by Urban Faith Staff | Jun 27, 2012 | Feature, Headline News |
HOW TO HELP THOSE AFFECTED BY
WILDFIRES IN COLORADO
FINANCIAL GIFTS ARE THE BEST WAY TO HELP!
FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO VOLUNTARY AGENCIES RESPONDING TO DISASTERS IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE WAY TO HELP
Cash allows disaster agencies to purchase exactly what is needed.
To make a financial gift to the organization of your choice, dial 2-1-1 (or 1-866-485-0211) for a list of reputable agencies responding to the disaster.
Member agencies of Colorado Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster does not promote one charity over another. Please donate to a charity of your choice. At this time, the following charities are responding to multiple wildfires in Colorado.
Agencies Responding to Boulder Fire:
American Red Cross
1-800 RED CROSS
444 Sherman St.
Denver, CO 80203
(designate to the Boulder Fire)
www.coloradoredcross.org
Agencies Responding to Waldo Fire:
American Red Cross
1-800 RED CROSS
444 Sherman St.
Denver, CO 80203
(designate to the Waldo Fire)
www.coloradoredcross.org
The Salvation Army
303-866-9216
1370 Pennsylvania Ave.
Denver, CO 80132
www.imsalvatoinarmy.org
Designate to Disaster Relief
|
Agencies Responding to High Park Fire:
American Red Cross
1-800 RED CROSS
444 Sherman St.
Denver, CO 80203
(designate to the Northern Colorado Chapter-High Park Fire)
www.coloradoredcross.org
The Salvation Army
303-866-9216
1370 Pennsylvania Ave.
Denver, CO 80132
www.imsalvatoinarmy.org
Designate to Disaster Relief
Larimer Humane Society
5137 S. College Ave.
Fort Collins, CO 80525
www.larimerhumane.org
Adventist Community Services LIFT
www.acslift.org
Note in comments that donation is for High Park Fire
Rist Canyon Volunteer Fire Department
Donations can be mailed to:
RCVFD-Treasurer
PO Box 2
Bellvue, CO 80521
|
Glacier View Volunteer Fire Department
Please send financial donations in the form of a check to: 1414 Green Mountain, Livermore CO 80536
Poudre Canyon Volunteer Fire DepartmentMail donations to:
|
|
Poudre Canyon Volunteer Fire Department
PO Box 364 LaPorte, CO 80535-0364The local Canyon Utilities is helping by taking credit card donations over the phone, please dial (970) 881-2262.
VOLUNTEERING
DO NOT GO TO THE SCENE OF A DISASTER
The arrival of unexpected volunteers will interfere with response efforts.
STAY SAFE by volunteering with a reputable agency!
Volunteers will be needed most during the recovery phase. Please be patient and WAIT until relief agencies can train you and use your help.
Please Click here to sign up to volunteer and list in the ‘Comments’ section the name of the fire you would like to give your time to. If a volunteer need is identified, you will be contacted by the agency that can utilize your skills.
A limited number of volunteer opportunities have been identified to assist at the Donations Collection Center for the High Park Fire. Shifts are from 7:45am-12:00pm, 11:45am-4:00pm, 3:45pm-8:00pm everyday of the week. In the ‘Comments’ section, please list your availability (date and desired shift). Please wait for the Donations Collection Center representative to contact you to schedule you for a shift- do not self deploy to the Donations Collection Center.
To make a financial contribution to the organization of your choice, please dial 2-1-1 (or 1-866-485-0211 ) for a list of reputable agencies responding to disasters in Colorado.
by Wil LaVeist | Jun 26, 2012 | Feature, Headline News |
ACQUITTED SINNER: Former Sen. John Edwards and family last month outside the federal courthouse in Greensboro, North Carolina, where he was found not guilty on one of six counts of campaign corruption. The judge ruled a mistrial on the other five. (Photo: Chucky Liddy/Newscom)
The campaign-corruption trial of former U.S. Sen. John Edwards is history now. His former mistress, Rielle Hunter, with whom he had a daughter, is now on tour promoting her memoir, What Really Happened: John Edwards, Our Daughter, and Me. She announced during a TV interview that she and Edwards are no longer a couple, but will continue raising their daughter together. Soon, both will be out of the news cycle, but their saga possibly offers a lasting lesson for many Christians concerning this question about sin and crime.
A jury found Edwards, an admitted sinner, not guilty on one count that he accepted illegal campaign contributions in order to hide his adulteress affair. The jury deadlocked on five other similar counts. The acquittal hasn’t totally exonerated Edwards of campaign finance crimes, but the U.S. State Department dropped the case anyway.
Edward’s sin with Hunter occurred while he was campaigning for the presidency of the United States and while his late wife, Elizabeth, was dying of cancer. Like many men (and women) caught in an immoral self-inflicted bind, Edwards lied and lied until the truth, as it always does, eventually came to light. Many people who paid attention to the case agree that Edwards was put on trial more so as punshment for being unfaithful to his dying wife and for his hubris to believe he could sneak his secret into the White House.
And so Edwards publicly confessed his sins (which the Bible, in 1 John 1:9, states will be forgiven) before God and the world. However, should the government criminalize a sin that basically affects only the imperfect consenting adults involved? Should the church get riled about certain sins, while giving a pass to others?
I’ve been wondering about this most recently since President Obama announced in a TV interview in May that he supports same-sex marriage. The president caused an uproar among many Christians that still simmers, including among many of his supporters in the black church. But should the government, under political pressure from the church, legislate against same-sex marriage, especially when in America two consenting heterosexual adults can marry and divorce without the church being involved? Should most Christians insist that same-sex marriage be illegal, when homosexuality is actually listed in the Bible equally among other sexual sins, including adultery, that are not federal crimes?
A sin is a transgression against divine law for which Christians believe the sinner will be accountable at the judgment seat. The sinner mainly puts him or herself at risk with God. A crime is an action against the people that injures the “public welfare.” Like a drunk driver who runs a stop sign, or an armed robber, committing a crime puts several innocent people potentially at great risk. The government, working on behalf of the people, therefore has a duty to prevent crimes and punish criminals. Does the same duty apply to non-felonious sins?
Obviously many sins are also crimes such as, for example, being a serial killer. But what injury does same-sex marriage between two consenting adults cause to the public welfare? Is it more severe than adultery? Is it more destructive than divorce, a sin that often tears families and wounds innocent children? God allows divorce (which should be a last resort when reconciliation fails) under certain circumstances. Neither adultery nor divorces are federal crimes. Thankfully America is a democracy — a nation of Christians, believers of other faiths, agnostics and atheists, who for the most part believe in preserving the separation of church and state, and not a theocracy, as in living under Sharia law.
A recent CNN/ORC poll indicates that the majority of Americans believe same-sex marriage should be legal. Perhaps they’re saying it should be treated like adultery or divorce; it may be wrong, but people deserve the free-will right to choose who they want to (or don’t want to) be in a committed personal relationship with.
During closing remarks, Edwards’ attorney Abbe Lowell reportedly told the jury, “This is a case that should define the difference between a wrong and a crime … between a sin and a felony. John Edwards has confessed his sins. He will serve a life sentence for those.”
Perhaps Christians who are adamantly against two consenting same-sex adults having the legal right to marry should adopt this reasoning, too.
by Christine A. Scheller | Jun 26, 2012 | Feature, Headline News |
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld a key component of Arizona’s controversial immigration law Monday, allowing local police to request documentation from people they suspect to be in the country illegally. It struck down “two provisions that made it a crime for an illegal immigrant to seek work or fail to register with the federal government,” NPR reported. It also ruled against “a portion of the law that allowed state and local law enforcement officers to arrest anyone based solely on the suspicion that the individual was in the country illegally.”
Governor Jan Brewer declared the ruling a victory, according to Politico. “Today is the day when the key components of our efforts to protect the citizens of Arizona, to take up the fight against illegal immigration in a balanced and constitutional way, has unanimously been vindicated by the highest court in the land,” she said. “Arizona’s and every other state’s inherent authority to protect and defend its people has been upheld.”
But the ruling “reignited concerns that the law could lead to widespread racial profiling and civil-rights violations by overzealous police targeting Hispanics, including U.S. citizens or those who are here legally,” The Arizona Republic reported. Writing at The Grio, Judith Browne Dianis said the decision is also “a mixed bag and a cautionary note for black folks” because anti-immigration laws “intrinsically include us in their broad sweep, as civil rights violations always do. ”
“I am pleased that the Supreme Court has struck down key provisions of Arizona’s immigration law,” President Obama said in a statement. “What this decision makes unmistakably clear is that Congress must act on comprehensive immigration reform. A patchwork of state laws is not a solution to our broken immigration system – it’s part of the problem.”
His administration went further. “Just hours after the Supreme Court issued its decision on SB1070, federal officials said they would immediately rescind a controversial federal-state partnership that uses local cops in Arizona to detain immigrants,” Colorlines reported.
Rival Mitt Romney took the opposite approach, according to The Washington Post. “I would have preferred to see the Supreme Court give more latitude to states, not less. And the states, now under this decision, have less authority, less latitude, to enforce immigration law,” he reportedly said at a fundraiser in Scottsdale.
The ruling could be a “boon” to the president, but Romney loses no matter what, said Howard Fineman at The Huffington Post. “Praise the court and [Romney] offends Latinos; fault it and he offends social conservatives who have made a crackdown on the undocumented a key Tea Party plank. … Since possession of a valid driver’s license is, under the Arizona law, sufficient proof of citizenship, the ruling will force legal residents and citizens to get them if they don’t have them. There’s no better place to run a registration drive than at or near a DMV. Most of those voters are likely to be Democrats, or at least Obama supporters,” Fineman wrote.
Either way, “Many politicians – and Americans in general – don’t understand the complex contours of Hispanic voters in America,” The Christian Science Monitor reported. The problem begins with the term Hispanic, which was reportedly “manufactured by Congress in 1976 to be an umbrella term that applies to all Americans of Spanish descent.”
Speaking of Hispanics, the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference issued a statement stating, in part, that the Court “initiated the process of establishing a legal firewall against draconian measures as it pertains to immigration” and conveyed “a clear message that 21st century jurisprudence will not tolerate measures that polarize and segregate our communities.”
Christians for Comprehensive Immigration Reform also issued a statement, from Jim Wallis, that said, in part, “The decision to strike down key provisions of this legislation is a victory for everyone in the faith community who seeks to follow the Bible’s call for concern for the vulnerable and ‘stranger’ among us. Arizona’s immoral legislation threatened families, harmed children, and made it difficult for law enforcement to safeguard the communities they swore to protect; it remains important to ensure that any remaining parts of the legislation are never used to justify racial profiling by local police.”
The American Civil Liberties Union will devote $8.7 million to fight expansion of “show me your papers” laws in other states, its Executive Director Anthony D. Romero announced Monday. The ACLU will “aggressively battle any state’s attempts to enact copycat legislation while also fighting the ‘corrosive effects’ of existing anti-immigrant laws in Arizona and five other states,” its statement said.
It may be an uphill battle. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 55% of likely voters wanted SB1070 upheld, while only 26% wanted it overturned. Nineteen percent were undecided about the law.
What do you think?
Did the U.S. Supreme Court make the right decision?
by Christine A. Scheller | Jun 22, 2012 | Feature, Headline News |
“Asian Americans are the highest-income, best-educated and fastest-growing racial group in the United States,” according to a new Pew Research Center report, which is curiously titled, “The Rise of Asian Americans.” Members of this community are “more satisfied than the general public with their lives, finances and the direction of the country, and they place more value than other Americans do on marriage, parenthood, hard work and career success,” the report said.
Asian-American groups quickly pounced on the research, however, saying the community is hardly monolithic. The National Council of Asian Pacific Americans issued a statement saying the survey “could lead some to draw conclusions that reflect inaccurate stereotypes about Asian Americans being a community with high levels of achievement and few challenges.”
“Pacific Islander women experience myriad health disparities, discrimination, long-term unemployment, domestic violence, foreclosure and more, but reports like this make it hard for those in need to have their voices heard,” echoed the National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum.
The Japanese American Citizens League also expressed dissatisfaction: “Asian Americans make up 5.6% of the U.S. population and include over 45 different ethnicities speaking over 100 different dialects. While our community reflects diversity, this research does not; instead, it sweeps Asian Americans into one broad group and paints our community as exceptionally successful without any challenges. This study perpetuates false stereotypes and the model minority. The JACL strongly advocates for further research and analysis specifically regarding disaggregated data collection.”
Colorlines reported similar sentiments from the Asian American Center for Advancing Justice. “More than a third of all Hmong, Cambodian and Laotian Americans over the age of 25 don’t have a high school degree,” the article. And, “while some Asians may report incomes at or higher than whites, Cambodian and Laotian Americans report poverty rates as high as, and higher than, the poverty rate of African Americans, according to the 2010 census.”
Pew Senior Researcher Cary Funk responded to Colorlines, saying the survey is “a detailed analysis of the census data combined with a nationally representative survey of all Asian Americans. …If you are going to talk about Asian Americans as a whole then the facts are what the facts are.”
The Rise of Asian Americans was based on “a nationally representative sample of 3,511 Asian Americans” who were interviewed in English and seven Asian languages by telephone from January 3 to March 27, 2012, the report said.
This being a presidential election year, there is, of course, a political angle. “Even though Asian Americans are slightly less than 6 percent of the U.S. population, they have become much-coveted voters. Both President Obama’s re-election campaign and the Republican Party have launched efforts to reach Asian-American voters and encourage members of the community to run for elective office,” The Seattle Times reported.
What do you think?
Does this survey reinforce stereotypes about Asian Americans?
by Christine A. Scheller | Jun 19, 2012 | Feature, Headline News |
HISTORIC ELECTION: Rev. Fred Luter has been elected as president of Southern Baptist Convention.
This afternoon, in a move that has been anticipated for at least a year, the Southern Baptist Convention elected the Rev. Fred Luter Jr. as its new president. Luter, the 55-year-old pastor of Franklin Avenue Baptist Church in New Orleans and first vice president of the SBC, will be the first African American to head the denomination, which was founded in defense of slavery in 1845.
In a rousing nomination speech, the Rev. Dr. David Crosby, senior pastor of First Baptist Church of New Orleans, said Luter is “qualified in every way to hold this office.” Crosby described Luter as a “man of integrity” who has a “loving family” and an “unblemished, untarnished reputation” in his community. Crosby also said Luter “would likely be a candidate for sainthood one day if he were a Catholic.” The men got to know each other after Hurricane Katrina when they shared worship space and did ministry together, he said.
Because Luter ran unopposed and because of the historic nature of his election, all convention “messengers” were asked to rise to affirm his nomination, which they did. Wiping away tears, Luter simply said, “To God be the glory for the things he has done. God Bless you. I love you.”
The New York Times reported that there are “51,000 congregations with 16 million members” in the SBC. “Luter shares the Baptists’ firm rejection of abortion and same-sex marriage, but he preaches more about personal salvation than politics. Though he never completed seminary training, he is renowned for his rapid-fire sermons filled with wordplay and hypnotic repetition,” the article said. Luter told The Times that his first priorities will be “the traditional Baptist goals of evangelizing, serving believers and providing disaster relief,” but that he would “use his power of appointments to get more minorities on the governing boards.”
The Rev. Dr. Dwight McKissic, senior pastor Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington, Texas, first advanced Luter for the presidency in 2010, according to an Associated Baptist Press article published earlier this year. Today, McKissic told UrbanFaith he thinks Luter’s election signals that the SBC wants to send a message that the denomination is ready to welcome African Americans.
“The next step I believe will be a real position of power in the Southern Baptist Convention. Unfortunately the president of the convention controls no budget, no personnel. It has influence, but it has no real inherent authority or power. … The jury is still out, but we’ll see when they get ready to hire an entity head whether or not they’re serious,” said McKissic.
“Symbolism has the capacity to make folks feel good about themselves without actually doing anything,” Robert Parham, executive director of Baptist Center for Ethics and EthicsDaily.com told USA Today.
“It is symbolism, but it’s major symbolism in the right direction that will open the door for full inclusion and empowerment of African Americans in the Southern Baptist Convention,” countered McKissic. Last year McKissic published two blog posts about egregious racism in SBC churches. UrbanFaith asked him if there has been any improvement in the situation since then. “The jury is out. Only time will tell. I don’t take this move to say that there is,” he said.
“This is not some tokenism. It’s symbolism with substance,” said Dr. Robert Smith, professor of divinity and Christian preaching at Beeson Divinity School in Birmingham, Alabama. Smith spoke to UrbanFaith this morning. “Fred Luter pastors Franklin Avenue Baptist Church, which is the largest Southern Baptist Church in terms of membership in the entire state of Louisiana. … He is greatly beloved and appreciated—the keyword is respected—by the convention. Otherwise he wouldn’t be elected,” added Smith.
After Luter’s election, UrbanFaith talked to Parham about Smith and McKissic’s responses to his USA Today quote. “Southern Baptists sought for decades to address the issue of racism with symbolic acts, such as pulpit swaps with African-American Baptist pastors. That symbolism of racial reconciliation was encouraging and positive,” Parham said. “When the white power structure in those pews sought to maintain economic privilege and maintain racial inequality, then the symbolism of pulpit swaps was often of little earthly good. … A lot of folks, including those in the national media, are reacting to the election as if it represented immediate, substantive transformation. Casting a single ballot is not the same thing as denominational reformation.” Still, Parham, like many others, tweeted his congratulations to Luter.
Quoting French author Victor Hugo, Smith said, “There’s nothing so powerful as an idea whose time has come. [Luter’s] time has come. It’s the right time. … He’s a middle of the way kind of person, aggressive with tenderness and mercy and patience. Things will not be changed overnight. …. I think he is the kind of person who is willing to see it through and waiting to see it through.”
“He will not be a black president. He will be a president black. What I mean by that is that if you say ‘black president,’ that means black is the adjective, which, in a way, modifies his presidency. No, he will be a president who just happens to be black. So it’s the presidency that is crucial and blackness happens to be who he is ethnically, but he’s been called to be president of the entire convention,” said Smith.
He also said it should be noted that “Fred really is not Fred without [his wife] Elizabeth.” “He has such great love for her and she has great love for him that they have a duel ministry and she will bolster his ministry in a tremendous way, because she has the same ideals.” Elizabeth Luter has spoken to “many of the great Southern Baptist churches” with white congregations, Smith said. “She is a mediating presence as well and has the ability to mix and mingle with different people and to love them as people and to not have a prejducial regard.”
Smith and McKissic were in New Orleans for the SBC annual meeting. Smith described the atmosphere this morning as “placid, peaceful, and anticipatory.” He said he overheard white men and women talking about “how wonderful it is” that Luter would be elected. “Everyone is standing on tip-toe anticipation, expecting it, and many are saying it’s a long time coming and should have been sooner,” said Smith.
It seemed few African Americans were tweeting with the convention hashtags #SBC12 and #SBC2012 throughout the day, and Dr. Nathan Finn, associate professor of historical theology and Baptist studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, tweeted that “The #SBC12 is still a sea of white faces.” However, Smith said he saw “pockets of African Americans” at the convention, including a large contingent from the National African American Fellowship. This group will host a banquet tonight in honor of Luter’s election, he said.
McKissic may be cautiously optimistic about the significance of Luter’s ascendency, but he put forward three race-related resolutions that he said will be voted on tomorrow. One opposes connecting same sex marriage to the civil rights movement; another denounces racism in Mormon source documents; the third seeks recognition of Baptist minister George Liele as America’s first missionary.
The “skuttlebut” is that the first and third resolutions will pass, but that the Mormon one will not, McKissic said. “For some reason, the Southern Baptist Convention is declining to carry that resolution forward. I’m amazed by that,” he said.
He put forth the resolution regarding George Liele, a former slave who became a missionary to Jamaica, to “correct historical error,” he said. “They were not telling us the truth to say [Adoniram and Ann Judson] were the first missionaries.” Leile embarked in 1782, while the Judsons left for Burma in 1812, his resolution says. “I thought it would also be great in the year of Fred Luter that they are bookends, so to speak,” McKissic said.
“We need to look back and recognize the George Lieles … and other people like that who’ve paved the way so that we can rejoice over what God is doing and not forget about the individuals who have gone through the struggles and walked the stony road and shed the tears that we might enjoy what [has happened] today,” said Smith.
by Urban Faith Staff | Jun 18, 2012 | Feature, Headline News |
ROAD TO REDEMPTION: Rodney King, 47, was found dead in his swimming pool on Sunday, June 17. In April, he was a featured author at the LA Times Festival of Books, where he discussed his autobiography, 'The Riot Within.' (Photo: Susan J. Rose/Newscom)
Rodney King’s untimely death over the weekend has led to a lot of conversations about his significance as a key civil rights figure. King, of course, gained fame for the 1991 videotaped beating by Los Angeles cops that he endured and the subsequent race riot that followed in 1992 after the officers were acquitted of any wrongdoing. He then became an unlikely voice of reason when, in the midst of the deadly and destructive rioting, he famously asked, “Can we all just get along?” Sadly, that question still echoes today after each new racially charged issue or controversy that erupts in the media.
But what will be King’s lasting legacy? By his own admission, he was not a perfect man. In fact, drunk driving and alleged substance abuse were the reasons he was pulled over by the L.A. cops initially in 1991, and he continued to struggle with drugs and alcohol apparently until the night of his death. In a Los Angeles Times post, reporter Ken Streeter recalls his series of interviews with King this year and confirms that King was still drinking and still smoking pot (he said for medical reasons).
So, King doesn’t exactly fit the classic image of the heroic civil rights icon. Yet, he stands as an important symbol in our nation’s uneasy saga of racial unrest and our stutter steps toward reconciliation.
Writing at The Root, Sylvester Monroe speaks of King as a “symbol” whose pain and missteps were not in vain. Last year at Poynter.org, Steve Myers observed how citizen journalism has changed since that infamous video of King being beaten by police. An Associated Press report at HuffPost’s Black Voices attempts to summarize King’s significance in shining a light on the injustices of racial profiling and police brutality in urban law enforcement. The article features an interview with Lou Cannon, author of Official Negligence: How Rodney King and the Riots Changed Los Angeles and the LAPD.
“The King beating and trial set in motion overdue reforms in the LAPD and that had a ripple effect on law enforcement throughout the country,” Cannon explains. Indeed, under L.A. police Chief William Bratton in the 2000s, the department began focusing on community policing, hired more minority officers, and worked to heal tensions between the police and minority communities who continued to protest racial profiling and excessive use of force.
In the post-Rodney King world, adds Cannon, “It became more perilous to pull someone over for driving while black.”
To his credit, King was well aware of his shortcomings and shared his story in an autobiography released earlier this year to mark the 20th anniversary of the L.A. riots. In The Riot Within: My Journey from Rebellion to Redemption, King came clean about his failures and his continued struggles with alcohol addiction, but also about how God had helped him begin to turn his life around.
In a poignant interview with the Canadian public radio program Q with Jian Ghomeshi, King talked about his book and expressed optimism about both his own future and the state of race relations in the United States.
What do you view as Rodney King’s legacy? What does his complicated journey say about race relations in America? Will he rightly be remembered a civil rights icon?