opposition to Hitler’s regime.  If Beck is going to question the validity of Christians who stand alongside the oppressed in witness to the crucified Christ, then he must answer to the life and death of Bonhoeffer.

While it is not possible to go in to all of Glenn Beck’s convoluted thoughts here, the crux of his arguments rely on reducing Christianity to its individual spiritual components while dismissing any communal or social implications as communist influences. This false dichotomy between the individual and social is exactly what Bonhoeffer reacted against.

Mr. Beck takes exception to the idea that Christianity addresses external social forces of oppression and not just the internal oppression of the soul by sin.  He fails to appreciate how the two are indelibly connected.  We cannot examine sin in our own lives without seeing the sinful institutions that are built upon it.  From his prison cell, Bonhoeffer wrote that Christianity teaches us to “see the great events of world history from below, from the perspective of the outcast, the suspects, the maltreated, the powerless, the oppressed, the reviled — in short, from the perspective of those who suffer.” Trying desperately to understand how so many Christians could remain silent in the face of Nazism, Bonhoeffer came to the conclusion that they had forgotten that Christ came to stand alongside the poor, the vulnerable, the oppressed, and the powerless.

Bonhoeffer took very literally the idea that Christians are called to be the body of Christ in the world and to imitate the life of Christ.  And when he looked to the gospels, the example he saw Jesus give was of a servant who challenged the oppressive social forces around him.  It was this understanding that lead Bonhoeffer to state, “The church is the church only when it exists for others.” Jesus frees us from sin in order that we may have a transformative impact on our social structures here and now, so that we may aid in ushering in the kingdom of God on earth as it is in heaven. For freedom we are set free.  And so, to Bonhoeffer, Christians of good conscience could not remain silent under Hitler’s rule, because the calling of God on their lives was one that compelled them to speak on behalf of the oppressed, to share in the life of Jesus, even to the point of sharing in his suffering and dying.  This last point is one with which Glenn Beck seems particularly uncomfortable.

Responding to the idea that the oppressed can look to Christ for liberation because he too was a victim, Beck said, “Jesus wasn’t a victim, he was a conqueror.”  But it was Bonhoeffer who wrote, “Christ helps us, not by virtue of his omnipotence, but by virtue of his weakness and suffering … only the suffering God can help.” Beck suggests that speaking of Christ’s suffering — and using it to uplift the suffering in our world — somehow negates the empty tomb.  But the cross has been called foolishness and a stumbling block before, and it does not alter the fact that “God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong.” (1 Corinthians 1:27).  Glenn Beck believes that if Jesus were a victim, he would have made “the Jews pay for what they did,” because all who are oppressed only seek retribution. He fails to understand that the cross teaches that liberation from oppression is not about wresting power from one group in order to give it to another, but liberating all people from the sin that comes when anyone seeks to dominate another.

That is why Christ came as a suffering servant, and not a conquering king.  When Bonhoeffer wrote, “only the suffering God can help,” what he meant was that the cross of the crucified Christ serves as a critique of every system of domination.  And as we stand in its shadow, we are convicted to see the places in our own world where the forces of subjugation are at work.  As Christians, we are not ashamed of the cross because it points us to the places in our world where we can stand alongside Christ in the form of our oppressed brothers and sisters and aid in God’s redemptive work.  We do this because we know the empty tomb awaits.  That is what it means to take up our cross and follow him, and that is what Bonhoeffer did.

Glenn Beck is fond of lifting up the Nazis as the preeminent exemplar of evil in our time, and he is right.  But when Christians were called to stand in opposition to Hitler’s regime, it was not the principles of the free market to which they appealed, or an individualistic faith divorced from communal bonds.  The Christian martyrs, like Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who gave their lives in defiance of the Nazis looked to the cruciform Christ who came to proclaim release to the captives and let the oppressed go free.

Cross posted from God’s Politics

Sun Tzu, the famous Chinese tactician said, “Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster. But if you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat.” For Democrats and progressives trying to make sense of the electoral map and early outcomes of this past year, those words explain a lot.

As a movement and a Party we have come a long way since the Kerry years when Democrats stood for a laundry list of policies but could not articulate a core set of principles and values that defined us. We have become better at articulating our values and speaking not just to voters’ heads but to their hearts (where most actually make political decisions). And we’d done a pretty good job of understanding Republicans and their voters during the Bush years–effectively peeling off independent voters and even some more conservative ones in our return to power.

But then came the Tea Party. And we find ourselves facing a new foe who’s harder to understand. Some things are clear. Tea Party members ID as “conservative,” most are registered Republicans (Gallup just announced that 80% self-ID as Republicans), and they are raring to vote. Couple those features with the nastiness and internally incoherent arguments coming from that movement, and many Democrats have simply decide these folks must all be racist, conservative, backward crazies.

But once we dismiss them, we stop trying to truly understand them… and in so doing we have failed to recognize their weakness and have helped strengthen and unify a movement that should be tearing itself apart…because identifying a political opponent is very different from understanding that opponent.

The Eleison Group has been at the fore of outreach and engagement of faith, veteran, and other independent and conservative voters in this country. And so we spend a lot of time in the communities from which the Tea Party is drawing its support. What we are seeing is that the Tea Party is not a rebranded version of the socially and politically conservative right wing of the Republican Party we are used to. It is something different, and it is DEEPLY divided.

Republicans and the media tend to focus on polls that show that 18% – 28% of the country identifies with the Tea Party movement or on the things that unify the movement like being “conservative.” But here are some facts our side doesn’t understand. Polling has also showed that the majority of Tea Party activists do not think government should support any set of moral values or define marriage. And a sizable majority of Tea Party activists are pro-choice. Think about that. Most Tea Party members hold positions that, in our completely un-nuanced political speak, make them “pro-gay and pro-choice.”

How can they hold those positions and be “conservative?” The reason is simple: the Tea Party is largely made up of libertarians who are very different from the big business or Christian right groups that have dominated “conservative” politics for the last few decades. Libertarians don’t want government intruding into their lives with programs or enforcing a moral code.

But where things get interesting is that the Tea Party also includes another group: the Palinesque Christian conservatives. Needless to say, they disagree completely on the gay and abortion issues with their libertarian brethren. But flip things again and where the libertarians are staunchly anti-immigrant, conservative evangelical leaders like the spokesman for the Southern Baptists and head of Liberty University have been outspoken proponents for immigration reform, and have spoken out in strong support for government regulation on the environment.

Perhaps most telling, another poll of activists sought to ID the ideological leaders of the Tea Party by asking who best exemplifies the goals of the Tea Party movement. Support broke down into two clear ideological camps between Palin and Ron Paul. But the divide became even more apparent when activists were asked who they would and would not support for President in 2012. It became clear that the difference is not one of preference but of strongly opposing views. 53% of Tea Party activists said they would not support Palin, and 59% said they would not support Paul if either was the Republican nominee.

Think about the implications…and then think about how poorly our side is developing messaging aimed at these folks that highlights the differences between the factions. Like the initial response to the Republican attempt to co-opt religious voters during the Bush years, we are simply accepting the Republican and conservative talk show narrative that all factions of the Tea Party movement have shared interests and values and then reinforcing it with our actions. We’re keeping the Tea Party united by attacking them as one and failing to highlight these divisions which should be tearing them apart.

We need to be educating the public (and especially Tea Party members) about these differences. We should be proposing legislation and campaigning on policies that force their leaders to take positions on these internally divisive issues and bring them into starker relief. And we need to start bypassing gatekeepers and communicating to foot soldiers in one wing of the Tea Party what the leaders (and members) of the other actually believe. Eleison has proven this tactic works through campaigns to our list of 25 million evangelical voters around the country in this and past cycles, but there are a number of effective ways to directly educate Tea Party members. However we do it, we need to start.

Since the early Reagan years Republicans have managed to hold together an unholy alliance between big business, libertarians, and moderate/conservative faith voters. It’s time we did a better job of knowing our enemy to help ensure the upcoming political battles of ‘10 don’t end in disaster.

Cross Posted from HuffingtonPost.com

America has often been the leader in innovation and the driving force of change throughout our history. One of the pressing issues of our time is climate change, and as South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has said in the past, “We refuse to accept the argument that the United States cannot lead the world in addressing global climate change.” In a political era fraught with extreme partisanship and a 24/7 news cycle contributing to the polarization, it was exciting to see an elected official stand up for what he believes in even if it diverged from his party’s status quo.

Unfortunately, as this new ad by the American Values Network demonstrates, in the last month Sen. Graham has changed his tune. All the reasons Sen. Graham supported climate legislation haven’t changed, just his willingness to stand by them.

Senator Graham recognized the urgency of the climate change issue and the many consequences that will result if we don’t take action. These consequences include threatening our national security, as we send “nearly $800 million a day to sometimes-hostile oil-producing countries.” Failing to do anything about climate change also threatens our economic security, as Graham has pointed out one example of how China is dominating the green economy. Indeed, President Obama recognized this as well, saying in his address from the Oval office last night that “countries like China are investing in clean energy jobs and industries that should be here in America.”

Ultimately, doing something about climate change is a moral imperative, as the negative consequences from doing nothing most negatively affects the poor and will leave our children in a world of trouble. On the other hand, the benefits of passing climate change legislation are numerous.

These include, but are not limited to, the creation of millions of new jobs through investing in renewable energy, sustaining our leadership in the new world economy, improving national security and cleaning up the air to improve environmental and health standards around the world.

Comprehensive and extensive climate change legislation needs to be passed in order to achieve these desired ends. Creating and passing such legislation is going to require politicians to work across the aisle, despite the partisan environment. As Senator Graham said, “We can’t be a nation that always tries and fails… we have to eventually get some hard problem right.” It appeared for some time that Senator Graham was going to be the man who was going to step up and be the leader in the effort to pass this crucial legislation.

Unfortunately, for Graham, and for every American, he has retracted his support for the comprehensive climate change legislation he developed with Senator Kerry and instead has lent his support to what he himself called a “half-assed” energy bill.

America used to be leading the world in innovation and in responding and adapting to how the world is changing. This is because there were men and women who were willing to take the risk to fight for what they believe in, no matter what the consequence. How long will America stay in the dark? How long must we wait for politics to be put aside and for a leader to step up to respond to the climate change crisis?

As Graham said, “We can either be followers or leaders.” What will it be Senator?

(Andrew Robinson, a 2010 Fellow at the American Values Network, contributed in researching and drafting this piece. Robinson, a Hillsborough, NJ native, is a senior at Dickinson College in Carlisle, PA where he is receiving dual degrees in Political Science and Religion.)

Cross Posted from HuffingtonPost.com

The edges of the American political and social landscape are loud right now. Too many Americans have retreated to their corners willing only to hurl names and labels and insults across the great divide to those with opposing opinions.

This is not healthy for our nation. Not the opposing opinions; those are good — but rather the unwillingness to respect and engage people who think differently.

Sarah Palin’s brand of politics, for example, defining some Americans as being from “real America” and others as wherever it is she thinks they are from (a city, perhaps?) is bad for America. Such political warmongering implodes our core values.

Our first calling, in politics, is to protect, honor and leave better our American system. If we tear down the American political process by doing and saying anything to win then we have failed that calling before we ever begin.

I’m all about winning. And I live for hardball politics. I get it naturally. But, dividing and angering voters; displacing the common ground of being American from under their feet in order to win has catastrophic consequences.

The campaign cycle of 2010 has had a tumultuous start. Tea Party libertarians screaming from street corners, unhappy workers taking on incumbents, disgruntled faithful praying that the administration will keep its promises, Birthers repelling from black helicopters into the American mainstream and town hall meetings resembling Three Stooges re-runs have been forever social networked into our national psyche.

Something is askew!

National media, noted bloggers and talking heads have salivated over the trends they have attempted to stamp onto this period of our political history. Somehow Pennsylvania, Arkansas, California and Nevada primary election results are rolled together like a fatboy and passed around the room without regard to individual, regional or state politics. It all means the same thing?

I even read some writers who were angered that Blanche Lincoln had defined herself as an Arkansan and opposed to many of the current Beltway antics. They thought this was wrong — dirty politics.

WTF!?

Folks, we can do better. I’m pretty sure we must.

My father was an old Mississippi cotton farmer and politician, God rest his soul. He was known as Big Daddy by nearly everyone in Mississippi. He stood at 6′7″, weighed in at over 330 pounds and wore a suit, cowboy hat and cowboy boots 7 days a week. Jesse A. “Big Daddy” Strider was Sheriff of Grenada County for 24 years. My uncle has since been sheriff and my oldest brother is currently sheriff.

I realize sometimes, at strange moments, how universal Big Daddy’s lessons and brand of politics were. He lived out and taught a progressive brand of politics that was about doing and not talking. It was about simply taking the right reality and putting it into action.

When I worked for Nancy Pelosi, I saw my father’s politics in her politics all the time. I certainly saw it in Jim Clyburn’s. And when my former boss, Hillary Clinton, says that the best rule of politics is following the Golden Rule then I hear Big Daddy all over again.

I have shared many Big Daddy’s sayings and teachings in the past. They’re worth re-sharing as we enter the 2010 campaign season for the sake of winning and bringing us together:

“A pick up truck beats a Cadillac any day of the week.”

Translation: Don’t get fancy. Don’t get fancy with your words, with your plan or with your attitude. Folks are looking for one of them to lead.

“Every tub has got to sit on its own bottom.”

Translation: In the final analysis the candidate has to carry the day. The candidate is who the voters want to hear from, not outside organizations or talking heads. Only the candidate can ultimately speak for the candidate.

“If you’re driving down the highway and see a car coming toward you in your lane then you’re going to change lanes.”

Translation: Don’t get in the way of your friends. Find a way to settle, before you enter the courtroom of public opinion and elections.

“If you come up on an old, yella, mangy dog and that dog is barking the word “God” then let him bark.

Translation: Don’t challenge, denigrate or dismiss the faith of anyone. A person’s faith represents the core, the essence of who they are. It’s one of their most personal choices. You tear that person down if you tear down their faith. Hell, join them. It can probably do you some good.

“Be careful what you say about someone, you’re probably talking to their cousin.”

Translation: You’re probably talking to their cousin.

“In politics if you take a swing at someone you better be prepared to take one right back.”

Translation: I actually learned this one from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. I share it with candidates and young political operatives all the time as I travel the country. It helps you think down the road to where your decisions are taking you.

“Preach it three times: before you do it, when you’re doing it and after you do it.”

Translation: It’s not just enough to believe it or even do it. People must know where you stand on an issue. They must know your actions. Just doing something without getting the news out is a waste of good time. I run across people running for office all the time who had done good things but no one knows. They’re even indignant that others don’t know of their good work. Well, they lose no matter how much time they waste being indignant. Tell your story and tell it often.

“No one ever had to apologize for something they did not say!”

Translation: Don’t talk if you don’t have too. If it doesn’t help you, remain quite. If you’re unsure if it helps you keep your mouth shut. You must know for certain what you’re saying and why. Don’t take chances saying something you likely can’t fix.

“The person with the khaki pants, sweaty shirt and straw hat driving the old truck is probably on the local Bank Board. The slick guy with the pin stripped suit, silk tie, tasseled shoes and new car probably owes the bank.”

Translation: Big Daddy was never impressed with those who put on airs. He had a lot of things to say about it. Being flashy was artificial to him. He wasn’t against spending money and living good but he was against anyone who seemed to take pleasure in using material items to show off or feel superior to others. We all know that flashiness is a waste of time in politics.

“Take the blame. Be responsible.”

Translation: Don’t pass the buck. Never, NEVER pass the buck. Stand up and take it when things go bad.

“Spread the credit.”

Translation: And when things go good, let people know who all was involved. Share the wealth and it will be returned to you over and over again.

“The Golden Rule is the best rule to follow in politics.”

Translation: Secretary Clinton says this. Treat others as you would like to be treated — that’s the rule, isn’t it? Just imagine if that rule was applied prior to every action, statement and decision in a political campaign.

“The world would rather see a sermon than hear one.”

Translation: This is from Congressman Jim Clyburn who relates a beautiful story about being in college and deciding, against his father’s dreams, he was not going into the ministry. When he took the long drive home and told his preacher father there was a long pause then his father said, “Well, son, the world would rather see a sermon than hear one.” That’s powerful. St. Francis of Assisi said preach often, sometimes use words. Our political system would be much stronger with more action and less talking.

“Don’t kick a person when they’re down.”

Translation: When people are at their lowest, no matter what they did, no matter how bad, it is not the time to pile on. Show them attention, love and support. Let them know they matter. This was Big Daddy’s philosophy not just in politics but for how the inmates were to be treated at his jail. Not your normal take on how a Mississippi Sheriff may run things. And he kept running his jail and Sheriff’s department because his county would give him 70 – 75% of the vote nearly every time he was on the ballot.

“Remember your raising.”

Translation: Cissy Ross Pierce was getting ready to move to Korea with her soldier husband who was being stationed there. There was a big going away party on our farm with all the families of Pea Ridge in attendance. At the end of the party, Big Daddy hugged Cissy and simply said “You remember your raising while you’re over there.” I was a little boy at the time and wasn’t there. But I’ve heard this story a hundred times by Cissy who did indeed live in Korea before she and her family returned home to Mississippi and rejoined our community.

I think it would bode well for all of us if we took time every now and then to remember our raising.

There you have it — Big Daddy’s for the 2010 campaign trail along with a peppering of Clinton, Pelosi and Clyburn. I doubt Big Daddy considered himself a post-modern philosopher, but what he taught and lived is relevant today — relevant to winning and to bringing us together, as one. Both are possible.

Cross posted from HuffingtoPost.com

As financial reform legislation stalls in the Senate for the moment and embattled Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein testifies today before a congressional subcommittee, faith-based organizations and religious leaders are mobilizing for stronger regulation of Wall Street.

Faith, labor and community groups will march through San Francisco’s financial district today to attend Wells Fargo’s annual shareholder meeting. A delegation will address the bank’s top executives and demand changes to corporate practices that have bankrupted families while enriching a privileged few. Tomorrow, faith and labor leaders will gather at Bank of America’s shareholder meeting in Charlotte, N.C. and urge the bank’s leadership to do a better job helping distressed homeowners refinance troubled mortgages.

The Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, a coalition of faith-based investors, recently challenged Citigroup to provide greater transparency about its derivatives trading. The Maryknoll Center on Global Concerns produced a You Tube video and web site – Stop Gambling on Hunger – that shines a spotlight on how Wall Street speculation and greed drove up food prices around the world. Catholic social justice leaders issued statements yesterday highlighting financial reform as an urgent moral issue, and called for prudent financial regulation that protects families from corporate abuse. PICO National Network, made up of faith-based community organizations in 150 cities and 17 states, has launched an Our Money, Our Values campaign with the online advocacy group Faithful America.

The faith community is not a newcomer to this fight. Catholic social teaching, in particular, has long addressed the need for sound economic principles that serve the common good. Amid the global economic collapse of 1931, Pope Pius XI affirmed a positive role for government that tempers the vagaries of the market and stressed the social obligation to pay workers a living wage. Last summer, Pope Benedict XVI issued a timely encyclical that called for a dramatic rethinking of global financial systems and urged “greater social responsibility” on the part of corporate leaders. As Time magazine noted last week, Catholic sisters have invested in Fortune 500 companies to influence shareholder resolutions that spur CEOs to conduct business more ethically. While Ronald Reagan made government the enemy back in the 1980s, U.S. Catholic bishops released Economic Justice for All, a provocative pastoral letter that challenged the Gospel of Free-Market Fundamentalism and ignited heated debate about the moral dimensions of capitalism.

More than 2,500 lobbyists are registered to represent the finance, insurance and real-estate sector dominated by banking interests. As the Washington Post reported on Sunday, many top Wall Street firms have ramped up campaign contributions to lawmakers who oppose financial reform with real teeth. The Business Roundtable has nearly doubled the pace of its lobbying this year compared with 2009, spending at the rate of $25,000 a day during the first quarter. Faith-based organizations and community groups don’t have gilded expense accounts for lobbyists. But they do have the power of the pulpit and a unique ability to inspire social justice movements that challenge conventional wisdom. In this case, an angry and disillusioned public is already on board. About two-thirds of Americans support imposing stricter regulations on the way banks and other financial institutions function, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Last year, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs justified outrageous bonuses paid to his employees by noting to a reporter that banks are “doing God’s work.” I will leave it to that big CEO in the sky to judge whether deliberately profiting from the mortgage meltdown falls under that auspicious category. What I do know is the titans of Wall Street will be hearing from people of faith inspired by the Hebrew prophets, the radical justice of Jesus Christ and a God who sides with the poor and abandoned over kings sitting high on their thrones.

John Gehring is Director of Communications for Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good.

One of the best summaries of the situation on the ground and clearest explanations of our moral responsibility as Americans to do something about it that I’ve read was just written by Robert Keller and published through the Tribune Media Service.

We can’t continue to allow our fellow citizens to die through inaction.  With the recent decision by the US government to vacate its former findings claiming there was not a connection between the sky-rocketing sickness and death on Vieques and the US weapon’s testing, there is now virtual unanimous agreement over the cause of the sickness on the island.  We need to speak out and create the political will that will allow the Obama administration to do the right thing by these people.  As I said earlier, I think Keller provides a wonderful explanation why:

“We owe the residents of the tiny island paradise called Vieques full compensation for the illnesses they are suffering courtesy of the U.S. Navy – and we owe them so much more than that.

We owe them a full accounting of what was done to their Manhattan-sized island, about 10 miles off the coast of Puerto Rico (the island is part of Puerto Rico and hence part of the United States) between 1941 and 2003, when it served as the Navy’s premiere weapons testing site. Bombs were dropped and guns were tested on the eastern portion of the island at least 200 days out of the year for 62 years; an estimated 80 million tons of ordnance pummeled the island’s fragile, tropical ecosystem over that time, contaminating soil, water and air, and bequeathing an array of serious health problems – cancer, birth defects, cirrhosis of the liver and much more – to the island’s 10,000 residents.

We owe them – how can I put this? – a commitment to sanity in the realm of national defense. What kind of defense involves the commission of war crimes against our own citizens? We owe them a national conversation about who we are and what we’ve allowed to happen in the name of national security and global dominance.

Vieques, one of the most beautiful spots I’ve ever visited – its stunning features include what may be the world’s largest bioluminescent bay (microorganisms in the water glow when disturbed, as by swimmers) – was commandeered by the U.S. military as a throwaway site for weapons testing. The Navy occupied three-quarters of the island until 2003; it finally left following four years of protests, which were ignited when an errant bomb killed a civilian security guard in 1999.

The Navy left but, of course, it didn’t really leave. It left behind heavy metal contaminants (arsenic, lead, mercury, cadmium, aluminum); unexploded ordnance (18,700 live shells or bombs that the Navy itself has identified); barrels of unknown, likely toxic substances dumped into the ocean or stored on ships that were deliberately sunk; depleted uranium; Agent Orange; napalm; secrets, lies and a legacy of irresponsibility almost beyond comprehension.

But it’s irresponsibility in the name of national security. This implicates all of us. The story of Vieques demonstrates that there’s nothing peaceful about preparing for war.

This small, fragile island – sometimes called Isla Nena (Puerto Rico’s “little sister”) – along with its impoverished residents, were, like the Downwinders of Utah, Nevada and Idaho, whose health was compromised by nuclear testing, collateral damage of the Cold War and all the pretexts for perpetual war readiness that have succeeded it. Vieques is proof of the flawed vision of militarism, which uses up the world.

The Navy is in the process of cleaning up its mess, but this too is controversial and problematic. It has detonated about a third of the unexploded ordnance it has identified, thus continuing not only the nerve-wracking explosions but the spread of contaminants, a problem exacerbated by the island’s east-to-west prevailing winds, which carry the smoke to the populated portion of the island. In addition, the Navy has proposed to burn hundreds of acres of contaminated vegetation on its former bombing range in order to facilitate the detonation process. This proposal is vehemently opposed by the islanders, who fear the wholesale spread of pollutants in the process.

Meanwhile, the Navy continues to deny that the pollution left over from six decades of weapons testing, including secret experimentation with biological and chemical weapons, is a health hazard to the residents of Vieques. Ignoring inconvenient science is, of course, standard procedure for the military.

Nevertheless, “The pervasiveness of the contamination and the poverty of most of the population leaves Viequenses with no way to escape the poisonous substances,” according to AmericanValuesNetwork.org. “The toxins are all around them in the air they breathe, the water they drink, the soil where they grow crops, and the food they eat. . . . Children on Vieques are 25 percent more likely to die in infancy than those on the main island of Puerto Rico.” There are, the site explains, far higher rates of cancer and other illnesses among the residents, and the island lacks even a clinic, forcing residents to travel for hours by ferry (with unreliable service) and bus to get treatment.

The damage done to this beautiful island can never be fully undone, but perhaps a better future – for all of us – can blossom here. This is the vision of John Eaves, a lawyer whose firm represents, and has filed suits in U.S. District Court on behalf of, 8,500 residents. Though he titled a legal update he recently gave about the island “Paradise Lost,” he told me: “We see (the suits) as an opportunity for a global solution to Vieques.”

The redress the law suits are seeking, he said, include a hospital on the island, better transportation, windmills for economic development and a research center devoted to the study of environmental cleanup – indeed, to the development of a new science of environmental reclamation.

Military-industrial contamination is, of course, a worldwide problem: the nightmare legacy of modern war. How fitting if Vieques should become home to its solution.”

Originally posted by Eric Sapp on Progressive Revival

The pols were all dug in, snug in their stances,
Yet more voters cared to watch Tom Delay’s dances!
Tea party protestors were on message and mad,
With poor families suffering, the partisan bickering was sad.

FOX News was lambasting, O’Reilly cried foul,
Palin and Limbaugh continued to howl:
“Obama, the Muslim, will take Christmas away.
He’s destroying our country, and he’ll make your kids gay.”

And so in this environ, I concluded my year,
Desperately searching for some true Christmas cheer.
What I got was a perk of political victory which came to my door,
An embossed White House invite, to their holiday tour.

“For you and a guest,” the invite did read,
So I called up a friend, and she followed my lead.
With spirits renewed, we headed into the cold,
Then my blackberry buzzed, with further instructions in bold:

“The Secret Service requires much, we’re sorry to say,
So bring your social, a picture, and no aerosol spray.
Plus, the delays may be long, security’s tight,
That reality couple last month really they gave us a fright.”

The Metro was slow, but we arrived at the gate,
Hoping and praying that we were not too late.
The cop looked us over, he patted me down,
“Let me see your ID,” he said with a frown.

As we walked through the gate, angry protestors came by,
And with worries and fears returning, I let out a sigh.
How easy it is, to lose track of what counts,
When the pressures and uncertainty of politics continue to mount.

Now the White House is hardly a manger with hay,
But what happened next gave me hope on that pre-Christmas day.
You see, as I started to walk and wander around,
Off in the distance, I heard the most beautiful sound.

Just down the hall was a glorious chorus,
Singing of Bethlehem’s star, and God’s perfect love for us.
Then I turned to my friend and started to tell her,
“You know, I think that singer up there’s my first cousin Keller!”

Up for Carolina he’d come, a trip with his school.
What were the odds he’d be here today?  Wasn’t it cool?
That we’d meet in the White House after a year gone apart,
And he’d be singing of joy and of hope, with all of his heart?

And then it all hit me at once, it became clear as a bell,
A truth for this Season, upon which we should dwell.
Humans will struggle; we’ll fight and we’ll moan.
The poor will be with us; the suffering will groan.

But we all have been promised, that’s not how the story will end.
And so each Christmas we celebrate, with family and friends
A child in a manger, and peace on this earth
As we join those whom we love, to remember Christ’s birth.

So good tidings to all.  I wish you hope and good cheer,
As we await this coming Christmas, and a bright, hopeful new year!

By:  Eric Sapp, Executive Director

After all, what better gift for the uncle who has everything than a dairy goat that will help feed a family for a year?  And how often are you able to give that special friend a big pile of manure and be thanked for it!?  You can find these ideas and others that will allow you give gifts with special meaning and that will truly change a life (something no striped tie will ever do!):

Oxfam America Unwrapped – http://www.oxfamamericaunwrapped.com/home.php

Heifer International - http://www.heifer.org/site/c.edJRKQNiFiG/b.204586/

Advent Conspiracy – http://www.water.cc/initiatives/adventconspiracy/

And if you do go to the store, take a moment to consider how your purchases can reflect your values.  For instance, you could refuse to buy gifts made in China, which not only has a history of sweatshop labor and religious oppression, but is the main investor in the government responsible for the genocide in Darfur.  Instead you could buy products from companies that are making efforts to be responsible environmental stewards, or (Product) Red merchandise, which supports the fight against AIDS in Africa.

At AVN, our hope is that believers will shine their own light this Christmas season and reclaim Christmas from the commercialism and stress that so often accompanies it.  Please consider forgoing the malls and giving the important witness of gifts that will help others…and which leave you more time and energy for your loved ones.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

Eric Sapp, Executive Director

Rachel Johnson, Programs Director