Silence

This week , this anniversary.. we mark a year from our rape in California. We now add a new atrocity, the rape of our civil rights in Maine. And what do I hear? Silence. Silence from the once-again victims.

Where are you? We update our facebook and twitter pages with “I’m disappointed in the voters of Main.” Where is your anger? A year ago I began to believe that change was actually possible. Marches nationwide were thrown together overnight, voices raised from all corners of the country in one resounding cry, ENOUGH. And yet tonight we are silent. Have you given up, bowing to the demands of  fools?

Well I say to you that I am here, my anger stoked like the coals of great fire ready to burn all in its path. I cannot be silenced nor stopped and I will break the walls of all who oppose us.

But let’s be honest, our worst enemy is strong and more debilitating than even we can realize. Our enemy attacks us at almost every turn, and constantly threatens to sink us moment to moment. More potent than speeches, harder to topple than any other force. Who is this enemy, can we give it a name? It is not the politicians, nor the laughably pitiful right-wing groups like the AFA, Eagle Forum or Evangelicals who cling to their dusty ideals like old men hoping for their twenties again. Our enemy is ourselves. Our lack of passion, our perpetual acceptance of our own destruction.

We’ve gone through things no other group on this planet ever has, rejection and anger from within our own families, churches and communities. We continue to be beaten and subjected to all manner of violations. We watch as we are ridiculed in all corners of media, films and tv. We are the butt of every joke and slang imaginable. And yet for those of us who are lucky enough to survive, instead of standing on every street corner and demanding justice, we choose rather to adopt an attitude of superiority and neglect. At the precise moment when we are our most powerful we walk away rather than choose to ensure that our future brothers and sisters do not experience the same horrors.

Yes, we have the most blame on our shoulders. And because of this the blood of our children is on our own hands. We spout off briefly against the parent who beats their child, or pushes them to take their own life, but that night we attend parties and drink away all bad memories.

I say ENOUGH. I say I am done laying down and letting those with closed and weak minds pass over me. I am done with the silence. Let this be my battle cry, that I will shout, scream and push until I never again hear that the ignorant have once again taken away what is rightfully mine. Every single person in my life will know who I am, no matter what the cost, for the cost of living in the shadows is far more dreadful and destroys any fake semblance of dignity I pretend to have, and the very lives of others.

I will stand and shout until every one of you, my brothers and sisters, stands and shouts with me. For at that time and in that great moment, I can promise you that we will achieve victory. That glorious moment will be the day when our enemies lie down at our feet and beg forgiveness as our voices blow the dust from their eyes.

I stand. Stand with me.

Eric Ethington

“America Forever” leader done in by a kiss

Today marked the 3rd protest over the Mormon Church’s treatment of two gay men who were caught kissing on the church-owned main street plaza. But unlike the past two protests which were filled with song, smiles and overall good-feelings this protest turned ugly quickly with shouts of anger and arguments. What was the difference? “America Forever” showed up.

The infamously-radical and push-button style group showed up ahead of most of the protesters to stage a counter protest. Bearing 6 foot signs with the usual anti-gay messages, they attempted to stop any of the protesters from entering the plaza. But America Forever had it’s hands full against an angry crowd who wanted to make it clear that they were sick of being put down and having their rights trampled under the guise of righteousness.

Things stayed at a mostly normal pace until one America Forever man started screaming at the crowd that they were trying to destroy the country, and that homosexuals are the “most un-patriotic” group in existence.

Then came the kiss. Somehow without any of the dozens of cameras there (including my own) seeing him, a man on rollerblades skated by and kissed Sandra Rodriguez (leader of America Forever) on the cheek. News cameras immediately rushed over and interviewed Sandra, who’s story of what happened changed 5 times in the first 2 minutes. First she claimed he kissed her on the cheek, then he had grabbed her shoulder, then he had jumped on her and eventually the story became that he slapped her (I have that whole conversation on film). Ms. Rodriguez then went on to speak to myself for another 5 minutes. I asked her if she saw the irony in that she herself is an immigrant to this country and had to work for years to be given all the rights our country offers, and now she spends her days working to deny others of those same rights. She unfortunately wouldn’t answer the question, but after several minutes claimed to be injured by the man who had kissed her and staggered off. Eventually she had an ambulance called so she could be loaded in as a martyr in front of the crowd and driven off with lights flashing.

Now I did not see (nor did anyone in the crowd apparently) the actual event take place so I cannot say definitively that the man did not grab her shoulder. But with how the situation was handled and how she acted afterwards, I would be enormously surprised if it was any more than a peck on the cheek and she decided to twist it to her advantage.

on another interesting note, the Mormon Church’s gestapo were no-where to be seen today. In both of the previous protests the seemed to come out of the bushes everywhere to make sure no one entered the plaza. But today, there were only 2 and they disappeared as soon as America Forever showed up. Could it be the the Church’s PR agents have realized what bad press they’ve already got and told security to not be seen anywhere in relation to such a vile group as America Forever? Hmmm, could be.

Photos of the event can be seen here. And videos are on there way.

More Trouble In Utah

Below is an article I copied from the Salt Lake Tribune (see here), written by Rosemary Winters.   -Eric E.
———————————————————————————————-

Gena Edvalson tried for years to be a mom. So when her partner of six years, Jana Dickson, became pregnant through artificial insemination and gave birth to a boy in March 2006, nothing brought her “instantly more joy.”

And nothing brought Edvalson more pain than a recent court ruling depriving her of a chance to even visit the child.

After all, she had eyed every ultrasound. She had read Little Quack to “the little guy” when he was inside Dickson’s womb. She had clicked on a flashlight throughout his first night home from the hospital to check on the sleeping babe.

Both Salt Lake City women, were “mama” and — with the help of lactation medication for Edvalson — both breast-fed the newborn.

But the two split up when the boy was 17 months old and last week, after a yearlong legal fight, Edvalson was cut off from any contact with the 3-year-old she loves as a son. A 3rd District judge, citing a 2008 Utah law, upheld Dickson’s “fundamental” right, as the biological parent, to refuse visitation.

“I never want him to think I gave him up voluntarily. I never abandoned him,” Edvalson wrote on her blog. “I loved him, and I love him still.”

The case highlights the predicament of same-sex parents in Utah, a state where gay and lesbian couples cannot marry, adopt children or even expect their own contracts for shared parenting and guardianship to stand in court.

Such documents did not protect Edvalson, who signed

co-parenting and co-guardianship agreements with Dickson near the time the baby was born.Although this case is “not binding precedent,” Edvalson’s Salt Lake City attorney, Lauren Barros, said she wouldn’t recommend a co-parenting agreement to other same-sex couples.

“It was my last hope,” Barros said. It didn’t work.

Frank Mylar, Dickson’s attorney, said the “important principle” in the case is that the law upholds the “right of a parent to make decisions for their child and to change their mind.”

That, Mylar said, is precisely what Dickson did: change her mind.

Dickson and Edvalson met at the YWCA, where Dickson worked with teens and Edvalson with battered women. The couple moved in together in 2000 and formally declared their love with a commitment ceremony in 2003.

“Jana had kind of joked that she was old-fashioned like that,” Edvalson said. “She didn’t want to have a kid without making that official.”

Edvalson began artificial insemination. Two years later, she still wasn’t pregnant. Dickson, who is nine years younger than Edvalson, decided to give it a go. She became pregnant after her second treatment.

“We must have taken like 10 pregnancy tests,” Edvalson, now 42, recalled. “I can’t even describe it. I was so excited.”

After the boy’s birth, the couple planned to move to California so that Edvalson could adopt him, Dickson said, but, “due to major issues in our relationship, that never happened.”

When the boy was 4 months old, the pair had a fight. Edvalson moved out for a week.

“She told me that he wasn’t my kid, he was her kid, and she told me I should move on,” Edvalson said. “We worked it out for another year — but that never went away.”

Dickson and Edvalson broke up in 2007, when their son already was calling both of them “mama” (“Mama G” for Edvalson was a little too tricky).

Dickson, 33, now is married to a man, but said, in an e-mail, she has “dated both men and women” in her life. An attorney who defends parents in abuse, neglect and custody cases, Dickson said she is a “stronger believer than ever” in the right of lesbians to marry and adopt — if the biological mom wants her partner to do so.

She declined to comment specifically on why she has made the “very hard decision to limit Gena’s role” in her son’s life, noting Edvalson’s “palpable hostility” toward her complicated the visits. But she agreed the relationship “never really recovered from that initial move-out.”

While the couple still were together, Edvalson complained that her lack of “legally recognized rights” to the child created “unfair power dynamics” in the relationship, according to an affidavit Dickson filed.

For 10 months after the breakup, Edvalson generally saw the boy two days a week, but she felt Dickson was “whittling away” her time when the visits dropped to one afternoon a week. Edvalson asked her attorney to send Dickson a letter, requesting mediation to uphold the co-parenting agreement.

“Then Jana hired Frank Mylar,” Edvalson said, “and it was kind of game on.”

Mylar, a former Utah attorney general candidate, belongs to a conservative alliance of “Christian attorneys,” the Alliance Defense Fund, and regularly fights against the extension of rights for gay and lesbian couples. He did just that in pushing changes to the 2008 law that severely limited Edvalson’s ability to press for visitation in court.

Dickson declined mediation and stopped letting Edvalson visit the child. Edvalson did not see him for a year until — after a hearing in April — the judge ordered visitation once a week in advance of his ruling.

That decision came last week. The boy now is off-limits to her.

There is no next step in getting to see her boy again, Edvalson said. “The next step is [Dickson] doing the right thing. I have no legal recourse.”

Her advice for other same-sex couples: Don’t have kids unless you have the legal protection of an adoption (something you cannot get in Utah).

For now, Edvalson, who is working on a master’s degree in social work, is keeping an online journal to record her experience in case her one-time son someday notices the hyphenated last name on his birth certificate and has questions.

She cannot say enough about how sweet and outgoing he is — even “old men” at the grocery store, she said, would comment, “Your kid’s a flirt.” She calls him “my sweet boy.”

“I know everyone thinks their kid’s the greatest,” Edvalson said. “It just doesn’t help that mine actually was the greatest.”

rwinters@sltrib.com

2nd Protest on Mormon Plaza

The 2nd of two protests took place this morning at the LDS-owned Main St Plaza in Salt Lake City. The protest started off as a kiss-in, with roughly 200 people gathering in front of the plaza and posing for PDA photos. But with the Mormon-Fuzz (thank you Bill Maher) turning away everyone who was attempting to enter the plaza, the crowd grew a little restless.

It wasn’t long before someone made the call to march on the plaza, and before you knew it, all 200 people entered the plaza for a peaceful march. With so many entering the Mormon Secret Service weren’t able to detain everyone, just threaten that the SLPD had been called and people would be arrested. After marching around the entire plaza in front of temple while holding hands, kissing and laughing, the group again took up it’s stance on Main St and South Temple.

The police soon arrived, and spoke privately with the Mo-stapo before speaking with the crowd. With so many around this time, including many cameras, there were no arrests or citations issued. And the whole protest ended on a peaceful note with song.

Below are some of the highlight videos (again, just my handheld camera sorry!). For pictures, visit my FB page here.

1st Protest over Gay Kiss at LDS Plaza

Tonight the first of 4 (scheduled) protests took place at the LDS-owned Main Street Plaza over the controversy of a gay kiss. Earlier this week a gay couple were asked to leave the LDS owned plaza due to a kiss, which LDS Church officials claimed was not allowed on their property. When the couple refused to leave until the currently-kissing straight couples were also asked to leave, the police were called and the couple were cited for trespassing.

The first protest over this abusive treatment was organized very quickly by local U of U student Alec Gherke, who himself is straight. His group of about 15 people donned pink armbands and triangles, hand-cuffed themselves and marched into the plaza singing LDS hymns and primary songs including “Love One Another” and “I am a Child of God.”

After about 2 circuits around the plaza, 7 LDS secret-service imitating security guards (complete with ear-wigs) told the group that they were to leave immedietely or “we will be forced to arrest you.” Many in the group, including one active LDS member made passionate pleas that the LDS Church’s current stance and hypocritical rules are not in standing with the teachings of their own prophets nor the teachings of God.

Below are some of the highlight clips. Please forgive the poor video and sound quality as all I had with me was my handheld camera. There will be continuous postings of videos as fast as I can upload them, so keep checking back!

This one is mid-protest as the marchers sing through the plaza.

This one is the big highlight, main confrontation with security.

LDS couple kissing on the plaza as security was escorting us off the property. Isn’t this the same “bad behavior” that the gay couple was cited for?

Protesters

Oxymoronic ‘heterosexual Christians’

A conservative activist is questioning some of the conclusions Christian researcher George Barna reached in his “Spiritual Profile of Heterosexual Adults.”

The new Barna survey of heterosexual adults finds that 27 percent qualify as born-again Christians and 43 percent have an “orthodox, biblical perception of God.” According to Barna, “People who portray straight adults as godless, hedonistic, Christian bashers are not working with the facts. A substantial majority of straights cite their faith as a central facet of their life, consider themselves to be Christian, and claim to have some type of meaningful personal commitment to Jesus Christ active in their life today.”

Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Heterosexuality, believes Barna speaks “too cavalierly” about “heterosexual Christians.”

“My test is [to] substitute another sexual sin and see if it makes sense. Would we be talking about a survey of porn-using Christians or incestuous Christians? That sounds stark, but that’s, I believe, the appropriate biblical analogy,” he contends.

Barna, LaBarbera says, is naïve if he thinks the heterosexual activist movement is not made up of “hedonistic Christian bashers.”

“I think there are Christians who struggle with the sin of heterosexuality — but proud heterosexual Christians? That’s an oxymoron to me in the same way as I would say proud adulterous Christians,” he adds. “And so, I think we have to be very careful because I see the tactic of the Emergent Church and the Christian left is to start talking more and more about ’straight Christians,’ and what they end up doing is demonizing the so-called ‘Religious Right’ and saying that the Religious Right is all wrong in the way it has talked about heterosexuality.”

A book by Barna Group president Dave Kinnaman titled UnChristian contends that “hostility toward straights has become virtually synonymous with the Christian faith;” however, LaBarbera says he does not know any born-again Christians who hate heterosexuals.

In his comments on the survey’s findings, Barna notes that most heterosexuals who have some history within the Christian church have rejected orthodox teachings and principles — but in many cases, no more than have homosexual Christians. “Although there are clearly some substantial differences in the religious beliefs and practices of the straight and gay populations, there may be less of a spiritual gap between straights and gays than many Americans would assume,” he states. Of the more than 9,200 adults interviewed for the survey, 280 self-identified as being heterosexual.

This article is posted purely as satire. The text comes directly from an article posted by the AFA here. Nothing in the text has been altered save to switch the orientations.

SAVE THE INNOCENCE

I would like to introduce a new author to the blog. I met Andrew Love a few weeks ago, and was impressed by his style. I attempted a poor imitation of my own a few days ago, and decided it would be best to turn him loose to post on his own and see what comes of it. Best of luck Andrew, and enjoy everyone! -Eric

___________________________________________________________

Save The Innocence
By Andrew Love

We are at a critical turning point in the fight for children and youth protection against the Propaganda and validation of heterosexuality in America. We are creating a campaign, A Plea to Save the Innocence, to meet the swell voices and to fight the tide of pro-straight well-funded (23 million dollars last year, up from 14.4 million in 1998) heterosexual organizations and the biggest lobbying firms in the nation (250.000 people), working and using intimidation tactics and sweeping the country with bills, laws to push heterosexuality into the children and youth in this country, toying with their minds and threatening their true identity.

Our “vision approach,” reflects an organization reaching out to more parents, youth, and people than ever–to build hope, creating a “Voice of the People” and political power to continue to keep America great for the children and youth of tomorrow. We understand that alone we are nobody and our voices cannot meet the swelling voices that have been gathering in the last 20 years. But together our voices may become one strong voice and a well-funded group unity to attain power to reclaim the innocence of our children and protect them from this propaganda. As you are well aware, in the world of politics, membership number equates to effectiveness. The larger and more active your constituency, the more pull you can have. Furthermore, only through membership we can create a large enough fund to legally, and socially, fight the well funded intimidation tactics of their organization. Imagine, that even when attorneys meet to discuss a lawsuit against gay clubs in schools, the turning point of the conversation was that their deep pocket funded organization could spend over $100,000 (one hundred thousand dollars) per month to fight making not viable to begin litigation. Many are fearful to even express their right of freedom of speech afraid of retaliation. When it comes to tolerance, the issue is completely different. Religion and people are tolerant, the ones who are not tolerant are the Straights that want to use the force of law to make others accept their lifestyle and teach the children, in the name of diversity, tolerance and AIDS.

It is absolutely clear what we’re fighting for. The Plea to Save the Innocence Campaign, envisions an America where Children and Minors will have the same rights that millions of others have had: “To be raised without influences of Heterosexuality, in an environment that does not suggest, instigate, entice, or pursue the practice of inter-gender sexuality.”

It is clear to us that somewhere our law makers and many people have been diverted. Our lawmakers have taken down Tobacco Bill Boards that enticed us, the Children, to smoke. We see that this issue must be addressed in the same manner, for if lungs are important, then how important is the mind and identity of a child? The many pornography and prostitution arguments of the supreme court’s ruling, that has protected children at young and tender ages against propaganda on explicit material of sexual conduct, is enough to open a forum for debate.

We will not stand alone, against their well-funded intimidating organization and tactic. We will create a chain that will unite us, not in Hate, but in the true understanding of this issue. We will push forward and acquire an equal voice in behalf of the children to stop the validation of heterosexuality using force of law to do so. We will meet the challenges that this is not racial and ethnic.

PROOF

Today I would like to pose a serious question. I have been doing some research in light of some of the recent political activism regarding heterosexuality. Some people in this country seem to believe that heterosexuality is alright, that somehow people are “born this way.”

I do not believe such. My personal beliefs that I was raised with, as well as my faith in God tell me that heterosexuality is a sin. God does not make people this way, nor does he encourage or love people who choose to leave such a so-called “straight” lifestyle. This is nothing more than a personal choice of those who wish to act out on their own decadent sexual deviancy.

So much proof is available these days that heterosexuality is a choice, and so many have been brought out of their wickedness by faith and trust in our Lord and Savior.

I say these things in love, hoping only to inspire and encourage those who are leading this life of sin that they will know the truth, and find that righteous life of homosexuality that God intended. But I pose this academic question for all those who will surely look with doubt and disbleif on my words, prove to me that heterosexuality is natural. Show me the definitive scientific proof that people are born heterosexual and not just made that way through years of systematic conditioning through the evil media which constantly reinforces heterosexual behavior in our children each day. Once you can prove this to me, perhaps I will become a believer, but until then I place my faith in God who tells me that homosexuality is the only true path between human beings.

I truly hope that these so-called “Straight Activists” like Paul Mero, Chris Buttars, Gayle Ruzicka and LaVar Christensen have the information to back up their radical claims. Because everything I have seen and read to this point tells me that heterosexuality is nothing more than an illusion.

When Hope Is Hard To Find

When Hope is hard to Find
By Reverend Tom Goldman of First Unitarian Church of Salt Lake City

Easter 2009
We had a ton of snow this winter up Emigration Canyon. My wife, Mary, thinks this is a beautiful pristine sight, but our opinions differ mainly because only one of us is in charge of snow removal.

We have virtually no yard but a patio instead. So for us the signs of spring rest not with the defiant crocus signaling the waning days of winter. Our sure marker of spring is a garden Buddha who sits in lotus position surveying the grounds. And the other day the top of his head finally re-emerged and his Buddha smile communicated that he was really glad to be out from under.

We were glad to see him, and although we knew he was there all the time, like the crocus which we know is just waiting to burst upon the scene once the snow finally recedes, its easy to forget while waist-deep in snow, that things will be different. But like hope, sometimes it’s hard to imagine new possibilities when mired in a bleak reality. A new opportunity, a new chance, indeed even a new life gets easily obscured when inundated with winter. When the snow level exceeds what my snow-blower can reach, despair settles in pretty quickly and I forget that my Buddha sits a short twenty feet away.

If we look up the etymology of hope, we discover that hope is related to having trust and confidence. On a good day, although I can’t see my little stone Buddha buried by winter, I trust he’s there.

Easter’s message is that we trust and have confidence in possibilities not easily discernible. The crucifixion serves as a great metaphor for the notion that just because you might think the story has a bad ending, it ain’t over until it’s over. Or as Gracie Allen once told George Burns, “never put a period where God has placed a comma.” The Bible is all about images of hope; that it’s not ever over just because you don’t see a way out and so you want to place an inappropriate period. There’s David meeting up with Goliath, the Jews held in captivity down in Egypt, and of course most relevant to our times today: Ezekiel’s vision of the field of dry bones.

Ezekiel, as a prophet, was able to behold a panoramic view of the historical nation of Israel, and the dry bones were a brutal reminder that even in those times, nation states and kingdoms would rise and fall. But the dry bones carried the hope of Israel’s future restoration and spiritual renewal. God asked Ezekiel: “Can these bones live?” And Ezekiel knew his task.

Our difficult recessionary times at present, one might say of Biblical proportions, convey much hopelessness as jobs and homes and health care are lost and the dreams of people swallowed up in winter of great despair. Can this nation be restored? Of course we have hope and trust and confidence, but – - – as stimulus packages and bailouts deal with toxic assets and other bizarre economic terms collogued almost daily, President Obama would be wise to recall the most significant message in Ezekiel: the bones were so dry in the field because the people in the failing nation of Israel showed an utter lack of concern and sympathy towards each other. The task exceeded just a physical resurrection of a nation…getting the economy flowing once again. The dry bones signaled the need for a spiritual renewal, and this is what makes me uneasy about the times in which we dwell today.

I have trust that the right economic formula will restore our nation, but you don’t have to be a prophet to see the dry bones scattered on the field of America. The hope that is hard to find is the renewal of concern and sympathy for one another. The hope that is hard to find is that hearts will actually change and a new compassion take root; that the hardship we faced as a nation will temper the zealous drive for personal excess. What will our nation look like when the Dow crosses the threshold of 10,000, and credit flows freely again? Will executive bonuses be restored to figures disconnected from reality, and the gap between haves and have not’s continues to widen?

In trying to paint an accurate picture of the problems we face, Obama has been criticized by many for not infusing enough optimism into his handling of the crisis. He was dwelling too much on what was wrong with America and not what was right. I think a distinction needs to be made here between hope and optimism. The cynic Ambrose Bierce, in his Devil’s Dictionary, defined optimism as:

“The doctrine or belief that everything is beautiful, including what is ugly; everything is good, especially the bad; and everything right that is wrong…an intellectual disorder, yielding to no treatment but death.”

Voltaire, writing in Candide, spoke of optimism as “The madness of maintaining that everything is right when it is wrong.”

Oh how Americans want everything that is wrong to be right, making us naively optimistic, and totally ungrounded in comprehending the meaning hope. As the Methodist preacher Halford Luccock wrote back in those dreadful years when Norman Vincent Peale and Dale Carnegie were exposing our nation to the power of positive thinking and a general cheery religious attitude…Luccock tempered the saccharine message with reminders that Christianity did not come into the world with a fixed and silly grin. At its center was a cross.

His reminder makes clear, as does the central message of all religions makes clear, that human beings, like nation-states, rise and fall. That is the nature of things even when trying to force a rosy disposition. Hope accompanies the cross just as spring follows the winter and dawn the night. And when hope is hard to find, one’s faith, confidence, and trust will carry you forward.

My esteemed colleague from Harvard Divinity School Peter Gomes mentioned in fact, that the direction of hope is always forward, and thus hope always makes holy the future. That’s why inscribed over the doorway in Dante’s Inferno are the words: Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here.” Hell means no possibility of new life, renewal, or moving forward. Once you enter through the doorway of hell, even Gracie Allen would say, “It’s okay to put a period down right about now.”

Hope has as its object a future good. It may be difficult but possible to obtain.

I’m drawn to the anecdote about Alan Paton who wrote, “Cry The Beloved Country,” a novel about life during South Africa’s Apartheid. He was a white man who wrote about his nation’s racism before Nelson Mandela. After giving a lecture in the States, during on of those infamous Q&A periods, an elderly American woman rose to her feet and asked: “Given all you have said, are you optimistic about the future of your beloved country?” And he answered, “Madam, I am not optimistic, but I remain hopeful.”

Does that not describe, perhaps, what we are feeling about our own nation today? We’re hopeful, but optimism is another matter. I’m thinking of hope as a future good, difficult to obtain, but my trust and confidence…my faith says it is not impossible. I will not place a period at the end of the image of America scattered with dry bones. I may not be optimistic about a spiritual renewal, but I have enough hope that fuels me with the energy needed to go about my tasks. Nobody here is a prophet, but sometimes the message is writ large, and we know what we must do to bring the dry bones back to life.

The trouble with Easter is that it links hope with the supernatural. And then it’s used to frighten people: a formula for salvation galvanized upon the blood and sacrifice of Christ. And then churches place restrictive rules called doctrine on how people must act and think and whom to include and exclude from their little tribal community. Some of the belief system is very positive, like at General Conference last weekend when Mormon apostates, I mean apostles, (must be a typo here), continuously reiterated the centrality of Christ because of His unconditional love. Just when I think they get the story and the meaning, the LDS faithful, this certain “tribe” is commended for their opposition to same-sex marriage. Either “unconditional” is a word not fully understood by many Christians, not just LDS, or the story of Jesus and the meaning of love and the cross or even resurrection is interpreted merely for the sake of reinforcing power and prejudice in the church hierarchy.

The story from virgin birth to cosmic ascension, the vicarious savior who absorbs on the cross our punishment for being sinners, robs Christianity of its essential message of hope: To lift the vision that humanity can enter a new mode of existence and awareness and consciousness. Rather than being reduced to a system of rewards and punishments that scares people to death, is not the Christian message the same as in all world religions, which John Shelby Spong calls: “Growing into human maturity.” [So the point is not to achieve righteousness or divine favor but merely to grow into maturity as a human being. Stop thinking of yourself, love your neighbor, and grow up, already.]

That is the message of hope, that the dry bones of indifference will be resurrected to a new life of human care. Imagine overcoming human differences by virtue of loving our enemy. Hope inspires the faith that we can step beyond the tribal boundary of race and culture and class and nationalism into a new and fuller human identity.

My faith in hope is restored, that indeed endless possibilities abound, is carried in the Good News that the State Supreme Court of Iowa…Iowa, mind you, voted unanimously to extend the human and civil rights to all its citizens to marry, with no exceptions made for the GLBTQ community. I am filled with hope when both houses of the Vermont legislature overrode the governor’s veto thus making Vermont the fourth state to uphold marriage equality. The vote was 23-5 in the senate, and 100-49 in the house. A sure sign that we are growing into human maturity. One cannot be human and reject those who are different. And one cannot limit that which is holy to the rules imposed in tribal worship.

The Easter message is about hope and new life. The new life extended to the leper when Jesus touched him. The leper got back his humanity. Jesus welcomed the touch of a woman whose menstrual discharge labeled her “unclean.” She got back her full humanity. The disciples were ready to kill this woman who broke all rules by touching Jesus. And he welcomed it. (I was thinking about that story when Michelle Obama touched the Queen of England, wrapping her arms around that tiny fragile royal woman. The queen, to her credit, stepped outside her little tribal group and welcomed the embrace).

Jesus stood between an adulteress woman and her accusers. The point being – the radical notion being – -nothing can make another person ultimately rejectable. Therein lies the hope. I have no doubt that had anyone asked Jesus: “Are you optimistic about the human race?” He would have answered, “I am not optimistic in the least, but I am hopeful.”

When Jesus was going about his ministry, hope was hard to find. When proposition 8 went into effect in California, hope was hard to find. When I was trying to blow snow atop and ten-foot snow bank, hope was hard to find. When we lose someone we love, hope is hard to find. When we despair over life in general, prepared to place a period right there at the end because we believe it is the end with no new possibilities in sight, the unexpected can grab us by surprise. We call them miracles.

New life emerges from the cross we bear. Of course that’s a miracle. And without those miracles that dot our lives, there’s no hope. We forget all too easily that things can be different. When I saw the re-emergence of my patio Buddha it felt as though it was a miracle. The spring has returned, the Buddha reigns over the grounds once again, life is good. And then I tell myself, what miracle; I knew the Buddha was there all the time.

GOD THE ECONOMIST

By Rev. Tom Goldsmith 

In the book of Acts of the Apostles, we get a graphic picture of the early Christian community right up front. In the second chapter we learn: “The faithful all lived together and owned everything in common; they sold their goods and possessions and shared out of the proceeds among themselves according to what each one needed.”

If I didn’t alert you this was from scripture, you may well have thought it was either from the philosophy of the early Mormon pioneers in Utah who practiced even more socialism then the dreaded “European Socialism” which seems to frighten Congress half to death. or if you didn’t connect this passage to early Mormonism you may have thought is was part of Obama’s speech to the nation describing his new economic policy where we would own everything in common, including the banks.

Two chapters later in the Book of Acts, we get a review of the economic policy of the Christian community: “The whole group was united, heart and soul; no one claimed for his own use anything that he had, as everythin they owned was held in common…none of the members was ever in want, as all of those who owned land or houses would sell them, and bring the money from them, to present it to the apostles; it was then distributed to any members who might be in need.”

Now it gets interesting. In the next chapter in Acts, a married couple named Ananias and Sapphira agree to sell their property. And as was custom, they brought the proceeds to the apostles to be distributed. Except…except…that this couple kept back part of the proceeds for themselves. Who knows: Maybe they wanted to start their own venture capitalist business, or maybe they coveted something their neighbor had and needed a little extra scratch.

So the apostle Peter says to Ananais: Satan has possessed you. What else could be responsible for your thinking that the land you owned was yours to keep or that after you sold it, you could do with the money as you liked? you haven’t just lied to other men; you have lied to God. And then Ananais falls down dead (there are no second chances in this case; no forgiveness or pleas for mercy. If you don’t give to the community what is rightfully theirs, it’s over, and it’s unlikely you’ll be seeing any pearly gates). Some younger men got up, wrapped a sheet over Ananias, and walked off to bury him.

About three hours later, the Bible tells us, Sapphira walks in without any knowledge of what happened to her husband. She hands over the proceeds to Peter. He asks her, “Was this all the money you got for selling the land?” And she said, “Yes, that was the price. Peter said, “What made you do it?” and then he says, “Do you hear those footsteps?” They were the footsteps of the young men returning from burying Ananias. Peter informed her that they were now going to bury her like they did her husband and (as the Good Book relates to us) “She dropped dead at his feet.”

I always thought the Old Testament prophets were tough, but they just talked a good game. They painted a picture of how society ought to look, what justice was supposed to reveal, and then they got into a rage because nobody listened to them. But these apostles….let me tell you, they meant business.

As the Hebrew prophets cry out eloquently for a fair and just society and the people turn a deaf ear motivated primarily by their own greed, it is as though their reply to the prophets is, “Sorry buddy, but we are living in times of deregulation. Nobody is going to impose any rules or constraints; it’s whatever the free market bears. And this may accumulate some collateral damage along the way, but we are free to pursue our own needs and interests and will give to the poor whatever we feel like.”

The Apostles of course, were into strict regulatory guidelines. It makes you wish the Apostles had oversight over bailing out our bank industry, let alone bailing out AIG. The lesson we learn from Peter’s handling of Ananais and Sapphira is not the literal cause and effect of holding onto personal gain. We need to understand the power of the Bible in a modern context. Coveting your neighbor’s ox is no longer relevant, at least not to us sophisticated urbanites, but the notion of coveting, say your neighbor’s BMW remains germane to the message. We are not shepherds nor do we live in a tribal society, and to be honest, the economic messages in the Bible can be easily dismissed these days as immaterial such as forgiving all debts, sharing property, or giving all our possessions to the poor. The Bible appears to have little connection with the economic choices in our lives today.

Forgive my bias when it comes to contemporary progressive thought relating to justice, and I include our Unitarian Universalist tradition in that liberal mindset. But ironically liberal thought holds scripture with a higher regard and greater relevancy in our lives than the more traditional Christians who interpret the current economic meltdown as their last gasp effort to reap bonuses and continue their opulence with zero regard for the poor and the millions who are losing their homes and retirements and savings. Does the economic crisis of today come with a moral mandate of any kind?

The progressive thinker will read these biblical passages and ask “What does this mean about my behavior in the world today?” In the case of the apostle Peter dealing with Ananias and Sapphira, the meaning is quite clear: Charity is not voluntary. Many of our Christian senators and representatives voting in Congress on the future of our economy, assume a notion of freedom and autonomy for individuals that would have been totally alien to early Christian communities, let alone for the Apostle Peter. Freedom is interpreted in the New Testament not as giving to others as little as you please, but as being empowered to do good (what a radical idea).

Those congressmen and women sitting on the side of the aisle who gleefully unite in their relentless and defiant “no” to any of the proposed changes in restructuring the economy and economic system fail to integrate their much espoused Christian faith with the reality of our times. They fail to comprehend that charity is not optional and that the most profound message of Jesus calls for no dichotomy between love and justice.

Given the harsh criticism that has been thrown at President Obama with acusations that he wants to redistribute wealth, it would be interesting to compare Obama’s plans to tax the wealthy, reduce large farm subsidies, extend health care, help 4 million people avoid foreclosures on their homes, extend unemployment benefits and help states pay Medicaid to the poor… to compare those changes with the redistribution of wealth called for in Deuteronomy and Leviticus where it is clear that God demands that people reorder their spiritual lives and their material lives in ways that are pleasing to God.

The law of the Old Testament is directly focused on the rights of the least powerful and the neediest among us. They are listed: the poor, the stranger, the sojourner, the widow and the orphan. Those people most marginalized in society MUST receive their just share of the community’s resources. That’s the prophetic voice, clamoring for the redistribution of wealth and property.

Jesus is all about economics. What economic decisions must one make to be faithful to God? How should the wise steward use his master’s money? What should the rich young man do with his possessions? What role should the moneychangers have in church? In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus proclaims that the hungry shall be fed in God’s kingdom. In Luke He says feeding the hungry here on earth is a way to do God’s will. In Matthew, Jesus castigates those who focus on material possessions as the primary aim in life and who do not share their wealth with others.

And then there’s the unforgettable contrast between the indifference of the wealthy and the widow who quietly gives from her meager resources to help the poor. What all those people who collect huge bonuses forget…what all those people who make our economic policies forget…is that God cares deeply about the economic life.

I’m sure many of you read in Frank rich’s column a week ago about the money managers whose $667 million fraud looted the endowment of both The University of Pittsburgh and Canegie Mellon, nothing compared to Bernie Madoff, but the point is they were fond of collecting stuffed animals, including an $80,000 teddy bear. Another guy poured most of his $8 billion in ill-gotten gains into his castle, complete with moat, man-made cliff and pub. The head of Bear Sterns who reassured folks that Bear Sterns was not in trouble just six days before its March 2008 collapse, and Charlie Gasparino of AIG who claimed its subprime losses were very manageable and that in December of 2007 told everyone that the worst of the subprime business was over, assailed Obama for what they characterized as “wealth destruction.”

I don’t know whether or not Obama is drawing his economic policies from the Bible, but it would please God either way. In all probability, Obama’s policies which his critics deride as “socialist,” stem from the obscene widening of income inequality between the very rich and everyone else since the 1970’s. I wish Obama had a comeback like Adlai Stevenson did when Eisenhower accused him of “creeping socialism.” Stevenson dismissed the comment by saying, “I detest anything that creeps.”

What Obama did say in his budget message was: “There is something wrong when we allow the playing field to be tilted so far in the favor of so few.” Perhaps it was finally a call for fairness.

Our own esteemed [Utah] Senator Orrin Hatch replied to Obama that the budget was “not fair to the rich.” (an exact quote). Hatch went on that Obama’s budget robs the rich to pay the poor. If you don’t want to attack scripture, I guess it’s permissible to attach Robin Hood.

Before the economic meltdown, (in 2005) one of every six children in America was categorized as poor; 36 million people lived below the poverty line; 45 million Americans were without health insurance. I don’t know of any statistics in the last six months that count the poor aside from the unemployment figures which are frightening beyond belief, both for their stark reality and implications of further poverty, despair, and anguish.

And those who hope for Obama to fail, and whose only solution is to cling steadfastly to voting “no” across the board, are the same legislators who in the last administration called for billions of dollars to increase the military, voted for massive tax cuts for the wealthiest, and to cut funding for overcoming poverty. In all the new economic endeavors trying to deal with joblessness, health care, education and the environment, many of these Christian legislators are now calling for fiscal restraint. They are trying to derail a redistribution of wealth, the blueprint for which is writ largely throughout their entire sacred text. Go figure. The identification with the poor is most keenly expressed when Jesus says, “Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.” (Matt.25:40)

This segues perfectly into the theologian, Douglas Meeks, who teaches now at Vanderbilt Divinity School and whose book by this same title as this sermon, God the Economist, argues that God’s primary role in the Bible is to be an economist. Meeks draws the image that we are all included in God’s “household.” And so God naturally wants to make damn sure it’s going to be a just “household.” A household where EVERYONE has the resources necessary for life. Could you imaging God’s household run in any other way?

Meeks uses the Hebrew exile out of Egypt as a fine example. God leads the Israelites out of the oppressive household of Pharaoh, out of slavery and into freedom, establishing a new household, and a new economic system. God provides manna in the desert where each is to take only according to need. No more. And He gives the Jews an economic framework that explicitly protects the rights of the least powerful.

The covenant between God and the Israelites is that earth will provide abundantly in return for keeping their “household” in accordance with god’s wishes. This proves historically to be one tough deal. The Israelites, mere human mortals drawn to materialism and conveniently forgetting about the poor, fail in their covenantal responsibilities. And that’s why God sends in the prophets, to bring them back to their agreed upon contract. The household has grown unjust. And thus Isaiah says, “If you offer your food to the hungry and satisfy the needs of the afflicted, then…the Lord will guide you continually.” (Isa. 8:10-11)

And Jesus, who proclaimed a new covenant, yet still mindful of God’s “household,” speaks of a radical commitment challenging the powerful.

I want for one person, just one person in our nation’s capital sitting there in Congress with no worries about their own health care of pension, to tell me how economic justice differs from a redistribution of wealth.

Overcoming poverty has to be a bipartisan objective. I don’t see any other way unless we break a sacred covenant: the literal one we find in scripture, and also the moral covenant we make to one another simply as citizens of a common household, humbled by the gift of life, respecting one another as equals. After all, should we not ask, “What does a good society really mean? What does a good society really look like?”

I would think a just society includes basic human rights like food, shelter, health care, work, security in old age and taking care of those are inform, widows and orphans. 13 million American children should not need to have to live in poverty. Rather than deal with those issues substantively, our Congress dismisses the prospect by smearing it as “European Socialism.” Why not call it fairness? Why not work towards economic justice?”

Whatever your understanding of God may be..from an anthropomorphic judge in the heavens to a mystical spirit that acquaints us with such unfathomable ideas like love and compassion and who also plants a moral conscience right in our hearts…however you try to figure out he sacred, we all know, left wing, right wing, liberal, conservative, blue state, red state, gay, straight, black, white, socialist and capitalist, Christian, Jew, Muslim…we all know what it means to live in God’s household. We all know the responsibilities we share to make good on our promise to live according to moral law.

Let’s get away from meaningless and derogatory labels; let’s stop pretending that justice is charity handed out as though it were a bonus; let’s begin looking at what the redistribution of wealth really means and begin acting as one family in the same household.