1

Joe, can you point your readers to any good lists of Christian organizations that exist to address those issues?

2

This seems reasonable, but it also seems like it could describe almost any Middle American, too--with the exception of the strong contrasts mentioned above. How distinctive do you think these are of *evangelicals*, and how much represents at most a theologizing of pretty much normal Middle-American beliefs?

I am, of course, aware of the reciprocal influences among evangelical Christians (like me) and Middle Americans at large (also like me).

Still, when I see the environment figured in there in sort of vague terms, I try to think of how many times I've heard any particularly "Christian" arguments on environmental issues--and I'm not coming up with any, only a few attempts to justify stock environmental concerns to Christians (who might be skeptical on account of the global doomsaying of eco-"prophets").

Another example: What's particularly Christian about "poverty reduction"? Do you know anyone who thinks we should *increase* poverty? There's certainly no large constituency that thinks we should do nothing about it; and I'm not sure there's any specifically Christian principle that favors *political programs* for the reduction of poverty.

3

The reason most people think of evangelical politics in narrow terms is that most evangelicals themselves tend to think politically with a perspective to specific issues, rather than crafting a comprehensive worldview. Without such a foundation and linkage, the efforts of the evangelical community to effect positive change is reduced to fighting individual battles rather than waging a campaign. Fortunately, the success of recent works by authors like Nancy Pearcy and others hopefully shows a resurgent interest by Christians in fully exploring the intellectual foundations of the Christian worldview.

4

Jim: Joe, can you point your readers to any good lists of Christian organizations that exist to address those issues?

Good suggestion. I’ve added a few and will include more as I think of them.

pgepps: How distinctive do you think these are of *evangelicals*, and how much represents at most a theologizing of pretty much normal Middle-American beliefs?

I think that Middle-American values are so imbued with evangelical beliefs that it would difficult to distinguish the two. I would say that a few of them, such as prison rape and AIDS in Africa, really aren’t that much of a concern to the average non-Christian American.

Still, when I see the environment figured in there in sort of vague terms, I try to think of how many times I've heard any particularly "Christian" arguments on environmental issues--and I'm not coming up with any, only a few attempts to justify stock environmental concerns to Christians (who might be skeptical on account of the global doomsaying of eco-"prophets").

They are out there; they just don’t get much press. I think that is one area where I should write more about.

Another example: What's particularly Christian about "poverty reduction"?

Um, quite a lot actually. Look around at countries that haven’t been influenced by Christianity and you’ll see that there isn’t that great a concern for the poor. For example, how many foreign Muslim or Hindu charities do you see working to alleviate poverty in North America?

I'm not sure there's any specifically Christian principle that favors *political programs* for the reduction of poverty.

Maybe not programs but definitely political policies. Debt relief for destitute foreign nations is one example.

5

One evangelical environmentalist group is the Evangelical Environmental Network (creationcare.org). They were behind the famous advertising campaign "what would jesus drive?".

Another group which is neither explicitly evangelical or environmentalist but still worth looking into is the American Scientific Affiliation (www.asa3.org). This is a group of Christians who are active, working, scientists.

A list of Christian environmental resources can be found here.

6

The following is a reasonable survey of environmentalism and anti-environmentalism amongst evangelicals.

I'll quote the conclusion:

It is the duty of all Christians to develop a uniquely biblical world view -- that is, to bring biblical truth to bear on all of life, and not to accept everything that comes to us from a culture that is thoroughly secular and often destructive to Christian thought and practice. There is a spiritual battle going on, and it is going to be felt in all of the affairs of humans. The world view conflict between environmentalists and anti-environmentalists reflects the spiritual condition of fallen humankind very well. These two sides have different visions of the good life and how to achieve it. Neither side understands the biblical doctrine of human depravity and the inability to escape its consequences. Neither side understands the environment as God's creation, nor humans as appointed both to dominion and stewardship acting as God's viceregents and imaging him.

We do not need to embrace either of these camps and become the religious camp-followers that they might want to provide some moral legitimacy to their agendas. On the positive side, the biblical world view may hold the key to this controversy. We do not owe our allegiance to any political party or philosophy, but to a higher authority. What the earth needs are stewards, people who see themselves as caring for something that does not belong to them--God's good creation--which should be protected and justly shared with present and future generations. Christian stewardship should be a natural outworking of our common faith; if more Christians were to take their stewardly calling seriously, we could hold up our faith and practice as "essential to the solution of our ecological problems," as the Evangelical Declaration [on the Care of Creation] puts it.

7

From Joe: Look around at countries that haven’t been influenced by Christianity and you’ll see that there isn’t that great a concern for the poor. For example, how many foreign Muslim or Hindu charities do you see working to alleviate poverty in North America?

I think you might want to reconsider this one, Joe. It is really over the top -- I've come to expect better from you. Why aren't Christian charities from Boliva or Nigeria working against poverty in North America?

8

While I appreciate your attempt to expand on the policital issues meaningful to evangelicals, the list you give is one that nearly anyone could sign up for except for a few issues hidden in the details so to speak. The main principles themselves are not so different from, say, the Green Party. I think that explains why the media tends to focus on those issues like abortion and same-sex marriage that distinquish evangelicals from so many of the rest of us.

I am surprised that capital punishment is listed and have to guess you mean evangelicals are against it. If that's true I'm very happy yet confused. How is it then that GWB, an evangelical, signed off on so many executions and, to my knowledge, strongly supports the death penalty? I can't remember ever seeing any evangelical speak out against capital punishment; yet we all are very aware of the 11 state constitutional ammendments that now prohibit same-sex marriage. To me, that's an immoral choice about what to do with your political power.

9

AndyS,

I think you might want to reconsider this one, Joe. It is really over the top -- I've come to expect better from you.

Why it is “over the top?” Pgepps asked a simple question: “What's particularly Christian about "poverty reduction"?” If the answer is “nothing at all” then we should expect to find Muslim and Hindu charities working to reduce global poverty in such countries as Mexico or El Salvador or any country in which we find Christian charities operating. Do you disagree?

Why aren't Christian charities from Boliva or Nigeria working against poverty in North America?

I expect that the answer is (a) neither of those countries has the resources to aid foreign nations and (b) there are already poverty-fighting Christian charities in North America. Neither reason would be applicable to a country such as Saudi Arabia or India. In fact, we find the Saudis send funds to support Wahhabist schools in North America but yet I can’t recall hearing of a Saudi based Muslim charity fighting poverty in Appalachia.

10

AndyS,

I am surprised that capital punishment is listed and have to guess you mean evangelicals are against it. If that's true I'm very happy yet confused. How is it then that GWB, an evangelical, signed off on so many executions and, to my knowledge, strongly supports the death penalty?

Like many other issues, evangelicals are divided over the morality of capital punishment. I myself hold a position that is similar to the Catholic Church. I recognize that capital punishment is Biblically mandated but have concerns about the ability to apply it in a just manner.

I can't remember ever seeing any evangelical speak out against capital punishment; yet we all are very aware of the 11 state constitutional ammendments that now prohibit same-sex marriage. To me, that's an immoral choice about what to do with your political power.

I suspect that evangelicals who speak out against cp aren’t labeled as such since it doesn’t fit in the “religious right” paradigm that the media wants to squeeze us all into.

11

Gay marriage aside, I don't see that you have mentioned what the Evangelical Christian "Gay Agenda" is. Could you elaborate? It's something I've always been curious about but can never truly get a "straight" answer about. I know of course that they do not recognize any relationship that I might have with my husband as valid but what else do they want from me?

Do they want to nuke West Hollywood? Prevent me from adopting or raising a child? Prevent me from working or living around children? Be able to fire me from my job simply because of my sexual orientation? Do you want to put me into prison or a mental institution for involuntary "preparative" therapy? If there was a hormone therapy that a mother could take when pregnant to insure that her child be straight, would they find this morally acceptable? Exactly how far do they want to take this? Is the long-term goal complete eradication of gay and lesbian people from the planet?

12

Patrick,

Gay marriage aside, I don't see that you have mentioned what the Evangelical Christian "Gay Agenda" is.

Um, I didn’t mention it because we don’t have one. Neither do we have an “Adulterer’s agenda” or a “Fornicator’s Agenda” or any other “[Insert sexual sin here] Agenda”.

Could you elaborate? It's something I've always been curious about but can never truly get a "straight" answer about.

You mean you could never get anyone to confirm an agenda that doesn’t exist. ; )

I know of course that they do not recognize any relationship that I might have with my husband as valid but what else do they want from me?

I’m not sure that is necessarily the case. As you know, my ex-wife is a lesbian and is in a domestic relationship with another woman. I certainly don’t “recognize” their relationship as a marriage but if the sexual component and the attempt to fashion a complementary union where none can exist where removed, I would have no problem accepting their “companion” relationship.
(BTW, husband seems to be a very un-PC term when you have two men in the home. Is he really the "head of the household?")

Do they want to nuke West Hollywood?

No. We’re very anti-nuke.

Prevent me from adopting or raising a child?

In an ideal world? Maybe. But then I would prefer to limit adoptions to families in which the child would have one mother and one father.

Prevent me from working or living around children?

I don’t assume that having a homosexual orientation makes one a pedophile. I doubt many other evangelicals do either.

Be able to fire me from my job simply because of my sexual orientation?

Not unless your job would require you to be a heterosexual (and offhand I can’t think of what type of work that would be).

Do you want to put me into prison or a mental institution for involuntary "preparative" therapy?

Um, no.

If there was a hormone therapy that a mother could take when pregnant to insure that her child be straight, would they find this morally acceptable?

Interesting question. I personally would be opposed to such a measure but I can’t speak for everyone.

Exactly how far do they want to take this?

About three blocks, to the corner of Main and Vine where we will drop you off and force you to walk home.

Is the long-term goal complete eradication of gay and lesbian people from the planet?

I don’t think we are going to start stoning people for sexual sins. If that happens then we are going to have one heck of a rock fight on our hands.

13

i think that evangelical christians should read this:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=6627

and who says that there aren't muslim/hindu/whatever charities in North America. I don't particularly know of any charities (christian, or otherwise). But, i'd be really suprised to learn that out of all north america, that only Christians were the ones starting charities.

14

"I’m not sure that is necessarily the case. As you know, my ex-wife is a lesbian and is in a domestic relationship with another woman."

Soooo....did you become anti-gay marriage before or after your wife left you?

15

yermom,

and who says that there aren't muslim/hindu/whatever charities in North America.

No one that I'm aware of. I only asked why there are presumably no Muslim or Hindu anti-poverty charities that are from foreign countries and which operate in North America. I could be wrong, there may be many such organizations and I’m just not aware of them. But it seems rather odd that no one else could think of one either.

I don't particularly know of any charities (christian, or otherwise). But, i'd be really suprised to learn that out of all north america, that only Christians were the ones starting charities.

I assume that other religions are like Christians and host charities here at home. My claim was only that, unlike other religions, American Christians sponsor anti-poverty charities in other countries. I may be wrong, of course, and would be more than happy to admit it if presented with evidence to the contrary.

Soooo....did you become anti-gay marriage before or after your wife left you?

When my divorce was finalized almost ten years ago, “gay marriage” wasn’t even on my political radar. Naturally, I would have been as opposed to it then as I am now. If anything my amicable relationship with my ex and her partner should make me more supportive of the measure. But I can’t abandon a deeply rooted principle (that marriage is a sacred trust between a man an a woman) simply because I empathize with a gay couple that I care deeply about.

Naturally, I don't think that gay marriage would be the end of civilization. But we can't have the government redefining institutions at their whim. Marriage, after all, was around long before any government. If the state doesn't want to "discriminate" against gay couples then they either have to provide a non-marriage option or stop recognzing the institution of marriage altogether. What it can't do, because it doesn't have the legitimate authority, is to define marriage as between anything other than a man and a woman.

16

Joe,

Thanks for the very reasonable answers.

Rich,

Thanks for the resources. I'll check 'em out.

17

The article stated:

"Evangelicals believe in the promotion of both a fair legal system that does not favor either the rich or poor and in a fair economic system that does not tolerate perpetual poverty. This principle also includes the protection of the vulnerable members of society, including the poor, children, the elderly, the disabled, refugees, minorities, the persecuted, and the imprisoned."

I don't want to sound cynical, but I was under the impression that the right-wing ideology (favored by most conservative evangelicals) is more inclined to advocate what has been dubbed "social Darwinism" (prosperity for the fittest) and to disfavor attempts to bring about a "fair economic system" that grants equal chances for all.

(This can be seen in the Republican proposals for fiscal reform; abolishing income taxes and leaving only sales taxes would cuddle the most prosperous and punish the poor.)

I agree that an injust economical system is un-Christian; however, conservative evangelicals (which is what I'd call myself, too) usually don't seem to have a problem with it in America. Or am I wrong?

18

No one that I'm aware of. I only asked why there are presumably no Muslim or Hindu anti-poverty charities that are from foreign countries and which operate in North America.
snip
I assume that other religions are like Christians and host charities here at home. My claim was only that, unlike other religions, American Christians sponsor anti-poverty charities in other countries.

You are comparing apples and oranges.

The appropriate comparison in your Appalachia question would be foreign Muslim/Hindu charities and foreign Christian charities. Are you aware of any Christian charities from foreign countries that are active in Appalachia? If not, might the reason be an assumption on the part of all foreign charities that the wealthiest nation on earth can take care of its own?

The apppropriate comparison to American Christians and the charities they sponsor in other countries would be to look at American Muslims or Hindus and the charities that they sponsor.

19

Thanks Joe for the article and references. I've been asking what other issues evangelicals have other than gay marriage and abortion. I used to hear evangelical voices on the school voucher issue and prayer in school. The rest of the issues, I don’t think there’s much organized effort from evangelicals.

I wish fighting poverty elicited the same passion as fighting gays by the Republicans. I’d say the Dems have the high ground there. Maybe this will inspire some: Look at Glen Stassen’s article for Sojourner that discusses the rise in the rate of abortion due to the unemployment and poor economy.

I think extreme deficit spending should be on the list of issues somewhere. This borrow and spend strategy is irresponsible and is saddling our children with and overwhelming amount of debit. It’s hard to really conceive of the size of the deficits annually but here’s a shot: we raked up about $95,000 of new debit in 2003 for every baby born in 2003. But Congress still passed, and the President signed, a set of additional tax loopholes that cut taxes for businesses. Not the values high ground.

20

Elliott,
Dr. Stassen's article and its faulty premises, faulty use of statistics (some faulty) and faulty logic have been refuted at numerous places by myself, national Right to Life, Ramesh Ponnuru and Michael New

Between Two Worlds covered this very well in October 22 and 23.

21

The question, rephrased: Imagine a prenatal therapy which prevents a homosexual orientation. Is it morally wrong for a mother to choose this therapy?

Joe seems to be morally opposed to this therapy. But I can't seem to imagine a reason that wouldn't apply to any prenatal therapy. So I wonder if he's answering a different question: is it morally wrong to force this therapy on every mother, whether they want it or not?

22

'I certainly don’t “recognize” their relationship as a marriage but if the sexual component and the attempt to fashion a complementary union where none can exist where removed, I would have no problem accepting their “companion” relationship.'

there has been a big call on the libertarian front to make all marriages civil unions, which is what theya re. marriages are an invention ofthe church, and should be seen as mixing church with state. many people never set foot in a church, other than to be married.

'I don’t assume that having a homosexual orientation makes one a pedophile. I doubt many other evangelicals do either. '

you may want to ask around about that. about half of the teachers at my school are gay, but they don't let parents know that.

'My claim was only that, unlike other religions, American Christians sponsor anti-poverty charities in other countries.'

huh, seems to be a lot of catholic charities. you know mother teresea, and all that. of course, she is in hell though, so she doesn't count.

'Are you aware of any Christian charities from foreign countries that are active in Appalachia?'

appalachia doesn't need charities because born-agains want to give charity to people to save them, appalachia has had that chance, so no need to bother. of course, many in iraq haven't heard it either, but they don't want americans there (it is US of halliburton now, after all), so it is ok to kill them before they hear the gospel.

god bless america and pass the ammo. yee haa!

23

Joe says; (regarding the anti-gay agenda)

"You mean you could never get anyone to confirm an agenda that doesn’t exist. ; )"

Oh, you mean like the "Gay Agenda"?

I don't think your answer is quite accurate but maybe you are just not aware. Every election, (so every two years), there is always an anti-gay proposition or proposed law on the ballot somewhere in the United States. Usually more than one, and usually at the state level. And every time you look at the sponsors of these laws it's always based in a primarily Christian organization, such as the Coalition for Traditional Values, etc. This is what I remember, for as long as I have been "Out", so that would be for at least 25 years. That is a lot of political time, effort, and money being spent by Christians to enact anti-gay laws. That's why I think "anti-Gay" is such a large part of Christian politics.

Just because I'm paranoid and think all Christians are out to get me doesn't mean that I'm not right.

24

Joe: Look around at countries that haven’t been influenced by Christianity and you’ll see that there isn’t that great a concern for the poor. For example, how many foreign Muslim or Hindu charities do you see working to alleviate poverty in North America?

Andy: I think you might want to reconsider this one, Joe. It is really over the top -- I've come to expect better from you. Why aren't Christian charities from Boliva or Nigeria working against poverty in North America?

Joe: Pgepps asked a simple question: “What's particularly Christian about "poverty reduction"?” If the answer is “nothing at all” then we should expect to find Muslim and Hindu charities working to reduce global poverty in such countries as Mexico or El Salvador or any country in which we find Christian charities operating. Do you disagree?

Yep, I strongly disagree, Joe, and remained surprised at your supporting this odd line of thought. You seem to be resorting to very twisted reasoning to make Christians look better than others, not a very Christian approach.

If you assume all people in poverty have equal worth, then you'd want to fight poverty where you can be most effective. Why would a Hindu charity be fighting poverty in the USA (some call it the richest country in the world) when they have so far more severe poverty in their own backyard? Ditto for an Islamic or Buddhist charity. (I didn't say this originally because it seemed so condescending.)

To go back to your original statement:

Joe: Look around at countries that haven’t been influenced by Christianity and you’ll see that there isn’t that great a concern for the poor.

By the same reasoning you could say: Look around at countries that haven’t been influenced by palm pilots (or sitcoms, or snow shovels, or pension plans) and you’ll see that there isn’t that great a concern for the poor.

25

AndyS,

Yep, I strongly disagree, Joe, and remained surprised at your supporting this odd line of thought. You seem to be resorting to very twisted reasoning to make Christians look better than others, not a very Christian approach.

I’m not trying to make Christians look better than other religions. I was merely pointing out what appears to be an obvious state of affairs: the Christian religion puts more emphasis on fighting poverty than other religions.

If you assume all people in poverty have equal worth, then you'd want to fight poverty where you can be most effective. Why would a Hindu charity be fighting poverty in the USA (some call it the richest country in the world) when they have so far more severe poverty in their own backyard? Ditto for an Islamic or Buddhist charity. (I didn't say this originally because it seemed so condescending.)

I’ll agree with that. Now can you show me an Islamic or Hindu (I didn’t originally say Buddhist)non-profit that is fighting poverty in a country in the Northern Hemisphere?

By the same reasoning you could say: Look around at countries that haven’t been influenced by palm pilots (or sitcoms, or snow shovels, or pension plans) and you’ll see that there isn’t that great a concern for the poor.

But palm pilots and snow shovels have nothing to do with aiding the poor. Christianity, on the other hand, has a great deal to say about the subject.

I’m not casting judgment. I’m honestly not to worried about what other religions do. But let’s not take the PC “all religions are virtually the same” approach and claim something that isn’t true. If Hindus and Muslims are as concerned about fighting global poverty as Christians are then we should be able to see evidence of that fact.

26

"Joe says; (regarding the anti-gay agenda)

"You mean you could never get anyone to confirm an agenda that doesn’t exist. ; )"

Oh, you mean like the "Gay Agenda"?"

There is no gay agenda, either. There are gay activists and Christian activists. What Joe is putting up is the concerns of the average evanglical who is no more an activist than the average gay person. In fact, there is also a very strong pietistic, anti-activism strain in evangelical thought.

Barney Frank and other activists was very much against all the San Francisco marriage stuff, not only now but at the time the events were transpiring. The marriage push was for the most part a spontaneous reaction by concervative, religious, gay people who wanted the legitimacy that marriage gives and were growing tired of waiting.

As evidenced by the reaction of the Log Cabin Republicans to the election, the gay "conservatives" finally realized that they got ahead of themselves and the gay "activists" were right.

The whole debacle was the result of a naive lack of political sense and not some agenda being driven by activists.

27

Now can you show me an Islamic or Hindu (I didn’t originally say Buddhist)non-profit that is fighting poverty in a country in the Northern Hemisphere?

Since I'm not a Muslim, I'm not familiar with Islamic charities. However, you could have answered your own question with a simple web search.

http://www.muslimaid.org/ (funds aid in both the northern and southern hemispheres)

http://www.islamic-relief.com/

http://www.imancentral.org/ (Chicago is in the northern hemisphere isn't it?)

If Hindus and Muslims are as concerned about fighting global poverty as Christians are then we should be able to see evidence of that fact.

Have you looked? Even a google search?

28

Fundamentalist politics: The Taliban's Shopping List

29

If Hindus and Muslims are as concerned about fighting global poverty as Christians are then we should be able to see evidence of that fact.

A curious assumption is that others agree with Randian Christians that poverty ought to be fought via private charitable organizations. I'm usually the last person to point to cultural presuppositions as an epistemic problem, but in the present case it seems apt. In India there's a strong social justice movement, but it primarily seems to be pursued through government channels, but they may not share the same involution of religion and capitalism that permeates Bible-Belt Christianity. The upshot is that the government may be the primary means to fight poverty. Without a lot more thought and argument, though, we just can't say anything definitive on the matter.

(mind you, I'm no scholar on Indian political theory; the key, though, is that a lack of organizations devoted solely to fighting poverty isn't evidence of a lack of concern over poverty, and the claim that it does sheds far more light on the claimant than its ostensible object)

30

This:

but they may not share the same involution of religion and capitalism that permeates Bible-Belt Christianity.

Should read:

since they may not share the same involution of religion and capitalism that permeates Bible-Belt Christianity.

31

"I certainly don’t “recognize” their relationship as a marriage but if the sexual component and the attempt to fashion a complementary union where none can exist where removed, I would have no problem accepting their “companion” relationship."

Joe, I didn't see this before.

If you are referring to male/female duality being complimentary, you should know by now that life is never quite as simple as things first appear.

All human beings of either sex possess elements of their opposite sex. This is true physically, mentally, emotionally, and many argue, spiritually.

I know it's difficult for men to admit, but you are a Marine, so you can deal with anything, right? The truth is that you Joe, have some female characteristics. A feminine side. And every woman also possesses some male characteristics. Psych 101. Your personality & emotional make-up may be mostly male, but no one is entirely 100% male. A little bit will always be female. Its how were were created.

This is valid whether you believe in Evolutionary or Biblical explanations of the beginning of men and women.

This can get confusing, but your relationship is not just between male and female. Your primary male is partnered to your wife's primary female aspect. But also, your minor female is partnered with your wife's minor male aspect.

It's still a duality, yin and yang, but it's doubled. Give and Take. It's between a male/female to female/male.

It's probably why men and women understand each other as little as they do at all.

A gay or lesbian relationship works exactly the same way. Except that the proportions of each aspect are closer to an equilibrium. In other words, the proportions of male to female within me, as a gay man, is probably a little more balanced. But in a relationship with another man, especially another gay man, it is still quite complimentary.

I would suspect if you thought about your ex-wife's relationship with her partner, you would see aspects of both male and female in it, the same as your marriage. It is not role-playing or gender imitation, it is a true complimentary relationship. In other words, a marriage.

PS. Just in case I've really frightened you and made you paranoid about your feminine side, I want to point out that a man having a feminine aspect is not a character defect. Most men (and even women) believe it is because our culture has a prejudicial low opinion of women.

This is why it's an insult to say a "He fainted like a woman", but it's a compliment to say "she was strong as a man."

32

I'll take one last run at the poverty and religion issue.

Saying proof of Hindus and Muslims don't care about global poverty because you don't see their charities addressing poverty in the USA is a like saying Doctors Without Borders don't care about medicine because you don't see them healing people in the USA.

33

Well, I have some experience with India, having visited there 3 times, adopted a son from there, have some of my best friends in the world there, and have done quite a lot of ministry there.

Hinduism is of course the chief religion, and within Hinduism, the concept of karma and reincarnation is a motivation for NOT helping the poor and needy - as they are suffering due to a prior life's choices, and to relieve some of that suffering now will only doom them to repeat it in the next life. Likewise, the refusal to destroy rodents and such which destroy so much food annually comes from a religious belief system.

There are many Hindus who do care for suffering children and elderly, such as those within government, the police and the like. These folks are the ones who call my Christian friends who run orphanages, lepor colonies and such to assist them. One would think they would call the Hindu charities if they existed. This also explains the universal love for a Mother Theresa there in India.

I cannot comment on Islam as strongly, however, I met a large, LARGE, number of Muslim women with children that were begging on the streets of India. One assumes they would look to their own mosques first for relief, before asking the Christians for help, but they do not for some reason.

The issue of Hindu charity helping America is not relevant. The issue of Hindu charity (or lack thereof) within India is quite relevant it seems.

34

"Beware of the man of one book."

35

joe's take on gayness is indeed interesting.

the essential skirt (sorry joe, you're wearing one) is to dismiss the libertarian view that all unions, regardless of title, are social constructs.

the term 'marriage' is problematic but in the final analysis, ironically, matters little. the question of whether or not the majority chooses to call only man/woman unions 'marriages' is an essentially unimportant question.

if the majority chooses to treat people differently, on the basis of whatever title the public wills, then we indeed have a problem.

attentive fourth graders can probably recall a history in which we described a certain substantial part of the American population as "seperate but equal". the fundamental lesson learned, and eventually enunciated by the supreme court was that treating people in a systematically "different" way would always be unequal.

my understanding of equality, and joe's too it would seem, obviously contravenes treating people "different[ly]".

so, while anybody may choose to view anybodys relationship anyway one likes, it's going to be quite difficult to build up any kind of ethically defensible reason for refusing to permit same sex partners to visit each other in hospitals, or immigrate together, or file their taxes together.

indeed, the libertarians are going to carry this one. and it seems fair minded americans agree--at least 60% of americans would favor either gay marriage, OR civil unions.

36

it seems fair minded americans agree--at least 60% of americans would favor either gay marriage, OR civil unions.