jimrigby.org

Our sermon tomorrow will be about the Sneetches, which is Dr. Seuss’ classic story of beach dwelling creatures some of which had stars on their bellies and thought they were superior, others who thought they were inferior because they had no stars, and a shrewd businessman who figures out how to profit either way.

Our scripture will be Galatians where Saint Paul declares, “in Christ, there is neither neither Jew nor gentile, slave nor free, male nor female.” For Paul, being “in Christ” did not refer to being a member of the Christian church. I believe it was a universal mindset that saw human beings as beyond religious affiliation, beyond economic class and beyond gender roles.

The Sneetches was written as a parable about race, but it works for other class issues as well. The story might even suggest how issues of class are complicated under capitalism. Both Dr. Seuss’ story and St. Paul’s passage call us to a kind of revolutionary consciousness. Can we picture humanity beyond gender roles, beyond racial or economic class, and beyond even religious itself?

Oh my gosh, I should have read the paper earlier! San Antonio passed anti-bias protections for gay, lesbian, bi and transgender residents yesterday!

The vote was being watched nationally after Elisa Chan from the city council called homosexual persons “disgusting.” Conservative religious groups claimed that protections against harassing and abusing gays would limit their freedoms. Texas Attourney General Gregg Abbott was in the awkward position of explaining why some Texas citizens don’t deserve equal protection.

After all was said and done, the city council vote was 8-3.  Thank you San Antonio, and welcome to the 180 other cities who have passed equal rights protections for all of their citizens.

I have no doubt that Assad’s regime is a rogue state and that the world community needs to address his war crimes, but the US is in particularly bad position to intervene. Allow me to give a little background.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the primary judicial branch of the United Nations. In 1984 the ICJ ruled that the US had violated international law in its covert war against Nicaragua by mining harbors and intervening in the affairs of a sovereign state. In 1986 the US renounced the jurisdiction of the World Court and, thereby, international law. In other words, we declared ourselves to be a rogue state.

The International Criminal Court is a world tribunal founded to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression. The US has signed the declaration but never submitted it for ratification. So, whereas recognizing that court would give the US the power to try Assad for his alleged murder of 100,000 people, it would also expose American politicians like Bill Clinton who is accused by some of killing at least five times that many during the embargo of Iraq. It is said some of our former leaders like Henry Kissinger do not travel to nations they know might charge them with war crimes. How can a nation that views itself as above the law, bring another nation to justice?

Few would argue against the proposition that, if Assad used chemical weapons, he should be brought to justice, but why would we not wait for the UN to finish its investigation to know for sure who did the crime? Is it not strange to punish an infraction of international law with a vigilante action?

Chemical weapons are an abomination, but how can we know that the US will not bomb that nation with the same immoral weapons, like depleted uranium, that is still causing birth defects in Iraq? One study showed that Fallujah in Iraq has “the highest rate of genetic damage in any population ever studied.” Or will we use our cluster bombs that are still blowing of the limbs of children decades after wars end? Our leadership assures us that only weapons will be destroyed, but will they also promise not to use the kinds of immoral weapons we have used elsewhere that injure people after the fact?

I am not arguing that Assad should not be brought to justice, I’m just suggesting that it be done by nations who know what the word means. One rogue state is in no position to bring another to international standards. When our nation, itself, submits to international law, then we can preach to other nations. Until then, we should leave the matter of enforcing international law to those who obey it.

Before you support bombing Syria, please take a look at current affairs in Libya. We were told the bombing there was for humanitarian purposes. After Gaddafi’s anti-western government was toppled, western businesses gathered to plunder the bleeding nation, but black markets cropped up everywhere and the country fell into further chaos. There was no talk from our leaders of humanitarianism after we got what we wanted.

“As world attention focused on the coup in Egypt and the poison gas attack in Syria over the past two months, Libya has plunged unnoticed into its worst political and economic crisis since the defeat of Gaddafi two years ago. Government authority is disintegrating in all parts of the country putting in doubt claims by American, British and French politicians that Nato’s military action in Libya in 2011 was an outstanding example of a successful foreign military intervention which should be repeated in Syria.” -The Independent

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/special-report-we-all-thought-libya-had-moved-on–it-has-but-into-lawlessness-and-ruin-8797041.html

A Florida man has been accused of double homicide after killing two men and shooting another eleven times. His defense? “Stand your ground” law, of course, which says an armed person does not need to retreat if they feel threatened. The Bush Doctrine is also sited as precedence of pre-emptive defense. If you are enjoying living in the wild wild west be sure to thank a Republican.

http://rt.com/usa/bush-stand-ground-florida-homicide-433/

“Political power grows from the barrel of a gun.” -Mao Tse-tung

“Ditto.” -Barack Obama, Nobel Peace Laureate 

As our nation considers bombing Syria instead of working with the rest of the world to explore negotiated solutions first, it is helpful to listen to the arguments that persuaded England to abandon the idea that unilateral bombing was the only or even best solution. Thanks to Alex Doherty of the New Left Project for the link:

“Military options range from pointless to “extremely dangerous”, and are generally both. A 2012 paper in the Journal of Peace Research found “that military interventions [in civil wars] in favor of the rebel faction … tend to increase government killings of civilians by about 40%”. This supports an “academic consensus” that outside involvement makes civil wars longer, more bloody, and more difficult to resolve peaceably. The “worst results typically involve multiple external actors with conflicting objectives”—as in Syria.” -Tim Holms, New Left Project

http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/who_has_the_power_to_make_war_on_syria

These are very difficult times for me, when the nation I love is about to unilaterally bomb yet another sovereign nation, and most of my friends are acting like everything is perfectly normal. “Well, we have to do something!” Yes but does it have to be violent, and do we have to do it alone or with some pathetic trickle of a coalition? My friends return a blank stare.

If an individual acted like our nation does, he or she would be committed. If an individual appointed himself as sheriff of the neighborhood and burned down the houses of people he considered bad, none of us would like him. If he was asked what made his victims bad, and he responded without irony that they were violent and did not obey the law, it would not be evidence of his superiority but further proof of his insanity.

If you make a list of the nations we have “helped” in the last fifty years and ask how they are doing today, it would not be pretty. After fifty years of covert and overt interventions Iraq, Libya and Egypt are in chaos. Central America is still bleeding from our “help.” The nations doing well in South America are usually those who avoided falling under our wing. And yet, Americans return to the narrative of our own saintly superiority like a lunatic to an imaginary crown.

I am all in favor of international efforts to bring about regime change in Syria, but right now that nation is locked in a bloody civil war. Perhaps I am cynical but it appears our strategy is to keep the two sides balanced so the nation bleeds out and doesn’t cause problems elsewhere. That strategy will not save lives. Our president made a foolish statement about Syria crossing a “red line” if it used chemical weapons, and now if he does not act the US will lose credibility. Perhaps, but then let’s be honest that our concern is not about saving lives, but saving face.

Most of the world is saying we are wrong, which we hear as proof of their cowardice. When the whole world says you are wrong, sane people question themselves, crazy people double down on their insanity. I dearly love my nation, but at times like this, when we put on our tinfoil hat and take aim at yet another “monster,” with weapons the like of which the world has never seen, I have trouble breathing.

Men of Texas, when we were young there were always women and girls who cheered for us. Whether it was in sports or some other quest, their support brought out something in us that might not have come out any other way. For forty thousand years women have given that support to men. Now it is time for us to return the favor.

We are at a time in human history where women are throwing off the chains of patriarchy and defining their own lives. Women are moving into positions of leadership thought impossible not that long ago. Honoring the wisdom and strength of women will bring our species to a new chapter in our history. But this coming to consciousness in women has brought about a vicious counter reaction from some men. In particular, women who take responsibility for their own bodies and reproductive decisions have been vilified and attacked by cowardly men in power. This attack is despotic for, if a person does not have rights over her own body, no other right matters.

On October 29, unless a court blocks the new law, poor rural women in Texas will begin to lose access to safe abortions. Texas men and women must rally to help them obtain transportation. Eventually, we must remove the political bullies who are causing this misery, but, for now, we must rally to help our sisters claim control of their own lives.

In the coming months we will all have opportunities to help, but men in particular need to search our consciences to calculate the debt we owe to the women who have supported us, and to recognize our duty to return that support at this critical time. We cannot be leaders in this women’s movement, but we can be their best cheerleaders as they lead us all into a fuller and richer humanity.

It is a living question. Is Christianity honest enough to survive?

Religions die just like people do. Usually religions die after plucking out their own eyes so that their beliefs will not be offended by reality. They die after severing their lifeline to the common good to protect their special claims of exclusivity. They die after warm blooded creativity is replaced by heart numbing ritual.

If you look carefully at any living religion, you will see it was built from the broken bones of earlier religious forms. The Ten Commandments are a remake of the Code of Hammurabi, the traditional Christian image of the devil is clearly a remake of the god Pan, and so on.

Religion is always a bridge we build between the past and the future. Can Christianity be radically honest about its own multicultural beginnings? Can we recognize the stories and images in our text that were taken from other religions, or will we continue to pretend we have been given a special revelation? Will Christianity be radically honest about  the superiority of science in testing reality claims, or will we continue to turn to science only when it confirms what we already believe? Will we consecrate ourselves to the common good or will we continue to try to cast the world in our own image?

Is the church honest enough to survive? This is a living question. The church will answer that question by how we respond to the crises that confront us. If the church can surrender claims of certainty and of superiority, then, even if it dies,  the church will be reborn like the phoenix. But if we lack this courage to be radically honest and authentically humble, the question is answered: we are already dead.

Multiple sources are reporting that Syrian rebels have admitted that they accidentally mishandled chemical weapons provided to them by the Saudis. The situation is still unclear, but hopefully the revelation will dampen the Obama Administration’s pressure to bomb the nation.

Thanks to Craig M. Watts for examiner link.

http://www.examiner.com/article/breaking-news-rebels-admit-gas-attack-result-of-mishandling-chemical-weapons

Below is the Voice of Russia story:

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_08_30/Syrian-rebels-take-responsibility-for-the-chemical-attack-admitting-the-weapons-were-provided-by-Saudis-1203/