World AIDS Day

More than 33 million people worldwide have HIV, the virus that can lead to AIDS, according to the United Nations. That includes 2.5 million children younger than 15. More than two million people have died of AIDS, just this year. That includes 330,000 children. And over 25 million have been lost to the disease in its short history of existence.



It is a common cause. Especially among the global socially conscious. And despite the scope of the crisis and the deadly extent of the disease, it is a epidemic that does have tangible solutions—solutions that Saturday Dec. 1, of every year, attempts to address, as World AIDS Day.



In America, the typical regimen for an HIV patient was about $1,140 in 2004, and this is not for the most effective treatment. Those outside developed nations don’t have access to these treatments or the funds for them. While tangible help and solutions, such as medical supplies and treatment, are available and necessary for those suffering with AIDS, most will never receive any. The only way to combat this epidemic is to halt its spread to those who remain healthy.

Unfortunately most of those at risk do not have access to information about how to prevent infection.



The 2007 World AIDS Day theme was leadership. In the words of Archbishop Desmond Tutu, “Today still 70 percent of infected people don’t have access to life saving therapies. Many still face stigma, economic deprivation and rejection because of their infection. Many still don’t have access to basic information or simple interventions that will reduce risk. This is not the time for complacency nor apathy. It is the time for compassionate leadership that recognizes that the voicesless are often those who suffer most—who can they turn to if their leaders do not listen and heed their cries?”



Bush has called for an additional $15 million from congress toward expanding the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Other leaders throughout the world are also involved.



While it may seem like a problem for Africa alone, Over one million people in the United States live with the same deadly disease. It will take everyone, joining the cause and taking a leadership role to slowdown the spread of AIDS and end the excessive deaths of innocent people. We already have enough of relentless murders inflicted by ourselves—without the help of the HIV/AIDS disease.

While World AIDS Day attempts to raise attention to the importance of each and every persons roll in combating AIDS, it is one day throughout the whole year when we stop to think about the implications of this epidemic. In order to really effectively change the future for all those at risk, we must start living everyday as World AIDS Day.

An illegal sanctuary

McCain and Romney battle over their devilish pride






At the CNN YouTube Republican candidate debates on Wednesday, front-runner Republican candidate Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney battled it out over who has held the “holiest” sanctuary for illegal immigrants, Giuliani’s city of New York or Romney’s own back yard, dueling over the right to a self proclaimed devilish approach to immigrant control. Even Anderson Cooper couldn’t control the shots fired back and forth over the heads of the thousands who reside in the United States illegally.



Yet as Giuliani and Romney seemed to be content with redundant accusations of shepherding the flocks, it took candidate John McCain to remind them that these are humans they are talking about, not dumb sheep.

"We must recognize these are God's children as well," McCain said. "They need our love and compassion, and I want to ensure that I will enforce the borders first. But we won't demagogue it."

Mike Huckabee also defended his position on respecting those illegally residing in the US, especially their children and his support for allowing these children to be eligible to apply for college scholarships.

Both McCain and Huckabee have been criticized by the GOP for their “soft” approach to immigration policies.

Romney proved his concern to appeal to the mainstream inhuman approach to illegal immigrants by responding, "Are we going to say kids who are here illegally are going to get a special deal?" Romney asked.

Huckabee objected, saying that scholarships would be based on merit, as for all applicants. "We are a better country than to punish children for what their parents did," he said

Hopefully we are also a better country than to vote for candidates who punish the parents for wanting a better life for their children. While the issue of illegal immigration must be addressed, the issue is one of helping these people to become safe, secure, and capable of providing for their families, legally in the United States or in an improved economic condition back at home.

Death Penalty? What would Jesus do?

In response to a question from Tyler Overman on the CNN YouTube debate, Republican Candidate Mike Huckabee was confronted with his position, as a Christian, on the death penalty – an interesting question for all followers of Christ.

“You know, one of the toughest challenges that I ever faced as a governor was carrying out the death penalty. I did it more than any other governor ever had to do it in my state. As I look on this stage, I'm pretty sure that I'm the only person on this stage that's ever had to actually do it.
“Let me tell you, it was the toughest decision I ever made as a human-being. I read every page of every document of every case that ever came before me, because it was the one decision that came to my desk that, once I made it, was irrevocable.
“Every other decision, somebody else could go back and overturn, could fix if it was a mistake. That was one that was irrevocable.
“I believe there is a place for a death penalty. Some crimes are so heinous, so horrible that the only response that we, as a civilized nation, have for a most uncivil action is not only to try to deter that person from ever committing that crime again, but also as a warning to others that some crimes truly are beyond any other capacity for us to fix.
(Applause)
“Now, having said that, there are those who say, "How can you be pro-life and believe in the death penalty?"
“Because there's a real difference between the process of adjudication, where a person is deemed guilty after a thorough judicial process and is put to death by all of us, as citizens, under a law, as opposed to an individual making a decision to terminate a life that has never been deemed guilty because the life never was given a chance to even exist.”

But when faced with the question again, Huckabee’s response needs no further commentary, What would Jesus do? Would Jesus support the death penalty?
Huckabee’s response? Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office. That's what Jesus would do.

Amen!

Across the Universe – Or right here at home

A musical twist of artistic social commentary set to the familiar tunes of the Beatles cannot even begin to describe the film Across the Universe. Set in the 1960’s during the Vietnam War, the film depicts a time when the innocence of America was radically shattered one young drafted male’s life at a time.



A depiction of passionate free love that defined the 1960’s in America, yet realistically portrayed in the bondage of passionate devotion to a cause…a cry…for true freedom from a world defined by a war across seas and a war within her own boarders. Passionate love in a bondage that forced protest to bring the violence from across the universe, to right here at home.

As I was memorized to the point of speechlessness by the film, I couldn’t help but believe that we live in a time of similar devotion. A time when we no longer see the why or how of the fighting, only the blood and body bags. A time when we soon will believe that enough is enough.

If they instituted a draft, that time would already be here. But if we continue the way we are, that time is coming soon.

The Season of Good Cheer?

Before the turkey could even be digested, avid shoppers across America began plotting and planning their strategy for the following day. Over one hundred million Americans were said to have hit the malls on the biggest shopping day of the year, black Friday—“black” to morn the death of true values and the birth of our material consumerism. By four o’clock am lines had formed outside Kohl’s awaiting the can’t-live-without bargains inside, while others were already finished with their first and even second bargain achievement pausing only long enough to refuel at the nearby Starbucks before checking the next purchase off the list.

What is supposed to be the season of good cheer some how got crossed with the season of good buys. By the looks of the shopping malls, high housing prices and gas costs have caused consumers to only cut one thing out of their budget this holiday season, forgetting one simple craze in the holiday book of catch phrase—to spread the cheer.

This year marked record low thanksgiving dinner food donations for those in need. As the holiday season is now entirely underway, food banks are reporting the emptiest shelves in 20 years.

Along with gas and housing costs, food prices are also up 3.3 percent from last year in Southern California, and the increase in cost of living is having drastic effects for everyone.

But when looking to cut back, donations should be the last to go.

In Orange County alone 190,000 people struggle to buy food for themselves and their families. They rely on help from the federal government and donations from those who don’t have to worry about where the next meal will come from.

Many of these families also rely on the two meals available for kids of low-income families at school. When school is out for winter break, those two meals are extremely costly and for many, impossible to compensate.

The holidays are not a season of good cheer for those who are hungry. While everyone is feeling the burden of raised prices and higher living costs, those of us who still hit the malls with Starbucks in hand and Christmas wish lists, must seriously consider the necessities we take forgranted and the necessities we can help provide for others. The holidays are the season of good cheer—but only when it is spread.

A Red light in the Red district

Charu was sold into prostitution after a friend promised her a job selling saris at a distant fair. The friend disappeared after they exited the train and a man approached who claimed he had purchased her. The man brought her to a brothel where Charu was beaten, assaulted and raped. Charu had lost everything. Her husband, her children, her dignity.

Early summer 2007, a source informed an International Justice Mission staff member of Charu’s brothel. IJM investigators arrived at the brothel and covertly documented evidence of her imprisonment. After presenting the evidence to a local authority, the police accompanied the IJM staff member back to the brothel and removed Charu from her imprisonment. IJM not only reconnected Charu with her family, they assessed her condition and found rehabilitation services that would adequately address her individual needs. IJM has also facilitated action against the brothel owner and helped Charu testify as part of the prosecution process.

Human trafficking is tied for the second largest and fastest growing criminal industry in the world. Between 600,000 and 800,000 recognized victims are transported across international boarders against their will, in a form of modern day slavery which dictates the lives of over 12.3 million people in every country throughout the world. More than 80 percent of these victims are women and girls, most of which are trafficked into commercial sexual exploitation. Known as sex trafficking, this 21st century form of slavery promises a better life—a paying job, a secure marriage, profit from the sale of a family member, transportation to a country with better opportunity—yet in return only pays in physical and psychological harm.

South East Asia is a region of origin, destination and transit countries for an estimated quarter million currently trafficked women and children. A recent study published in August 2007 strongly emphasized a connection between sex trafficking and the increasing spread of HIV/AIDS within South Asia.

The global problem of sex trafficking is impacting lives throughout the world, from poverty-stricken third world nations to the United States and Europe. Victims who are rescued and released from bondage have suffered greatly physically and psychologically from beatings, traumatic brain injury, drug/alcohol addiction and STDs. Physical suffering from miscarriages or forced abortions lead to psychological harm which includes Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, depression, insomnia, suicidal thoughts/suicide attempts, mind/body separation, shame, grief, fear distrust, hatred of men and self-hatred. Many women also suffer from traumatic bonding in which they feel gratitude or indebted to the perpetrator for being allowed to live. Many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have taken the role of establishing rehabilitation and recovery opportunities for these victims.

The United States along side the United Nations have attempted to define the adequate responsibility of a countries government to address this issue of international human rights, but the action and implementation of these standards varies from country to country. The underground nature of the trade and corrupt and instable governments allow thousands of women to live enslaved with no hope of a future.

With ineffective government action, victims do not have the opportunity to reach these resources and the UN and US have not done enough to ensure governments uphold their commitments.

But the International Justice Mission (IJM) is an NGO that not only provides resources for recovery and rehabilitation but is also actively devoted to bringing the victims to them. IJM is a human rights agency comprised of lawyers, investigators and after-care professionals, who work with local governments to rescue victims, prosecute perpetrators and strengthen the public justice systems. Focusing on these three aspects, IJM works not only to respond to the humanitarian crisis but effectively reduce the profitability of the enterprise and increase the risk to those involved. The goal is simple, help these governments to legitimately uphold the standards of legislation set forth by the UN to effectively rescue victims and prosecute perpetrators. A red light in the red district.

War in Iraq

Sin City: Where sin abounds, grace abounds.

Las Vegas, Nevada: An oasis of over stimulating entertainment amists a dessert, quenching a thirst for physical momentary pleasures.




Entertainment.


Money.


Sex.



The forces that drive this city, and the forces that rightfully earn it the name, the City of Sin.

Nevada is the only state that still has legalized prostitution in the forms of brothels, escort services and “independent entertainers.” About 140 pages in the Nevada Yellow Pages are devoted to such “entertainers,” and over 30 licensed brothels employ upwards of 300 women.

According to the Decriminalizing Prostitution Now Coalition, prostitution is legal in Canada, most of Europe (including England, France, Wales, and Denmark), most of South America (including Mexico), Israel, Australia, much of Asia and South East Asia (including the Philippians and Thailand) and Iran.

The problem is that with a room, a bed, a condom and a red light, many women, especially in developing countries, have the opportunity to make 10 times what they would make as a factory worker. And as a parent, selling a child into the sex industry could earn them more than they would make in their entire life.

While I am deeply saddened by a world that has nothing more to offer these women and children than a bed and some cash, my question is this. While for many, the decision to sell your body for sex is the decision to find a way to eat, America is not a developing nation. We are a stable, organized, democratically lead nation which guarantees life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Yet the life of these sex slaves, in Nevada, is anything but free or happy and while it often physically kills the body, no women’s heart can survive emotionally or spiritually when she is selling herself.

Aside from trying to understand how a man can find pleasure in a body he not only must pay for but one that despises him, how can we as Americans allow this to take place anywhere in the world, let alone in one of our own states. These are American women and children. Regardless of where they are from, regardless of how they got here. These are American women and children who deserve life—one of liberty and happiness.

A city of sin within a sinful state left alone by a sinful nation.


But where sin abounds, graces abounds even more. But only if the redeemed step out in faith with a passion and a purpose to spread the kingdom of grace and the waters of righteousness across the desolation of a dessert.

The Human Behind the Bean

On a campus that knows all to well the early morning hours devoted to writing papers and studying for mid-terms, the lines at Cornerstone Coffee Shop and the nearby Starbucks also prove that as college students we know all to well the benefit and necessity of the caffeine found in coffee to make those early morning hours productive.

Yet on a campus that boasts social consciousness and awareness, the importance of acting on that, which is seen, as socially debilitating is crucial.

It is easy to indulge in a cup of coffee without thinking of the human behind the bean. The hands that planted and picked, the mouths that must be fed by the income.

Ethiopia is the birthplace of the rich, dark, earthy bean that is roasted and brewed to create a robustly flavorful awakening experience for millions throughout the world every morning with breakfast, as an afternoon “pick-me-up” or a rich compliment to decadent desserts. Ethiopians have been growing and drinking coffee for over 3,000 years and sending it out throughout the world since the 16th century currently making up over half the countries total export earnings.

With approximately 1.2 million Ethiopian coffee bean farmers and 15 million Ethiopians in the industry, the country is highly dependent on this small dark brown bean.

Yet the life of those dependent on the coffee bean industry throughout the world is not quite one of relaxing with a good cup of Joe in the morning.

The collapse of international coffee prices dropped the average coffee farmer earning from $1.20 per kg to $.40 per kg.
So how does a college student practice what we preach in light of the well-known less than humanitarian acceptable conditions of the coffee bean farmer?

It is possible to indulge in a stimulating cup of coffee without the guilt of supporting the cycle of poverty stricken coffee bean farmers. The Fair Trade certified sticker guarantees coffee from farmers whose bean prices and living conditions are protected.

Fair Trade is a market-based network of trade connecting over one million farmers in 58 developing countries throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America. The democratically organized farmer groups receive a guaranteed minimum floor price and an additional premium for certified organic products. They enjoy freedom of association and regulated safe working conditions that strongly prohibit child labor. Middlemen are reduced and importers purchase the beans as directly as possible to keep any profit or revenue directly within the farming community investing in social and business development projects including scholarship programs, quality improvement training and organic certification. Genetically modified organisms are strictly prohibited and integrated farm management systems to improve soil fertility, limit harmful agrochemicals and support sustainable farming methods protect the health of the farms as well as the farmer.

So next time you take an invigorating sip of your cup of Joe in the morning, remember that there is story on every farm, a face to match every story and a human behind every bean.

Religious Division Devastates

I spoke with a man from the Jordan Evangelical Theological Seminary (JETS) the other day and he told me a story about one of the Sudanese pastors he worked with about the persecution of the Christian Church in Sudan. It got me thinking. While international attention on Africa has finally been drawn to the atrocious genocide of the native Sudanese people, as I have commented on prior, attention has been focused primarily on the bloody genocide in Darfur. Yet while media attention is focused to the west, a deeply-rooted religious partition has continuously divided the Islamic north and Christian south with much more deadly, yet less recognized, implications.

“Government soldiers came into the village [located] in the Nuba Mountains, a significant bridge between north and south, and burned all the Christian homes, burned the churches, and demanded the pastor denounce Christ,” Daffron said. “In front of the whole village they removed a finger each time they asked and he wouldn’t renounce. Then they dragged him behind a van through the village.”

Daffron believes that only by the grace of God was the life of this pastor spared, to spread a message, not of retaliation, but of hope.

The atrocious genocide of the native Sudanese people in Darfur, a region the size of France in western Sudan, has taken the lives of an estimated 200,000 to 400,000 since the most recent uprising in 2003. Yet while this uprising is the most recent and prevalent, it is one political conflict within a deeply seeded religious civil war between the minority Islamic Arab population and ruling party in the north and the majority native Christian Sudanese population in the south. A religious civil war that has taken the lives of over 2.2 million people in the past 50 years.

The minority Islamic Arab ruling party in the north, and the majority native Christian Sudanese population in the south, have stained the sand of the Sahara over border conflicts, oil revenue and humanitarian aid, for the extent of the country’s independent history.

The conflict is complex with multiple key parties and, even more, angry players. But while it is a political conflict between the National Congress Party, Sudan’s Arab ruling party of the north, and the “Rebel” liberation parties in the south, it is a political conflict with deep religious roots.

Cliff Daffron sees the root of the conflict as “one of an Islamic Arab-led government imposing Islam and all of its systems on the south and the Christian people.”

An Islamic North against a Christian South.

“Islam is not just a religion but a social, political and economic system,” Daffron said.

He said he has seen the Muslim population impose Islam within all aspects of society from banks to school curriculum on the Christian people.

I also spoke with another man directly involved in fighting within the war zone of Sudan. Reverend Sam Childers has lived in the bush of Sudan for 11 years and founded an orphanage in south Sudan for children orphaned by the war. He fights on the front line as a third entity for these children before they are displaced or either side can recruit them as soldiers.

Childers is pessimistic that the hybrid United Nations and African Union peacekeeping mission to be deployed sometime before Jan 1 will succeed due to the harsh ethnic and religious partition. He believes the mission will consist of primarily Muslim peacekeepers whose deep-seeded religious bias will detract from a fair protection of the native Christian population.
He also attributed his pessimism to the fact that a peacekeeping mission is to “keep” peace, a peace that cannot currently be found in the country of Sudan.

This conflict is between an Islamic north against a Christian south that has been overshadowed by strong political language that the west is used to using to describe civil conflict. Unfortunately until the international community recognizes the religious aspect of this conflict peace efforts will not address the true conflict and therefore not be successful.

Cliff Daffron left me with this to ponder, which I leave you with.

“I’m all behind [the peacekeeping troops] to stop the slaughter, but that is an external peace, imposed on the country,” Daffron said. “It’s not an internal peace, and that’s what is needed.”

The Game of Politics

Nov. 3 will mark one year until Presidential Election Day 2008.

With Election Day approaching fast and primary elections approaching faster, candidates are frantically refining how they “play the political game.”

A game of voter pawns hungry for a candidate whose eloquence in speech and decisiveness of promises fulfill their immediate needs at the time. As the game heats up, the play gets nastier, the promises more compelling but less realistic, and the speech more driven toward distinguishing one player from another than the authenticity of the true individual.

Yet what this leads to is an inauthentic brand of buying and selling candidates rather than striving to find the best possible leadership for the country. It is not uncommon to hear that political campaigns are decisive promises almost never fully deliverable.

One candidate has recognized this. Barack Obama’s campaign of hope calls for a change in this political game. A politics less defined by party lines and more by individuals, for individuals.

Yet even a candidate in favor of refining the way this game is played is criticized for not playing the game and will suffer votes because of it.

Many, even of his own party, have questioned whether his promise to pursue a brand of politics that transcended partisanship disabled him to compete in the most partisan of arenas. That he hasn’t taken a hard enough stance on issues that starkly define him from others.

In response Obama has said, “The notion that somehow changing the tone means simply that we let them say whatever they want to say or that there are no disagreements and that we’re all holding hands and singing ‘Kumbaya’ is obviously not what I had in mind and not how I function. And anybody who thinks I have, hasn’t been paying attention.”

In an interview transcribed in a New York Times article, Obama acknowledged that he had “held back” a little, until now. He asserted that it was a planed decision to introduce himself and his values authentically, before engaging opponents, responding to their stances and catering his own to distinguish himself. “At times, he said, he has taken lines out of speeches prepared by his campaign that he felt were “stretching the truth,”’ according to the NYTimes article.

This is the political game that should be played. A game of authentic honesty from candidates that reveal the decisions they will actually make.

Yes, this is idealistic. No, I don’t think that the “game” will ever stop being played. But a candidate who perceives the need for this change, regardless of whether he still must be a player in this election season’s game, is hope for the future.

A Spooky Story for a Spooky Sweet

With Halloween just around the corner, costumes are being created and America is stocking up with candies and chocolates to satisfy the anticipation of children and adults alike for a night of sweet spookie treats!

Yet as you indulge in rich sweet creamy chocolates you probably don’t think about the hands of who picked the cocoa beans that made your chocolate. You don’t see the face of a child, only six years old, who spends all day, every day carrying bags of cocoa beans, bigger than they are, across the plantation and is barely given enough food to survive in return. You don’t think about the 12,000 children in Cote D’lvoire alone who are child slaves to the chocolate industry.

Well, maybe this year, you will.

Almost half of the world’s chocolate is made from cocoa beans grown in Cote D’lvoire, Africa where over 12,000 children have been trafficked to work as slaves in the cocoa farms. Some of them were kidnapped, some sold by their parents…but all of them robbed of their childhood, robbed of their self worth, and robbed of their rights as a humans.

The good news is you can still indulge without the guilt (at least not of supporting slave trafficking). In the southern California region four chocolate companies are certified as “Traffik Free Guaranteed” chocolate with no involvement by trafficked people in the harvesting of the cocoa beans according to Stop the Traffik organization (www.stopthetraffik.com). These chocolates can be found at five different easily accessible locations.

With the upcoming holiday seasons take a stand against the modern day slavery throughout the world. Only support chocolate companies who can guarantee they are traffic free.

Here’s where you can buy “Traffik Free Guarantee” chocolate:

Trader Joe’s
-Trader Joe’s Swiss 71% dark Chocolate
-Trader Joe’s Swiss Milk Chocolate
Target
-Green & Black’s Maya Gold Organic Dark Chocolate Bar
Ten Thousand Village’s in Pasadena, CA
-Divine Bars
-Divine Milk
-Divine Dark
-Divine Milk with Hazelnut
Equal Exchange
-Organic Very Dark Chocolate
-Organic Dark Chocolate with Almonds
-Organic Chocolate Espresso Bean
Whole Foods Market
-Green & Black’s Maya Gold Organic Dark Chocolate Bar

Legal Murder

Almost every third baby conceived in the US is killed by abortion. That is approximately 1,700,000 legal murders of innocent blood every year. 1,700,000 children robbed of their childhood, robbed of their opportunity to make a difference in this world.

The fight to end the legalization of abortion began in 1973 when the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion nation wide. Pro-life vs. pro-choice. The right of the child vs. the right of the mother.

Yet the debate over the morality of abortion is a moral question that has taken the political world by storm. It has become a heated topic of discussion during political campaigns and one of the traditional defining differences between the conservative Republicans and liberal Democrats.

I believe strongly that abortion is murder. Regardless of the situation and circumstance, every child conceived should have the right to enter this world. We as women are merely the vessels God has chosen for his children to enter this world. The right of a woman to choose to become a mother should come after the baby is born, not before. Whether by a mistake or even rape, unwanted pregnancy should in no way be a justification for murder.

Yet the political aspect of this issue is much more complicated. The legalization of abortion allows for hospitals, doctors offices and private clinics to perform the procedure. If outlawed, women seeking the procedure will still find places willing to perform it, underground and without safety regulations protecting the women.

In a New York Times article, Legal or Not, Abortion Rates Compare, Elisabeth Rosenthal reports on a compilation of global studies that determined “abortion rates are similar in counties where it is legal and those where it is not.” Unfortunately this shows that outlawing the procedure is not necessarily the answer to this problem. The studies also concluded that where abortion is legal it is performed with less harm to the women having the procedure.

Maybe we shouldn’t be making this such a political issue. Maybe we won’t conquer this problem through Supreme Court decisions or candidate stances.

Pregnancy is an extremely intricately complex emotional issue. It changes lives forever. I cannot understand the responsibility that comes with pregnancy, and therefore I feel very inadequate to tell a impregnated women what to do. But I can understand the value of a life, and I believe the women’s life is just as valuable as the child’s life.

What we need is a shift in focus. A shift from focusing on the fight for making abortion illegal to supporting and encouraging pregnant women as the valuable life they are and the valuable life they have growing inside. We need to focus on the fight for the life of the women and the life of the child will be protected. Through love and care, sympathy and forgiveness, emotional encouragement and financial support, we can help to make other options just as easy and worthy an option as abortion and with much less damaging consequences.

“If you love the creator, take care of the creation.”

While the site of this bumper sticker on the back of one of the most environmentally damaging modern day amenities as a stream of exhaust is released from below may be paradoxically amusing, it does raise a most pertinent issue in the increasingly important conversation about environmental issues among evangelical Christians.

Yet although the discussion is heating up even in the political arena, as people are beginning to understand that the drastic consequences of climate change are not a hoax, why are evangelicals about as lukewarm as the oceans are becoming?

While it is hard for us, as middle class evangelical Americans, to feel the direct impact of climate change, just ask one of the 1,836 people who lost everything, including their lives, to Hurricane Katrina; or the 20,000 people who lost their lives to the 2003 heat wave in Europe, both of which are scientifically believed to have been intensified by climate change.

The scientific community is more and more definite that the longer we wait to take action to reduce and reverse global warming the harder it will be and the more drastic the consequences. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2001 report stated, “There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.”

Over the last 30 years, ocean temperatures have risen by one degree. While this may seem insignificant, the IPCC has released that the number of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes worldwide has more than doubled.

As temperatures rise and natural disasters continually increase in intensity, the urban poor are those most greatly affected. Droughts are dryer, floods fiercer and hurricanes more devastating. And as seen in the impact of Hurricane Katrina, the poor suffer most, for they are most often lack adequate resources to cope with intensifying conditions. The 20,000 killed in Europe’s heat wave were mostly the poor and elderly. Summers of increasingly intense heat, are projected to be typical in the next 50 years.

The first commandment says it all. Love your God, and love your neighbor. Ignorance of the necessity for drastic action to address the environmental crisis of climate change violates this basic and underlying tenet of the Christian faith.

The problem is real. And we as evangelical Christian Americans have a mandate to address it.

Not only is our beloved God the creator of the very earth we are exploiting, His call for us to care for our neighbors should cause us to see this devastation as a mandate to get involved. Now. Not tomorrow, or next month or next year—because that may be too late.

While individual actions such as replacing energy expending light bulbs for those more energy efficient, and committing to recycling, are necessary and helpful, larger scale creation care action is required from businesses, organizations and institutions to seriously combat climate change, insuring our world will last as long as the Creator intended.

Universities have a unique responsibility as role models in their communities and in training their students to be leaders in developing solutions to stop and even reverse global warming. Azusa Pacific University is an institution with not only this humanitarian responsibility to each other but a sacred responsibility to our Creator.

Styrofoam still overflows trash receptacles multiple times per day alongside recyclable paper, aluminum, glass and plastic, and florescent lighting still illuminates campus housing.

The consequences are deadly. If we as evangelicals don’t also start taking significant action now, we may be eager for the cool climate of heaven sooner than we think.

Call for Creation Care

Go Green, or Go Home!

Here’s what you as an individual can do to care for creation:

Do the little things:
- Change electrical sources, such as light bulbs, to more energy efficient ones. Compact fluorescent light bulbs last up to ten times longer and use 2/3 less energy!
- Unplug chargers, appliances, and other electronic devices when not in use. Although they may not be turned on, just having them plugged in uses energy.
- Only use the dishwasher and laundry machines when necessary for a full load.
- Recycle! And use recycled materials. Bring your own mug to Starbucks and Tupperware when you go out to eat and know you’ll have leftovers. DO NOT USE STYROFOAM! Styrofoam cannot decompose and will continue to fill up our landfills and hurt not only the environment but animals in the area as well.
- Bring a cloth bag to the grocery store or at least ask for paper.
- Find other ways to travel. Walk or ride a bike and when necessary use public transportation or at least carpool.
- Plant trees! It’s fun and it’s great for the air! Those of us in southern California know the importance of cleaner air.
- Don’t litter!

Educate yourself!
Knowledge is power, and knowledge will help us to not only know what to do but why we should do it.
- Research products and companies that promote energy efficiency and are environmentally conscience. Buy organic produce and meat from local markets that don’t use pesticides or hormones and feed their animals vegetarian diets. Find local businesses that use bio-degradable and bio-compositable packaging materials, such as 21 Choices Frozen Yogurt!
- Public Policy: Read up on environmental initiatives and vote on them! While individual action is extremely important the biggest difference we can make is by pushing for political attention.

Why Go Green?
There are many answers to this question but the most significant are:
- Preserving the environment not only makes the world a better place to live today, but for our future generations as well. Cleaner air and oceans mean better quality of living for people and animals!
- Climate change is scientifically proven to increase in intensity of extreme weather conditions such as flooding, hurricanes, and heat waves. Thousands have died already from conditions we are inadequately prepared for. The poor are the most drastically effected.
- Energy efficiency cuts energy and gas costs!
- Energy independence decreases US dependency on foreign oil and increases national security.

Where’s the peace in the Middle East?

Violent conflict in the Middle East is not a new story. It is so frequent that suicide bombings and civilian casualties rarely constitute as a news value worthy of front-page attention. With weak leadership in both Israel and Palestine, and United States attention spread thin over the War in Iraq and concerns in Iran, little has been heard recently in the fight for peace in the Israel-Palestine conflict. But that doesn’t mean that peace has been found.

Israeli-U.S. relations have traditionally held a strong importance in U.S. international policy. Since Israel declared its independence on May 15, 1948 as recognized by President Harry Truman, U.S. presidents have always stood by Israel’s side. Israel currently receives about $3 billion in economic and military grants, refugee settlement assistance and other aid. In my opinion, three billion U.S. dollars to support terrorism, maybe not the official Al Qadea type, but terrorism all the same, of the Palestinian people.

To his credit, President Bush has taken a stronger initiative to push for peace rather than solely a concern to maintain an allegiance to Israel. Yet even so, attempts are regarding the doctrine as progressive despite the hurt it causes the Palestinian people.

The “security fence” constructed by Israelis beginning in 2002 was designed to mark the definition of the “boarder” with the West Bank. While proposed by Israelis and supported by Americans as a form of defense which seemingly has reduced violence, it has also made for a huge inconvenience for Palestinians forced to cross checkpoints on a daily basis making it sometimes impossible to return home to be with their families. The fence, which is called by many the ‘apartheid wall,’ has been constructed through villages, cutting them off from their farmland and bulldozing anything in its path.

This week, Israel declared Gaza an “enemy entity” to justify new sanctions imposed in an attempt to keep Gazans on the edge of a humanitarian disaster, in hopes that they will turn against the militant group Hamas which gained a majority in the legislature after the January 2006 elections. The American-Israeli plan is to improve life for Palestinians in the West Bank, boosting the image of democratically elected President Abbas, of the Fatah party, while creating unlivable conditions in the Hamas controlled area of Gaza.

Again, while doctrine may seem good, at what expense, must be considered.
People are people, whether boarders, or walls separate them. Peace in the Middle East is a cry that should echo across all regions—Iraq and Iran included. Yet in America we seem to think that in order to achieve peace, violent terrorism of people, is justifiable.

The political conflict over land rights and occupation in the regions of Israel and Palestine have a deep religious significance as well, which should be even more reason to attend to humanity rather than good or logical doctrine. The conflict remains a constant battle for the Holy Land and a battle that continues to spill blood on the very soil upon which Jesus walked.

Columbia's unwelcome invitation

Columbia University President Lee Bollinger may have allowed an unworthy man freedom of speech, but he denied his students the reason this freedom should exist.

Freedom of speech in an academic forum is not about always agreeing, it is about seeking understanding. It allows for one to engage in learning from multiple perspectives and gain insight from those perspectives, regardless of whether they are our own.

On Monday Sept. 24, a man who crossed into very dangerous territory when stepping foot on American soil, was invited to partake in a freedom he doesn’t even allow his own people, in an attempt to learn and better understand. The President of Iran, Mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, was invited to speak at the World Leaders Forum at Columbia University during his visit to America. Despite Columbia’s “long-standing tradition of serving as a major forum for robust debate,” according to Bollinger, Ahmadinejad’s invitation did not imply a welcome one. In fact, Bollinger made it clear that Ahmadinejad should not even be considered a part of the World Leaders Forum, but rather in his own World Dictator’s category.

The extensive introduction of Ahmadinejad consisted of a chain of criticizing statements referring to not only Ahmadinejad’s atrocious actions in governing his people, but his overall “fanatical mindset.” His invitation to free speech was therefore not one without strong preconceived notions of the absurdity for anything he was to say.

What I don’t understand is why then was Ahmadinejad invited in the first place? Despite his record of inhumane actions toward his people and appalling political doctrine, as clearly pointed out by Bollinger, wasn’t he invited so that we may hear from him, his side of the story? I wanted to hear the ideas that provide the root for these actions I cannot understand. But instead a preconceived attitude toward the words that would follow caused my ears to be tainted rather than open to hear.

While Bollinger himself was partaking in free speech, his insults completely distracted from the ideas, in an environment where open-minded learning should have been the goal.

To his defense, Bollinger has been criticized for honoring academically, “ideas of those whom should not be honored,” and he was clearly attempting to appease his critics in this introduction.

“It is a critical premise of freedom of speech that we do not honor the dishonorable when we open our public forum to their voices; to hold otherwise would make vigorous debate impossible,” Bollinger said.

Yet you should be able to respect without honor, if honor is truly not due. There was no respect for Ahmadinejad, and he, respectfully, pointed this out.

He later proceeded to address his criticism of America as a bully trying to “manage the world.”

He received no respect from his bullying American host, as the world receives no respect from a bullying America.

Thank you Bollinger for proving President Ahmadinejad correct.

Putting a face to the crisis

As Zara walked for ten days carrying her one-year-son through the harshest climate in the world, the driest part of the Sahara, she was forced to think back over the destruction she had just experienced.

“They attacked us very early in the morning, some militiamen on horseback and camels and some soldiers in military vehicles,” she told CBS News. “They burned my village, they killed my people, they slashed their throats and captured others.”

Zara’s husband, along with two of her children, two sisters and three brothers, were brutally murdered by insurgents. Yet Zara was spared, only to live displaced from her home and in constant fear that she would be next.

Zara is a victim of what has been reported by the Human Rights Watch to be the worst genocide and calculated campaign of displacement, starvation, rape, and mass slaughter of this generation, alongside the Rwandan genocide of 1994.

A disputed 200,000 to 400,000 native Sudanese have been murdered over the past three years. Millions more have been displaced from their homes and their country in an attempt by an Islamic militant group, the Janjuweed, to ‘ethnically cleanse’ the Darfur region in Sudan of the rebelling native tribe.

Yet for the past four years, this massive loss of life was apparently not enough of a priority to keep the rest of the world from ignorantly ignoring the morbid fate of the native Sudanese people. Despite the signing of a three-phase international force proposal within the Darfur Peace Agreement, which proposed to deploy the largest mission of UN and AU peace keeping troops in history, very little has actually changed. Most of these past four years, a mere 7,000 African Union (AU) troops have been deployed to Darfur, a region the size of France. Their attempts at maintaining peace have been insignificantly brushed aside by the insurgent forces and insignificant in reducing the violence.

Just a few days ago, on Sept. 29 an AU base in Hasakanita, South Darfur was attacked by militant forces killing at least 10 AU peacekeepers, wounding at least seven others and leaving 50 unattended for. This represents the worst incident against neutral peacekeeping troops since the AU mission began in 2003.

If rebel forces have already violently slaughtered over 200,000 people, how can the international community believe that only 7,000 will be capable of creating peace and stability? It seems this small number of peacekeepers would be forced to expend more energy protecting themselves than protecting the people.

Yet the world continues to sit back and watch as they encourage the small force of AU peacekeepers to stop the Janjaweed from continuing to clear the countryside of all civilization, burning any sign of life that once existed to the ground.

If establishing a democratic government and removing a brutal totalitarian dictator is enough reason to forcefully invade Iraq to “establish peace and justice” then motivation to save hundreds of thousands of innocent lives in Darfur should inspire intervention as well. (I’m not calling for a declaration of war, I am merely making a point of international priorities.) If the ground beneath the feet of Zara as she was forced to walk for days through the harshest climate of the Sahara only to seek refuge in camps infested with cholera or hepatitis which only pick up where the Janjaweed leave off, if that land was rich in oil would U.S. attention be different? Should international interest be more important than life? Maybe if political leaders could put a face to this conflict, they would see things differently. A face, Zara’s face, that represents life that should not be taken in vain.

God is not a Republican – and the Democrats have finally figured it out

(Excerpt from “Faith Race ’08,” The Clause, Sept. 28, 2007)

“I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities, but I also believe that when a gang-banger shoots indiscriminately into a crowd because he feels somebody disrespected him, we’ve got a moral problem. There’s a hole in that young man’s heart—a hole that the government alone cannot fix.” Barack Obama said at the Sojourners Call to Renewal Gathering in 2006.

As he continued his discussion on the importance of faith, including his own, within politics, most would be shocked to find that Obama was not running for president of the traditionally conservative religious Republican Party. As a leading Democratic candidate for the 2008 presidential election, Obama’s words signified the start of a campaign season saturated in religious talk, leaving the religious right of America praying for direction.

Traditionally, conservative Christian Americans predominantly align with the Republican party, where faith and morality is openly used to support ideals and agendas. Conservative leaders jump at every opportunity to exploit this dividing difference from the “secular” Democratic Party by reminding evangelical Americans that Democrats reject any notion of faith based morality. That is, until now.

The 2008 presidential election season has earned the title ‘Faith Race ’08.’ Not only has America recognized, with the election of President Bush, that religious belief and personal values play a large roll in voter support for a candidate, but the Democrats have finally caught on too. The leading Democratic candidates for this presidential election are not only open about their faith, but active in allowing it to influence their political ideas, regardless of the traditional stance of their party.

Simultaneously, the Republican presidential candidates, have not made issues of Christian faith and values a priority in their campaigns leaving traditionally Republican religious voters with what appears to many as unconventional Republican options; Mitt Romney, “a politically elastic Mormon,” Rudy Guliani, “the twice-divorced, pro-choice, gay-friendly former New York City mayor,” and John McCain, “a maverick who called conservative religious leaders ‘agents of intolerance’ the last time he ran,” according to Michael Duffy and Nancy Gibbs in a Time Magazine article “Leveling the praying field.”

Traditionally, it is the Democrats who have stayed far away from any discussion of religion, values or morality within the political culture, while taking a strong liberal stance on moral questions. While this behavior appeals to secular America, recent [hype for the issues of] abortion, gay marriage, school prayer and stem-cell research proves it typically repels the 55 million Americans who consider themselves pro-life, bible reading, evangelical Christians.

But a sudden acceptance and abundance of religious talk from the mouths of the Democrats has left many, especially the religious right, with valid skepticism of whether religious jargon is straight from the donkey’s ass, or if the Democrats are genuinely taking a step away from their traditional party ties and revealing their true beliefs. A question that should be valid for all candidates.

***

The trends are turning, and the traditionally defined Red and Blue is becoming a shade of muddy purple.

For too long have Evangelical Americans been pressured to see the political world only in shades of red, and those who resist, told they have compromised their faith. For too long have all American voters been forced to chose between a religious right or secular left, rather than individual candidates and their personal beliefs; the beliefs that will direct their decisions and coarse of action. But as this election season approaches, the once starkly dividing issues of faith and morality are less definable by left and right, red or blue. We are progressively moving toward a purple politics without so many labels which determined stances or divisions. A purple politics where candidates are finally standing up for what they believe, not merely their parties stance, and forcing voters to really consider outside their typical ballot box.


To read the complete version of “Faith Race ’08,” visit www.clause.apu.edu

Can we trust Bush's opptomistic talk of withdraws?

In light of recent events concerning the war in Iraq, I want to write on the President’s hopeful address to the nation of a possible troop withdrawl, which may not be so hopeful. Ironically, or maybe not so ironically given the common criticism of irony within the President’s statements and decisions, his recent response to Security General Petraeus’s congressional testimony seems to contradict current events in the Middle East.

The President made claims of progress since the surge of 30,000 troops deployed from January until June 2007. While violence may seemingly be subsiding in Baghdad, violent struggles between extremist tribes throughout other regions in the country not only continue, but seem to be increasing. A suicide bombing in the Yazidi providence on Aug. 14 was the deadliest bombing since the U.S. declaration of war in 2002.

Yet while multiple progress reports have been filed and two major congressional testimonies from General Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, the President has optimistically announced Sunni success and therefore greater security in the region of Baghdad. These reports allowed Bush to allude to the idea of allowing some troops to be sent home. An optimistic claim could give a little over 5,000 families the holiday season they wouldn’t have even thought to ask for.

While Bush made this announcement during a secret sneak eight-hour visit to the Anbar Province, once one of the most violently dangerous regions in Iraq, he was trying to prove his optimism with his actions. Yet, despite a hint at talk of withdrawals, the President is still supporting a continuation of the troop surge in Congress.

Throughout the world, leaders have lost respect and denied support for the U.S. based on the extended occupation of Iraq, just as many Americans have.

But the question I ask now is if so many truly do not support this war, why are we still occupying Iraq? I have never supported this war, but the reality is that we have been a part of dismembering any resemblance of political leadership and stability and now have taken a serious interest in the “safety and security” of the Iraqi people, or at least their oil. But it’s no use arguing whether we should have invaded Iraq. We did. Period. So the question is what now? Is it reasonable to believe that the President will keep his word and begin to send troops home?

Even Osama Bin Lauden, who resurfaced to make an address on the sixth anniversary of Sept. 11, says it plainly. “People of America: the world is following your news in regards to your invasion of Iraq, for people have recently come to know that, after several years of the tragedies of this war, the vast majority of you want it stopped. Thus, you elected the Democratic Party for this purpose, but the Democrats haven’t made a move worth mentioning. On the contrary, they continue to agree to the spending of tens of billions to continue the killing and war there, which has led to the vast majority of you being afflicted with disappointment. Here is the first of the matter: why have the Democrats failed to stop this war, despite them being the majority?”

It’s terrifying, but Osama Bin Lauden just stated my argument for me.

I wish I could say the President’s visit to Iraq and hint of a withdraw is a positive step in US international relations and I wish I could believe that he is taking steps to begin a withdrawal. Unfortunately I am continually disappointed with actions that fail to support the words that so often proceed from our President’s mouth. My realistic realism tells me not to get my hopes up.

My interest in politics began when I discovered how much I really didn’t know…

A few years ago, I read the story of Immaculee a young woman who hid for 91 days with seven other Tutsi women in a tiny bathroom of a Hutu pastor’s house, escaping the genocide which killed over 800,000 Rwandans in the short span of only three very dark months. Miraculously she survived to tell her story, opening the eyes of a very blind world, as she opened mine.

I was surprised at how little I knew about this atrocity. The Rwandan Genocide began in early April 1994, when I was 8 years old. Despite the fact I was old enough to watch the news with my parents and understand major events people were talking about, I knew very little of the atrocious crimes committed that day, and don’t remember anything about it on news media.

Although I was young, I do remember watching the OJ Simpson trial on TV constantly. I remember seeing footage of the car chase and everyone talking about the verdict.

To my surprise, as I was researching the Genocide further I discovered that Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were killed in June 12, 1994, almost exactly two months into the Rwandan Genocide, just as world was beginning to recognize the atrocities occurring in Rwanda.

I was so appalled at how powerful our media is in determining public knowledge and opinion. I recognize that most of my peers are not knowledgeable about important current affairs. Yet I feel strongly that my generation consists of the future decision makers of this country and we must take this responsibility seriously. As we approach the years of adulthood comes a social responsibility which calls us to engage in the world outside of our own physical surroundings and cultural setting, whether we want the responsibility for it or not. We must seek understanding and gain knowledge of the people and places throughout the world where hardships and suffering, celebration and accomplishment or even simple differences exist. While it is a common occurrence for my peers to go on mission trips all around the world learning and participating in other cultures, social responsibility is more than that.

We as Americans have the privilege to make informed political decisions that affect people across the world, across the country, or even just across the street. We have been given a precious gift that most of the world will never have. We can help make political decisions and put political pressure on those who have the power to make a difference. But we can also make decisions about what to do with our own time and money to support and encourage those in need.

Although I still get caught up in my day-to-day routine and business of my own life, God has given me a passion to encourage widespread knowledge of the issues that should impact our political understanding and decisions.