All Saints Church in Pasadena takes another stand for justice on April 15th when it hosts the launch of "A Moral Compass to Justice" – justice-minded faith leaders calling for a faith based alternative to the environment of racism, homophobia, discrimination, and violence generated by the current Tea Party movement.And who better than the church that took on the IRS to take on the Tea Party movement? I am SO proud to be part of this important work ... here's the press release that went out today about the April 15th launch:
=========
"A Moral Compass to Justice" is a collaborative of justice-minded faith leaders calling for a faith based alternative to the environment of racism, homophobia, discrimination, and violence generated by the current Tea Party movement.
"A Moral Compass to Justice" claims social justice as a core value of all religions and faith. The new group calls for a return to the faith and values that have guided America through the social transformations that challenged discrimination and resulted in greater equality, freedom, respect and dignity for all of Americans.
They urge elected officials and the American people to join them in the sacred work of setting a moral compass for justice so that there will be a more just world for all of us."
WHEN: 10.00AM - Thursday, APRIL 15th to counter Tea Party protests
WHERE: All Saints Church, 132 N Euclid Avenue, Pasadena 91101
WHO: (Speakers at Tuesday's Press Conference)
- Rev. Canon Susan Russell, All Saints Episcopal Church-Pasadena
- Rev. Eric P. Lee, CA President, Southern Christian Leadership Conference
- Rabbi Denise Eger, President, Southern California Board of Rabbis
- Eddie Martinez, Associate Director of The Wall Las Memorias Project
- Ani Zonneveld, Co-Founder/President, Muslims for Progressive Values
MORAL COMPASS MEMBERS INCLUDE:
Rabbi Steven Jacobs, Rabbi Emeritus, Temple Kol Tikvah
Dr. Sharon Groves, Asst. Dir. of Religion and Faiths Program, Human Rights Campaign
Rev. Ryan Bell, Pastor, Hollywood Seventh-Day Adventist Church
Vincent Jones, Senior Program Officer, Liberty Hill Foundation
Rev. Samuel Chu, Executive Director, CA Faith for Equality
Rabbi Jonathan Klein, Executive Director, CLUE-LA
Rev. Art Cribbs, Pastor, San Marino UCC
22 comments:
All Saints needs to do more fact-checking regarding the Tea Party Movement.
Actually, I think we're good to go on that.
Just Me - welcome to reconciliation as practiced in TEC. "I'm right, your wrong" and we will agree to talk as long as you understand that your wrong.
Good Luck
It's hard looking in the mirror, isn't it, little Tea-baggers?
Not a Member of any Tea Party - but I figure I might listen to the 53% that have some skin in the game. Looks like they had a good day - but I'm more of a Fair Tax Libertarian.
As for the mirror .... Tea Bag looks "family size", sorry if your suffering from "single serving" limitations. ; )
I supported you in your protest against the IRS. Tea Party folks have an equal right to protest about higher taxes, fear that health care will get worse with Government in charge and worries about the National debt getting out of control. These are the core issues and they have nothing to do with racism as the rabbi claimed in the ABC news report I saw of your news conference. Just as you say on this website "feel free to disagree but give a reason." Simply trying to dismiss a movement by claiming racism when that isnt what the movement stands for is unfair. Try and live up to your website's stated goals and talk issues not smack. And I will give you a pass that you don't understand what "Tea Bagger" means but its a very vulgar sexual term and should be immediately removed from your supporters posts. It's very rude and very ironic that you are looking for a speck of racism in the Tea Party but cant see the plank of disrespect within your own ranks. Sad.
If you see one serving, it's because that's all you have room for. "Fair" tax to support you and no one you deem unworthy. Please, feel free to go away and make your own civilization! After all, why should I pay taxes to allow you to enjoy police and military and hospitals and roads and . . . right?
Your mirror.
I'm quite aware what a tea-bagger is, and the vulgarity of the term. It was the term the reactionaries used for themselves, before we pointed out what it meant. Save the outrage, it's ridiculous.
As for charges of racism - really, you gonna try to get by with nothing more than "Nuh-uh!"? Really? Come on! It's right there! "Obama's Plan - White Slavery!" Really? Gonna say it's not about race? Do you really think we are that stupid, that all you have to do is wander in and say, "It's not about racism, so come up with evidence!" while the evidence is right there in front of everybody and your sole response has been "No it's not!" with no other reason.
Have you no ability at introspection? None? No ability to see beyond you?
"The Fair Tax" is not just for me - it might be for you too. But it does require some radical thinking
Instead of income, payroll taxes, excise, etc. - imagine a 23% sale tax on new items and services. Everybody pays and everybody pay the same amount for new items and services. To offset the burden on the poor, everyone would receive an amount by EFT equal to the calculated amount of tax a person/family at the calculated (USDOL) poverty level would pay in a given month.
If you are in the used market - no tax, if you grow your own - no tax, the growth of your savings and investments - no tax. Only when you purchase new goods and services.
Corporations would not be taxed - whoa radical idea - but they aren't taxed now. The customers of their goods & services pay the tax.
So what would happen - Freedom. An end to the behavioral engineering by politicians, a revitalization of industry now competitive on the world market, a growth in savings & investment, and an end to tomes of tax law and (unfortunate for them) tax lawyers.
The government is funded to do it mission, employers are freed from a good portion of the HR nightmare, and your representatives in Congress can do less mischief.
Get the Book - Read it - Criticize it - look for the flaws - see if they are real or imagined - and lets move toward Freedom.
Gosh, I like my mirror!
I was interested in your movement until I saw "little teabaggers" in the comment section. In case you don't know...that is a term to describe a sexual act and is not very appropriate for a church to be leaving on their comment page. Good luck in all of your endeavors!
I was interested in your movement until I saw "little teabaggers" in the comment section. In case you don't know...that is a term to describe a sexual act and is not very appropriate for a church to be leaving on their comment page. Good luck in all of your endeavors!
I was interested in your movement until I saw "little teabaggers" in the comment section. In case you don't know...that is a term to describe a sexual act and is not very appropriate for a church to be leaving on their comment page. Good luck in all of your endeavors!
For Eric ... Who knew? Here's what I found when I did a little "tea bagger" research:
"The first big day for this movement was Tax Day, April 15. And organizers had a gimmick. They asked people to send a tea bag to the Oval Office. One of the exhortations was "Tea Bag the Fools in D.C." A protester was spotted with a sign saying, "Tea Bag the Liberal Dems Before They Tea Bag You." So, conservatives started it: started with this terminology."
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/to-teabag-or-not-thats-still-the-question-for-conservatives.php
So while the term evidently has some sexual connotations (which was frankly news to me!) and isn't I'll choose to use myself, I guess I don't see the urgency in deleting commenters who opt for it as a descriptor the Tea Party folks themselves generated.
Susan, It's your choice conduct your blog pages as you see fit. You can dance around the term all you want, but it lost me as a supporter because it is used here (and other places as well) to denigrate folks with differing opinions in a sexual way.
BTW...I believe the term was coined by Matt Lauer on MSNBC.
Good Luck and God Bless!!!
So what say you, commenting colleagues:
Do we damage our cause when we appropriate language that can be interpreted to cause insult and demean? (As Eric suggests.) Or can we become so "politically correct" we hand over the power to those who would oppress us?
Really -- what do you think?
I have to say I'm shocked Susan at your response. I gave you a pass when I thought you probably didn't understand the vulgar term. But your response is morally confused. Since countless African Americans have at times used the "N" word then that somehow makes it acceptable for others to use? If gays use slurs amongst themselves that makes it ok for others to use those offensive terms? That's crazy. If a term is offensive it's offensive. You can't claim it's okay to use it because someone somewhere else once said it freeing up that vulgar word for all to use in perpetuity.
If you have an organization called Moral Compass you need to at least attempt to live up to it.
sorry, Eric. I think you're in 'apples and oranges'land. Am I going to Refrian from using 'teabagger' now that I know its implications? as the former Governor of Alaska would put it: 'you betcha.' My question, however, stands: is it become OK to hurl racial, religious and other slurs and then retreat behind the cloak of 'victimhood' when your own ill-advised nomenclature comes back to bite you? (and BTW I don't buy the 'Matt Lauer made it up' ... too much evidence out there to the contrary.)
so yeah ... i'll use MY moral compass to regulate my own vocabulary. but my question for commenters is how do you make those decisions?
I think it's a matter of keeping your own house in order. I am not using any slur and I suggest if you are trying to be a moral compass you dont use any not only personally but set the standard that your website won't tolerate them either. It's your call. Seems to me this blog should be about an exchange of ideas and if someone on your blog admits they used it in a vulgar way then it should be remove. Thats what being a moral compass is about.
Somewhat, but what really hurt's your message is to dismissively avoid engagement with with a curt twist and maybe a vulgar characterization of those that hold an opposite view.
It seems at that point, you have said "I have no intellectual case for my opinion and 'So's You're Old Man!'"
Now while I'd love to use a term like ****** ****** or ****** ******* as a hurtful retort to a challenge - flexing my imagined superior outlook with a put down - it wouldn't advance my point. While I will rise with clever retort in response to vulgar brush-off, I have already won the high-ground and the argument, by the lack of substance and nature of the brush-off.
Of course IMHO.
I'm fine with talking about the issues. See my original post. My point to Susan is if you allow your own side to use vulgar terms in their 15 posts then what right do you have to complain about a handful of signs by a movement of millions? You lead by example. If you allow on your blog the very vulgar things you accuse the other side of then why should anyone take you seriously as a moral authority? I would tell the same thing to anyone in the Tea Party. Using slurs only proves the other sides point. Nobody wins any arguement by insulting the other side. Anyway, it is not my desire to go back and forth and back and forth. I'm done. I'm glad you won your IRS thing. The best in al you endevors. Cheers.
"the environment of racism, homophobia, discrimination, and violence generated by the current Tea Party movement."
That statement flows from an inaccurate understand of the facts.
And, ftr, is Leviticus biblical homophobia? Is Paul a homophobe?
In any event, could you provide some evidence to support your allegations and clarity to your audience?
Post a Comment