Although the excitement has died down a bit since the end of election season, I just came upon this video of Dr. Shaun Casey. Dr. Casey is a graduate of ACU and served as a Senior Advisor for Evangelical Outreach for Barack Obama during the campaign. He is a member of the Church of Christ, and he visited ACU during election season to talk with students, faculty, and staff about faith in public life (ACU also invited a prominent Republican speaker). In this video, he addresses the myth that having a Republican president or a Republican majority Congress or Supreme Court will lead to the overturning of Roe v. Wade and, therefore, to the end of abortion in the US. For those of you have asked me and countless other Christians who identify themselves with the Democratic party, this is how I can be a Democrat and pro-life.
Shaun Casey on Abortion from Christopher Berry on Vimeo.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Witnessing History
Regardless of our individual political ideologies, that today is a great moment in American history is undeniable. As I watched the celebrations last night and listened to the speeches of both McCain (who was very gracious and did his best to encourage unity) and Obama, I couldn't help but get a bit choked up. When I talked to two of my African American students today, however, my heart swelled even more for what this means to them, their families, and their future children and grandchildren. Both stressed that they have never felt like the same opportunities were available to them because of their skin color. Both mentioned that, until now, there was no proof available to them that their potential for achievement was unlimited. This is their time. And if Obama's greatest achievement in his presidency is that he will have opened these doors for my talented, brilliant students (although I'm very optimistic that he'll do much more), that is enough for me.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Faith Priorities
Here is a posting from Jim Wallis' blog, God's Politics, that most closely matches my own personal integration of my faith and my political views. I hope that, as he states, we'll all take our faith into the voting booth with us, realizing that our friends, family members, and colleagues are doing so as well, perhaps with different faith priorities than us.
In 2004, several conservative Catholic bishops and a few megachurch pastors like Rick Warren issued their list of “non-negotiables,” which were intended to be a voter guide for their followers. All of them were relatively the same list of issues: abortion, gay marriage, stem cell research, etc. None of them even included the word “poverty,” only one example of the missing issues which are found quite clearly in the Bible. All of them were also relatively the same as official Republican Party Web sites of “non-negotiables.” The political connections and commitments of the religious non-negotiable writers were quite clear.
I want to suggest a different approach this year and share my personal list of “faith priorities” that will guide me in making the imperfect choices that always confront us in any election year — and suggest that each of you come up with your own list of “faith” or “moral” priorities for this election year and take them into the voting booth with you.
After the last election, I wrote a book titled God’s Politics. I was criticized by some for presuming to speak for God, but that wasn’t the point. I was trying to explore what issues might be closest to the heart of God and how they may be quite different from what many strident religious voices were then saying. I was also saying that “God’s Politics” will often turn our partisan politics upside down, transcend our ideological categories of Left and Right, and challenge the core values and priorities of our political culture. I was also trying to say that there is certainly no easy jump from God’s politics to either the Republicans or Democrats. God is neither. In any election, we face imperfect choices, but our choices should reflect the things we believe God cares about if we are people of faith, and our own moral sensibilities if we are not people of faith. Therefore, people of faith, and all of us, should be “values voters” but vote all our values, not just a few that can be easily manipulated for the benefit of one party or another.
In 2008, the kingdom of God is not on the ballot in any of the 50 states as far as I can see. So we can’t vote for that this year. But there are important choices in this year’s election — very important choices — which will dramatically impact what many in the religious community and outside of it call “the common good,” and the outcome could be very important, perhaps even more so than in many recent electoral contests.
I am in no position to tell anyone what is “non-negotiable,” and neither is any bishop or megachurch pastor, but let me tell you the “faith priorities” and values I will be voting on this year:
1. With more than 2,000 verses in the Bible about how we treat the poor and oppressed, I will examine the record, plans, policies, and promises made by the candidates on what they will do to overcome the scandal of extreme global poverty and the shame of such unnecessary domestic poverty in the richest nation in the world. Such a central theme of the Bible simply cannot be ignored at election time, as too many Christians have done for years. And any solution to the economic crisis that simply bails out the rich, and even the middle class, but ignores those at the bottom should simply be unacceptable to people of faith.
2. From the biblical prophets to Jesus, there is, at least, a biblical presumption against war and the hope of beating our swords into instruments of peace. So I will choose the candidates who will be least likely to lead us into more disastrous wars and find better ways to resolve the inevitable conflicts in the world and make us all safer. I will choose the candidates who seem to best understand that our security depends upon other people’s security (everyone having “their own vine and fig tree, so no one can make them afraid,” as the prophets say) more than upon how high we can build walls or a stockpile of weapons. Christians should never expect a pacifist president, but we can insist on one who views military force only as a very last resort, when all other diplomatic and economic measures have failed, and never as a preferred or habitual response to conflict.
3. “Choosing life” is a constant biblical theme, so I will choose candidates who have the most consistent ethic of life, addressing all the threats to human life and dignity that we face — not just one. Thirty-thousand children dying globally each day of preventable hunger and disease is a life issue. The genocide in Darfur is a life issue. Health care is a life issue. War is a life issue. The death penalty is a life issue. And on abortion, I will choose candidates who have the best chance to pursue the practical and proven policies which could dramatically reduce the number of abortions in America and therefore save precious unborn lives, rather than those who simply repeat the polarized legal debates and “pro-choice” and “pro-life” mantras from either side.
4. God’s fragile creation is clearly under assault, and I will choose the candidates who will likely be most faithful in our care of the environment. In particular, I will choose the candidates who will most clearly take on the growing threat of climate change, and who have the strongest commitment to the conversion of our economy and way of life to a cleaner, safer, and more renewable energy future. And that choice could accomplish other key moral priorities like the redemption of a dangerous foreign policy built on Middle East oil dependence, and the great prospects of job creation and economic renewal from a new “green” economy built on more spiritual values of conservation, stewardship, sustainability, respect, responsibility, co-dependence, modesty, and even humility.
5. Every human being is made in the image of God, so I will choose the candidates who are most likely to protect human rights and human dignity. Sexual and economic slavery is on the rise around the world, and an end to human trafficking must become a top priority. As many religious leaders have now said, torture is completely morally unacceptable, under any circumstances, and I will choose the candidates who are most committed to reversing American policy on the treatment of prisoners. And I will choose the candidates who understand that the immigration system is totally broken and needs comprehensive reform, but must be changed in ways that are compassionate, fair, just, and consistent with the biblical command to “welcome the stranger.”
6. Healthy families are the foundation of our community life, and nothing is more important than how we are raising up the next generation. As the father of two young boys, I am deeply concerned about the values our leaders model in the midst of the cultural degeneracy assaulting our children. Which candidates will best exemplify and articulate strong family values, using the White House and other offices as bully pulpits to speak of sexual restraint and integrity, marital fidelity, strong parenting, and putting family values over economic values? And I will choose the candidates who promise to really deal with the enormous economic and cultural pressures that have made parenting such a “countercultural activity” in America today, rather than those who merely scapegoat gay people for the serious problems of heterosexual family breakdown.
That is my list of personal “faith priorities” for the election year of 2008, but they are not “non-negotiables” for anyone else. It’s time for each of us to make up our own list in these next 12 days. Make your list and send this on to your friends and family members, inviting them to do the same thing.
In 2004, several conservative Catholic bishops and a few megachurch pastors like Rick Warren issued their list of “non-negotiables,” which were intended to be a voter guide for their followers. All of them were relatively the same list of issues: abortion, gay marriage, stem cell research, etc. None of them even included the word “poverty,” only one example of the missing issues which are found quite clearly in the Bible. All of them were also relatively the same as official Republican Party Web sites of “non-negotiables.” The political connections and commitments of the religious non-negotiable writers were quite clear.
I want to suggest a different approach this year and share my personal list of “faith priorities” that will guide me in making the imperfect choices that always confront us in any election year — and suggest that each of you come up with your own list of “faith” or “moral” priorities for this election year and take them into the voting booth with you.
After the last election, I wrote a book titled God’s Politics. I was criticized by some for presuming to speak for God, but that wasn’t the point. I was trying to explore what issues might be closest to the heart of God and how they may be quite different from what many strident religious voices were then saying. I was also saying that “God’s Politics” will often turn our partisan politics upside down, transcend our ideological categories of Left and Right, and challenge the core values and priorities of our political culture. I was also trying to say that there is certainly no easy jump from God’s politics to either the Republicans or Democrats. God is neither. In any election, we face imperfect choices, but our choices should reflect the things we believe God cares about if we are people of faith, and our own moral sensibilities if we are not people of faith. Therefore, people of faith, and all of us, should be “values voters” but vote all our values, not just a few that can be easily manipulated for the benefit of one party or another.
In 2008, the kingdom of God is not on the ballot in any of the 50 states as far as I can see. So we can’t vote for that this year. But there are important choices in this year’s election — very important choices — which will dramatically impact what many in the religious community and outside of it call “the common good,” and the outcome could be very important, perhaps even more so than in many recent electoral contests.
I am in no position to tell anyone what is “non-negotiable,” and neither is any bishop or megachurch pastor, but let me tell you the “faith priorities” and values I will be voting on this year:
1. With more than 2,000 verses in the Bible about how we treat the poor and oppressed, I will examine the record, plans, policies, and promises made by the candidates on what they will do to overcome the scandal of extreme global poverty and the shame of such unnecessary domestic poverty in the richest nation in the world. Such a central theme of the Bible simply cannot be ignored at election time, as too many Christians have done for years. And any solution to the economic crisis that simply bails out the rich, and even the middle class, but ignores those at the bottom should simply be unacceptable to people of faith.
2. From the biblical prophets to Jesus, there is, at least, a biblical presumption against war and the hope of beating our swords into instruments of peace. So I will choose the candidates who will be least likely to lead us into more disastrous wars and find better ways to resolve the inevitable conflicts in the world and make us all safer. I will choose the candidates who seem to best understand that our security depends upon other people’s security (everyone having “their own vine and fig tree, so no one can make them afraid,” as the prophets say) more than upon how high we can build walls or a stockpile of weapons. Christians should never expect a pacifist president, but we can insist on one who views military force only as a very last resort, when all other diplomatic and economic measures have failed, and never as a preferred or habitual response to conflict.
3. “Choosing life” is a constant biblical theme, so I will choose candidates who have the most consistent ethic of life, addressing all the threats to human life and dignity that we face — not just one. Thirty-thousand children dying globally each day of preventable hunger and disease is a life issue. The genocide in Darfur is a life issue. Health care is a life issue. War is a life issue. The death penalty is a life issue. And on abortion, I will choose candidates who have the best chance to pursue the practical and proven policies which could dramatically reduce the number of abortions in America and therefore save precious unborn lives, rather than those who simply repeat the polarized legal debates and “pro-choice” and “pro-life” mantras from either side.
4. God’s fragile creation is clearly under assault, and I will choose the candidates who will likely be most faithful in our care of the environment. In particular, I will choose the candidates who will most clearly take on the growing threat of climate change, and who have the strongest commitment to the conversion of our economy and way of life to a cleaner, safer, and more renewable energy future. And that choice could accomplish other key moral priorities like the redemption of a dangerous foreign policy built on Middle East oil dependence, and the great prospects of job creation and economic renewal from a new “green” economy built on more spiritual values of conservation, stewardship, sustainability, respect, responsibility, co-dependence, modesty, and even humility.
5. Every human being is made in the image of God, so I will choose the candidates who are most likely to protect human rights and human dignity. Sexual and economic slavery is on the rise around the world, and an end to human trafficking must become a top priority. As many religious leaders have now said, torture is completely morally unacceptable, under any circumstances, and I will choose the candidates who are most committed to reversing American policy on the treatment of prisoners. And I will choose the candidates who understand that the immigration system is totally broken and needs comprehensive reform, but must be changed in ways that are compassionate, fair, just, and consistent with the biblical command to “welcome the stranger.”
6. Healthy families are the foundation of our community life, and nothing is more important than how we are raising up the next generation. As the father of two young boys, I am deeply concerned about the values our leaders model in the midst of the cultural degeneracy assaulting our children. Which candidates will best exemplify and articulate strong family values, using the White House and other offices as bully pulpits to speak of sexual restraint and integrity, marital fidelity, strong parenting, and putting family values over economic values? And I will choose the candidates who promise to really deal with the enormous economic and cultural pressures that have made parenting such a “countercultural activity” in America today, rather than those who merely scapegoat gay people for the serious problems of heterosexual family breakdown.
That is my list of personal “faith priorities” for the election year of 2008, but they are not “non-negotiables” for anyone else. It’s time for each of us to make up our own list in these next 12 days. Make your list and send this on to your friends and family members, inviting them to do the same thing.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
W.
My friend, Shelly, and I went to see W. last night. It was better than I expected. If a movie can make me feel empathy for George W. Bush, that means it was well-balanced. It portrayed Bush as a man who is not unintelligent, which is the way I typically view him, but as someone who coveted his father's approval and got in way over his head in his quest to achieve it. It was a good reminder to see his pain and frustration, his love for his wife, and his anger and anxiety when it was discovered that there were no WMDs in Iraq. It reminded me that he, like me, is only human. No one, except for Dick Cheney, was portrayed as especially evil or sinister. From the perspective of the movie, Cheney was the primary architect of the Iraq war with Donald Rumsfeld being an important sidekick. The most fascinating character was Condoleeza Rice, simply because she was such a non-significant voice. During the entire two-hour movie, she may have spoken 5 complete sentences. According to the movie's portrayal, she had no power or influence. The covert message seemed to clearly be that she has been a puppet National Security Advisor because of her sex and race. There were some humorous moments, and some of the most well-known Bushisms made an appearance, but it was clearly meant to be a drama. If you've been considering seeing it, I would say it's worth the time.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Prayer for Peace
Our prayer in graduate chapel today:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth,
Holy and Awesome is your name.
The earth and all that is in it is yours,
And so is the world and those who live in it.
You created us and placed us here to love you and one another,
And to lie at peace with all people.
But LORD, we have failed to do this,
And so your peace has eluded humanity.
We come before you conscious of many who live without peace;
Without the inner peace of knowing you and without the outer peace of security.
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For the people of Iraq and Afghanistan,
For the people of Israel and the Palestinian territories,
For the people of Syria and Lebanon,
For the people of Pakistan and India,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For those who live in Sudan and Somalia,
For those who live in Uganda and Kenya,
For those who live in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Cote d'Ivoire,
For those who live in Liberia and Sierra Leone,
For those who live in Chad and Zimbabwe,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For the people of Georgia and Russia,
For the people of North Korea and South Korea,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For the poor and homeless,
For the neglected and the rejected,
For the abused and the molested,
For the orphaned and the fatherless,
For the widow and the lonely,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For the greedy and the selfish,
For those who live in plenty and yet are never content,
For those who promote greed by their cowardice,
For those who condone selfish living by their silence,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For us who are impoverished of your love,
For us, sinners in need of your grace,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
Through Jesus Christ your son, we have prayed, Amen.
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth,
Holy and Awesome is your name.
The earth and all that is in it is yours,
And so is the world and those who live in it.
You created us and placed us here to love you and one another,
And to lie at peace with all people.
But LORD, we have failed to do this,
And so your peace has eluded humanity.
We come before you conscious of many who live without peace;
Without the inner peace of knowing you and without the outer peace of security.
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For the people of Iraq and Afghanistan,
For the people of Israel and the Palestinian territories,
For the people of Syria and Lebanon,
For the people of Pakistan and India,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For those who live in Sudan and Somalia,
For those who live in Uganda and Kenya,
For those who live in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Cote d'Ivoire,
For those who live in Liberia and Sierra Leone,
For those who live in Chad and Zimbabwe,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For the people of Georgia and Russia,
For the people of North Korea and South Korea,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For the poor and homeless,
For the neglected and the rejected,
For the abused and the molested,
For the orphaned and the fatherless,
For the widow and the lonely,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For the greedy and the selfish,
For those who live in plenty and yet are never content,
For those who promote greed by their cowardice,
For those who condone selfish living by their silence,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
For us who are impoverished of your love,
For us, sinners in need of your grace,
We humbly beg you:
O LORD, Sovereign of all the heavens and earth
We plead that you may grant your peace.
Through Jesus Christ your son, we have prayed, Amen.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
My Wii Fitness Age...
...is 44 years old. Forty-four!! I was pulling for 25. For those of you who don't know, my real age is 31. The Wii thinks I'm 13 years older than I really am. And how was this determined? By how quickly I could get my center of balance within bars that decrease in size and hold it there for three seconds. After an entire summer of exercising faithfully, I'm delivered with the news that my body is that of a 44-year-old. How encouraging! What is the point, I ask, of exercise if it makes no difference in your Wii fit age? I guess I should get back to work so that I can convince an inanimate object that I am worthy of its approval by decreasing my "age" to at least match reality.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
I Pledge Allegiance to the Kingdom of God
Randy Harris reminded us in graduate chapel at ACU on Wednesday morning that despite the political fervor of this season, as Christians, our true allegiance is to Christ the King. Presidents come and go, and in 100 years the outcome of this election will mean little. So, although it is certainly important for us to be discerning about how we will cast our votes, the eventual triumph of God's kingdom is a certainty, and our job as followers of Christ is to hasten the coming of God's kingdom on earth by being dedicated servants to our true King.
So, what does all of this mean in terms of how we ought to conduct ourselves as citizens of this country? First and foremost, we need to realize that good Christian people will be voting for Barack Obama and John McCain. We also need to realize that although we may invoke biblical principles and standards to justify our decisions, those decisions are typically based much more in our own lived experience (as is our interpretation of the very scriptures we invoke). Finally, if we are followers of Christ the King above all, what are the implications for how we treat others on this earth who follow a different earthly, albeit secondary, king than we do? Unfortunately, it has seemed that people who claim to be followers of Christ are the most divisive during election seasons, saying awful things about and to one another. When Christians behave in this way, how can we expect our political candidates to act any differently? Perhaps one way in which we can be about the breaking in of God's kingdom is by refusing to engage in hurtful, mean, and divisive conversation, regardless of whether or not the object of our comments will ever hear what we say about them. If we refuse to engage in these types of conversations, perhaps we can begin to change the political atmosphere in which we live.
"Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen" (Eph. 4:29).
So, what does all of this mean in terms of how we ought to conduct ourselves as citizens of this country? First and foremost, we need to realize that good Christian people will be voting for Barack Obama and John McCain. We also need to realize that although we may invoke biblical principles and standards to justify our decisions, those decisions are typically based much more in our own lived experience (as is our interpretation of the very scriptures we invoke). Finally, if we are followers of Christ the King above all, what are the implications for how we treat others on this earth who follow a different earthly, albeit secondary, king than we do? Unfortunately, it has seemed that people who claim to be followers of Christ are the most divisive during election seasons, saying awful things about and to one another. When Christians behave in this way, how can we expect our political candidates to act any differently? Perhaps one way in which we can be about the breaking in of God's kingdom is by refusing to engage in hurtful, mean, and divisive conversation, regardless of whether or not the object of our comments will ever hear what we say about them. If we refuse to engage in these types of conversations, perhaps we can begin to change the political atmosphere in which we live.
"Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen" (Eph. 4:29).
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Titletown, USA - PARKERSBURG, WV
Parkersburg, WV, is one of the finalists for ESPN's Titletown, USA competition. Parkersburg is also Eric's hometown and where we both went to college and fell in love (ahhhh). Here's the video feature. Hope you enjoy. If you have a soul, please vote for them to win.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Who's Hottest?
Kip? Magnum? Or Eric?
*For those of you who may be worried, this was only temporary. Thankfully, it's already been removed.
*For those of you who may be worried, this was only temporary. Thankfully, it's already been removed.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Stephen Colbert and N.T. Wright
A few weeks ago, N.T. Wright, Bishop of the Anglican Church, was a guest on The Colbert Report discussing his new book, Surprised by Hope. I've not read the book, but I know that Wright's theological views have been instrumental in shaping the vision of the Highland Church. I've posted the interview here so that you can hear for yourself what the book is about. I'm adding it to my reading list.
So, what do you think? Is heaven just an ethereal place we'll go upon Christ's second coming that is totally separate and apart from earth? Or is God's ultimate goal to restore all things to him...humanity, heaven, and earth?
So, what do you think? Is heaven just an ethereal place we'll go upon Christ's second coming that is totally separate and apart from earth? Or is God's ultimate goal to restore all things to him...humanity, heaven, and earth?
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Women in Leadership #2
Although it's been quite a while, some of you may remember that I wrote a post about women in leadership using Hilary Clinton as an example of the double binds women in these roles face (find it here). At the beginning of the Democratic primaries, I felt torn about who I would support in this election. The feminist in me really wanted to like Clinton, but I quickly found myself being drawn to Obama, and my vote ultimately went to him. What a lot of it came down to for me was that Clinton didn't seem to be embracing her femininity and addressing the ways in which having a female president would make a difference. Instead, I saw her embracing masculinity in many ways, and while this likely helped her to win the votes from steelworkers and autoworkers, I think it may have hurt her among young feminists like me. I desperately want to see this nation elect a female president, and I think we will in my lifetime, but I want her to be like me and my female colleagues...intelligent, discerning, and able to be tough when needed but also collaborative, inspiring, and committed to relationships. This article from Slate echoes my sentiments:
Death of a Saleswoman
How Hillary Clinton lost me—and a generation of young voters.
By Meghan O'Rourke
Posted Wednesday, June 4, 2008, at 11:31 AM ET
Death of a Saleswoman
How Hillary Clinton lost me—and a generation of young voters.
By Meghan O'Rourke
Posted Wednesday, June 4, 2008, at 11:31 AM ET
"That bitter cynicism of yours is something you've acquired since you left Radcliffe."
"That cynicism you refer to I acquired the day I discovered little girls were different from little boys!"
—Lloyd Richards to Karen Richards, and vice versa, All About Eve
In the coming days, as Hillary Clinton moves to the sidelines and Barack Obama takes the stage alone, many people will suggest that America just wasn't ready for a female president. This may be true. But we'll never entirely know, because Clinton did not invite us to spend much time contemplating the momentous fact that she was the first female presidential candidate with any chance of occupying that position. Her problem wasn't that she was a feminist. Her problem was that she wasn't feminist enough.
For me, at least, she wasn't—and for many young women my age. Back in the mid-1990s, as a college student, I spent an afternoon on the New Haven Green, adjacent to Yale University, waiting for Hillary Rodham Clinton to speak. There was a huge crowd of mostly young women. I found her impressive, if not entirely galvanizing. She had a girlish voice and soft, wispy bangs, as I recall, and she struck me as a real person—not merely a wife performing the role of first lady. I remember wondering if she might some day run for president. I also remember feeling that it seemed outside the realm of the imagination.
That's no longer the case. When Clinton announced her candidacy in January 2007, she raised hopes and possibilities in the minds of young women across America. But the substance of her presidential run seems far more dismal than I would ever have imagined back in 1995. You can't be a historic first unless you act like one, and Hillary Clinton has not. In the Wellesley commencement speech that made her famous before she got to Yale Law School, she spoke about "searching for more immediate, ecstatic, and penetrating modes of living." Yet Clinton ran away from the revolutionary aspects of her own candidacy. There's been nothing of the ecstatic in her presidential bid—that mode, instead, has been embodied by Barack Obama. He appealed to voters' desire for liberation and revolution, and on the strength of that appeal won them over.
Clinton didn't trust that the message of revolution embodied in her candidacy could animate American voters, particularly male voters. And she lacked the courage of her young, ecstasy-seeking self. And so she sent the message that gender was not a factor. Presumably, she did this based on the reasonable assumption that it was politically perilous to be a woman. But the paradox is that in taking the safe tack she thought made her more electable, she actually made herself less electable. She presented herself as a hard-bitten Washington insider, running on experience when a lot of American voters, particularly young women, were looking for transformation.
Obama understood this from early on. Contrast their opening bids: Obama skillfully announced his in Springfield, Ill., with a speech that echoed Abraham Lincoln. Clinton, by contrast, announced hers in a risk-averse video recording on her Web site: "I'm in it to win," she said redundantly. As her campaign progressed, she rarely invoked the historic predecessors that made her candidacy possible—Susan B. Anthony, say, or Jeannette Rankin, a pacifist and suffragette who was the first woman to be elected to Congress (and who always had the courage of her convictions, voting against the First World War). To be sure, Clinton did praise Eleanor Roosevelt's "thick skin"—rather the way one nerd praises another's social-avoidance techniques. It was part of acting as if she were a man inoculated against the slings and arrows of sexism.
In this regard, Clinton never really was the first American matriarch. Instead, she may be best remembered as our last patriarch. The more her campaign floundered as Obama offered ecstasy and she didn't, the more masculine and hard-nosed she made herself out to be. Cannily reversing gender roles, she told Obama supporters that if he couldn't "take the heat" he should "get out of the kitchen"—a subtle put-down of her own gender aimed at working-class male voters who wanted reassurance that Clinton was manlier than the girlie men the Democrats had of late been nominating. Her supporters (among them, Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana) invoked stories of steelworkers waxing enthusiastic about her "testicular fortitude." While Obama went on rhetorical flights about hope, she compared herself to the hyper-masculine Rocky Balboa—an underdog, to be sure, but a stoic one who keeps getting up. None of this was accidental, even if the source wasn't always Hillary herself. She was "manning up." Over the years, her hair had grown shorter, and her make-up thicker, like a mask. She played the men's game so well that James Carville eventually quipped, "If she gave [Obama] one of her cojones, they'd both have two."
Unfortunately, a man's rules seemed to be politics as usual. There were the researchers who planted fears that Obama had been schooled in a madrasah, the bizarre (for a Democrat) implication that McCain would make a better president than Obama, the appeal to voters' latent racism. It was these types of calculation that lost her many young women's votes. Worse, all this hardball was occasionally interrupted by cynical, strategic cries of sexism. It's indubitable that sexism infected the campaign, and the media's coverage. Of course, there's a double standard when it comes to men and women in politics—"the tyranny of high expectations," as Elizabeth Kolbert puts it in Thirty Ways of Looking at Hillary, a recent anthology. John McCain can call his wife a "cunt" in the earshot of reporters and get little blowback, yet Clinton can't change her hair without being called untrustworthy. But even last fall Clinton's relationship to sexism seemed schizophrenic: First she did the tough, impervious act, and then she played the dame in distress when a debate didn't go her way. In contrast to Obama's matter-of-fact relationship to race—as a subject that bore serious discussion but was hardly the be-all and end-all of American politics—Clinton's relationship to gender seemed at turns angry and deeply ambivalent.
Of course, there's some logic behind Clinton's calculation that running on gender was too politically risky. Race—however profound an issue it is in America—doesn't get in the way of the paradigm that treats ambition and leadership as masculine qualities. Gender does. Obama can still draw on the classic paradigm of leadership; Clinton would have had to create something new. To judge by all kinds of studies of women in private-sector leadership positions, this would have been a fraught battle, strewn with double standards. It's only fair to point out that many of Hillary's attributes—toughness, control, emotional distance—are qualities that are sometimes admired in men but almost never in women. We'll never know whether the traits Clinton displayed in this campaign would have drawn less animus from voters had she actually been a man.
But if ever there were a moment to have ventured that battle, this was it. If she'd run against an establishment candidate like Kerry, being the experienced woman would itself have seemed radical. In the context of Obama's transformative campaign, though, she couldn't afford to become the old-style candidate. As Obama grew more potent, Clinton grew more brittle. She allowed him to set the terms of debate—optimism, church choirs, soul music. Then she responded by tearing him down instead of defining the conversation on her own terms. At the apogee of her campaign's vicious sniping this spring, Clinton seemed to embody a travesty of feminist values—to be a cautionary emblem of what can happen to a gifted young woman embittered by the challenges she's had to face. It was as if she failed entirely to see the revolutionary nature of her achievement.
Last week, I e-mailed a group of young women, asking them what they thought of Hillary Clinton's campaign as it drew to a close. The women I heard from were mostly young, well-educated, upper-middle-class, and white—one of the groups that didn't flock to Hillary in numbers her campaign (and many second-generation feminists) had expected. I got one response over and over: frustration that Clinton hadn't done enough, as a historic "first," to differentiate herself from stodgy, old male Washington politics. But they also felt … ambivalent about their frustration. In that sense, you might say, nothing has changed. Women have always been ambivalent about Hillary. In another sense, though, she had been a candidate of profound change—albeit not in the way that you might think. Her own risk-aversion has given us "something to chew on," as a young film producer told me. And the media's sexism forced twenty- and thirtysomethings to recognize that feminism is not just "our mother's problem," as another young professional phrased it.
As he goes forward, Obama will undoubtedly be compared to Abraham Lincoln. But I always thought Whitman was a more apt predecessor for both candidates. Whitman embodied the ecstatic to which Hillary Clinton, at one time, linked her hopes for a better America. But she didn't make it part of her campaign. Instead, she made fun of Obama's knack for lighting a fire in the hearts of a wide swath of Americans. She preached pragmatism instead of fellow-feeling. And she scolded Obama for being starry-eyed. But her decision to turn away from the ecstatic was a great mistake, as Whitman might have understood. By stripping her campaign of its native appeal, by refusing to portray herself as part of a transcendent feminist narrative, by diluting the dynamic pleasures of mass political response, she let us down. After all, feminism need not be joyless.
Meghan O'Rourke is Slate's literary editor and the author of Halflife, a collection of poetry.Friday, May 23, 2008
Your Kingdom Come
"Our time would be a good time for your kingdom to come, because we have had enough of violence and travail." -Walter Brueggeman
As I look around at the world, I sometimes see little of the hope, joy, and peace that is supposed to come with the establishment of God's kingdom. Families are marred by conflict and tension; churches fight against one another; thousands of people are dying in natural disasters, in wars, and from famine. The poorest of the poor are hungrier than ever because of food shortages in the very places where food is most needed. The world is consumed with poverty and injustice. As I look back through the 2000 years of history since Christ dwelt with us on this earth, I wonder, have we made any progress on a grand scale? Or are things the same? Will they always be the same?
We have been trying to figure out the nature of God's kingdom for that 2000 years as well. Did he mean for us to conquer the world, threatening all those who choose not to bow down to him with violence? I don't think so. Did he mean only that his kingdom consists of the church and the people within it taking care of their own? I hope not. Did he mean only his heavenly kingdom and that we have no power to bring his justice to the earth? Again, I hope not, for this would produce a people concerned first and foremost for themselves as they become so consumed looking up and forward that they forget to look around. It has been so long...2000 years! What is God waiting for? What are we waiting for?
God, help us to be aware of our roles in the hastening of your kingdom, whatever its true nature may be. May we seek answers to the question, "What can I do to set forward the coming of the day of universal peace?"
As I look around at the world, I sometimes see little of the hope, joy, and peace that is supposed to come with the establishment of God's kingdom. Families are marred by conflict and tension; churches fight against one another; thousands of people are dying in natural disasters, in wars, and from famine. The poorest of the poor are hungrier than ever because of food shortages in the very places where food is most needed. The world is consumed with poverty and injustice. As I look back through the 2000 years of history since Christ dwelt with us on this earth, I wonder, have we made any progress on a grand scale? Or are things the same? Will they always be the same?
We have been trying to figure out the nature of God's kingdom for that 2000 years as well. Did he mean for us to conquer the world, threatening all those who choose not to bow down to him with violence? I don't think so. Did he mean only that his kingdom consists of the church and the people within it taking care of their own? I hope not. Did he mean only his heavenly kingdom and that we have no power to bring his justice to the earth? Again, I hope not, for this would produce a people concerned first and foremost for themselves as they become so consumed looking up and forward that they forget to look around. It has been so long...2000 years! What is God waiting for? What are we waiting for?
God, help us to be aware of our roles in the hastening of your kingdom, whatever its true nature may be. May we seek answers to the question, "What can I do to set forward the coming of the day of universal peace?"
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
San Diego
As most of you know, I spent last weekend in San Diego. My primary purpose for being there was to attend the Council of Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU) conference on gender relations on Christian college campuses. There were some very interesting conversations that took place. You can go to www.cccu.org if you're interested in learning more about what took place at the conference. The conference was hosted by Point Loma Nazarene University which sits on a hill overlooking the ocean. It was really beautiful.
But, what all of you really want to know about is my trip to the zoo. If you like zoos, and you haven't been to the San Diego Zoo, you're missing out! It was awesome. They have just about every kind of animal you can imagine. My favorites are the large apes (they had baby gorillas...so cute!), any kind of cat (especially the small wild cats that look like Oscar and Cassie; it's just funny to think about how they could probably rip me apart), polar bears, meercats (a mom and babies), and on this trip, the hummingbird aviary. Here are some photos of my favorites:
But, what all of you really want to know about is my trip to the zoo. If you like zoos, and you haven't been to the San Diego Zoo, you're missing out! It was awesome. They have just about every kind of animal you can imagine. My favorites are the large apes (they had baby gorillas...so cute!), any kind of cat (especially the small wild cats that look like Oscar and Cassie; it's just funny to think about how they could probably rip me apart), polar bears, meercats (a mom and babies), and on this trip, the hummingbird aviary. Here are some photos of my favorites:
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Church Softball
Eric has decided to play softball on Highland's team this spring and summer. Their team's name is Highland: God's Helpers, or HGH (let's just say they're a little full of themselves). Unfortunately, I haven't been able to go to any of the games yet, but apparently Eric was the hero of the first game. When he got home that evening, I noticed that his entire left leg was bloody. After wiping away the blood, we discovered that he had at least a 6-inch "boo-boo" (my term, not Eric's). I asked how on earth he did that, and he proceeded to tell me about how he had slid three times during the game, one of which was for the game-winning run. One of his slides was apparently head-first. He's been out of practice for a while. They have a team blog at www.hghsoftball.wordpress.com. It's incredibly entertaining, so check it out if you have time. I, by the way, will not be playing softball anytime soon. We went to the batting cages last night, and I hit about 5 out of 30 balls. It's not looking promising for me!
Saturday, March 22, 2008
My "Little Sister"
Many of you have heard me talk about Anyssia, my "little" through Big Brothers Big Sisters (BBBS), so I thought I'd share a picture with you. If you aren't familiar with BBBS, they provide one-to-one mentoring for any child who wishes to have a mentor. They are unique in the nonprofit sector because they have opened themselves up to outside program evaluation for years. The outcomes are incredible. "Littles" in the program are more likely to graduate from high school, less likely to engage in risky behaviors (alcohol and drug use and promiscuity), and less likely to end up in prison when compared to other children in similar circumstances who are not in the program. I know much of this because Eric works for BBBS here in Abilene, but I also know this from the position of a researcher. During my studies at Michigan State, I was on the positive youth development (PYD) research team. We conducted the type of program evaluations mentioned above and found repeatedly that a one-to-one relationship between a child and an adult other than his/her parents makes a significant difference in his/her pro-social development. Clearly, this is a program in which I really believe. Such a tangible difference can be made with such a small amount of time and effort. And while the research focuses on outcomes for the "littles," I think "bigs" would report significant positive outcomes as well. I know it's had positive effects in my life...joy, laughter, gratitude, opportunities to learn, and many others. If you've been thinking of getting involved in your community and have 4 hours per month to offer, try Big Brothers Big Sisters. You won't regret it.
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Hoopie
The other night I was sitting at a coffee shop with some good friends having good conversation, when I began to tell them about some of my childhood experiences of going "down hoopie" with my family. Being that I am from West Virginia, and they are from Texas and Oklahoma, they had never heard the word "hoopie" and wanted to know exactly what it means. Hoopie, I told them, is a place "down the river" from where my family's home was. It was where my Grandma Altie and Grandpa Charlie lived (although they weren't actually my grandparents at all; they were the parents of my great uncle). Several times during the year, typically at squirrel, deer, or turkey season, my entire extended family on my dad's side would make the trip down the river to hoopie. Grandpa Charlie and Grandma Altie owned hundreds of acres with beautiful forests, streams, and fields and two farm houses. They lived in one of the houses, and we would stay in the other when we visited. Their house was updated, but our house had been built in the early 1900s, and no updates had been made. I only remember one electric light in the entire house: a lone lightbulb that hung over the dining room table. Accompanying the lightbulb was always a strip of flypaper, dotted with its victims. There was a water pump in the backyard, and we bathed by pouring water into the kitchen sink. There were heaters of some type in the bedrooms, but I remember that we always had to turn them off at night because there was too much of a fire risk. So we would bundle up with an abundance of blankets and wake up in the morning with icy cold noses. Despite the lack of modern creature comforts, I always smile when I think about hoopie. Here are some of my favorite memories:
So, do you have a "hoopie"? I hope so.
- Having huge farm-style family lunches at Altie and Charlie's house when the men came in from their morning of hunting
- Exploring Altie's bookshelf and reading books that seemed so old they would surely fall apart in my hands
- Walking in the woods and seeing frog eggs for the first time (this happened shortly after I had seen E.T., and I remember asking my dad if they were E.T. eggs)
- Running through the fields, streams, and woods and catching all sorts of animals...turtles, salamanders, frogs, etc.
- Sitting around the living room and singing gospel songs, occasionally accompanied by someone playing the spoons
- Staying up late telling stories and jokes and thinking that I must have the best, most fun family in all the world
- Exploring the barns and sheds with my sister, always being fearful of meeting a snake
- Going out to the potato patch with my dad and Grandpa Charlie and sitting under the weeping willow that stood in the middle of the field
So, do you have a "hoopie"? I hope so.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
I Love My Husband!!
Well, it's my tenth Valentine's Day with Eric, so I want to take this opportunity to publicly declare my love for him. As I was writing in his card this morning, it struck me that I have no regrets about the decisions we've made in our life together. No regrets. How many people can say that? Of course, we've made mistakes, and there have been painful times, but I can honestly say that I treasure every moment we've shared together. There's nothing I would change about our journey. Eric has supported me endlessly, putting my needs (especially my career goals) ahead of his own time and time again. I love him in every sense of the word...agape, filia, and eros. My continual prayer is that I will be able to be a wife that is worthy of him each day.
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Out of Commission
This has been quite a week. Last weekend, I had the privilege to speak at the Zoe conference in Fresno, CA, and after an eventful trip home due to bad weather and flight cancellations, I finally arrived home on Monday evening. With a temperature...and as I would find out on Wednesday upon visiting the doctor, with the flu. I have never been so sick in my entire life. I had a 102 temperature for 4 days, the worst aches and pains I have ever felt, and sinus congestion that could not be alleviated. I did nothing but lie on the couch for the entire week. Eric took wonderful care of me, carting me to the doctor's office and making endless trips to the drug store and grocery store. At one point, he jokingly said to me, "Isn't it weird that you have something that some people die from?" My life, of course, wasn't in danger. But the sad truth of that question penetrated me later as I thought about all the people who will get the flu who don't have insurance to pay for their doctor visit and who don't have the $30 (more without insurance, I'm sure) to pay for the 10 pills that will kill the virus. Despite feeling awful, ultimately, at the end of this week of illness, I'm thankful...thankful for a job that allows me to miss a week of work and provides health and prescription insurance; thankful for a comfortable home in which to heal; and thankful for a husband who is attentive and caring. I hope that I'll continue to appreciate these things as the memory of my bout with the flu fades.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
I'm Hooked
Thanks to Eric's cousin, Zach, we were introduced to the joys of Guitar Hero while visiting our family over the holidays. When I first heard about the game, I thought, "That sounds really stupid." Well, it is stupid, but it's also a lot of fun. Eric and I saved some of our Christmas money so that we too could be the proud owners of Guitar Hero (although we only have Guitar Hero II, and we have a generic guitar). On Sunday, our first day of ownership, I played so much that I had to put Icy Hot on my wrists before going to bed. That's embarrassing. And, here's what real guitar players think about people who play Guitar Hero:
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
1992
When I was at my parents' over the holidays, we spent one evening going through boxes of pictures, and this is just one of the gems I found. Yes, this is me in 1992 at 15 years old. Note the huge hair and glasses, the color block shirt, and the stirrup pants. If you're observant, you'll notice that I'm reading It by Stephen King. During my junior high and early high school years, I was obsessed with him, and I was clearly very irritated that someone had interrupted my reading to take this picture. Go ahead...have some fun at my expense!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
