www.ucc.org

I‘ve been accused by someone within my denomination of assaulting the first amendment. He describes activities I’ve had a major role in as a “full-fledged assault on conservative media” – “an organized campaign . . . a carefully planned, well-funded systematic assault on talk radio and Fox News that involves at least seven major liberal American religious denominations.”

I’ve never seen myself as a part of something like that and I’ve never been described that way before. It brings home the talk about cyberpolarization — how we tend to use media that reinforces our own viewpoints and therefore are not aware of misinformation and are not sensitive to insults and accusations lacking objectivity and logic.

Jeffrey Lord (From The American Spectator)

And it gives me a lens from which to see how it works. It occurs to me that others might be interested in that view. So I’m going to first…

Timely advice for faith-based organizations? Source: N. Kinney

Our president has a lot on his plate right now, including the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a battered economy and health care in need of reform.  Putting his own stamp on efforts to better utilize religious organizations as social problem-solvers is probably not at the top of his “to do” list.  However, for those like myself who have watched the policy developments concerning faith-based initiatives over the past decade or so, a bit of speculation seems warranted about what might happen under the Obama Administration.

Earlier this year, President Obama announced the formation of a new executive-level office that would guide his administration’s efforts to increase the participation of religious groups in addressing social problems.  Some had predicted that the new president might dismantle altogether George W. Bush’s White House Office of Community and Faith-based Initiatives.  However, the administration made some noticeable waves…

The Supreme Court case about the cross in a remote part of the Mojave National Preserve is itself a monument–a monument to changing times.

The cross placed in the Mojave National Monument in 1934. Photo by the Associated Press.

The simple white cross was erected in 1934 by the Veterans of Foreign Wars, Death Valley Post 2884. A plaque accompanying the cross dedicates it to the memory of the dead of all wars. It is similar in design to the crosses we’ve all seen in photographs of the cemetery fields in France.

Fellow blogger Leigh Hunt Greenhaw has said she’ll approach the legal issues inherent in whether the cross’s placement violates the First Amendment’s requirements for the separation of church and state. (the “establishment clause”). There are other issues as well, which are covered in the story published in the Post-Dispatch last week. My own opinions are based not on the fine points…

“People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed, and redeemed; never throw out anyone.”
~Audrey Hepburn~

This election season has given rise to language that has been especially vitriol. And I am not taking about the conversation between the candidates, but between groups of neighbors, colleagues, church members, friends, family and acquaintances.

The presidential candidates during the most recent debate noted the heated climate, each candidate arguing whether their leadership in their respective parties has been enough to bring about civil dialogue amongst their supporters. 

Yesterday, while eating my bagel at The St. Louis Bread Company, I overheard the conversation between two men. I won’t say who they are supporting for U.S president — that is beside the point I am making here –  but they called those who were against their chosen candidate racist and hate mongers. Since the country is nearly divided on the issues and presidential candidates, I wondered if these men realized that they just wrote-off…

The pulpit and politics in my church – The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints – rarely come together. Ranking religious institutions and political involvement on a scale of one to ten, with ten being the most politically active, my church is likely to be rated a 2 or 3 on the scale.

My church affirms it’s political neutrality. However, it maintains the right to speak out on social and moral issues that affect the Church and families. And occasionally the Church encourages action.

Most recently, our church leaders are encouraging members to vote YES on Proposition 8 in California to provide a legal definition of marriage being between a man and a woman. LDS.org, the Church’s website, offers various links to discussions and information on this issue.

One point made in the discussions is the idea of the “Tyranny of Tolerance” – when tolerance is redefined to mean acceptance rather than love.

Elder Dallin H. Oaks, Latter-day Saint church leader, clarifies and reminds us what “tolerance” means:

“Tolerance obviously requires a non-contentious manner…

This title reflects the first of 2 good questions posed by one of the readers (who named his/her Centrist) of my first blog posting about finding my Muslim voice. The part I am going to address in this post is quotes below (emphasis in the quote is mine).

“I saw a woman in a West County grocery store the other day with traditional Muslim dress, not a burka, but the only part showing were her eyes. That is fine, I have no objections with her choice.”

“… Our culture is so different in terms of outward sexuality and homosexuality that is so contradictory to the Muslim faith, that I don’t understand why they would not prefer to live in Saudi Arabia or some other Muslim country where they can live more easily which in the norms of their culture and religion.

I have a problem with Muslims coming here and not wishing to assimilate and try…