Park51 -- a symbol of American values
FPL held a press teleconference today featuring national security experts and diverse faith leaders making a compelling argument in favor of the Park51 Islamic Center and mosque near Ground Zero: the project not only has the legal right to move forward, it should be encouraged to do so because it would promote national security and embody American values of pluralism, religious liberty and interfaith cooperation.
Speakers included national security experts Matthew Alexander, a former high-level military interrogator in Iraq, and Andrew Bacevich, a nationally recognized expert on the military and international relations, as well as powerful voices (and strong allies!) from the faith community - Simon Greer of Jewish Funds for Justice, Lisa Sharon Harper of New York Faith & Justice, and David Gushee of the New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good. (Full-length audio of the call is here.) Individually and as a group, they made a compelling case in support of the Park51 Islamic Center, and gave political opportunists who have used fear-mongering rhetoric to stoke opposition to the mosque the stinging rebuke they deserve. Quotes from each of the speakers are after the jump:
Words of enduring wisdom
Stories this week about the demagoguery surrounding the Cordoba House Islamic Center and the widespread, mistaken belief that President Obama is a Muslim reminded of Colin Powell's forceful words about then-Senator Obama, anti-Muslim bigotry, and Muslim Americans shortly before the 2008 election in an appearance on Meet the Press:
And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, "He's a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists." This is not the way we should be doing it in America.
I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards-Purple Heart, Bronze Star-showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn't have a Christian cross, it didn't have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life. Now, we have got to stop polarizing ourself in this way.
His words are as poignant and relevant today as they were two years ago.
Taking Aim at Military Spending: Can Deficit Hawks Cut the Fat?
Peace and justice activists from diverse religious traditions have decried bloated military budgets for decades. Now it seems their prophetic witness is picking up some traction in Washington. The National Catholic Reporter has an important front page story looking at this development.
As Capitol Hill is consumed by a fierce and often fact-free debate over our growing national debt, two public officials have forged an unlikely partnership. Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Ron Paul (R-Texas), are calling for "substantial reductions in the projected level of American military spending as part of future deficit reduction efforts." The subject of military spending "has been glaringly absent from public debate," they wrote in a recent statement. "Yet the Pentagon budget for 2010 is $693 billion -- more than all other discretionary spending programs combined."
David Robinson, Executive Director of Pax Christi USA, the leading national Catholic peace group, thinks it's about time deficit hawks start applying common sense to this issue.
"The deficit is going to be the battleground, budget-wise, in Congress for the next 18 months, and having the wisdom to include defense spending is going to be critical," he told NCR. Deficit reduction measures normally fall hardest "on the poor and vulnerable," Robinson said, "and people hurting now are going to be hurt further if military spending is not folded into the deficit reduction debate. By introducing defense spending -- which I would argue is the real culprit behind deficit spending -- poor people will take less of a hit."
For those tempted to dismiss these arguments as mere peacenik propaganda, remember it was Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Supreme Commander of Allied Forces in World War II, who in 1961 presciently warned about the growing dangers of a "military industrial complex." Recently, even Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has spoken out against excessive spending on unnecessary weapons systems and Andrew Bacevich, a professor of international relations at Boston University and retired U.S. Army Colonel, has emerged as a trenchant critic of how Democrats and Republicans alike have eagerly fed the machinery of war with a remarkably bipartisan spirit. His most recent book is aptly titled: "Washington Rules: America's Path to Permanent War." Check him out on the Rachel Maddow Show last night:
In Memoriam
A few Christmases ago, my grandpa finally told me the story of how he earned his Bronze Star on a cold day in Normandy during World War II. After matter-of-factly saying that he didn't think his actions on that particular day merited the award, he speculated that his commanding officer cited him for the distinction to make amends for not doing so after he took action to save fellow soldiers during a Nazi ambush a week earlier.
Then he shifted into recounting how his best friend in his unit was killed by enemy fire on Christmas Eve, 1944. His sadness was understated but, suddenly, deep. Christmas Eve was grandpa's Memorial Day, far removed from the barbecues and parades that usher in summer.
I told the story about the Bronze Star at grandpa's wake on a cold day in North Dakota this January, and people laughed reverently. The next day we buried him in his dress uniform. He was 90. The Bronze Star and the other medals were displayed next to the guest book at the entrance of the funeral parlor. The servicemen who folded the American flag and gave it to my grandmother looked pained, like this solemn ritual gets no easier after years of repetition, as more of their fellows join the ranks of the commemorated.
Today is my first Memorial Day without my grandpa, my living link to World War II. This holiday has always been more than a picnic to me, but now more than ever it feels like a remembrance.
I've always believed that faith, patriotism and militarism are not all one and the same, and that commingling them can be dangerous. But even those of us who are most hesitant to support war can have deep connections with men and women who die in the field, and with those who live to come home and honor the fallen.
Rebukes of Hazard
If the sirens and hubbub outside our office are any indication, the issue of nuclear weapons has rolled into town in a big way-- today, President Obama kicked off the 47-nation nuclear summit here in Washington, DC, with heads of state from across the globe.
And this week's buzz around nuclear weapons builds on last April's "Palm Sunday speech" in Prague, where President Obama pledged to work towards a world without nuclear weapons, as well as last week's signing of the START treaty between President Obama and Russian President Medvedev and the release of President Obama's Nuclear Posture Review.
Former Secretary of State (under President Reagan) George Shultz and former Secretary of Defense (under President Clinton) William Cohen penned an op-ed in yesterday's New York Times, supporting the START treaty and advising ways for the U.S. to work with Russia to ensure we move even closer to a world without nuclear weapons.
Incidentally, George Shultz has been advocating nuclear abolition for quite some time, and last April, he teamed up with the Two Futures Project to help advance that cause. The Two Futures Project, also supported by prominent evangelical faith leaders, such as Chuck Colson, Bill Hybels, and Shane Claiborne, is gaining more and more attention as a faithful voice for the abolition of nuclear weapons. As Dan blogged about last week, they earned some ink around last week's activity around nukes, and they can now add the dubious distinction of being attacked by the Family Research Council, which claims 2FP is neglecting the need to work for peace through strength.... wait, what? Yes, you read that right-- "peace through strength." Sure is an odd rendering of turning swords into plowshares. (On another odd note, FRC accuses the Two Futures Project of "flawed theology," and in the very next sentence analogizes nuclear weapons as "God's instrument to deal with wrongdoers.")
The broad-based evangelical support for the Two Futures Project belies FRC's claims that they're left-wing partisans to be dismissed. In fact, many of the endorsers of 2FP are quite conservative on a host of political and social issues, and their desire to rid the world of nuclear weapons stems from theological conviction, not a partisan agenda.
A step toward making nukes history
When President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the START Treaty this week -- which places additional limits on the circumstance under which use of nuclear weapons is authorized and reduces nuclear weapons stockpiles by 1/3 -- faith leaders responded with strong statements of support, which received ample news coverage. Religion and Ethics Newsweekly and the Washington Post's On Faith section placed the treaty in the context of the faith community's decades-long efforts to abolish nuclear weapons, citing Catholic, Evangelical, Methodist, and Presbyterian advocacy on the issue. Catholic News Service reported that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops endorsed the pact, and outlets such as Associated Baptist Press, World Magazine, Religion News Service and the Christian Post reported support for the treaty among evangelical leaders such as Rich Cizik, Joel Hunter, and Two Futures Project executive director Rev. Tyler Wigg-Stevenson. (A USA Today article on the treaty also included a quote from Tyler.) The breadth of coverage speaks to the faith community's dedication to this issue.
And it's not just statements. People of faith are organizing and pushing for a action, as well. Today, Faithful America circulated a petition from True Majority calling for "a legally binding verifiable agreement, including all nations, to eliminate nuclear weapons by a date certain."
Fall Into the God Gap
Earlier this week, the Washington Post reported on a study released by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs addressing the role of religion in foreign policy and the need to close the 'God Gap' in foreign policy.
"Religion," the task force says, "is pivotal to the fate" of such nations as Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Iraq, Iran, Nigeria and Yemen, all vital to U.S. national and global security.
Some specific recommendations cited:
-- Adding religion to the training and continuing education of all foreign service officers, diplomats and other key diplomatic, military and economic officials.
-- Empowering government departments and agencies to engage local and regional religious communities where they are central players in the promotion of human rights and peace, as well as the delivery of health care and other forms of assistance.
-- Address and clarify the role of religious freedom in U.S. foreign policy...some parts of the world -- the Middle East, China, Russia and India, for example -- are particularly sensitive to the U.S. government's emphasis on religious freedom and see it as a form of imperialism.
Needless to say, responses to the report have run the gamut, but a particular strand seems to have developed that caught my eye: blog posts such as "Foreign policy + religion = recipe for disaster" and "Please, no religion in foreign policy formation".
Stark lines drawn between 'religious freedom' and the inclusion of God strike me as precisely the problem the report is addressing (the report itself is 109 pages long and I admit to not having read it), and it echoes debates in domestic politics, which often pit conservative Christianity against no role for religion in politics. It goes to show that these issues and debates don't - and shouldn't - stop at the water's edge.
New study shows Muslim community's anti-terrorism efforts
Buried among the flood of terrorism news that's come out over the last couple of days is a new study showing that American Muslims have effectively worked to stop radicalization in their communities.
The researchers, from Duke University and the University of North Carolina, found that
...it is the Muslim-American communities themselves who play a large role in keeping the number of radicalized members low through their own practices...Leaders and Muslim-American organizations denounce violent acts, for instance, in messages that have weight within communities.
In addition, such communities often self-police -- confronting those who express radical ideology or support for terrorism and communicating concerns about radical individuals to authorities. Some Muslim-Americans have adopted programs for youth to help identify those who react inappropriately to controversial issues so they can undergo counseling and education, the researchers said.
The study also found that "since 9/11, there has been increased tension among Muslim-Americans about their acceptance in mainstream American society," and that they perceive anti-Muslim bias in the media and discrimination in security and counterterrorism initiatives.
When demagogues openly call for racial profiling, it's important to remember not only that such measures violate American principles of due process, but also that they single out communities that are already doing a great deal to stop terrorism and facing religion-based discrimination and hostility. It isn't right, and it isn't smart.
Faith Leaders on Afghanistan
As President Obama, military leaders, and Congress consider next steps in Afghanistan, the faith community has begun weighing in from the blogosphere. While opinions range widely from acknowledging the brokenness of the world and occasional need for war to urging President Obama simply to get out of Afghanistan, another strain has begun to emerge in the debate: the need for an alternative approach.
Brian McLaren speaks to this most directly in a letter to President Obama:
I believe now, as you and I both did [when President Bush was preparing for war in Iraq], that war is not the answer. Violence breeds violence, and as Dr. King said, you can murder a murderer, but you can't murder murder. As the apostle Paul said, evil must be overcome with good, which means that violence and hate must be overcome with justice and love, not more of the same.
He goes on to propose the use of military spending on development and peace work.
Along these lines, Lisa Schirch at Sojourners asks: "So what would real security in Afghanistan look like? Instead of military engagement, it would focus on: development... diplomacy... [and] democracy."
Last week, Rabbi Michael Lerner added his thoughts in the San Francisco Chronicle and Tikkun:
It's time to abandon the strategy of global domination (military, economic or cultural) and seek homeland security through an ethos of generosity and genuine caring for the well-being of everyone on the planet and of the planet itself.First step: When President Obama comes to San Francisco's St. Francis Hotel on Tuesday, tell him to just say "no" to the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and instead launch a domestic and global Marshall Plan with the G-20 countries, each one dedicating 1 to 2 percent of its gross domestic product each year for the next 20 years, to once and for all end global and domestic poverty, homelessness, hunger, inadequate education, inadequate health care, and to save the global environment. This is what the Bible means when it instructs us: I have set before you life and death - choose life!
In a recent Associated Baptist Press op-ed, David Gushee echoed similar sentiments:
Somehow, I don't think that a ramping up of the bloody, costly war in Afghanistan is exactly "change we can believe in." It is instead more of the same American imperialistic hubris mixed with fear and fiscal improvidence. We cannot afford this quest for perfect security. We would instead do better to improve our homeland-security capacities and use our intelligence services and diplomatic corps rather than stretching our military and budget to exhaustion.
Getting nukes on the agenda
Recently, we helped coordinate the media launch of the Two Futures Project, an anti-nukes initiative led by a young evangelical pastor, Tyler Wigg Stevenson, and backed by an impressive cadre of big-names (from Bill Hybels to Chuck Colson to Reagan-era Secretary of State George Shultz to Jim Wallis).
The first reaction we got from friends and reporters upon hearing about this project was usually something along the lines of, "Nuclear weapons...? That's so 80's." Or "I wonder why these people care about that?"
On the one hand, it seems like something that those on the left and right could easily rally around--just look at the list of supporters. They certainly transcend political party affiliation. Tyler, the founder and director of the project has said, "I think it can appeal to the most conservative just-war theorist, I think it can appeal to the most radical pacifist."
But on the other hand, in order to get support, you have to get people to care and to take the issue seriously. And nukes just aren't on most people's radars nowadays. We live in a post-Cold War world and for the most part, choose to ignore the highly dangerous Cold War leftovers that are nuclear weapons.
In order to combat this apathy and disinterest around the issue, we worked with Tyler to put together a show-stopping team of speakers for the media launch. George Shultz kicked off the call... and how many people can talk about first-hand experiences at meetings between Reagan and Gorbachev? Tyler then introduced the project, and Lynne Hybels, Jonathan Merritt, Rob Bell, and Shane Claiborne all talked from their various Christian vantage points, providing their own set of reasons for supporting the project. They were all compelling speakers and we were able to entice reporters to write about the story by showcasing such an impressive slate of spokespeople.
Keep reading!
Young Christian Leaders Mobilize to Eliminate Nuclear Weapons
The Two Futures Project, a new initiative dedicated to the global elimination of nuclear weapons, launched at the Q conference in Austin, Texas, today. It's led by young evangelicals (founder Tyler Wigg-Stevenson is a 31-year-old preacher from Nashville, and Rob Bell [38] and Shane Claiborne [33] are endorsers), endorsed by national security experts and prominent faith leaders, and brings a new chapter and new blood to the decades-long faith-based movement to rid the world of nuclear weapons.
Two Futures will mobilize Christians online and in schools and churches across the country, in partnership with organizations like Ted Turner and Sen. Sam Nunn's Nuclear Threat Initiative. The Two Futures website urges visitors to sign a statement of conviction in support of the abolition of nuclear weapons and to contact President Obama and their elected representatives to express their support for this goal. And Tyler Wigg-Stevenson will meet with VP Joe Biden's staff next month (Biden is tasked with shepherding ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.) So this more than a statement -- it's a mobilization.
Check back later for audio from the launch press conference, and click here to learn more about the project.
Obama's interview with Al-Arabiya
What Eboo said
A humble observation on Gaza
What Does Benazir Bhutto's Murder Mean?
Here are three reflections that get past the debate over which presidential candidates will benefit from Benazir Bhutto's death and instead focus on what the tragedy means for Pakistan and Islam.
The Rev. Deb Haffner shares a message from a friend in Pakistan:
Only after her assassination have we come to realize just how many of our hopes were pinned on Benazir, her presence and leadership of the only mainstream party that consistently speaks of the federation, of the poor, the peasants, the workers; spoke of equality for all, especially the minorities and women. The one party with supporters until now across a deeply divided and troubled country, who gave us hope that, maybe – just maybe we could turn this nightmare around, if elections were held and if they were not entirely rigged, and if we received some breathing space…so many if's and still we dared to hope.
And Brian McLaren writes:
Churches fight human trafficking
On CBS' The Early Show Not For Sale campaign's David Batstone talks about the religion-based abolition movement's efforts to stop modern slavery.
According to a relatively long article in Sunday's WaPo, the abolition movement achieves highly levels of bi-partisan support in Congress.Throughout the 1990s, evangelicals and other Christians grew increasingly concerned about international human rights, fueled by religious persecution in Sudan and other countries. They were also rediscovering a tradition of social reform dating to when Christians fought the slave trade of an earlier era.
Monks lead Burmese change through peace
The UK's Independent reports: In a remarkable show of defiance Burmese monks and nuns yesterday led 20,000 demonstrators through Rangoon in the largest protest against the country's military regime for almost two decades.
A day after hundreds of monks had walked to the house of the imprisoned democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, thousands more returned to the streets in a show of numbers not seen since the pro-democracy marches of 1988. Back then the regime responded with a brutal crackdown, killing thousands of civilians and monks. While yesterday's march ended peacefully, it was clear that the authorities had increased security in the city and the monks and the other marchers were refused access to Ms Suu Kyi's house when they tried to repeat Saturday's extraordinary meeting.
The long march to peace
Just as 9/11 served as a starting pistol for the race to war in Iraq, the sixth anniversary of that abominable day should mark the start of a decisive leg of the long march to peace. Regardless of whether the surge ends, President Bush will prolong this war for as long as we let him.
Religious groups continue to sound a prophetic call for peace. An Interfaith fast, organized by numerous Muslim, Jewish and Christian groups, will occur on October 8, and you can register to organize a fast in your community, or find one near you, at the Interfaith Fast web site.
Christian Peace Witness, which held an inspiring religious service and march for peace on the war's fourth anniversary, is organizing peace vigils across the country, which will continue occur continually between now and the fourth anniversary of the Iraq war in April. You can register to lead a vigil in your community at their web site.
If peace were easy, we would have it by now. Ending the war will continue to take tremendous effort on numerous fronts, and the movement's spiritual health will be necessary for its ultimate success. Interfaith Fast and Christian Peace Witness can provide this nourishment. Please take part.
Jennifer Butler: After 9/11, choosing love over fear
Even as I know 9/11 has been used politically to whip up fear; I will admit it: I am afraid. I find my fear, and therefore my courage intensified by the confluence of 9/11/01 with first day of my married life with Glenn, who was moving to New York City that day to join me, arriving to find us walled off from one another. My child was conceived on the eve of the global marches opposing the war—the largest global protest in history. This morning I went over our catastrophe plan again, and we told each other with a kiss, “have a good day.”
Today the spiritual struggle for me is what it was in 2001. In 2001, as NPR informed me of the first plane striking the twin towers, I calmly alerted my interns at our office across from the United Nations. As the NPR station went dead (it was in one of the towers), I turned on TV to monitor events. As more planes hit and rumors spread the prayer, “Where there is fear, let me sow…” I couldn’t complete the sentence in the turmoil, so I made up the words, but it helped. A few days later I found St Francis’ prayer in Union Square Park in a makeshift vigil surrounded by people of all nationalities and faiths, many wrapped in American flags.
My tradition tells me that I am to act out of love, not fear. From “Fear not!” to “Perfect love casts out fear,” my marching orders are clear. We often think of fear and love solely as uncontrollable feelings. But they are also choices. I have a choice every day and every hour: be guided by fear, which leads to more violence, or choose hope and love, which leads to creative solutions.
Are these naïve words; empty clichés? “God gave us not a spirit of fear, but a spirit of power, love and self-discipline.” The opposite of fear is power. The opposite of fear is self-discipline and love. This is what I learn from my staff, from all of you, when you choose to sit down with those who supposedly are our enemies and hammer solutions. When you forge coalitions to retake your communities from intolerance, greed, fear mongering, corruption, abuse of power. When we cross divides, speak the truth, sacrifice comfort to do what is right. And when we push our national leaders to do the same.Rev. Jennifer Butler is Executive Director of Faith in Public Life
September 11, General Petraeus, and the Failed Moral Vision of a Nation
Why we were still sitting there in a Capitol Hill hearing room in the midst of chaos and what was then still a rumor that the nation had been attacked, I don’t know. We had already seen the images on television of the twin towers going down, the Pentagon could be seen smoldering in the distance from the front steps of the Cannon House Office building as we entered.
No one in Washington on that day knew what to do, where to go, or how to think or even talk about how the world would be made different by what we were experiencing. All we knew was that it would be time for this nation to act. The only question was how and when.
Fast forward to September 10, 2007. Yesterday’s testimony before the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs Committee by General Petraeus, our top commander in Iraq, indicated, more than anything, that the world has changed very little since 9/11. Vulnerable people (then New Yorkers and DC Pentagon workers, now Iraqis) are paying for the sins of an overmilitarized world with their lives. As the General sat and provided cover for a President, a Congress, and a nation mired in an unpopular war that still has no purpose or direction, I truly felt that this sideshow is about as far from a tribute to the lives lost on 9/11 as one could imagine.
Iran in the crosshairs: How will the faith community respond?
Saddam Hussein could then be expected to seek domination of the entire Middle East, take control of a great portion of the world's energy supplies, directly threaten America's friends throughout the region and subject the United States or any other nation to nuclear blackmail.Many religious activists and leaders courageously and prophetically opposed the war, but on the whole the American religious community's reaction was tepid and mixed. In March 2003, a Pew Forums on Religion and Public Life survey reported thatSimply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction; there is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies and against us. And there is no doubt that his aggressive regional ambitions will lead him into future confrontations with his neighbors, confrontations that will involve both the weapons he has today and the ones he will continue to develop with his oil wealth...
We are, after all, dealing with the same dictator who shoots at American and British pilots in the no-fly zone on a regular basis, the same dictator who dispatched a team of assassins to murder former President Bush as he traveled abroad, the same dictator who invaded Iran and Kuwait and has fired ballistic missiles at Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel, the same dictator who has been on a State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism for better than two decades.
In the face of such a threat, we must indeed proceed with care, deliberation and consultation with our allies. I know our president very well. I've worked beside him as he directed our response to the events of 9/11. I know that he will proceed cautiously and deliberately to consider all possible options to deal with the threat that an Iraq ruled by Saddam Hussein represents.
Nearly six-in-ten (57%) of those who regularly attend religious services say their clergy has spoken about the prospect of war with Iraq. But just a fifth (21%) say their priest or minister has taken a position on the issue. When churchgoers do hear a point of view, it mostly comports with the national stance of their religious faith: white Catholics and African-Americans are hearing anti-war messages, while white evangelical Protestants are getting a pro-war point of view.
Five years later -- almost to the day -- President Bush made a disturbingly reminiscent case for war with Iran:
The theft of the future -- the relationship between the market, religion and social change
This Paul Hawken talk is about an hour long which will take a commitment to watch, but it will be well-worth your time if you're interested in the long view of what's going on with market economies, faith and social movements in the world these days.
The New Great Transformation with Paul Hawken
Video from the Long Now Foundation - San Francisco, CA
The title of Paul Hawken's talk, "The New Great Transformation," has two referents. Economist Karl Polanyis 1944 book, THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION, said that the "market society" and modern nation state emerged together in Europe after 1700 and divided society in ways that have yet to be healed.
Karen Armstrong's 2006 book, THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION, explores "the Axial Age" between 800 and 200 BC when the world's great religions and philosophies first took shape. They were all initially social movements, she says, acting on revulsion against the violence and injustice of their times.
Both books describe conditions in which "the future is stolen and sold to the present," said Hawken - a situation we are having to deal with yet again.
Get to know Avaaz
Avaaz is a community of global citizens who take action on the major issues facing the world today. If you use You Tube you may see their highly watched videos featured often. Avaaz has members in every country on earth, and operates in twelve languages working to ensure that the views and values of the world's people -- and not just political elites and unaccountable corporations -- shape global decisions. Check out all the great videos at Avaaz's YouTube site.
One of the Avaaz campaigns I really like. . .
Get to know: Global Days for Darfur
VIDEO: Building a social movement on the responsibility to protect
This week many organizations and congregations are participating in Global Days for Darfur. The video below is an excellent collection of leaders sharing really smart policy and mobilization strategies for building broad, effective coalitions among the student and faith-based community.
Stopping Mass Atrocities: An International Conference on the Responsibility to Protect
Building a Social Movement: An Examination of Current and Past Campaigns
Conference partners include: Progressive Students of Faith, Amnesty International, Center for American Progress, Consulate General of Canada, International Crisis Group, San Francisco Bay Area Darfur Coalition, STAND-UC Berkeley, World Affairs Council of Northern California, World Federalist Movement-Institute for Global Policy.
How can lessons learned from successful campaigns be applied to the anti-genocide and R2P campaign? Models include the anti-slavery campaign, the campaign to ban landmines, and the campaign for the creation of the ICC. - Anita Sharma, ENOUGH, moderator - Mark Hanis, Genocide Intervention Network - William Pace, World Federalist Movement-Institute for Global Policy, Coalition for the International Criminal Court - Ken Rutherford, Landmine Survivors Network - Rev. Gloria White-Hammond, M.D., My Sister's Keeper
PBS' NOW: NCC talking to Iran (link to VIDEO)
"When political leaders mess up, religious leaders ought to be here to go and build up the people, build up relationships, and bring the conversation up the high moral ground," said one of the U.S. delegates, Rev. Dr. Shanta Premawardhana, who represented Episcopalians, Methodists, Evangelicals and dozens of other denominations.
Faith in Public LIVE Dr. Nazir Khaja and Islamoyankee: Islamophobia Rising, Part 6
Click below for the latest post...
Part 6: Islamoyankee on the Reformation vs. Renaissance
Who's got faith in Iran and US relations?
Here's more information about this historic and informative meeting. . .
Dispatches from Davos: Rules for a Global Neighbourhood in a Multicultural World
In an era of great change, religion and spiritualism can provide strength and guidance. However, it is vital to strengthen the dialogue among different religions and cultures in order to foster common understanding. In the case of the West and Islam, a growing disconnect poses serious challenges to global order. This session builds on the ongoing dialogue created by the World Economic Forum's C100 initiative.
CLICK BELOW for a list of the interfaith participants and to watch the video of their discussion.
ACTION ITEM: Oppose Discrimination in the House
As religious people from diverse traditions, we call upon Virginia Congressman Virgil Goode to re-examine his opposition to newly-elected Representative Keith Ellison, a Muslim, taking his unofficial oath of office using the Qur'an, and to apologize for his statement that, without punitive immigration reform, "there will be many more Muslims elected to office demanding the use of the Quran." Please read the statement and add your signature.
Daily Show: "Left Behind" Video Game
Who cares about Darfur?
Faith Blogs Weigh In: Violence in the Middle East