Many R 2 Blame 4 Trump

 THERE IS PLENTY OF BLAME TO SHARE

+Bishop Durrell Watkins, D.Min. 

   I'm super annoyed. I know, take a number. But I'm not just annoyed by Our Clockwork Orange administration, or by Christian Nationalism (more broadly known as white supremacism), or by the earth crying out in pain (& her tears can cayse us quite a bit of pain) in response to abuse humanity has inflicted upon her. I'm annoyed by the all too common narrative that VP Harris was a bad choice & JB before her (& thst narrative is what made her a candidate).  If only the D's had made wiser choices(!). Um, no.

   I don't buy that  we had bad candidates (when T has a chance in hell, quality isn't the issue, & Harris is as good a leader as we might hope for & better than we deserved). I don't buy that D's are too liberal or too conservative, too much like GOP, too little like Rust belt America. Few D candidates are as left of center as FDR who saved this country from ruin. Both FDR & Johnson promised government help to address poverty and in differing measure, to address racial discrimination. And even if Dems are left of the vibe of the moment, their job is to sell their ideas, not hide/disguise/deny them to win elections. 

   This is a racist, homophobic, sexist country (one's singular lesbian friend or one hardline POC candidate does not negate this), wealth (even by those who lack it) is our religion, & the commercialized American church has embraced the greed & hatred & called them holy. Oligarchy, racism, neo-fascist leanings, & theocracy have conspired together to dominate this country, destroy its diversity, & diminish its compassion. This has been in the works for 40 years & they made a grab for power (complete with attacking the capital & being pardoned for it!!) when they knew few ppl of consequence would stand in their way. That is not the cause of any one or seven Dem tickets. 

Inexiable nonvoters are hugely to blame, as is the media who sold fact checking & truth telling for ratings & $$ while giving free air time to the most loathsome voices in American politics. 

   The coalition of evil told us they were coming (a rare instance of honesty) & the mild middle & pusillanimous media held the door open for them as they came. 

   And, the largest share of blame goes to every eligible voter who saw women's rights bulldozed, trans* people demonized, social safety nets put on the chopping block (as I angrily mix metaphors), & racist rhetoric normalized & thought, "Hell yeah, that sounds pretty good". 

   As culpable are those who saw how ugly it all was & supported it anyway for tax breaks or cult like loyalty to a brand. "I don't feel that way" means squat all if you in fact vote that way.

   We've lost house, senate, scotus, and WH...that coup took decades, not one Tuesday in one November. With little left to lose we may as well offer the bold alternative. They call centrists the "far left." I wish we could organize a loud & fully committed Left. We can at least speak up as conscience demands & vote every single time (local too). 

   But for now, the "how did we get here" question cannot be answered with "people didn't like the old guy who wasn't demonic & they didn't like the woman of color, so what could they do but empower an amoral dictator?" 

   No. People chose perfidy & cruelty & avarice and now we have chaos (as we did in his first term, but now there are fewer adults to restrain him and his dementia has worsened). Maybe we'll learn from this...but I have doubt.

   This is a huge mess. We can all do what we can, if not with real hope of healing, then as least with the consolation of having engaged in moral resistance. But this burning dinosaur turd is not because a Black woman was thrust into a candidacy with only 100 days to build a movement. It's because we've watched bigotry & greed grow larger, stronger, & more organized for over 4 decades without calling it out consistently & with conviction. Some are now coming to the realization that may have been a mistake. (dw)

Liberal? Left? Lovely!

Left of center, liberal, progressive...I hear these used as insults, but I embrace them and hope they are true of me. Here are other synonyms for those words that can be hurled at me without my objecting one bit: high minded, thoughtful, compassionate, fair, inclusive, generous. I never tire of being "accused" of being a good person. I may not always live up to the estimation, but I appreciate it nevertheless.

Not Worried YET About Voter Turnout

So, I see people lamenting about the less than robust Democratic primary turnout. Let me throw some positive spin on the situation. The GOP turnout is apparently hearty. That's good (people engaging in politics is a good thing). However, they started out with close to 20 candidates, and still 5ish that are hanging on. Perhaps there are only two REAL contenders at this point, but still, that was a lot of candidates each with a fan base, and some of those former candidates have thrown support to some of the survivors. That's a lot of energy. 

Meanwhile, the Dems have two (really), and and while the discourse between their camps is disappointing sometimes, in reality, neither camp REALLY believes the other would be a disastrous choice. So, if I'm marginally more in favor of Clinders over Santon, but could pretty easily live with Santon instead of Clinders, I might be less motivated to take off work early to cast a vote. 

So, I'm not worried yet about primary turnout. I am choosing to hope that regardless of primary numbers, people come out in DROVES in November to vote. 

Women's sovereignty over their own bodies, the survival of marriage equality, the continuation of economic recovery, access to higher education and to healthcare, a non-hijacked supreme court, and true religious freedom (including the freedom to live safely as a Muslim, or as a non-religious person, or as a gay-positive/pro-choice/transgender-affirming religious person) are all on the line. I'm guessing those issues will be much more compelling when it just a two person race. I do hope so. 

So, Dems (and 3rd partiers), the GOP is showing us how to be good, engaged citizens throughout the process. Let's thank them and follow their example. But in any case, get your asses out there, stand in line in the rain for hours if you must, and VOTE (and demand that your vote be counted if there are any shenanigans) in November. A lot is at stake.

A Christian in Pakistan on trial for her life

Asia Bibi is on trial for her life  (actually is appealing a previous ruling) for the "crime" of blasphemy in a theocratic state. She belongs to a minority religion (which Christianity is in Pakistan) and is accused of blaspheming the Prophet Muhammad during a quarrel. Of course that someone could be killed by the state for their religious views (or even for not holding someone else's religious views in high esteem) is horrifying. I hope that those who insist that ours be a "Christian" nation take note. Theocracy is the enemy of liberty. I want to be free to be religious (or not) and to choose the religion I hold dear; but theocracies cannot (by definition) allow such freedom, and lives are destroyed as a result. I hope our nation is always filled with spiritual and religious people, and I hope as strongly that our government is never a religious one.

My prayer for Asia Bibi and the world is: May she be safe and well and soon freed, and may there be hope and healing for all who have been tormented by the idea that only one religion is right and non-members are to be converted, shunned, or killed. Amen.

Demonizing "the Other" Never Helps

Today, in response to yesterday's shooting in Tennessee, Franklin Graham posted that the U.S. is under attack from Islam and that no Muslim should be allowed to immigrate to the U.S. "until the Muslim problem is solved." A resident of a "free" country in the 21st century posted that (with an alarming number of supportive replies). Mine, however, differed.

I am a gay man, and I have benefited from heterosexual allies standing up for LBGT rights. I cannot in good conscience remain silent when other marginalized groups are targeted and vilified.
My response to Mr. Graham on his Facebook page was as follows:

"While I disagree with almost everything F. Graham says and stands for, this xenophobic, Islamaphobic, racist, demonizing, dehumanizing, wholesale slander of an entire group of people is the most reprehensible diatribe in a long, sad history of reprehensible diatribes to come from Graham. "Muslims" are not any more likely to be "radicalized" than any other religion. I am a Christian pastor and I hope I am never lumped in with the same sort of racism, homophobia, and misogyny that Graham promotes as religion. Of course, just as there are dangerous Christians (and Jews and Hindus and Atheists), there are dangerous Muslims; however, those who disgrace and blaspheme their religion with violence (and violent rhetoric) never represent the best of their religions or the true intent of their religons nor are their acts of violence representative of the larger bodies of the faithful. Criminals must be held accountable for their individual actions, but others who share their faith or skin tone or ethnic heritage must not be condemned for the acts of individuals. "Radical" Muslims no more represent what Islam truly is than the KKK represents what Chrisitanity is. For all the whining about religious persecution on this page, it is beyond hypocritical to then attempt to persecute an entire religion. I hope good people of varying beliefs will challenge Franklin Graham for his dangerous, prejudicial rhetoric." Rev. Dr. Durrell Watkins

Will Right Wing Christians Support "Religious Freedom" Based Discrimination When They Are Its Victims?

This is a response to someone who defended the "religious freedom" bills that are meant to allow discrimination against LBGT people. He insisted that same-gender coupling was "sinful" (I strongly disagree) and said that while we should always be polite to people, we shouldn't be forced to participate in same-sex weddings (as if selling flowers or cakes or tuxes to people was "participating" in their nuptials). He further stated that while Jesus associated with "sinners" he probably didn't pay prostitutes for sex or steal people's donkeys. I responded with one of my more verbose rants. It follows:

Actually, the Palm Sunday story features Jesus having his disciples steal a donkey. But, there were so many Messianic figures in the first century that was a common practice...in case the next Messianic claimant was really the one, if they asked for an animal to ride, one usually just let them have it...though, the stories don't show the disciples asking, just taking, and when they are caught and asked, "what are you doing?" only then do they say, "The Teacher has need of it." But, Jesus wasn't the literalist that many of his later followers pretend to be.

Secondly, Jesus may not have paid for sex (though we can't know), but his ancestor (Tamar's father-in-law) certainly did (with Tamar, who is listed in Jesus' genealogy)...in fact, ALL of the women in his genealogy are associated with Taboo activity (Tamar and Rahab were prostitutes, Ruth was a pagan Moabite, Mary was an unwed mother)...that Matthew makes a point of showing Jesus' less than pristine lineage shows that Jesus comes from earthy stock...of course the men were pretty gritty too...Solomon with 1000 sexual partners, David who was a murderer and a rapist, Boaz who seems pretty gay to me, etc.

Thirdly, these scriptural and theological discussions are IRRELEVANT for civil law. We aren't a theocracy. All citizens should have equal opportunity and equal protection. Religion shouldn't even be part of the discussion. We already have religious freedoms...we can worship anywhere in anyway or not at all. We are at choice. But religion can't be an excuse to discriminate against others in public life (and business and politics are public life). We settled the issue of if diners could refuse service to people because of race long ago...can they now refuse service to Muslims, atheists, gays, single mothers, non-citizens...NO. 

If Christian Business Owner doesn't agree with abortion, then she shouldn't have one, is free to pray for unwed mothers, donate money to anti-abortion "counseling" services, but is not free to say "I won't sell you my product because i heard you had an abortion." When you open a business, the social contract is that you will serve the public without discrimination. You don't have to agree with Hindus, but you can't deny them service. You don't have to understand that sexual orientation is innate and not chosen, but your ignorance of sexual diversity isn't a reason to refuse service to LBGT people. You can think atheists are on a fast train to hell, but you can't humiliate them by denying them service in this life. If I sell you flowers or cake or a veil that you will use at your wedding that i don't understand or like, that doesn't imply that I agree with you, only that I don't use my personal prejudice as an excuse to humiliate or dehumanize you. You have a business, gays want to support your business (but if they know how you feel about them, I wonder why they would), and that's that. YOu aren't allowed to use your business to force your religious values on others (or to punish them for now sharing your beliefs).

You can even let the Bully Some Homos for Christ Club put posters advertising their next meeting in your window, but you can't refuse to do business with someone just because they are the target of the BSHFCC.

These onerous and odious "freedom" bills are a petty backlash against marriage equality. In the end, they will be ruled unconstitutional (and are already proving to be vastly unpopular) and those who wish to marginalize same-gender loving people will have to find new and more novel approaches to do so. 

One final point: Sauce for the Christian goose is sauce for the non-Christian gander. Will the Christians who assume these new bills give them a blank check to dehumanize same-gender loving people, be as supportive of the laws when Muslim business owners refuse to do business with "Christian infidels", when Wiccan shop-keeps refuse service to anyone driving an Earth harming SUV, when Christian Science teachers won't send your injured child to the school nurse, when Gay Christians won't serve homophobes...If religion is the legal excuse to deny service, then any religion can be used to deny service to anyone...will Right Wing Christians support the law when it is used against them?

"Religious Freedom" Discrimation Bills are Oppressive, Plain and Simple

I'm glad there is such an outcry against Indiana's law allowing discrimination based on religion (discrimination is discrimination whether or not you blame it on a deity), and I hope that the other 18 states with similar laws will experience a similar backlash (including ARKANSAS). These laws are fueled by homophobia, but once in place, anyone could refuse service to anyone else for any reason as long as they claimed it was for religious purposes...Muslims, women, divorcees, people who work at women's clinics, Jews, Catholics, Atheists, smokers, drinkers, women who wear makeup, biracial families, Wiccans...no one is safe. All anyone would need to claim is "my religion says YOU are bad". Hatred of gays allowed these laws to pass, but it would be naive to believe they will be limited to gays (and even if they were, discrimination against one group is problematic enough). From women's suffrage to anti-Semitism to Jim Crow to sodomy laws...this battle has been fought over and over. When will this nation grow past the need to marginalize, control, belittle, or exclude groups of people (and how many times can we cling to such hatefulness in the name of a deity???). These laws make religion seem irrelevant (if not dangerous) and government seem ineffective (if not tyrannical). Write letters. Share Tweets. Vote in ALL elections (not just national). And limit spending in the places that are presenting bigotry as "religious freedom."

Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner...A Sad Time in the US

Do you hear that? It's the sound of Dr King, Rosa Parks, Bobby Kennedy, Mother Jones, James Baldwin, Bishop Pike, Howard Thurman, Bayard Rustin, Thurgood Marshall, and Medgar Evers all weeping as news reaches their spirit-dwelling that after all that they risked, suffered, and lost for the cause of equality and justice, there remains income inequality not seen since the Great Depression and those who feel their power and privilege being threatened have declared war on immigrants, people of color, and African American youth in particular (though the middle aged are not exempt). The Right Wing take over of the culture that began in force in the 80s has managed to reverse much of the gains that people in the 50s, 60s, and 70s lived and lost their lives to secure. The level of injustice this country is seeing cannot be sustained. Our country will, to use an old and often abused religious word, "repent" (have a deep change of heart) or it will join the long sad list of fallen empires. Hopefully China or India or whoever emerges as the next world leader will leave a nobler legacy. The American dream was a beautiful one, if only we had allowed it to become a full and lasting reality.

Stranger in My Own Land

I am perplexed (as, apparently, many progressives are):
Social Security is the most effective and popuplar social program in US history; State after state has done what the Federal government won't~increase minimum wage; Marijuana is now legal in a handful of states; Marriage equality is now a reality in 3/5 of the country (often thanks to GOP appointed judges!); AND the people who have demanded, accepted, and celebrated Social Security, Minimum Wage hikes, legalized pot, and Marriage equality voted for Reps, Senators, and Governors who oppose ALL OF THAT. Some sociologist can become famous if s/he will figure out why centrist people either vote for (or don't vote at all) right wing ideologues who oppose what they actually value. Of course gerrymandering, the assault on the Voting Rights Acts, and Citizens United have made it difficult for marginalized people to have a voice in government, but even with those obstacles, I still can't make sense of a nation that twice consecutively votes for a progressive president also voting consistently (or not at all) for legislators who work tirelessly to oppose that president's vision. I am a stranger in my own land.

Can We Have Different Opinions Without Being Nasty?

So when did this happen? Last year, I quoted someone in a sermon (maybe Henry Ford?), not because I thought he was Buddha or Jesus or Yogananda, but because the thing he said was wise (even if it was the only wise thing he ever said). I was verbally assaulted by someone who really didn't like the person I quoted. That was the first time I noticed it. Another time I quoted Eleanor Roosevelt (whom I very much admire), and a right leaning person got very snarky...not about the quote, but about its source. Now, I often find that if I share (on FB or anywhere really) a quote by someone I may have disagreed with a lot, but who happened to say something at least once that I liked, people who share my dislike of the figure will use the quote as an opportunity to go on a rant about how evil the human is rather than simply agreeing or disagreeing with the thing said. 

I am a democratic socialist, a spiritual humanist, a pro-choice, pro-peace, pro-marriage equality liberal. I'm a lefty, honest to Engels! And, I think Nixon and Reagan made many mistakes and that Bush II was utterly incompetant. HOWEVER, I can acknowledge that they were well educated public servants each of whom must have gotten something right a time or two. Is it possible that we can disagree with people's ideologies without assuming that they are evil to the core with no redemptive qualities whatsoever? Can a person be wrong (in our opinion) 95% of the time and still get credit for the 5% they get right????

Goddard College: An Impressive History and Relevant Still

Goddard College has a century and a half institutional history as a leader in the progressive education movement.

Founded in 1863 as Green Mountain Central Institute in Barre, VT, the school changed its name in 1870 to Goddard Seminary, a theological preparatory school in the Universalist tradition. The school especially prepared students to attend Tufts College, a school originally affiliated with the Universalist Church. Goddard was named for Thomas Goddard, Tufts 2^nd Treasurer.

In 1919 Royce (aka Tim) Pitkin was graduated from Goddard Seminary and would later return to Goddard as its primary visionary and philosophical architect. After graduating from Goddard Seminary Pitkin went on to earn a Bachelor’s degree from the University of Vermont and a PhD from Columbia University. He was a contemporary of progressive education pioneers John Dewey and William Kilpatrick. Under his leadership, Goddard College would be guided by philosophies influenced by Dewey and Kilpatrick as well as by religious Universalism, the Danish Folk School, and the democratic principles exhibited by New England Town Meetings.

In 1929 the Goddard School for Girls was established and in 1935 Tim Pitkin returned to Goddard to organize Goddard Junior College as part of the Seminary. In 1937 Goddard Seminary was closed but Goddard was immediately resurrected as Goddard College, chartered in 1938. Also in 1938 Goddard relocated from Barre to Plainfield, VT, moving to the Greatwood Farm Estate. Pitkin was the reformed, relocated and renamed College’s first president. Tim Pitkin served as the college president from 1938 to 1969. He died in 1986. Since 1938, the school has been in continuous operation as Goddard College.

From 1938 to 1940 Goddard operated as a four year Junior College, that is, students attended the last two years of high school and the first two years of college. Goddard became a Baccalaureate degree granting school in 1943.

In 1952 Goddard started a summer work camp for urban youth to help rural farmers and also in 1952 Goddard awarded its first masters’ degrees.

In 1956 Goddard started the Educational Resources Project and its students would work as Teaching Assistants in nearby schools.

In 1959 Goddard received regional accreditation. Having never been a rich school and offering a progressive pedagogy that “traditional” schools didn’t understand, Goddard had been denied accreditation since the 40s. But in 1959 the college was unexpectedly given the New England Association of Schools and Colleges’ stamp of approval, and enrollment almost doubled immediately as a result.

In 1963 Goddard College initiated the Adult Degree Program – the first college in the US to do so.

In 1964 Goddard participated in another ground breaking experiment that would prove to be successful for decades to come. In 1964 a consortium of colleges was formed called the Union for Research and Experimentation in Higher Education. 10 colleges made up this “Union” and along with Antioch College, Sarah Lawrence College, Bard College, and Hofstra University, Goddard was a founding member of the consortium.  In 1969 the consortium changed its name to the Union for Experimental Colleges and Universities. It would go through a few more name changes, including The Union Graduate School, The Union Institute, and Union Institute & University as it is known today. But before UIU was a well-known, independent school of higher learning, it was a consortium of progressive colleges and Goddard was among them.

In 1966 Beat poet Allen Ginsberg performed at Goddard; in 1969 the Third World Studies Program was initiated and was in operation for 5 years, and the early 1970s saw more excitement for Goddard College.

In the 1970 the Goddard-Cambridge Program in Social Change was born and that program was in existence for 9 years. Also in 1970 a Design and Construction program was initiated, an alternative media conference was held where New Age spiritual leader Ram Dass offered a workshop, and from 1970 to 1974 the incredible Bread and Puppet Theatre was in residence at Goddard College!

In 1973 Goddard launched its own radio station (WGDR), in 1974 the Institute of Social Ecology was founded and would remain part of Goddard until the year 2000 when it became an independent institution, and in 1975 more new programs were launched – Integral Education, Inter-dimensions in the Visual Arts, Outdoor Education, and Women’s Studies.

In 1986 a single parents’ program was offered and in 1988 restoration of Goddard’s historic gardens began. 11 years later, The Greenwood Estate and Gardens, the Goddard College campus, was entered in the National Register of Historic Places.

Goddard had more innovations to offer the world of education. In 2002 the residential undergraduate program was closed and Goddard became an entirely low-residency college.

In 2012, with sites now in Washington state as well as in Vermont, Goddard remains an accredited institution of higher learning with its highest enrollment in 30 years!

Goddard, in all its incarnations, has always been a progressive and innovative school, and by the 1970s it was well known as a radical, counter-cultural college. When it was redesigned as Goddard College in 1938 it was unusual in that it offered no grades, gave no exams, and had no required courses. To this day Goddard offers a self-directed learning experience, faculty members are called co-learners or advisors rather than professors, grades are not given and unless other arrangements are made, transcripts are narrative evaluations rather than a dry and largely uninformative list of courses taken and grades given.

The Goddard philosophy early on was based on 4 educational principles:
Thought should be tested by action
We only learn what we can inwardly accept
One matures by carrying responsibilities suited to one’s capabilities
And College should provide education opportunities for adults because learning should continue throughout life.

The undergraduate degrees that Goddard offers today are:
The BA in Education, the BA in Health Arts & Sciences, the BA in Sustainability, the BA in Individualized Studies, and the BFA in Creative Writing.

Graduate degrees offered are:
The MA in Education (there is a licensure option as well as possible concentrations in School Counseling or Community Education), the MA in Health Arts & Sciences, the MA in Psychology (with an option of concentrating in Sexual Orientation), the MA in Sustainable Business & Communities, and the MA in Individualized Studies with possible concentrations in Transformative Language Arts, Consciousness Studies, or Environmental Studies. There are also two MFA programs, one in Creative Writing and one in Interdisciplinary Arts.

There are many notable graduates of Goddard College, including:

Frances Olsen, Law Professor (UCLA)
Page McConnell, Trey Anastasio, & Jon Fishman of the Band PHISH
Howard Ashman, actor/playwright/lyricist (Little Shop of Horrors, The Little Mermaid, Beauty & the Beast)
Jay Craven, film director/screenwriter)
Tom Griffin, playwright (Boys Next Door)
Larry Feign, cartoonist (The World of Lily Wong)
Caroline Finkelstein, poet
Ann Gillespie, actor (Beverly Hills 90210)
Neil Landau, screenwriter/playwright/TV producer
Cara Hoffman, novelist (So Much Pretty)
William H. Macy, actor
David Mamet, playwright/direct, Pulitzer Prize winner

For 149 years Goddard has been trailblazing and challenging the status quo. People have literally come to Goddard to study from all over the world. If you want a challenging, non-traditional, stimulating, limited residency degree program that honors your vision while guiding you through academic theory, interdisciplinarity, and ethical practice, with financial aid available and without requiring you to quit your job or leave your community for more than a few days a year, then Goddard may be a dream come true.


The program isn't correspondence, it isn't online, it isn't modular...it's something else, something different, something more.


Whether you want to complete a Bachelor’s degree, earn a Master’s degree, or return to school for a second or third graduate level degree, Goddard College is worth your consideration. Learn more by visiting their website: www.goddard.edu.



Information gathered from displays and literature at the Pratt Library at Goddard College as well as from the Goddard College website and other online sources.

Christians Are Not an Oppressed Group in this Country (and I don't care what the President's religion might be)

According to some right wing whack job extremist group called "Defend Christians", there are 10 "irrefutable proofs" that our president isn't a Christian.

Before we thumb noses at their every ridiculous claim, let me first say that President Obama's religious affiliation is completely irrelevant. He doesn't need to be Christian or even religious to lead our secular nation. Should he ever decide to pastor a Christian church, being a baptized, confirmed, and ordained Christian minister might be reasonable requirements. To be president, I couldn't care less what his religious views are. I expecet him to be ethical, reasonable, intelligent, courageous, and wise; but whether he worships Allah, Isis, Apollo, or the Tooth Fairy doesn't interest me in the least.

That having been said, the "irrefutable" truth is that he is a Protestant Christian. This doesn't impress me, but it is the truth. He isn't a fundamentalist (to my great relief), but he is at very least culturally Christian.

Finally, let me say how extremely bored I am with the claims that Christians in this country are under attack and need defense. There are places in the world where one might be savagely beaten, imprisoned, or brutally killed for embracing the Christian faith. The US is not generally such a place. In this country, Christians vote, run for public office, and have houses of worship in every town, village, city, and unincorporated rural patch of grass within our borders. In this country, Christians bash gays and claim to be victims if gays respond defensively. In this country, Christians (and anyone for that matter) can utter the prayer "god bless america" at any public event they so desire. In this country, God (presumably the Judeo-Christian god) is named in our country's pledge and on our currency (although that wasn't always the case). This country has a national cathedral. This country has a Senate Chaplain. This country has a chaplain corps in the brances of the military. This country has official diplomatic relations with the Vatican, and people run for office and sit on judicial benches proudly proclaiming their personal religious beliefs as being their motivation for public actions. The idea that Christians are somehow an oppressed group in THIS nation is beyond ridiculous. Now, Christians as the persectuors, that is something else, but we'll save that for future missives.

Now, for the moronic claims of "Defend Christians" that Pres. Obama isn't Christian:

1.) Economics: Obama advocates for failed Marxist/​socialist economic schemes that are based on envy and class warfare that divides the country and uses the government to steal from one group to give it to another.

Response: Capitalist schemes also have a disturbing record of failure. Whether socialism or capitalism is the better economic system is a matter for debate, but has NOTHING to do with faith or devotion. Moreover, "Christian Socialism" was a very strong movement a century ago. - dw

2.) Marriage: Obama abdicated his sworn presidential duty to defend the laws of the United States by refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act and even actively worked to undermine the law.

Response: Hello? Really?! We make and change laws. The president defends the constitution, not the moronic notion that laws can never change. Otherwise, we would have had no emancipation proclamation, women's suffrage, or civil rights act...though I'm guessing this group doesn't find those progressive changes to be very impressive either. And in any case, even if he were to break a law (when has a president EVER done that?!), that still doesn't prove anything about his spiritual life. - dw

3.) Religious Liberty: Obama signed “Hate Crimes” legislation that can result in prosecution for speaking against homosexuality. Even pastors who preach the biblical view of sexuality could face prosecution in certain situations.

Response: The biblical view? Would that be the biblical view that rich powerful men can have multiple wives? Would that be the biblical view that only bishops are required to be monogamous? Would that be the biblical view that fathers can give their daughters away like property? Would that be the biblical view that if a widow is left childless she must marry her late husband's nearest male relative? Which biblical view of sexuality should we be preaching? And, free speach isn't a hate crime...in your church, sell all the hate people will buy, but when people listen to that hate speech and use it as an excuse to harm, threaten, or publicly slander LBGT people, yes, a crime against human dignity has been committed. Christianity isn't a pass to abuse people you don't like. It's really time to make peace with that fact. - dw

4.) Abortion: Obama’s policies have caused taxpayer funded abortions in other nations and fund of embryonic stem cell research that kills human embryos. He gave $50 million to UN population agency for promoting abortion and working with China’s murderous “one child” policy. He eliminated federal funding for abstinence-​only education and overturned the ban on funding abortions within Washington, D.C. During the 2011 budget debates, Obama refused to end funding for Planned Parenthood, almost causing the government to shut down.

Response: Excuse me?!?! Abortion is legal! And earlier, disagreeing with laws amounted to, in your argument, high treason. If abortion is legal, and legal is the definition of "Christian," then suck it up cupcake. The president is just supporting the law. And still, there are pro-choice Christians. Supporting a woman's sovereignty over her own body does not disqualify one from Christianity. - dw

5.) Homosexuality: Obama signed a bill repealing the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy which opened the door to open homosexuality in the military. Now military chaplains will be pressured to perform homosexual unions. Obama had militant homosexuals as part of his inaugural events and even hosted a reception in the White House celebrating the fortieth anniversary of the homosexual rights movement.

Response: Sorry, once again, hating Queers isn't a core Christian requirement. There are Christian homophobes, but heterosexism isn't a requirement for the faith. - dw
6.) Liberal /​Marxist Liberation Theology: Obama sat under a radical, Marxist minister, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, for 20 years and has adopted all of his Marxist ideology. Obama denies Christ’s atonement and mocks the Bible and rarely attends church, yet we are supposed to believe he’s Christian. Many believe he’s really a Muslim, and for some good reasons.

Response: You don't like his Christian pastor, so that means he's not a Christian? You can name his former pastor; can you name his former Imam? No. And, again, we have freedom of religion; he gets to be Muslim if he chooses. And liberation theology is, well, you know, theology! It's a Christian framework for thinking and talking about God. And, newsflash, there are multiple views of atonement theology (including a rejection of it). Within the larger Christian tradition there is a lot of diversity of thought. - dw

7.) National Christian Heritage: In a speech given in Turkey, Obama said, “we do NOT consider ourselves a Christian nation.” Obama intentionally misquotes the Declaration of Independence omitting “our Creator” as the source of our unalienable rights.

Response: One need not be a Christian to believe in a "creator." And, we do NOT have a state religion. Christians may be the majority in our nation, but that doesn't make us a Christian nation. In this nation, we are still free to belong to any religion or no religion. If you want a Christian nation, go to Italy or England. If you want unrestricted freedom of and from religion, welcome to the US. - dw

8.) Supreme Court Appointments: Justice Elena Kagan is a hardcore liberal on abortion, gun rights and homosexual marriage and is suspected to be a lesbian. Kagan wrote a brief supporting Clinton’s veto of a ban on partial birth abortion. While a Dean at Harvard, Kagan banned military recruiters from the campus. Kagan also opposed the Federal Defense of Marriage Act. Justice Sonia Sotomayor is a liberal and activist judge who believes courts should make policy not just interpret the constitution. Sotomayor argued for unlimited abortions for any reason throughout pregnancy and for taxpayer funding of abortions.

Response: You don't like their social views, their politics, or their scholarly understanding of the law. You failed to mention what they "beleive" about metaphysics, philosophy, religion, devotion, or spirituality. Neither liberal nor intellectual means "non-Christian"...and even non-Christian doesn't mean anti-Christian. - dw
9.) Obama-​care: Your tax dollars will pay for abortions and the older you get your life will be considered a liability and expendable. Some bureaucrat on a “DEATH PANEL” will ultimately decide if YOUR life is worth saving or not.

Response: Healing the sick...really, this is your evidence of non-Christian behavior? And guess what, we already have death panels, they are the insurance execs who deside what procedures they will cover and which meds they will approve. Since someone will be deciding the quality of the care I get, why not let it be someone who doesn't personally profit from declining health?! There is no Big Brother Death Panel, but as long as medical coverage is less than universal, there are many people who will die needlessly. Offering care is a matter humanitarian ethics. Offering or denying care is not the definition of Christianity. - dw
10.) Radical Czars: Kevin Jennings, Obama’s Safe School “czar,” is a militant, homosexual activist from Massachusetts. Radical pro-​abortion advocate Kathleen Sebelius is Obama’s Secretary of Health and Human Services. She took a quarter of a million dollars from George Tiller, the notorious late term abortionist. Chai Feldblum, a lesbian law professor was appointed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Feldblum said in any conflict that might arise between religious liberty and homosexual “rights,” she would have a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win.

Response: Religious liberty doesn't mean denying liberty to those your religion tries to dehumanize. You are free to worship the God of your understanding; you are not free to deny others their equality because you say the god of your understanding hates everyone you hate. You have shown that the President doesn't discriminate against gays and lesbians; you have not shown that he is or isn't Christian. - dw
If you like the president, support him. If you don't like him, vote for someone else next year. But the witchhunt to decide if he's Christian is irrelevant to the political process. And, frankly, if Christianity was as limited and limiting as the presentation by "Defend Christians" would suggest, then surely Christians would soon number fewer than those who believe they have abducted and anal probed by space travelers. Christians need no defense, but Chrisitanity should be protected from those who claim they do.


For the article about the "Defend" group, visit http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/

We Shouldn't Be Surprised...Progress Has Been Happening All Along

A Progressive's Reflection...
by Durrell Watkins

Yes, it's very exciting that DADT has been repealed, that there was an attempt to pass the DREAM Act, that largely because of US pressure sexual orientation is once again included in the UN Resolution against killing minorities, and an Arms Treaty has been ratified. These are significant accomplishments that have happened in a fairly brief amount of time (or so it would seem).
But it's unfair to act as if these progressive victories are rare, sudden, and only in response to the mid-term elections.

The truth is that in just two years we have seen:
- The appointment of more openly gay officials than occured in ANY previous administration in history
- Extending benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees
- Pell grants expanded to help low income students go to college
- Funding increased for the Violence Against Women Act
- Funding provided to improve services to US veterans
- Increased fuel economy standards
- The appointment of the first Latina (& 3rd woman ever) to the US Supreme Court
- The appointment of only the 3rd woman to the office of Secretary of State
- More private sector jobs created in 2 years than in the preceding 8 years
- An executive order to repeal the restrictions on federal funding for stem cell research
- The reduction of Rx drug costs for Medicare recipients by 50%
- The signing of the Children's Health Insurance Reauthorization Act, insuring 11 million children (4 million of which were previously uninsured)
- The signinig of Financial Reform Law
- The provision of $12.2 billion in new funding for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
- Health Care Reform, preventing insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions

AND there's more!!!
Visit http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/ for a more comprehensive list.

I'm very proud of recent developments; but i'm not surprised...they are in line with what has been happening for the entire last two years.

We liberals need to acknowledge when people are trying to help us accomplish what we say we want (and our liberal leadership needs to do a MUCH better job of letting the world know what they have accomplished!!!).

I'm glad we've benefitted from two entire years of progressive legislation and executive leadership and I hope that such progress will continue even now that the Houses of Congress are no longer dominated by the same majority party.

It's been a productive couple of weeks...but in reality, it's been a productive couple of years!

Biblolatry, Hatred, and Gay Marriage

Bible believers are free to vote their biblical values. Many who fund anti-gay marriage initiatives and who vote to keep same-gender loving persons as second class citizens often use the bible as their justification to do unto gays as they would never want anyone to do unto them.

I assume those who use the bible to justify their heterosexism have sold all their possessions and given all the proceeds to the poor (Mark 10.21).

I also assume all the women who voted against gay marriage because of their biblical faith never teach sunday school, sing in church choirs, pray in public, preach, or otherwise break silence in church (1 Corinthians 14.34).

I certainly hope NONE of the righteous voters are tatooed (Leviticus 19.28), and I would bet that every single one observes the Jewish Sabbath from sundown Friday to sundown Saturday as is COMMANDED in the precious Ten Commandments (Exodus 20.8).

And, being the good biblical literalists they are, I'm sure they've worked out somehow which of the two contradictory creation narratives (Genesis 1.1 - 2.4 and Genesis 2.5 ff) they take at face value. I'm sure they believe slaves should obey their masters and men can have multiple wives and children can be beaten and that it is very difficult for the wealthy to "enter the kingdom of heaven)...bearing in mind that almost everyone in the US is wealthier than most everyone else on the planet.

As long as they are consistent with their biblical literalism and biblically excused fears and hatreds, I'm OK with it all...oh, wait...maybe hatred is hatred and no amount of proof-texting can make it less ugly than it is. OK, i'm back. Let's fix this mess and demand equality for everyone.

I Am A Values Voter

I am a US citizen.
I am a faithful voter.
And, as it turns out, I have values.

I value equality.
I value civility.
I value religious pluralism.
I value "liberty and justice for ALL."
I value mutual affection (regardless of the genders expressing that affection).
I value civil liberties.
I value peace.
I value opportunity for all people.
I value diversity.
I value health, and I believe all people should have full access to health care.

Those who beat the drums of war, and those who confuse homophobia for family values, and those who point fingers and shout insults and make threats rather than engaging in respectful dialogue, and those who equate capitalism with democracy, and those who are willing to sacrifice civil liberties for a false sense of security clearly have values, and they are demonstrating what they value. But let's not be fooled into believing that those are the ONLY values to be had.

Liberal values are values none the less.
I, an unapologetic liberal, have values.
And I am a values voter.

Not everyone will share my values. But not everyone who uses the rhetoric of values speaks for all values, and certainly not for mine.

9/11 Commemoration

September 11th - a day that serves to remind us how dangerous religious fanaticism can be. Fundamentalism and the intolerance it breeds, as well as the violence it tends to promote, is dangerous and potentially lethal whether it calls itself Muslim, Hindu, or Christian.

In 2001 I was living about 60 miles outside of Washington, DC. I was stunned as I watched on CNN a plane fly into the World Trade Center (NYC was only a four hour drive from my house at the time). While I was trying to make sense of what happened, another plane struck a tower. I remember saying, "We're under attack." Of course, the Pentagon was also attacked, and another plane landed in rural Pennsylvania.

Friends from Texas called me to make sure I wasn't "too" close to the planes that were raining down from the heavens. Less than a year later I began a second master's degree in New York City. People in the City still responded with sorrow and near disbelief when they spoke of the terrible day in 2001.

It's 8 years later.
Religion is still used to divide, wound, and intimidate.
Politics seem no more civil than they were almost a decade ago.
Racism along with political discord and religious fundamentalism all conspire to keep power and privilege in the hands of too few.
The oppressed and marginalized attack one another rather than banning together to demand equal opportunity and "liberty and justice for all."

September 11, 2001 was a sad in the US.
Of course, other countries live with days like 9/11 every day.
In this country, AIDS attacked entire communities while many pretended not to notice or worse, actually blamed the victims.
Matthew Shepard and James Byrd knew what it was like to be targeted, tormented, and killed for being different.
9/11 could have been a wake-up call that caused us to look with compassion on all who suffer. It could have been an opportunity to unite for the common good making sure no one gets left out.

As we continue to argue about providing health care for all people, and as we continue to protect homophobia/homohatred instead of standing up for equality for everyone, and as we voice our disagreements by spreading misinformation, insults, and personal attacks instead of engaging in healthy, respectful dialogue, one wonders if the healing that could have followed the 9/11 tragedy has been carelessly overlooked.

As we remember a sad day in American history, let's also remember that others have also had sad and painful days. And lets use our painful memories not to justify hatred or to promote fear, but to summon the compassion and goodwill that can bring healing to our whole world. That is the Phoenix that ought to rise from the ashes of 9/11. That is the Resurrection that can affirm life in the aftermath of death. That is the spiritual maturity that may just help heal the wounds inflicted by fundamentalism of every stripe.

Rev. Dr. Durrell Watkins
12:45 AM (EST), Sept. 11, 2009

My Liberal Religious Ministry

I was ordained in 1997. I worked full-time at a large church as a student intern for three years before that. I promised myself that I would always respect congregants enough to share with them whatever I knew. Theological, biblical, or religious scholarship would never be a professional secret that I would keep. Whatever would enrich, challenge, or broaden my faith I would offer to others. They wouldn't need to accept my views uncritically nor would they need to adopt my opinions whole-heartedly, but I would offer them my honest thoughts and the best scholarship as I understood it. What they would do with my gifts would be up to them, but I would never assume that they were incapable of "handling" the information I had to share.

Fourteen years later I continue to share honestly with the congregation I serve. My views continue to evolve, but I share the reality of my faith as it is in the moment hoping that such a witness will encourage others to ask their own questions, discover their own truths, and share their own insights and experiences. I'm not very interested in doctrinal certainty or dogmatic conformity but rather an honest and reasonable faith that has room for doubt, that allows for change, and that assumes the sacred value of all people.

I have no notion that my belief or anyone else's will provide the assurance of eternal security. On the contrary, I assume the life-force is forever. Religion should improve this life, not promise another one. Life continues beyond this experience or it doesn't. Either way, religion isn't a guarantee that some will exist in a post-mortem paradise while others will be excluded from that paradise. Instead, for me, religion is an opportunity to form community, to ask questions, to search for meaning, and to find hope in life. If it accomplishes those lofty goals, it has proven itself valuable in our world.

Somehow, my approach to religion is often viewed as seditious, outrageous, even heretical. This always surprises me. And yet, my integrity demands that I share honestly. My optimism leads me to believe that such radical honesty helps at least some people.

So, I continue to offer a pluralistic and progressive approach to religion. I hope that the gifts that I offer are finding happy homes and that they are contributing to a better world. I will at least keep trying.

A Liberal Catechism

What is God? God is All That Is, and the Whole (naturally enough) is more than the sum of Its parts. Others might say God is a concept, the highest of all human ideals. Still others might say God is the personification of what is highest and best in life. Some would equate God with life itself or they might say that God is the Source and Substance of life or that God is the process of life as it evolves. Infinite Intelligence, Perfect Love, Interconnected Web of Existence...these various philosophical ideas are represented by the one, simple word: God.

What is the Devil? The Devil is a literary character meant to personify evil, which is the manifestation of the false belief that there is a power that could oppose the Allness which we call God. To focus on evil or to believe it to be ultimately real is to give it power in one's experience of life.

Who is Jesus? Jesus represents for us the Christ Idea...the human being at her or his very best. Though highly romanticized and mythologized, Jesus is for us the symbol of humanity's potential to realize unity with the divine.

What is the holy trinity? Divine Mind, Perfect Idea, Ideal Expression...this is the New Thought experience of the Holy. The Trinity is one of many images that point toward the Allness of God. Some people will find it a useful image, and others won't. If it helps one feel united with the divine Reality, then it is an appropriate way to discuss the ultimate.

What about the bible? The bible is a story of the human search for God. The bible shows the development of a people's concept and experience of God. It is neither a rule book, an argument against science, nor a literal history, but rather creative attempts to find meaning in life and to commune with the Source of life. The journeys of the people and characters in the bible can empower and encourage us as we move forward on the journeys of our lives.

What are Sacraments? A sacrament is an outward sign of inward grace. The traditional Christian sacraments are baptism (initiation) and holy Communion (a symbolic feast representing God's love for all people). The use of water for baptism and bread and wine for the Eucharist are helpful tools in acting out the message of grace, but the grace (unconditional, unwavering divine love) is an internal, universal reality.

Do miracles still occur? If they ever did, they still do. A miracle is a change of perception. Whenever we broaden our view, we see possibilities that we didn't see before. The new vision opens us up to new experiences which we may call miracles. Some people believe that all Good is available to all people and so there are no miracles, only the abundance of life that was kept at bay by limitation thinking that was finally released by developing a healing, prospering consciousness.

Does God answer prayer? Prayer is recognizing the divine Presence. Sensing the availability of divine power, we change our thoughts. New thoughts change our feelings. New feelings change our motives. New motives change our actions. New actions bring about new results. So, learning to pray powerfully does bring about desired results, but that isn't because a god separate from us chooses to grant some favors and not others. God is universally present and when we tap into that presence and choose to think creatively, we attract our Good. In this way prayer is answered, consistently and dependably. Prayer is the way we become receptive to the goodness of life.

Can we be healed through prayer? Prayer, meditation, counseling, rest, nutrition, medication, surgery, energy work, chiropractic, massage...there are many ways to experience healing. Whatever helps us express our wholeness is an agent of healing. Prayer can certainly help us change our thinking and our feeling so that we experience more of life and its goodness.

What is sin and atonement? Sin is missing the mark. The "mark" is knowing our oneness with God. When we forget or fail to know our divine nature, we have missed the mark. Atonement, or at-one-ment is learning or remembering that we are one with God. At-one-ment is our natural state, our oneness with our Creator.

Is there a heaven or hell? The details of the so-called after-life are the stuff of much speculation. But many people believe that like all energy, life and consciousness can't ultimately be destroyed. Living a life of hope, love, and joy will mean that if death is the end of life, we can conclude our lives without regret. And, if death is but one more experience in a life that never ends, then living with hope, love, and joy is the best way to prepare for whatever is beyond the experience of death. Heaven is being in the presence of God, and hell is separation from God...so, whenever we realize our unity with the divine, we are in heaven. When we forget our unity with God, we are in hell. Heaven and hell are states of consciousness and we can be saved from hellish thinking whenever we choose to return to the heavenly reality of being aware of God's presence within us.

Let's Clear Up This Non-Theist Business

I'm a non-theist. I say it often. I say with conviction. I say it without apology.

However, there seems to be some confusion when people learn this about me. They find it strange that as a non-theist I remain religious, OR they assume non-theist means "atheist" and therefore label me "godless."

Now, I don't really care. My opinions are my own and your opinion of my opinions isn't likely to change them. A good argument might, a sound case, but just a differing opinion probably won't.

Still, it doesn't feel quite right to hear that I don't believe in "god." The god I contemplate and seek to worship isn't a separate Other. The god I contemplate and seek to worship isn't gendered, human-like, or provable. It may in fact be only a concept, and this possibility doesn't disturb me.

When I say I'm a non-theist, I mean I don't believe in Zeus (by any name, including the generic "God"). But mystery, that's something else! Beauty? Absolutely! Hope? You betcha. The interconnected, infinite web of all existence? Without doubt!

So, I do believe in the field of infinite possibilities, the energy of life, the great and grand Whole that is more than the sum of its parts (and in which we each "live and move and have our being"). One could call It spirit or principle or life or mind (and, of course, each of those words could be capitalized: Spirit, Principle, Life, Mind).

When we examine it all closely, I seem to believe in much (maybe even most) of what "god" represents - I just don't think that god is judging or condemning anyone. I don't think god is making arbitrary decisions or controlling every event in life. I don't think god is someone/something separate from us (or from the earth or the universe).

I believe in the powerful process of life in which we each participate. The "isness" that many call "god" is not separate from you and me - we are part of It! That's my theology. God is all, and because god is all, we can call It anything we want. I usually don't call it "god" but It is no less what It is regardless of what we call It. The energy field of existence and possibilities is definitely something in which I believe, but that still isn't a warrior-thunder god on a throne, punishing the wicked and rewarding the faithful, is it? So, until I find a better term, I'll stick with non-theist. And yes, a religious non-theist at that. That's the fun part!