Faith Trumps Reason
A great deal has been written, some of it by me, about the frightening implications of a society that rejects science in favor of adherence to a fundamentalist belief system; one that does not acknowledge that there is information available to us today that was not available thousands of years ago. "God said it, I believe it, End of Story" is the bumper sticker summation of this point of view. Such a summation begs the question of which Old Testament God is being invoked: that one that the J (Jehovah) scribes wrote about, or perhaps the P (priestly) scribes interpreted. But belief isn't fussy. As long as the chosen God concurs with the "believer" in every respect, then that God is fine. The enormous appeal of this system is that nothing need be justified.
Our president subscribes to this interpretation of God as defender of irrational thought, and not just about scientific concepts. He campaigned on his constant declaration that he spoke to God, and would consult with God on all decisions. It is a very short trip from speaking to God, to speaking for God, to believing that he is God, and Bush made it in record time. Anything he says is truth simply because he says it, and no one should question otherwise. Thus, he only repeats himself, and never explains himself. God doesn't need to justify anything.
Sadly, there are still millions of Americans (some in my extended family) who are more than willing to view the president as a messianic messenger of God, simply because his dismissal of the need for study and analysis is more comfortable than the suggestions of policy "wonks" that there are few simple answers to complex questions.
So, administration talking points are constantly trotted out with the same bumper sticker mentality: Bush Said It, I Believe It. This morning's newspaper was filled with Bush "truths": "We have to fight them over there, or we will fight them over here." "To question the war enables the terrorists and places our troops in danger." "Clinton fired 93 attorneys, why the big deal about Bush firing eight? It's his right!!" And although the lie that Obama is a secret Muslin terrorist does not come directly from the White House, I hear it so often that I can't help but wonder if it originally sprang from the devious minds of the Rove "think tanks."
We are still being led by an administration that doesn't twist intelligence so much as dismisses it as irrelevant. Directors for important administration posts such as head of the Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Food and Drug Administration, National Park System, the National Broadcasting System, the Federal Emergency Management System, and on and on are all appointed because they do not believe in the agency they head, and can be counted on to "expose" their agency as incompetent and useless.
John Bolton was on the Daily Show recently, with his assertion that Bush only governed on behalf of those who voted for him. Otherwise, what was the point of elections? It's government by the 30%, for the 30%, and no one but the 30%. Bush has often said that he governs according to his beliefs alone, and will continue to do so if the 30% erodes to the point that only Laura and Barney agree with him. God is infallible; thus, so is Bush.
Congress is squandering its time on the details. As long as Bush is president, and Cheney is vice-president, effective and rational government is impossible. Replace the self-appointed "god" with the God who gave us the minds to study, to think, to reason, to empathize. Impeach now.
Blessed are the Merciful
Last week I spent several evenings speaking to various public groups on social justice issues. It's something I do all the time, and rarely give it a thought. The routine practice is that I am invited by some civic, political or faith-based group to speak on an issue that has caught the attention of the membership. Some of the folks there are interested in my topic, some want eagerly to help, and others are indifferent. A few, the radio announcers of the world, are hostile, but then they are paid to be "controversial."
Monday night, however, was a different story. I was not talking to a self-selected crowd of persons engaged in civic endeavors in one way or another. I was talking to a "town hall" meeting comprised of members of the general public. Much has been made of the bitterness and anger felt by the "Christian" right, and I've nodded and wondered what lay beneath it. For the first time, however, I really felt it. It is terrifying.
Looking out over the crowd, I saw well over a hundred well-dressed men and women, most of whom were middle-aged, and all of whom seemed comfortably well off. They have every reason to be satisfied. They live in a right-wing community, governed according to their tastes. Taxes are at the lowest possible given state law (which means they are extremely low), governmental regulation in the form of sign laws, set-backs, tree ordnances, etc., is non-existent, not a dime is spent on social services. The schools produce FCAT scores that are the highest in Florida, with meager per capita funding. Churches crowd every street. Diversity is held to a minimum. From my point of view, this must be right-wing paradise.
Obviously, I am wrong. These people are filled with rage. They trembled with anger when I spoke compassionately about people who are barely getting by. When I spoke of how our homeless are sleeping in bathroom stalls and stair risers in the churches that open, because there is not enough room to meet the need, men rose up shouting that the solution was to not open the church doors at all, but to leave the homeless in the cold and hope they froze to death.
In the past, I have wondered at the persecution complex of many in the far right. Until recently, they have controlled both houses of Congress, the Presidency, the Supreme Court, the media, major corporations. It couldn't be the "Establishment" trying to crucify them - they are the establishment.
To my shock, I realized that according to their lights, I was the persecutor. Every time I spoke of families broken by domestic violence, I was throwing an insult to their way of life. When I talked about giving a 13-year-old homeless girl the first coat she had ever had, I cracked the mortar holding their world together. By talking of families that had fallen into the underclass, I was pointing out the tenuousness of their hold on the middle class. Most of these families have little savings and great debt, and their house is built on sand.
From my liberal point of view, the anger should be directed not at the people who cannot harm them at all, but the people who are actively causing them harm. The corporations who outsource jobs rather than pay living wages, the government that raises interest rates on student loans and restrict Pell grants, the insurance companies that devote enormous resources to avoiding providing the services for which they are contractually obligated.
But it doesn't work that way, because the corrupt CEOs, the government bureaucrats and the lobbyists are not real to those of us living on the outskirts of the country. They come across as figures of authority, to be admired for their achievements, even when the achievements come at the expense of those providing the admiration. They are abstract constructs, revered by a patriarchal society.
The poor, however, are very real. We trip over them on the sidewalks. We barely miss them with our cars when we belatedly notice them walking along the side of the road at night. They sit in our parks, and look mournful and hopeless as they cluster in groups near the library. They provide a living reproach, and a terrifying example. They take nothing from us, but our assurance that the world is a safe and forgiving place.
The next night I spoke to a wholly different group, one that was eager to work on behalf of others. The stress of the previous night was washed away for a bit. But, like the tide, it will return. But perhaps, better clarity and experience will provide a more effective response.
On a personal note - I am leaving my employer of the last 10 years, and setting up the Homeless Continuum of Care as a viable, independent organization. I have been raising funds for three different non-profits, and it was becoming too confusing even for me. Thus, I have resigned from the large company that can get by without me, and dedicating myself to the causes where I fill a critical need. It feels a lot like jumping off a cliff, but fortunately I seem to have a lot of people ready to make certain I've got a safety net somewhere at the bottom.
Truly Free to Choose
For the past few months, the front page of our local paper was intermittently filled with the court martial of an Air Force officer convicted of six counts of rape. Given the profile of most sex offenders, and the general unwillingness of any rape victim (especially men) to report rape, it can be safely assumed that the total number of victims was far higher. Indeed, we know that two reported victims were not called in as witnesses since they were civilians in a different jurisdiction.
What makes this relevant is how these rapes occurred: a gentle-looking, well-dressed officer in the military staked out popular nightclubs, and used date-rape drugs to overcome his victims. There was nothing about him that would make normal alarm bells go off, and alert the average young man or woman that something was not right.
The very normality of this rapist’s appearance is absolutely typical. The average sex offender claims many victims before being apprehended, and he couldn’t manage it if the word “monster” was emblazoned on his forehead.
What is remarkable about this recent case is that a conviction was obtained. Date rape drugs and alcohol, either in combination or alone, are useful to rapists because they cloud memory and diminish the credibility of a victim’s report. While 38% of rape victims (according to the US Department of Justice) report crimes to law enforcement, less than 10% of rapes facilitated by drugs and/or alcohol are reported. Less than 1% of these cases are prosecuted, and even fewer prosecutions result in conviction. By and large, rapists using date rape drugs and/or alcohol are free to claim further victims without interference.
The instinctive societal approach to stopping drug and alcohol facilitated rape is to tell young men and women not to drink, and thus avoid being a potential victim. Liquor sales, however, tell us this is not a fool-proof approach. The crowds at nightclubs indicate that drinking can be fun, and most of us, not just young people, will occasionally choose immediate pleasure over an abstract risk such as rape. As is often the case with life, we need a Plan B.
The first line of defense is to fortify our community’s refusal to tolerate rape. We are a mixed message culture, and much of the message aimed at young men encourages sexual aggression and conquest. At the same time, men and women who come forth with rape reports are often greeted with suspicion. Women who have been drinking are assumed to have forfeited their right to have non-consensual sex, rather than treated as victims whose rights were stripped from them.
The second line of defense is generally the only one promoted: learning how not to be a victim: know where you are going, inform others as to where you will be and when you expect to be back, use your own transportation or call a cab, ask a friend to call to make sure you got home safely. Young men and women who are known to have people looking out for them are at dramatically less risk than those who are isolated. Since a rape-free society is not likely to take shape tomorrow, being careful will remain good advice for some time to come.
Still, part of being young is to explore options and make choices, some of which are wiser than others. What doesn't need to be part of being young is to pay for a poor choice with the anguish of having become a victim of rape.
