Opposing the Death Penalty

When I was still a teenager, I became a pacifist, and I have remained so for nearly 70 years now. It was perhaps only a little later, and for some of the same reasons, that I became an opponent of the death penalty, and I ask you to consider that position as you read this post. 

The above meme was included in a blog post I made in December 2013. That article, which you can access here, is the only time I have dealt directly with the matter of the death penalty since I started this blog over 15 years ago. But this is an important matter that needs further consideration.

Support for the death penalty is at an all-time low among USAmericans, but still, accord­ing to a late 2024 Gallup poll, 53% of Americans say­ that they sup­port the death penal­ty. And in spite of decreasing public support, in 2024, the number of executions was the most since 2015 (with 2018 the same).

Of the 25 executions in 2024, 48% were non-White. Fifteen of those 25 were from only four states: Alabama (6), Texas (5), Oklahoma and Missouri (4). The average age of those executed was 52, but their average age at the time of offense was 27 (including four teenagers)—a 25-year gap!

Consider these prominent people’s opposition to the death penalty:

** Most prominent is Pope Francis, who changed the wording in the Catechism of the Catholic Church in 2018. It now reads,

… the Church teaches, in the light of the Gospel, that “the death penalty is inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person”, and she works with determination for its abolition worldwide.

* Far earlier, Helen Prejean, a Catholic nun and the author of Dead Man Walking (1993), became a tireless advocate of abolishing the death penalty since first accompanying Elmo Patrick “Pat” Sonnier (b. 1950) to his execution by electrocution at Louisiana State Penitentiary on April 5, 1984.

From 1993 to 1995, Prejean served as the National Chairperson of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, which was founded in 1976.*¹

* Recently, I learned that John Grisham, the noted novelist, is also an opponent of the death penalty. Last October, I read the three novellas in his 2022 book Sparring Partners. The second, “Strawberry Moon,” is a touching story of a woman who became pen pals with a man facing execution.

Grisham’s main concern, it seems, has been the execution of people who were apparently innocent, and his latest book is Framed: Astonishing True Stories of Wrongful Conviction.*²

 * Former President Biden also opposes(d) the death penalty. In 2021, his Administration placed a moratorium on federal executions, and on December 23, 2024, he commuted the sentences of 37 individuals on the federal death row to sentences of life in prison without the possibility of parole.*³

From 1972 to July 2020, there were only three federal executions. And even though there had been no federal executions since January 2021, during the last six months that Trump was in office as the 45^th President, there were thirteen federal prisoners executed, including the first woman in 67 years.

On inauguration day in 2025, the 47^th President rescinded Biden’s moratorium on federal executions. It is widely recognized that conservative White evangelicals favor the death penalty far more than do moderate/progressive Christians, so perhaps Pres. Trump was primarily pandering to his base.

If you would like to know more about why I oppose the death penalty, please read the last part of Chapter 9 in my book Fed Up with Fundamentalism (2007, 2020), even though the discussion there is also too brief.  

Or, please email me or post your questions/comments on the blogsite. I look forward to dialoguing with several of you on this important issue.

_____

*¹ At the invitation of Jesuits in Japan, Sister Prejean (b. 1939) visited Japan four times. In 2002, when she came to Fukuoka, June and I had the privilege of hearing her speak and then chatting with her. Last Sunday, we watched the 1995 movie Dead Man Walking and were impressed again by Sister Prejean. In the film, she was portrayed by Susan Sarandon, who won the 1996 Academy Award for Best Actress for that performance.

*² Grisham, who celebrated his 70^th birthday on February 8, was interviewed for an article in AARP Bulletin in October 2024. Twelve years ago, he was interviewed by Bill Moyers regarding Grisham’s first nonfiction novel, The Innocent Man. That interview, titled “John Grisham on Wrongful Death Penalty Convictions,” can be accessed here.

*³ Death penalties are usually carried out by state governments, but the federal government imposes and carries out a small minority of the death sentences in the U.S.

But What About Biden’s Support of Israel?

There are several reasons why President Biden’s re-election as POTUS is uncertain despite the undesirability of his only real opponent. In this post, I am dealing with only one of those, which is the main reason some people, including some of my Thinking Friends, say they cannot vote for Biden. 

Pres. Biden contemplating what to do about Gaza.

Why is Pres. Biden supporting Israel so strongly? This is a question many people, especially younger people, in the U.S. are asking. And most of those asking that question are quite critical of the President because of that support.

In contrast to Lord Tennyson’s well-known words, “Theirs not to reason why, / Theirs but to do and die,” concerning Israel’s retaliation against Hamas and the U.S. President’s support of that warfare, it is incumbent upon us to ask the reason why—and to ask why so many Palestinians have had to die.

The attack on Israel by Hamas on October 7, 2023, was an atrocious event, one not unfairly compared with the September 11, 2001, attack on the U.S. True, the deaths on 10/7 were around 40% of those on 9/11—but the population of Israel is only about 3% that of the U.S.

Do you remember the reaction of the U.S. government to those horrendous attacks on 9/11/01? On October 7 (in a remarkable coincidence of dates), the U.S. officially launched Operation Enduring Freedom against Afghanistan.

In that war which ended on August 30, 2021—an ending for which Biden has also often been strongly criticized—at least 175,000 (and probably far more) people were killed, including more than 46,000 civilians.

If that is how the U.S. first responded to 9/11 even though the attackers were not Afghans, it is not surprising that Israel responded with strong military action against Gaza, where most of the Hamas terrorists lived.

Support of Israel has been U.S. policy since 1948 when Israel became a nation, and the U.S. under Pres. Truman was the first to recognize that new nation, and this country has been Israel’s primary ally ever since.

Israel has been the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign aid since its founding, receiving about $300 billion (adjusted for inflation) in total economic and military assistance.

What else could Pres. Biden do but stand by an old ally? As I wrote in my blog post on Dec. 21 last year,

I don’t think Biden’s position is any different from what any other President’s would be, including Hillary Clinton (who could well have been nearing the end of her seventh year as President if it had not been for her inexplicable loss in 2016).

Near Election Day in 2016 when I thought Clinton’s election was assured, I wrote “an open letter to Madame President.” Among other things, I implored her to ease up on her support for Israel in order to lessen the injustice being done to the Palestinians.

Pres. Biden’s support of Israel has lessened over the months since last October, and his support for humanitarian aid for Gaza has increased notably.

Four weeks ago, Senator Schumer (D-N.Y.), the highest-ranking Jewish official in the U.S. and a staunch ally of Israel, gave a powerful speech criticizing Prime Minister Netanyahu and called for new elections in Israel, for if held now, Netanyahu would most likely not be re-elected.

Pres. Biden praised Schumer’s speech. In contrast, it was also widely reported that leading Republican lawmakers were quite critical of it. U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said the U.S. needs to stand with Israel and give its friend and ally its full support.

What would happen if Trump were President? Two weeks ago, Trump said he would have responded the same way as Israel did after the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas but urged the country to “finish up” its offensive in Gaza and “get this over with.”*¹

On that same day, “U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg, a Republican from Michigan who used to serve as a Baptist pastor, suggested at a town hall meeting during Holy Week that the Gaza Strip should be nuked.”*²

I certainly wish Pres. Biden—and the U.S. government—had a far less supportive position toward Israel and a far greater humanitarian position toward Gaza.

Hearing what Trump and the Republicans are saying, though, why would anyone think voting for them rather than Biden would be better for the Palestinians?*³

____________________________________________________________________

 *¹ This was widely reported in the news media; here is the link to what the Associated Press wrote.

*² Here is how my friend Brian Kaylor, president & editor-in-chief of Word&Way, continued, citing Walberg: “‘We shouldn’t be spending a dime on humanitarian aid,’ [Walberg] declared on March 25 after a constituent asked about the U.S. effort to build a port to deliver humanitarian aid to starving people in Gaza. ‘It should be like Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Get it over quick.’” (Word&Way is a Christian [Baptist] media company based in Missouri since 1896.) 

*³ Please note my contention in the March 20 post that not voting or voting for a third party candidate, especially in swing states, increases the likelihood that Trump will be re-elected. 

Is the Republican Party Dead?

This is not the blog post I first intended to write for today. Last month I happened to see that Ralph Nadar was celebrating his 90^th birthday (on Feb. 27), and I planned to write about him. But my plan changed when I saw this headline: “Trump Jr. says ‘MAGA movement is the new Republican Party’.”

Various voices over the last few years have spoken about the death of the Republican Party. Surprisingly, one of those voices was that of Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.).

In November 2022, CBS News quoted Sen. Hawley as saying, “The Republican Party, as we have known it, is dead.” That was an expression of his disappointment about the outcome of the mid-term elections. Democrats maintained that those results were because of voters’ displeasure with Trump.

Since then, though, Trump and MAGA Republicans have become much stronger. Last week, “Donald Trump Jr. mused that the ‘Make America Great Again’ movement has replaced the old guard of the Republican Party.”

That New York Post article went on to cite Trump Jr. declaring, “That [old-school establishment] Republican Party frankly no longer exists outside of the D.C. Beltway.”

With Trump Sr. replacing the leadership of the Republican National Committee with his hand-picked supporters, including his daughter-in-law, the traditional GOP has essentially become the MAGA Party.

As the March 25 issue of Time magazine says (on p. 7) under the title, “It’s Trump’s Party,”  “The MAGA movement’s takeover of the GOP is now complete.” In that sense, it may be correct to say that the Republican Party as it has existed for the past century is dead.

What are traditional Republicans or opponents of Democrats to do? That seems to be the dilemma many U.S. voters find themselves in now.

Come November 5, one of two old, White men will be re-elected POTUS (assuming they are both still alive and well then, which is by no means assured.) But what if you cannot bear to vote for “Sleepy Joe” or “Sleazy Donald”?

That’s where Ralph Nadar enters the picture. According to Wikipedia, Nadar is an “American political activist, author, lecturer, and attorney noted for his involvement in consumer protection, environmentalism, and government reform causes, and a perennial presidential candidate.”

The latter is the only aspect of Nadar’s career that I will consider here, for Nadar’s running as a third-party candidate in 2000 is quite likely the major reason George W. Bush was elected President over Al Gore.

It is difficult to fathom how much better off this country, and the world, would be if Gore had been elected in 2000. As you may remember, Gore did receive the most popular votes, but thanks to the Supreme Court’s dubious decision, Florida’s electoral votes went to Bush and he became the 43^rd POTUS.

In that decisive state of Florida, Bush defeated Gore by only 537 votes. Nader received 97,421 votes in Florida, which led to justifiable claims that Nader was responsible for Gore's defeat—or rather, the Democrats and Independents who voted for Nadar were those most responsible for Bush’s election.

What does all this mean for 2024? Among other things, it means that those—and most especially those who live in the so-called “swing stages” of Ariz., Ga., Mich., N.C., Nev., Penn., and Wis.—must beware of voting for a third-party candidate if they don’t want Trump to win the election.

Some speak of voting for the lesser of two evils, and others say if both candidates are “evil,” they cannot and will not vote for either.

But it seems quite clear to me that it is far better to vote for the better of two evils than to not vote at all. Also, it is far better to vote for the lesser of two evils rather than for a third-party candidate that will potentially lead to the election of the greater of the two evils.

And mark it down: it is nearly 100% certain that either the Democratic or the Republican candidate will win the 2024 presidential election.

If Trump’s MAGA party is the only alternative to the Democratic Party, which seems to be the case now that the traditional Republican Party is the same as dead, I admonish you to vote for Biden’s re-election and for Democratic Senators and Representatives. Democracy itself and so much more is at stake.

Tarnishing the Name of Jesus

It was a week ago tonight that Pres. Biden delivered the annual State of the Union (SOTU) message. His address was widely applauded by Democrats and by the mainstream media—and, not surprisingly, panned by Republicans and by right-wing news outlets who castigate the “lamestream” media.

This post, though, is about the Republican rebuttal speech given by Alabama Senator Katie Britt. 

Katie Boyd Britt (b. 1982) was elected the junior Senator from Alabama in 2022, defeating Democrat Will Boyd, a Black Baptist pastor. She received nearly 67% of the vote.

I didn’t remember hearing the name of Sen. Britt before I saw that she would give the rebuttal after the SOTU address, so I looked her up on Wikipedia and elsewhere.

In a July 2021 interview, Britt stated, “Jesus Christ is the most important thing in life, and that should be the foundation that everything else comes around.” I certainly would not disagree with that, but surely such a statement should include telling the truth and not bearing false witness.

Earlier this week, the Los Angeles Times candidly stated that “the woman sitting in the kitchen with the cross glittering on her neck lied.” After listening (on Friday) to her Thursday night rebuttal speech, that clearly seems to be the case.

And given what she has said about Jesus Christ and the sparkling (diamond-studded?) cross around her neck as she gave her speech, it seemed to me that she was tarnishing the name of Jesus.

No wonder more and more people in the U.S. are leaving the Christian faith and joining the “nones.”

Sen. Boyd’s rebuttal speech was criticized and critiqued by a wide variety of voices. For example, here is part of what historian Heather Cox Richardson (HCR) wrote about Katie’s talk in her March 8 newsletter:

Sitting in a kitchen rather than in a setting that reflected her position in one of the nation’s highest elected offices, Britt conspicuously wore a necklace with a cross and spoke in a breathy, childlike voice as she wavered between smiles and the suggestion she was on the verge of tears. 

At the close of HRC’s letter, I first learned about Jess Piper and her Substack posts under the name “The View from Rural Missouri.” Her March 8 “view” was titled “The Fundie Baby Voice.”*

But it wasn’t the voice that most disturbed me. It was the lies that Sen. Britt told in that problematic voice.

In his remarks at the Academy Awards ceremony on Sunday evening, Jimmy Kimmel made these remarks about Emma Stone, who had just been awarded the Best Actress Oscar: “Emma, you are so unbelievably great in Poor Things. Emma played an adult woman with the brain of a child, like the lady who gave the rebuttal to the State of the Union on Thursday night.”**

Sen. Boyd did her best to harm Pres. Biden and to lessen his chances of winning a second term as POTUS. She may have done the Republicans more harm than good, however.

I was saddened by the touching story she told of talking last year with the girl who had been a victim of sex trafficking—and then off-put by her blaming the President for that tragic event. And then I was incensed when it turned out the incident in question took place when George W. Bush was President!

On Monday, Washington Post associate editor and columnist Karen Tumulty wrote that the “horrific story” Katie told, “at least by implication, turned out to be a big fat lie.”

Tumulty went on to note that the “Post’s fact-checker Glenn Kessler awarded Britt four Pinocchios for the way she twisted this tragic story to make a cravenly partisan point.”

Despite her later efforts to walk back what she had said, there was no way her listeners could have known she was talking about an incident that took place more than a decade ago. Even if it wasn’t a blatant lie, it was highly deceitful and told with the intent of harming the President.

It is quite clear, though, that in spite of her prominent display of a cross on a necklace and pious talk, she tarnished the name of Jesus and did the cause of Christ far more harm than good.

_____

  * Jess Piper lives in (or near) Maryville, Missouri, which is about 35 miles from my hometown. In 2022 she ran as a progressive Democrat to become a Representative in the Missouri legislature, but she was soundly defeated in the district that twice voted for Trump by 80% or so. I am now receiving her Substack posts and have had email exchanges with her this week.

** This was a powerful putdown of Sen. Britt’s rebuttal speech to those who had seen Emma Stone's Oscar-winning performance in Poor Things, but I do not recommend that movie except to insightful, mature adults.

Looking Back, Looking Ahead

In her December 31 sermon, my pastor told us about Sankofa, a concept/symbol that comes from the Akan people who live mainly in Ghana. I had not previously heard of Sankofa, but Pastor Ruth’s use of that idea on Dec. 31 was surely appropriate.

Sankofa is also appropriate for us to think about now in this second week of the new year. 

Sankofa is often illustrated as a beautiful bird with its head turned backward taking an egg off its back. It symbolizes the West African proverb about the importance of reaching back to the past, learning from it, and using that knowledge to create a more desirable future.

According to what ChatGPT told me, “The Sankofa is deeply rooted in African philosophy and is often used to emphasize the significance of cultural heritage, knowledge and the interconnectedness of past, present, and future.”

As Pastor Ruth showed us in her sermon, this symbol is at the very top of the new (2019) Sankofa Peace Window at the New Mount Pilgrim Missionary Baptist Church in Chicago. (Click here to see a picture of that impressive window.)**

It is certainly appropriate for African American people to use the Sankofa symbol as they seek to acknowledge their past heritage in endeavoring to create a better future for themselves in this country.

That same emphasis, though, is something we all, regardless of race or nationality, can borrow and apply to our lives with considerable benefit at the beginning of this new year.

Sankofa can be linked to the ancient Roman god Janus, the god with two faces, one looking forward and the other one backward. The English word January, as you probably know, is named after Janus. 

Both Sankofa and Janus symbolize a dual-faced looking backward and forward, but Sankofa is more noteworthy. Janus was primarily the god of beginnings and transitions, associated with the passage of time and the start of a new phase.

Sankofa is more meaningful, though, because it places a significant emphasis on learning from the past for the benefit of the future.

Utilizing the Sankofa concept in this critical year of 2024 is of great importance. We need to learn from the past year, or past few years, to help us make wise decisions in this new year.

Many things might be considered in this regard, and I encourage each of you to consider what you can learn from your own past experiences to forge a better future for yourself and your loved ones in the year ahead.

Here, however, I want primarily to think with you about the debacle that took place three years ago on January 6 in our nation’s Capitol.

At a news conference last Thursday (Jan. 4), Matthew Graves, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, said,

On January 6, 2021, the United States lost control of the grounds around its Capitol and most of the Capitol itself. Thousands of people descended on the Capitol, and hundreds of people within the mob used force and violence to overwhelm the vastly outnumbered law enforcement officers protecting the building and those who work within it.

Then on January 5, President Biden made an important speech in Pennsylvania, not far from Valley Forge, where General George Washington quartered his troops from December 1777 to June 1778 during the Revolutionary War.

That war, the President said, was about “Freedom, liberty, democracy.” “Valley Forge,” he emphasized, “tells the story of the pain and the suffering and the true patriotism it took to make America.” But three years ago, when insurrectionists tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power on January 6, 2021, “we nearly…lost it all.”

When all the facts are examined, it seems undeniable that by his words and actions, the 45^th President of the U.S. was the one who instigated the violence of that unruly mob.

For the sake of preserving the democracy that has been at the heart of this nation from the beginning, it is imperative that we look back and properly assess the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and look ahead to November with the resolve to do all we can to keep Donald Trump from becoming the 47^th POTUS.

_____

** This is the third remarkable stained-glass window installed in that church since the MAAFA Remembrance Window was unveiled in 2000. The term “maafa” is a Swahili word that means “great disaster” or “great tragedy.” It is often used to refer to the African Holocaust or the transatlantic slave trade, during which millions of Africans were captured, enslaved, and transported to the Americas and other parts of the world (ChatGPT). The window pictures a representation of Christ whose torso contains a schematic of a slave ship.

Note: Last week I discovered that a novel titled Sankofa was published in 2021, and I am reading it now and finding it quite interesting. It is by Chibundu Onuzo, a woman born in Nigeria in 1991 and who has lived in England since 2005. It was Reese Witherspoon’s book club “pick” for Oct. 2021. 

Is President Biden Too Old to Run for Re-Election?

As you doubtlessly know, President Biden announced last week (by this video) that he is running for re-election in 2024. That was not welcomed by some Democrats, even many who are supporters of the President and voted for him in 2020 (as I am and did). The main concern is his advanced age. 

President Biden is already the oldest President in U.S. history—and it is still over 625 days until the end of his present term. If re-elected, he would be expected to serve for another five years and 8½ months from now. That would put him two months past his 86^th birthday.

The President seems to be physically fit now with no major health concerns. But what about 5.7 years from now? There certainly is a possibility that he would be able to finish a second term with no major health issue arising. There perhaps is a stronger possibility that he would not be able to do that.

Yes, I know that people age at different rates. When I was still teaching in my mid-70s, some of my students remarked on how much more vigorous I was than their grandfathers who were the same age. But I wouldn’t have enough energy to teach that once-a-week three-hour evening course now, and I am not yet 85.

There are many things I was able to do when I was 80 that I no longer feel up to—despite being in good health. I am not inclined to think it will be markedly different for Pres. Biden. Of course, he would be surrounded by aides, advisors, and a large staff of helpers we ordinary people don’t have.

Does raising questions about Biden’s age indicate ageism? According to Ageism.org, “Ageism is the discrimination against an individual strictly on the basis of their age.”

Along with racism, sexism, and ableism, ageism is an ongoing societal problem. People should not be discriminated against and denigrated because of some personal characteristic. All people have equal worth and should be treated with equal respect.

But there is a distinct difference between racism and sexism on the one hand and ableism and ageism on the other. The former pair is based on the idea that those of one race/color are superior to those of another race/color and that males are superior to females.

Some “discrimination” because of the latter pair is not a matter of worth but of needed abilities to perform certain tasks. If I were needing brain surgery, I wouldn’t want a surgeon with Parkinson’s disease—or an 85-year-old surgeon, for that matter—to perform that surgery.

Does that mean I would be guilty of ableism or ageism? I think not.

Similarly, to raise questions about Pres. Biden being too old to start a second term as President at age 82 is an expression of legitimate concern, not an indication of ageism.

Still, if Pres. Biden is nominated for a second term, I will vote for him. It is looking more and more as if Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee for the 2024 presidential election. If he is, I have no doubt but that Pres. Biden, although older, has better physical and mental health.

Some Republican politicians are, of course, saying that voting for Biden would likely end with Vice President Harris becoming President before Biden’s second term would be completed.

Last week it was reported (here, for example) that Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley said that Pres. Biden will likely die within five years and that his supporters would have to count on Vice President Harris if he were to win re-election next year.

And, of course, that could well happen. But that might not be so bad. Last week, Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson posted an opinion article regarding the Vice President’s hard job at the present and her suitability to succeed Pres. Biden, if that should be necessary. (You can read that article here without a paywall).

I close with this bit of levity. At last Saturday night’s White House Correspondents’ Dinner, Biden joked about his age: he said he believes in the First Amendment that protects freedom of the press, and “not just because my good friend Jimmy Madison wrote it.”

Labor Day (and Labor Union) Ruminations

This is the third time that my September 5 blog post has been made on Labor Day, but on this date in 2011 and 2016 I made no reference at all to it being a federal holiday in the U.S. But now I am sharing some reflections on the history and significance of Labor Day—and of labor unions. 

On June 28, 1894, President Cleveland signed S. 730 into law declaring Labor Day a national holiday. Since 1882, Labor Day had been celebrated at local and state levels, and from 1887 to 1894, 23 states had enacted a Labor Day holiday. Now it had become a nationwide observance.

It is highly ironic that the creation of Labor Day in 1894 came in the midst of the Pullman Strike, one of the most consequential strikes in U.S. history.*

Just four days after Cleveland signed the Labor Day bill, the U.S. Attorney General got an injunction against the strike, and on July 3 the President dispatched federal troops to enforce the injunction. Then on the 7^th, the Guardsmen fired upon the strikers; 30 were killed and many more wounded.

What a sad start for the new federal holiday to honor the nation’s working class!

Despite Labor Day becoming an official national holiday in 1894, it took decades as well as much struggle and suffering for laboring people to achieve the reforms they had ardently sought.

From long before 1894, the laborers clamored for an eight-hour workday and a forty-hour workweek. They also called for safer working conditions, a minimum wage, unemployment compensation, and the end to child labor.

The appeals/demands of the labor movement were augmented by some prominent religious voices. For example, in 1886 Walter Rauschenbusch began his pastorate of a Baptist Church in "Hell's Kitchen," New York.

His first-hand experiences there led Rauschenbusch to lead what became the Social Gospel movement, which was to a large extent the struggle against systemic injustices foisted upon exploited laboring people in New York and elsewhere.**

Then in 1891, Pope Leo XIII issued “Rights and Duties of Capital and Labor,” an encyclical addressing the condition of the working classes.

The Pope’s primary concern was some amelioration of “the misery and wretchedness pressing so unjustly on the majority of the working class,” and to that end, he supported the rights of labor to form trade unions and to engage in collective bargaining.  

Such efforts and support were still necessary for long after 1894. Finally in 1938, President Roosevelt signed the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). That law established a minimum wage (of 25 cents per hour!)

The FLSA also instituted a standardized 44-hour work week, which later dropped to 40 hours, a requirement to pay extra for overtime work, and a prohibition on certain types of child labor.

Even though it was forty-four years later, the dreams surrounding the founding of Labor Day in 1894 were finally realized, and labor unions experienced widespread growth and acceptance over the next 20+ years.

Support for labor unions was highest in the 1950s when three-fourths of USAmericans approved of them. According to a recent Gallup Poll (see here), now over 70% approve of unions, the highest point since 1965.

This is a good sign—as are recent initiatives by Amazon employees and Starbucks baristas to form unions.

President Biden, thankfully, is a big supporter of labor unions. In his remarks in honor of labor unions last September, the President said that “a union means there is democracy. . . . Organizing, joining a union—that’s democracy in action.”

In his Labor Day Proclamation last Friday (Sept. 2), President Biden said, “I call upon all public officials and people of the United States to observe this day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities that honor the energy and innovation of working Americans.”

No matter how, or whether, you celebrate Labor Day today, remember those across the nation who are part of the laboring class, those people who are working for an hourly wage including many who are still working for a highly-inadequate minimum wage and still unable to form a labor union.

_____

* In May 2022, History.com (here) posted “10 Major Labor Strikes Throughout U.S. History.” Following the disastrous Homestead Steel Strike of 1892, the Pullman Strike is the second of those ten. For more about the latter, see “How a Deadly Railroad Strike Led to the Labor Day Holiday” (here).

** See here for my Sept. 30, 2021, blog post about Rauschenbusch and the Social Gospel.

Combating Egocentricity

Egocentricity (=thinking of oneself as being at the center of the universe and seeing everything primarily from that perspective) is a universal human characteristic—and a persistent problem that needs to be combated. 

Explanation of Egocentricity

Babies are born self-centered. In those first weeks/months they don’t have the ability to understand the world except from their own perspective. Normal infants, though, grow to an ever-increasing awareness of the world outside themselves and as young adults outgrow much of their egocentricity.

We start life thinking about “me” and, in a healthy/happy childhood proceed to see things proudly from the standpoint of “my family,” “my community,” “my church,” “my country,” and so on. Whatever is “mine” is normative and “the best.”

(Yesterday was Father’s Day, and I wonder how many children, of any age, sent cards or other items to their fathers boldly proclaiming, “World’s Greatest [or Best] Dad!”—here is a link to numerous images saying that. Since he is my father, he must be the best!)

Unfortunately, most people never fully grow out of their egocentrism in order to see themselves and their surroundings more objectively—and more correctly. Thus, they are continually inflicted with observations/evaluations skewed by egocentric bias.

Mature people seek to combat/overcome such bias by endeavoring to understand the world from the viewpoint of other people also and not just their own. This is an ongoing issue with which we all must struggle.

Examples of Egocentricity

Consider two examples of objectionable egocentricity I have recently observed.

** Example #1 – Reason for School Shootings

Here is a meme I have seen several times on Facebook: 

This is an example of people seeing things only from their own (limited) perspective and intimating that if things were just like they experienced the rash of contemporary school shootings could be curtailed.

Such people fail to note that the countries where homicides by guns are the very lowest are countries where the percentage of Christians is also very low and where there certainly is not, or was not, daily classroom prayer and reading from the Bible.

The homicide death rate by guns per 100,000 people is 0 (zero!) in Japan and Hong Kong! As only about 2% of the citizens in Japan and around 11% in Hong Kong are Christians, the public schools in those countries most certainly do not start the day with Bible reading and (Christian) prayer—and never did.

Maybe there is some reason for mass shootings in U.S. schools (and elsewhere) other than “taking God out of our schools.”

** Example #2 – Reason for High Gas Prices

Currently, inflation is definitely a big problem in the U.S.—and some wrongly-focused politicians are now declaring that having to pay $5-6 a gallon for gasoline is a more critical issue than the serious threat to U.S. democracy seen in the insurrection at the Capitol on Jan. 6 last year.

Many Republican politicians—and Facebook memes, again—directly accuse President Biden’s flawed policies as being the main reason for the inflated gasoline prices in the U.S.

According to a recent report, though, on June 13 a gallon of gasoline (in U.S. dollars) costs $10.22 in Norway, $9.06 in Central African Republic, $8.39 in the U.K., $7.82 in New Zealand—and $5.19 in the U.S. It is amazing how Pres. Biden has so much influence on gas prices around the world!

Or, isn’t this just another example of how people tend to view things only from their own egocentric (or ethnocentric) perspective rather than understand matters as they really are?

Elimination of Egocentricity

Egocentricity can/will never be completely eliminated even in the most mature among us. But we all can meaningfully work toward the elimination of unacceptable egocentricity through concerted efforts to try to see things from other people’s point of view also—and to search for objective truth.

Helping Ukraine: War without Violence?

Today is the twentieth day since the beginning of the unprovoked Russian invasion of the sovereign country of Ukraine. The courage and resilience of the Ukrainian people has certainly been admirable, but their suffering has been great and their short-term future is exceedingly bleak. 

From the 3/5/22 cover of The Economist

President Zelenskyy’s Call for Help

Since the very beginning of the invasion of his country, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been widely praised as a courageous leader in his beleaguered country and an exemplary advocate of freedom. He will be awarded the Ronald Reagan Freedom Award for 2022.

President Zelenskyy has repeatedly taken to the airwaves to make zealous appeals for increased military help from NATO and the U.S. He has warned that the refusal to give assistance through such means as declaring a no-fly zone over his country will result in the deaths of thousands of his citizens.

In response to that March 5 appeal, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) said, “Let’s be cleareyed about our options: “A No-Fly Zone means sending American pilots into combat against Russian jets and air defenses—in a battle between nuclear powers that could spiral out of control quickly.”

So, how should the U.S. and NATO respond to Zelenskyy’s call for help?

Has President Biden’s and NATO’s Response been Weak?

Some in this country have used the lack of full positive response to Zelenskyy’s call as a sign of weakness on the part of President Biden.

An opinion piece in the March 11 online issue of The Christian Post is titled “The Ukrainian crisis: A catastrophic failure of leadership.” The author is Richard Land, President Emeritus of the SBC’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.

Land asserts that the Russian invasion of Ukraine was “so preventable,” pointing out that 62% of Americans believe that if Trump were still president, Russia would not have invaded.

Apparently, Land is among those 62%. He writes, “Putin feared Trump’s strength, whereas he holds Biden’s invertebrate weakness in disdain.”

He also asserts that “Biden’s weakness is illustrated by his apparent fear of what Putin might do.”

This same sort of criticism is expressed by Wendell Griffen, a progressive Baptist leader for whom I have great respect. I was disappointed, though, by what he wrote in a March 9 opinion piece.

Griffen asserted, “What perturbs Zelensky and delights Putin is the knowledge that world leaders lack the will to bring their arsenals, warriors and other war-fighting resources to bear against Putin.”

The opinion of Daniel Davis, a former lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army is far better than the two divergent Baptists just cited. Davis’s article in the March 8 post of The Guardian is titled “A no-fly zone means Nato shooting down Russian jets. We must not do that” (emphasis added).

Can there be Significant Help without Violence?

The effectiveness, and even the morality, of the violent resistance of the Ukrainian people is discussed in an article posted March 7 by Religious News Service (here). It is titled “Catholic theologians question the morality of Ukraine’s violent resistance.”

While I agree with much in that significant article, here I am writing only about the morality of help for Ukraine supplied by the U.S. and NATO—and in that regard I strongly believe that the stance taken so far by the U.S. is not a show of weakness but of prudence.

The increasing level of sanctions leveled against Russia will surely in the long run lead to a cessation of violent fighting in Ukraine. Direct military action would, no doubt, be more effective in the short run—but with the distinct possibility of leading to greater escalation of violence.

Greater military help of Ukraine now, could—and perhaps would!—lead to greater suffering, more casualties, and more violent Russian warfare not only against Ukraine but also against other European countries.

Hasty, belligerent acts by the U.S./NATO could—and perhaps would!—provoke Russia to use strategic nuclear weapons. And that could well be the beginning of World War III.

Looking at the bigger picture and the potentiality of unthinkable disaster, I am deeply grateful that the U.S. and NATO are seeking to help Ukraine mostly by non-violent (=non-military) means.

Do Hope and History Rhyme? Assessing Biden’s First Year

It’s been a hard year since January 20, 2021, the day Joe Biden was inaugurated as the 46^th POTUS—and it has been a harder year for him than for most of us. What can be said, fairly and honestly, in assessment of Biden’s first year in the White House? 

1/7/22 image by Mandel Ngan

Biden’s Quote from Seamus Heaney

The President is said to be five-eighths Irish and has spoken frequently of his family ties to Ireland. He also likes Irish poets, especially Seamus Heaney (1939~2013), who was awarded the 1995 Nobel Prize in Literature.

In his inaugural speech a year ago today, the new President cited these words from Heaney’s poem “The Cure of Troy”:

History says, Don’t hope
On this side of the grave…
But then, once in a lifetime
The longed-for tidal wave
Of justice can rise up,
And hope and history rhyme.

These are memorable words, and Biden quoted them with great sincerity (and you can hear him read those words here), but one year later it seems as though the hopes of the President are far from rhyming with history now.

Biden’s Hard Year

As is true of each new President, except perhaps for #45, they start their term in office with high hopes for what they want to accomplish for the good of the nation. But those hopes are seldom realized (thus, history says, Don’t hope).

Perhaps the last President to have come close to realizing his inaugural hopes was FDR. Especially during the first two terms of his presidency (1933~1941), hope and history did rhyme to a large extent.

Roosevelt’s third inaugural address, though, delivered 80 years to the day before Biden’s address last year, was a lifetime ago. Few remember those remarks stressing America’s obligation to take action during the international crisis. Those next 4+ years were especially hard for FDR.

But for Biden, the first year has been a hard one:

* The covid-19 pandemic, with its new variants and the widespread refusal of being vaccinated, worsened instead of dissipating.

* Largely related to disruptions caused by covid-19, inflation grew rapidly and consumer prices increased perceptibly.

* Because of the intransigence of all 50 Republican and of two Democratic Senators, a democracy-protecting voting rights bill and an expansive infrastructure bill both failed to gain the support necessary for enactment.

* The events surrounding the withdrawal of U.S. troops in Afghanistan were widely criticized as Biden’s debacle.

* The Jan. 15 issue of The Economist states that Biden is “almost the most unpopular president since records began” (only Trump “rated worse” at the same point in his term). Accordingly, “a mid-terms shellacking for his party looks highly probable.”

Biden’s Hope in the Year(s) Ahead

One year doesn’t make or break a presidency. In spite of the setbacks and disappointments, there are first-year accomplishments that the President and his party can legitimately accentuate in the year ahead.

* The early rollout of vaccines was highly successful. (It was certainly not Biden’s fault that so many people, mostly Republicans, refused to get vaccinated—or that new variants, delta and then omicron, developed.)

* Early in his tenure Biden also won passage for a roughly $2 trillion stimulus package and followed that with enactment of a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill with bipartisan support.

* Also, as Heather Cox Richardson points out, last February the jobless rate was 6.2%; today it has dropped to 4.2%. This means the Biden administration has created 4.1 million jobs, more than were created in the 12 years of the Trump and George W. Bush administrations combined.**

* Further, according to a 12/20/21 Bloomberg News article, “America’s economy improved more in Joe Biden's first 12 months than any president during the past 50 years . . . “ The S&P 500 gained 26.9% and Dow Jones gained 18.7% in 2021.

Perhaps if the President stays the course and “soldiers on,” as James Carville admonished him to do this week on Meet the Press, the longed-for tidal wave of justice will yet rise up, and hope and history will begin to rhyme more and more.

_____

** This, and much more about Biden’s first year accomplishments, is found in Richardson’s 12/22/21 “letter” (see here).

Determinedly Defending Democracy

You probably have heard/read about last week’s “Summit for Democracy,” convened by President Biden via Zoom on Dec. 9-10. In spite of criticism from totalitarian governments (especially from China) and some domestic opponents, the President sought determinedly to defend democracy.

(Here is the link to the President’s closing remarks on Dec. 10.)

The Decline of Democracy

Freedom House is a non-profit, non-governmental organization in Washington, D.C., that conducts research and advocacy on democracy, political freedom, and human rights. Here is part of their report for 2021: 

Accordingly, President Biden warned world leaders at the Summit for Democracy on Dec. 9 of a “backward slide” in democracy around the globe and urged them to champion the form of government that needs concerted work to be sustained through an “inflection point in history.” (See here.)

The editors of the Dec. 15 issue of The Christian Century wrote of “Democracy’s death spiral” in the U.S., declaring that right now democracy “is under open attack.” (You can read that powerful editorial on p. 7 here).

And even Pope Francis has recently lamented that democracy has deteriorated dangerously as discontented people are lured by the “siren songs” of populist politicians who promise easy but unrealistic solutions. (The Pope expressed that sentiment on Dec. 4 as reported by Reuters.)

The Threat to Democracy

The biggest domestic threat to U.S. democracy in everyone’s lifetime was the attempted coup by Donald Trump and his fanatical supporters on January 6 of this year. But according to Barton Gellman, January 6 was practice for what is coming. 

Gellman (b. 1960) was on the staff of The Washington Post for 21 years, but now is a staff writer at The Atlantic. His cover story for the Jan./Feb. 2022 issue of that venerable magazine (founded in 1857) is “Trump’s Next Coup Has Already Begun.”

It is becoming increasingly clear from the indefatigable work of the January 6 Committee that the events on that volatile day at the Capitol were not due to outside rabble-rousers. It clearly was an inside job, that is, plotted from inside the White House.

An opinion piece in the Dec. 14 issue of The Washington Post is titled “Trump’s PowerPoint coup plotters were crackpots. We may not be so lucky next time.”

In that article, columnist Dana Milbank quips that then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, now being held in contempt of Congress (for his refusal to testify), “would more properly be held in contempt of competence.”

Milbank concludes by saying that on 1/6/21 “democracy was saved only by the bumbling of the coup plotters.” Next time, though, “we may not be so lucky.”

The Defense of Democracy

To a large extent, the defense of U.S. democracy is up to the Congress—and up to us voters who elect the 535 voting members of Congress. That is why next year’s election is so important. All 435 members of the House will be elected, of course, and 34 Senate seats will be decided.

But now the changes in election procedures in numerous states jeopardizes a truly democratic election next year.

The President was determinedly defending democracy at the Summit for Democracy last week. Now he must do everything necessary to defend U.S. democracy in 2022 and beyond.

Addendum: What about Democracy in the Church?

This article has been about the form of government employed, or rejected, by nation states. But what about churches, either as denominations or as local congregations? As a baptist (lower case intended), I am a strong advocate of democracy in church government.

I wonder, though, about the contradiction in the thinking of people who are advocates of democracy in the national government but have no qualms about accepting a hierarchical, non-democratic form of government for churches.

For example, is the completely hierarchical (authoritarian?) structure of the Roman Catholic Church, for example, in direct contradiction to the Pope’s good word about political democracy?