Archive for the ‘Race Relations’ Category

Who has the microphone?

Thursday, September 3rd, 2009

microphone

In this season of debate about US health care reform, Broadstreet Ministry in Center City Philadelphia recently hosted a health care town hall with Congressman Joe Sestak.  Rev. Bill Golderer, convening minister, began the event by directing the attention of community members and media gathered to the bright origami swallows hanging in the rafters of the sanctuary.  Each piece of paper contained a prayer or lament from someone in the community. We were asked to hold the weight of the prayers hanging above us in our awareness during the dialogue.

This invitation is an important one for communities of faith to hold forth as the health care debate resumes following the August recess.  Now is the time we must ask: whose voices are given priority in our dialogue?  What are the prayers of the community that have seemed to be ignored or unheard?  There are nine million uninsured children in the United States who are not filling our headlines with their shouts at town halls, though their lack of access to quality health care deserves such indignance.

Further, now is the time for communities of faith to critically confront the structures that lead to significant disparities in access to quality health care based upon a child’s racial-ethnic identity.  As Children’s Defense founder Marian Wright Edelman has spelled out, “minority children are uninsured and underinsured at far greater rates than White children. One in 13 White children is uninsured, compared to one in five Latino children, one in five American Indian children, one in eight Black children, and one in nine Asian/Pacific Islander children.” (find column attached below)

Now is the time for communities of faith to pass the mic to those too often ignored or unheard by our legislators.

In your community, who is holding the microphone, and who is going unheard?

Laura Markle Downton
Princeton Theological Seminary

http://www.childrensdefense.org/child-research-data-publications/data/marian-wright-edelman-child-watch-column/unfair-childrens-health-disparities.html

a>

EPA’s pledge to environmental justice: a start for health care.

Wednesday, June 10th, 2009

Healthcare goes beyond governmental coverage.  Over the past few weeks of our discussions about the healthcare issue, it has strengthened my perspective to look at it through the eyes of Matthew 25.  So, thank you!

Similar to the obligation our country has to insure healthcare for its people, we the people have a moral obligation to care for the health of ourselves and our neighbors.  What responsibilities does this commitment hold us accountable for? We can look at this answer through many different lenses: social, religious, economical. But as I read environmental news every day I see more and more how related our environmental stewardship and healthcare are.  Lisa Jackson, who President Obama elected to head the EPA, recently reports about environmental justice and EPA’s pledge to renew it for minorities. It is fact that minorities and low-income people are victims of more pollution and riskier environmental degradation. Extensive exposures to pollutants cause these groups to fall ill with diseases like asthma and cancer and are a real threat to their health.  Every day there are reports about exposures to lead in neighborhoods where owners are too poor to replace paint, old pipes and other sources of the contaminant. Liver disease is linked to pollutants such as pesticides and heavy metals in our water and air. We are all held accountable for these pollutants; they are not exclusively generated within the boundaries of these neighborhoods but are carried universally from each emitter. What are we subjecting ourselves to?

Additionally, businesses that could provide jobs are leaving these areas of town.  Companies like coal plants and similar polluting manufacturers are coming into these neighborhoods where land is not as valuable. This challenges minorities’ quality of life and jeopardizes their healthcare. Chris Foreman, who is professor at University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy, expressed threats to minorities’ neighborhoods that include filth, odors, dust, noise, congestion, and the absence of recreational and park facilities.

These neighborhoods are truly “the least of these.” This is our obligation as Matthew 25 believers. Jackson encourages, “we have to go to every community and show them that the issues of environmental protection are their issues and that our world is their world. That’s how we bring every voice to this discussion. That’s how we bring real change.” Environmental stewardship is where health care, true care for the health of our neighbors, begins.

Equal Justice Under The Law: The Case for Cocaine Sentencing Reform

Wednesday, April 22nd, 2009

Equal Justice Under the Law: The Case for Cocaine Sentencing Reform

A false balance is an abomination to the LORD, but an accurate weight is his delight (Proverbs 11:1)

 

 

I call upon all people of goodwill to support H.R. 1459, the Fairness in Cocaine Sentencing Act of 2009. Senator Jim Webb recently sounded the alarm about the brokenness of our prison systems. His pronouncement, of course, is nothing new, but it lends visible and much-needed support to the cause of prison reform. And, to be sure, altering cocaine sentencing policy lies at heart of prison reform.

But why, inquiring citizens ask, should we use every available means at our disposal to contact our respective members of the House Judiciary  and House Committee on Energy and Commerce and express support for H.R. 1459? Briefly phrased, cocaine sentencing disparities disproportionately impact minorities, interrogating our national commitment to equal justice under the law. H.R. 1459 aims to alter the Controlled Substances Act and eliminate two things. First, it aims to “eliminate increased penalties for cocaine offenses where the cocaine involved is cocaine base.” And secondly, it aspires to eradicate “minimum mandatory imprisonment penalties for cocaine offenses.” The title of H.R. 1459, Fairness in Cocaine Sentencing Act, assumes that a gross inequity exists within current sentencing policy (the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, PL 99-570, to be exact). The inequity, referred to by many as the “100:1 quantity ratio”, means that “it takes 100 times more powder cocaine than crack cocaine to trigger…harsh five and ten-year mandatory minimum sentences”. According to a report by the 2009 Criminal Justice Transition Coalition, the disparity, despite being “facially neutral”, unevenly penalizes minorities. 

If we are to achieve our country, as the eloquent James Baldwin once said, then policies championed by the White House must not unfairly punish those who go to the crackhouse. If we are to achieve our country, let us call on Vice President Joe Biden, a repentant architect of this sentencing policy, and the White House Office of Urban Policy to proudly and persistently support this bill. All too often, the penal structure of our criminal justice is a modern-day example of unbalanced scales. Although not always in intent, cocaine sentencing consistently—and adversely—impacts minorities in ways that are so horrifically disproportionate that the words of the black bard Tupac Shakur come to mind: “Lady Liberty needs glasses/ And so does Mrs. Justice by her side”. Let us march one step forward from aspiring to equal justice under the law to its actuality, and inch towards achieving our country by supporting H.R. 1459.   

Shoutout to James Rucker and colorofchange.org for being a drum major for justice on this critical issue.

Liturgies of Progress and Lament

Monday, March 9th, 2009

Like a preteen restlessly hoping for a deeper voice, America seems anxious to get beyond difficult issues by attaching a “post” prefix to everything. President Obama enters the White House from a campaign trail where red states meet blue states. Post-partisanship. A man who is black and biracial becomes president. Now, bewilderingly for some and joyously for many, journalists often image our nation as “post-racial”. To remix Abraham Lincoln, fondly do I hope, and fervently do I pray, that this scourge of racism will go away. But alas, that day is not today.

The ubiquity of the term post-racial is more than an artifact from a presidential election cycle. Rather, it represents our readiness, as a country, to prematurely eulogize the persistent correlations between race, poverty, geographic dislocation, etc. President Obama deserves credit for treating race with a measure of nuance. Yet far too frequently, Obama exchanges his law professor subtlety for MTV multiculturalism—a place where the correlations of race and social ills shuffle into an iPod of many colors, where every kid from every nation sings,”Only in America is my story even possible”. Or, switching songs on the same playlist, “only in America can a skinny kid with a funny name… ”. As a black seminarian, I love Obamarama. But I worry that the newness of our historical moment may cause us to miss old storylines. For instance, the leading sentiment of Obama’s “Change in America” is a brilliant, but repackaged, innovation of Reagan’s talk about “Morning in America”. Even more troubling, Obama’s rapid ascent to the White House—and his rhetoric about that rise—both encourage and enable a reassertion of the myth of rugged American individualism. And that myth, if I can remix Emma Lazarus this time, is about tired and huddled masses of every nation coming to a post-racial American meritocracy. President Obama is a historic and historical figure, the latest high priest of a distinctly American and modern liturgy of progress. And in his office, he is to lead the faithful beyond partisanship in Washington, caricature on talk radio, ideology in policy implementation, and of course, the specter of racism.

For Christians, whom I presume (safely, I hope) are unwilling to participate in this liturgy of progress, the question then becomes: are there any alternatives? Perhaps, we can recover liturgies of lament from the Psalms to discipline our expectations of public servants and of ourselves as politically engaged Christians. Such liturgies can make room for suffering in our sanctuaries, rooting our ultimate hopes for beloved community in God. And if we are doubly blessed, they will reorient our political imaginations to the sweat and struggle of a liberal democracy built on incrementalism.

Of Chimps, Cartoons and Campus Racism

Monday, March 9th, 2009

(Mark Lewis Taylor is Princeton Seminary’s Maxwell M. Upson Professor of Theology and Culture. Dr. Taylor provided the following essay off notes he used for a lecture this past week.  Hopefully this essay provides for some good groundwork for us to have a meaningful conversation over the coming days – Grant Brooke) 

Prophetic Critique and Free Speech in the Age of Obama 

I understand that we are gathered here today to discuss the relationship between prophetic critique and freedom of speech, because the racist, sexist and generally demeaning pamphlet that appeared on our campus last Fall, The Foreskin, has been defended from alleged “prophetic” criticism by assertions, from some, of a right to free speech. Moreover, recent criticism of racist images linked to President Obama – especially the cartoon of the slain chimpanzee in the New York Post, but also the postcard photo of water-melon patches at today’s White House – have only heated up the issue on our campus. These images also have been defended as “free speech.”

Both of the terms before us, “prophetic word” and “free speech,” are important notions, but each often suggests a caricature that must be questioned. I want to probe below each caricature, and in so doing address the relation between them. Overall, I hope to show, first, that prophetic criticism should not be seen as an opposite to valuing freedom of speech, and, second, that “free speech” is not free from a prophetic criticism of its limits. Let me unfold this more slowly.  

(more…)

Like a Thief in the Night Part II.

Wednesday, February 25th, 2009

 Like A Thief In The Night Part I

In response to many of the raids that were separating parents from their children, senior citizens from their caretakers, and spouses from one another, The Latino Leadership Circle, The Council of Churches of the City of New York, CONLICO, and the Latino Pastoral Action Center hosted “LEVANTANDO NUESTRAS VOCES” (Lifting Our Voices) at La Sinagoga on 115 East 125th St, NYC.

I was there, along with Grant Brooke, listening to testimony after testimony of people—mothers and their children, fathers, sons, daughters, brothers and sisters of all races, cultures, and colors—speak about the raids, the difficult process of legalization, the abuse they received at the hands of dishonest lawyers and intimidating officers.

Gabriel Salguero, a pastor and the Director of the Hispanic Leadership Program at Princeton Theological Seminary, among other roles, hosted the event that also called for people to be informed of their basic human rights by staff on hand, to sign petitions, and to present their pressing cases.

I was so surprised that it was packed with so many people—leaders from the community, media, pastors, politicians, religious folk, etc, etc.  Why?  Well, I often feel that churches stay away from controversial issues, unless they concern the so-called “culture wars.” 

Churches walk a fine line, as tax-exempt organizations that have a respected role in the government’s view, when they take on controversial issues such as immigration (of course with notable exceptions like the Sanctuary Movement, which has been thrown around again recently).

As far as immigration reform aiding undocumented immigrants, what roles CAN churches play? What roles DO churches play?  People of faith?

Political Satire? I Think Not!

Saturday, February 21st, 2009

Negotiating life as ministers in Christ’s service presents is with wonderful rewards and the ability to calmly handle challenging situations.  Paul’s admonition to us is not to get into a “tit-for-tat” spat with anyone, rather opting to engage the other with kindness (Romans 12:17-18).  Yet I still find myself having to temper the reactionary Scrappy-Doo (“let me at ‘em”) character that wants to fight for justice when I encounter things such as Sean Delonas’ cartoon that ran in the New York Post yesterday (February 18, 2009). Portrayed in the sketch are 2 white policemen who have just shot and killed a chimpanzee.   The caption reads “They’ll have to find someone else to write another stimulus bill.”  The editors of the New York Post have claimed that the artist was trying to capture 2 stories that had recently been in the news.  The first was the passing of President Barack Obama’s Stimulus Bill, and the second was that of a 200 lb chimpanzee that attacked and gravely injured a woman who was visiting its owner.  The chimpanzee was shot by police who responded to the call.

The unfortunate choice of the cartoon as appropriate political criticism should instead be placed in the category of blatant racism. The Stimulus Bill may draw critique, but it is preposterous that it necessitates the employ of racist caricature that depicts African Americans as monkeys and chimpanzees.

Why is it so difficult for some to evaluate without resorting to such base tactics? Come on, it’s 2009…yes, even here in the United States!  People of all backgrounds have expressed outrage at Sean Delonas and the New York Post editors, Bob McManus and Col Allan. Reverend Al Sharpton has called for folk to join in the protest rallies to remove the New York Post from circulation, and for all clergy to address this issue from their respective pulpits.  It is appalling that one should come across such invective that is passed off as political satire, but I find it particularly disturbing that it occurred during Black History Month.

La lucha continua, on with the fight and may we all rally together calling out our uniting “charge” that we will no longer tolerate racism because “there is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

Cheers and blessings.

He called us “a nation of cowards”…

Thursday, February 19th, 2009

Often, when one hears a good sermon, they go away pondering many things in their heart.  Perhaps the sermon has left them with challenging or convicting thoughts and/or a desire to do something – to put faith into action.  Similarly, our newly appointed Attorney General, Eric Holder, has done nothing less than offered us as a nation and a community a prophetic call to change the status quo.  His recent speech has provoked a great deal of much needed discussion in our nation.  Tonight, a segment on CNN revealed the comments of many viewers from across the nation who felt that his words were harsh, divisive, and counterintuitive.  It is unfortunate, I think, that his words could not be received as a convicting word.  Perhaps, however, in the coming days, weeks, months, etc., the nation can find itself in a continuing dialogue which may result in some change.

Holder spoke the truth; though there are many facets of our society and culture that appear to embrace racial and cultural diversity and harmony, there are many that are not a far cry from the days of slavery and segregation.  Our society is filled with instances of modern-day slavery, as people from various immigrant communities are forced to do work they might not otherwise, had they the opportunities that others have had, and as minority groups still continue to struggle to have the same access and opportunity to quality education, health care, etc.  Also, one cannot help but recognize the way our cities and towns are structured – always segregated.  Take for example Austin, Texas.  It is an extremely diverse city which is filled with beautiful people from various countries and different faith traditions.  Nevertheless, it is very segregated.  East Austin is overwhelmingly populated by Latino and African American communities, while the rest of the city almost seems worlds away, divided by the 1-35 that few, from either side, rarely cross.  I am certain that this cultural landscape is not unique to Austin, Texas.  It is, in part, what Holder is referencing.  Perhaps we go on, patting ourselves on the back, reassured that we are doing so much better, turning a blind eye to the ways in which are cities, our schools, our circles of friends, and so on, are not so diverse.

Why is it so hard for us to take in Holder’s words?  Why is it so hard for us to admit that we do in fact live in a time and place where modern-day slavery and modern-day segregation exist?  Is  it because we have an aversion to admitting our own complicity?  Is it because we are an ahistorical people who are unaware of the sad and shameful history which has laid the foundation for our current circumstances?  I think it is, at best, a little of all of these.

Therefore, it is – without a doubt  - the call and the responsibility of the Church to speak prophetically about our racial prejudices and divisions, and to humble ourselves and heed prophetic words when we hear them.