Two Campaign-Related Videos

Hat tip to Andrew Sullivan.

A "Morning After Pill" for Political Mistakes?

Dan Dennett Video Clip -- A Proposal to Teach All Religions in All Schools

At 4:20 after the start of the video, he advocates for teaching a fact-based curriculum on all religions.

Dennett's suggestion is very similar to the one that Joel made on his blog.

Maybe Disney will make a movie about this year's election season?

[Hat tip to Andrew Sullivan for posting this video clip on his blog.]

Video Resource on Cultural Misappropriation

Here are two clips from White Shamans and Plastic Medicine Men, a one-half hour documentary dealing with the popularization and commercialization of Native American spiritual traditions by Non-Indians.


White Shamans and Plastic Medicine Men, Part 1 of 3



White Shamans and Plastic Medicine Men, Part 2 of 3



I found a study guide for this documentary that asks the following questions:

1. What are the motivations for many non-Indians who take use Indian religious practices?

2. Do you think any of them are aware of the problems caused by what they do?

3. Do you think any of them consider the possible dangers related to their appropriation of Indian religion?

4. Which of the non-Indian people interviewed might be the most aware of the fact that they are exploiting Indian religion and people?

5. What are some of the recognizable names discussed in the video?

6. When non-Indians appropriate elements of Indian religions, what does it say about their view of the complexity of Indian cultural practices?

7. Why do they think it is okay to do use Indian religious practices?

I saw this video several years ago when I attended a Young Religious Unitarian Universalist "Spirituality Development Conference" as an adult advisor.

This documentary with a follow-up discussion would make a very useful adult or youth religious education class on appropriate and inappropriate borrowing from other cultures in Unitarian Universalism.

Planned Parenthood Response to McCain's Attack on Abuse Prevention

[Hat tip to Andrew Sullivan for making this resource known to me through his blog.]

McCain speaks out against child abuse prevention

I bet my headline has caught your attention.

Some may think it's unfair to make this charge against Senator McCain.

But it's really no more unfair the recent McCain campaign criticism of Senator Obama's support of age-appropriate sexuality education during his time in the Illinois State Legislature ("McCain criticizes Obama vote on sex ed legislation")

Senator Obama's support of age-appropriate sexuality education is endorsed by public health and sexuality education experts like Rev. Debra Haffner:

Educating Children for Prevention
A high quality sexuality education program, such as Our Whole Lives (OWL), is one of the best methods for sexual abuse prevention. Children who learn that their bodies are good, that their sexuality is a gift, how to make good decisions, and the language to communicate accurately and effectively about sexuality are also being prepared to respond appropriately when faced with abusive behaviors, to assert their right to control their own bodies, and to tell an adult if such behaviors occur.

So ... Senator McCain's criticism of Senator Obama's support of " ... one of the best methods for sexual abuse prevention" tells me that Senator McCain is either intentionally or accidentally speaking out against effective child abuse prevention.

Many Unitarian Universalist and United Church of Christ congregations offer this type of age-appropriate sexuality education in our congregations for children in kindergarten and first grade. And the excellent resources used in these congregations can also be used in other religious and secular settings as well.

Now -- I don't seriously believe that Senator McCain is really in favor of child abuse.

But I do believe he is in favor of putting his honor and integrity into a blind trust so he can be elected President.

The Religious Gap Between "Theory" and "Practice" ...

Greta Christina (a blogging favorite of mine who writes on "Sex, atheism, politics, dreams, and whatever") recent wrote a post on atheist bloggers.

Greta made an observation about the gap between religious "theory" (religion as taught in seminary and the academic world) and religious "practice" (religion as it is actually lived in congregations and communities):

Truth to tell, though? I honestly don't care all that much about advanced modern theology. If you have an argument to make, I'll certainly read it. But for the most part, I'm just not all that interested in religion as it's believed and practiced by a handful of theological scholars. I am primarily interested in religion as it overwhelmingly plays out in the real world.

Greta's comment got me to wondering about Unitarian Universalism. Do we have a gap between academic "theory" and day-to-day "practice" in the Unitarian Universalist tradition?

Can we call it sexism if it's done by her supporters?

Several days ago, I asked a question on my blog about Alaska's Govenor Palin's selection as the Republican Vice-President pick with a t-shirt that referenced her perceived attractiveness:

"I wonder if this is the intended message of Senator McCain's VP pick?"

A few Unitarian Universalist bloggers criticized me for asking this question.

However, it's interesting to view some of the campaign buttons worn by Gov. Palin's supporters:



I'm relieved to see that her selection as the Republican VP candidate was a measured and well-reasoned decision based on her public service experience as a PTA parent/community organizer and politician.

It would be a shame if her appearance was a major factor in Senator McCain's decision-making process.

The 2008 election is more important than a high school election,

However, our elections seem to resemble high school elections in terms of framing of the candidates. And because of this, the outcome is worse for our nation.

Instead of voting for the "smart" candidate, we end up voting for the more popular kid or more attractive kid.

This is how we ended up with the "class clown" president instead of the Nobel Peace Prize winner president in the White House.

And we can't afford another four years of "class clown" government.

Debating the Wisdom of Abstinence-Only Sexuality Education

It may be time for us as a nation to examine the public health outcomes and public policy impact of our nation's decision to federally funded "abstinence-only" sexuality education to the exclusion of other types of sexuality education in our schools and our wider society.

There are two recent news stories that I saw on Google News that are related to our public policy decision on this.

One story is concerned with the personal life of Gov. Palin's oldest daughter:

Gov. Palin Says Her Unmarried 17-Year-Old Daughter Is Pregnant
"We have been blessed with five wonderful children who we love with all our heart and mean everything to us," reads the statement from Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and her husband Todd.

"Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned," they continued, referring to their 17-year-old daughter. "As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support.

"The Palins said that "Bristol and the young man she will marry are going to realize very quickly the difficulties of raising a child, which is why they will have the love and support of our entire family.

The second story deals with the public policy position that Gov. Palin has taken regarding "abstinence-only" sexuality education:

Palin backed abstinence education
(CNN) – Sarah Palin, who announced on Monday that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant, indicated during her run for Alaska governor that she was a firm supporter of abstinence-only education in schools.

In a 2006 Eagle Forum questionnaire, Palin indicated that she supported funding abstinence-until-marriage education programs instead of teaching sex-education programs.

"Explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support," Palin wrote in the conservative group’s questionnaire.

However, we do know that the comprehensive sexuality education programs used in Western Europe do have a better public health and public policy outcomes in comparison with the United States. However, this isn't the type of sexuality education that Gov. Palin or Sen. McCain supports.

Here are a few graphs from the Advocates for Youth "Adolescent Sexual Health in Europe and the U.S.—Why the Difference?" fact sheet:


If the teen pregnancy, teen abortion, and teen sexually-transmitted infection rates in the US were the same as the Netherlands, we would have 657,000 fewer teen pregnancies, 441,000 fewer teen births, and 215,000 fewer teen abortions. It would also save the taxpayers $921 million each year (in 1997 dollars).

Unplanned pregnancy is a something that can be prevented. It's not something that "just happens" and it doesn't take "rocket science" to prevent it.

Our Western European cousins have an excellent track record with promoting healthy sexual decision-making in their teens. This is something that we could do in the US if we want to.

As Unitarian Universalists working in partnership with the United Church of Christ, our gift to the wider world is our excellent "Our Whole Lives" lifespan series of comprehensive sexuality education curricula.

It's amazing what one finds on CafePress ...

I wonder if this is the intended message of Senator McCain's VP pick?

"Postchristianity" and the Future of Unitarian Universalism in North America (Part II)

I understand that folks are upset by the recent use of the "p-word" by a Unitarian Universalist Association spokesperson after the recent Knoxville shooting. I've got several comments about this in my last blog article ("'Postchristianity' and the Future of Unitarian Universalism in North America").

But I'm going to post this question to see if we can get folks to focus on the long-term demographic trends in North America that point towards a postchristian society:

If we end up with a postchristian society similar to Western European societies where religion fulfills at most a cultural, symbolic, and ceremonial role, what is our future as a Unitarian Universalist movement in this postchristian society?

I would like to focus on this question and how it might affect future Unitarian Universalist growth and survival.

Any thoughts?

"Postchristianity" and the Future of Unitarian Universalism in North America

Postchristianity has been talked about on the Unitarian Universalist blogosphere for the past few weeks -- you can read these discussions here, here, here, here, and here.

However, I think we're overlooking the very real "postchristian" demographic trend in North America and its impact on our congregations.

Here's a brief quote from Wikipedia to help us with what the term "postchristian" might mean:

Postchristianity, postchristendom or postchristianism are variants of a term used to describe a contemporary cultural attitude strictly linked to postmodernism. It may include personal world views, ideologies, religious movements or societies that are no longer rooted in the language and assumptions of Christianity, though it had previously been in an environment of ubiquitous Christianity (i.e., Christendom). Neopaganism and its cultural backgrounds, are the most notable examples of this kind of postchristian new religious movements.

Thus defined, a post-Christian world is one where Christianity is no longer the dominant civil religion, but one that has, gradually over extended periods of time, assumed values, culture, and worldviews that are not necessarily Christian (and further may not necessarily reflect any world religion's standpoint). This situation applies to much of Europe, in particular in Central and Northern Europe, where no more than half of the residents in those lands profess belief in a transcendent, personal and monotheistically-conceived deity.

Or in simpler terms, postchristian describes a culture where Christianity had been the dominant civil religion in the past, is still present today, but is not the dominant religion today.

In other words, religious life in our culture is moving from Christianity as the majority religion to simply being one of many religious views in North America. The suggestion that Christianity is present but not dominant visually depicted by this Universalist lapel pin where the cross is present but not central (image provided by UniUniques):

If the term "postchristian" is insulting, I suppose this lapel pin is insulting as well. Go figure.

In a postchristian world, we can't assume that our potential members will understand the Protestant Christian assumptions that influence our Unitarian Universalist congregations in the past and today.

We will see this demographic shift happen in Canada first based on the extrapolation of current demographics provided by the Ontario Consultants for Religious Tolerance:

"The percentage of Canadians who identify themselves as Christian has been dropping by about 0.9 percentage points per year. This is very close to the rate of decline in the U.S. If this trend continues, then by about the year 2023, non-Christians will outnumber Christians in Canada."

And here is their prediction for the United States:

[In 2001,] 76.5% (159 million) of Americans identify themselves as Christian. This is a major slide from 86.2% in 1990. Identification with Christianity has suffered a loss of 9.7 percentage points in 11 years -- about 0.9 percentage points per year. This decline is identical to that observed in Canada between 1981 and 2001. If this trend has continued, then:

• At the present time (2007-MAY), only 71% of American adults consider themselves Christians
• The percentage will dip below 70% in 2008
• By about the year 2042, non-Christians will outnumber the Christians in the U.S.

In the past, we have recruited many of our members from those who have left Christianity to become Unitarian Universalist as adults. Close to 90% of our adult membership are adult converts who were not raised as Unitarian Universalist.

However, this group of potential Unitarian Universalists is shrinking.

What impact will this have on our future growth and long-term survivability as a religious movement?

While we discuss the suggestion that "postchristian" is an insulting or loaded term, this demographic issue remains untouched even though it could and probably will impact us within the next 10 to 30 years.

If McCain compares Obama to Britney ...

... then this "viral video" response is probably the funniest response to McCain's ad:

Candace Chellew-Hodge's Open Letter to Sean Hannity

Rev. Candace Chellew-Hodge has written a response to the right-wing pundit incitement to violence connected to the recent Knoxville Unitarian Universalist church shooting.

Candace is the founder/editor of Whosoever: An Online Magazine for GLBT Christians and currently serves as associate pastor at Garden of Grace United Church of Christ in Columbia, S.C.

Here's a short quote from her open letter to Sean Hannity (who used to be a former co-worker when she worked in the news media business before entering the ministry):

Sean, you occupy a position of power. All words have power, but some words are more powerful than others simply because they are amplified from a larger stage. With power comes responsibility. If there is any of that old Sean left—the one before the big office, the popular TV and radio show and best selling books—I appeal to that man. Understand the power of your words. I know that words of division are profit-making words for you. We human beings apparently love to see a good fight, or feel our views justified by a good argument. But I hope this incident will give you pause and help you begin to choose your words more wisely. I hope, in choosing future words, you’ll consider not what’s best for the Hannity bank account, but what’s best for humanity.

I long for the day when profitable words are words that uplift, encourage, and inspire people. The strength of this nation has always been our unity in diversity and our unity in the face of adversity. By using your words to create a world of “us” and “them” you only perpetuate violence and discord in our society. I am asking you, Sean, to examine yourself and your words. You don’t have to agree with liberals and their views, but you can oppose liberal ideas without painting those who hold those beliefs as enemies who need to be stopped or defeated. If conservative ideas are truly superior, then a compelling case can be made for them without resorting to the politics of personal destruction.

Sean, your words have the power to heal and the power to destroy. The choice is yours.

The rest of the letter can be read here.

Her new book, Bulletproof Faith: A Spiritual Survival Guide for Gay and Lesbian Christians, will be published in September 2008 by Jossey-Bass.

Dan Dennett: Ants, terrorism, and the awesome power of memes (TED Talk Video Clip)

Bloggingheads Video Clip -- "Science Saturday: The Young and the Restless"

Check out the Blogginghead online conversation between Abigail Smith (University of Oklahoma grad student and blog author of erv) and PZ Myers (University of Minnesota - Morris professor and blog author of Pharyngula).

An excellent explanation of the importance of Richard Lenski's research on evolutionary biology of bacteria during this discussion can be found here.

The portion of this discussion related to recent Bill Donohue-PZ Myers dispute can be found here.

Background info on the Donohue-Myers dispute can be found here and here.

More Outrage and Death Threats Over "Religious Insult" - Round Two

After the initial "cracker kidnapping" incident, the Minnesota biology professor PZ Myers has commented on the over-reaction on the Pharyngula science blog:

IT'S A FRACKIN’ CRACKER!

PZ Myers blog was noticed by Bill Donohue and the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights:

MINNESOTA PROF PLEDGES TO DESECRATE EUCHARIST

Bill Donohue has asked his followers to harass Myers and the University of Minnesota President. Myers' reaction to this harassment can be found here:

Now I've got Bill Donohue's attention

Earlier today, Myers reported the following response to his criticism of the religious over-reaction from Donohue and the Catholic League:

Fight back against Bill Donohue!

Instead of "turning the other cheek," Myers blog commentary on the "cracker" incident has earned the following reaction:

So far today, I have received 39 pieces of personal hate mail of varying degrees of literacy, all because I was rude to a cracker. Four of them have included death threats, a personal one day record. Thirty-four of them have demanded that I be fired. Twenty-five of them have told me to desecrate a copy of the Koran, instead, or in some similar way offend Muslims, because — in a multiplicity of ironic cluelessness — apparently only some religious icons must be protected, and I would only offend Catholics because they are all so nice that none of them would wish me harm. I even have one email that says I should be fired, that the author would like to kill me, and that I only criticize because Catholics are so gentle and kind.

Myers has also received death threats in the comments on his blog:

If God doesn't get you, I will

You're a fucking giant sized scumbag. I hope you die slowly and painfully. Cunt.

And it's starting to get noticed outside the blogosphere and in the mainstream media:

Communion wafer held 'hostage' raises holy heck

And we're still waiting for the moderate religious voices to condemn threats of violence and economic harm over a cracker that wasn't eaten and the subsequent commentary about this uneaten cracker.

Death Threats Over "Religious Insult" in the US??

Remember the Danish Muhammad cartoon controversy where a perceived religious insult led to death threats for those doing the insulting?

Apparently something very similar happened in Florida on a college campus after a student "kidnapped" the "body of Christ":

• Student Who Took Religious Icon Getting Death Threats
• 'Body Of Christ' Snatched From Church, Held Hostage By UCF Student

So far, I have seen no press coverage of moderate or liberal Christian voices speaking out against this religious extremism happening within Christianity.

This is no different from the relative lack of moderate or liberal Islamic voices speaking out against religious extremism happening within Islam.

Apparently, the safety of a human is less important to some Christians than the safety of a cracker.

Does this describe a "typical" Unitarian Universalist?

I ran across this web site after reading an interview with the author.

Much of this list describes a very common demographic group in Unitarian Universalist congregations. Much of this list would describe (in biting satirical accuracy) a "stereotypical" Unitarian Universalist.

Check out the complete list here.

Given the population demographic trends presented in Rev. Peter Morales' opening speech at the 2008 General Assembly candidates forum, this is an area for future work.