Religious Intolerance – immigrationcourtside.com

⚖️ “BRAVING THE WILDERNESS: HOLDING HANDS WITH STRANGERS” — A Timely Sermon About Promoting Justice & Resisting Bigotry — By Steven A. Honley

October 23, 2022 Twentieth Sunday after Pentecost 10:00 AM

Scripture Lesson: Matthew 25:31-40

Sermon: “Braving the Wilderness: Holding Hands with Strangers”

When Pastor Deborah asked me to preach today, I was honored as always to accept her gracious invitation. But I have to tell you: This has ended up being one of the most challenging sermons to write that I’ve given in my 28 years at Beverley Hills, for several reasons.

The first challenge stems from the fact that I had never read anything by Brené Brown until now. In fact, I first heard of her just a few months ago, when her name popped up on a Canadian situation comedy, “The Lake,” that I streamed on Amazon Prime.

The next problem: I have never been a fan of self-help books, though I enjoyed reading this one. And I found a lot of Brown’s observations sensible, if sometimes obvious.

The title of this morning’s topic was yet another hurdle. Most of you will probably not be surprised to hear me confess that the very idea of holding hands with strangers gives me the willies. Frankly, I’m not even wild about holding hands with friends! But duty calls.

Finally, it turns me off when authors strive to come across as “spiritual” rather than religious. You won’t find any Bible verses in Braving the Wilderness, and only passing references to Christianity. What I find most frustrating about that approach is that it appears Brené Brown and I have had similar journeys, moving from Southern-fried fundamentalism to a more inclusive faith. So I would have liked to hear more about that!

To be blunt, Braving the Wilderness is only incidentally a book about faith. But as you’ve been hearing—and I hope you’ll hear again today—it still has some useful things to say to us about becoming an even more welcoming faith community. And in that respect, I admire the way Pastor Deborah has adapted Brown’s thoughts for our current sermon series, both by focusing on the themes in various chapters each week and finding Scripture passages to go with them.

All of which brings me to today’s topic, “Holding Hands with Strangers.”

********

In today’s Gospel passage—surely one of the most memorable of our Lord’s parables—Jesus describes two groups of people. The first group, the sheep, have done God’s will by ministering to strangers: feeding the hungry, giving water to the thirsty, clothing the naked, and visiting those who are sick or in prison. The king in the story informs these servants of his pleasure at their virtuous conduct on his behalf, which shocks the sheep. They had literally no idea they’d done anything out of the ordinary, let alone done something for royalty. So they ask: “When did we do that for you?” And he answers: “Inasmuch as you have done it to the least of these, you have done it unto me.”

Matthew does not record what, if anything, they said when the king explains that, but I imagine “O my God, what if I hadn’t done that?” figured pretty prominently in their thoughts.

We didn’t hear the goats’ story read today, but you know how that part of the story goes. They saw the same strangers as the sheep did, but did nothing to help them.

Now, I have a hunch that only some of the goats were callous, intentionally withholding their

assistance from the needy because they regarded them as unworthy. The rest were just preoccupied with their own troubles, or feared they wouldn’t have enough resources for their own families if they gave away food and clothing to mere strangers. Some may genuinely have believed that someone else would take care of feeding the hungry and performing other good works.

Whatever the reasons for each goat’s indifference and apathy, the core issue is that they failed to recognize the people they encountered as people: members of their own community. As Desmond Tutu once observed: “We’re not our brother’s keeper; we’re our brother’s brother.”

Beverley Hills Community United Methodist Church has a long tradition of acting on that understanding. We don’t just write checks, either, valuable as that is. No, many of you are hands-on participants at Carpenter’s Shelter and ALIVE and Casa Chirilagua and many other worthy organizations. You literally hold hands with strangers!

********

Speaking of which: I can’t honestly say I found much of Brown’s chapter on this topic helpful. She devotes a lot of it to the idea of experiencing community at soccer games and rock concerts and funerals, and even goes so far as to talk about “football as religion.”

She doesn’t mean that literally, of course, but she really does seem to believe that the wave of emotion a stadium full of fans feels is not just a momentary rush of adrenaline, but something more profound. Maybe I’d buy that claim if I’d ever felt it for myself, but I haven’t—so I don’t.

Happily, just when I was about to give up on finding any inspiration in this chapter, Brown talks about a concept she calls “common enemy intimacy.” Or, as the old saying goes, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

Brown cites one of my favorite quotes to introduce this section of the chapter: “If you don’t have something nice to say about someone, come sit by me!” That saying, generally attributed to Alice Roosevelt Longworth, expresses something universal. Most of us love to gossip about someone, especially if they’re all high and mighty and could stand to be taken down a few pegs.

But the problem, as Brown notes, is that there is no adhesiveness to such a bond. If all two people have in common is their mutual dislike of a third, then their “friendship” is phony. And as such, it can’t sustain a more meaningful relationship, let alone build community.

From there, common enemy intimacy snowballs into tribalism, which dehumanizes not just individuals but whole groups. And because there is nothing keeping such a group cohesive except fear and hatred, its leaders must keep fueling the fire with ever more polarizing rhetoric that attacks anyone not in the group.

********

Sadly, we see the evidence of the breakdown of community all around us. So what can we do as Christians to bring about reconciliation and healing?

Alas, I have no sweeping answers to that question. But I will offer this recommendation: We should speak out, both as individuals and as a church, against the bullying and abuse so many of our politicians and faith leaders are advocating. And I’m not talking about generic hand-wringing, either. We should be naming names, and making clear that those who invoke God as they persecute sexual minorities and the powerless are not honoring Christ in the process.

Now, some of you are probably thinking, “Wait a minute! What about turning the other cheek? Aren’t we supposed to be peacemakers?”

Yes, of course we are. But I would respectfully point out that our Lord did not mince words when he confronted the religious authorities of his day, who followed the letter of the law but not its spirit.

In Luke 11, Jesus declares: “Now, you Pharisees cleanse the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside you are full of extortion and wickedness. You fools! Did not he who made the outside make the inside also? … Woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God; those you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. Woe to you Pharisees! For you love the best seat in the synagogues and salutations in the marketplaces. Woe to you! For you are like graves which are not seen, and men walk over them without knowing it.”

Pretty harsh, right? But Jesus was following a long prophetic tradition that stretches all the way back to Moses warning the pharaoh of the dire consequences if he didn’t let the Israelites go. Elijah and Elisha and Isaiah and Jeremiah all denounced the kings of Israel for their failure to rule justly.

Nor did our Lord stop at speaking truth to power. He took matters into his own hands on one memorable occasion, Matthew 21 tells us. Just days before his death, “Jesus entered the temple courts and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. And He declared to them, “It is written: ‘My house will be called a house of prayer.’ But you are making it ‘a den of robbers.’”

I have always detested the saying “Hate the sin, love the sinner.” As a gay man, I’ve heard that a lot over the years, and in practice, what it actually means is: Hate the sin and marginalize the sinner. So let me be clear: I am not advocating that we sink to the level of those who promote so-called “Christian Nationalism,” by declaring them evil and beyond redemption.

But we do have a solemn charge to resist those who are working to flout democratic norms and rend our social fabric, under the pretext of making America a “Christian nation.” Our faith commands us to defend all those whom politicians target and exploit for who they are; for whom they love; for what deity they believe in or don’t; for the color of their skin; for the language they speak; or where they came from. As I John 4 tells us: “If anyone says, ‘I love God,’ and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. And this commandment we have from him, that he who loves God should love his brother also.”

Back in January, on the first anniversary of the Jan. 6 insurrection, Washington National Cathedral hosted an online conversation between Jon Meachum, the Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and journalist, and the Episcopal Church’s presiding bishop, Michael Curry. If you watched the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markel a few years back, you saw and heard Bishop Curry in action; hold that image in your mind while I share a few excerpts from that dialogue.

Bishop Curry begins his remarks by referencing all the stories about Jesus and his disciples huddled on a boat at night in turbulent waters. There’s no artificial light, just the moon and stars, so we can certainly understand why the men are terrified.

In one of those stories, Peter sees Jesus walking on the water in the midst of the storm. Impetuous as always, he jumps out of the boat and starts walking toward him. Peter’s doing OK until he lets his fear of the storm take his focus off Jesus, at which point he immediately starts sinking. Curry draws this parallel to our situation:

“We must not shift our focus from becoming the true democracy—a multiracial, multiethnic, plural, holistic democracy—which is that shining ‘city on a hill.’ We must not shift from that vision of who we can be by focusing only on the storms that are in our midst, because the storms will consume us. They will consume our perception. And eventually, we’ll believe that’s all there is—lightning, thunder and the roll of the water—instead of the possibility of becoming that city on the hill.

Bishop Curry continues: “It’s midnight in the hour of this democracy. We will determine what we will do with that moment. It’s a moment of decision, and we must decide: Will we be E Pluribus Unum? Will we truly become, from many diverse peoples, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice—not just for some, but for all?”

The full title of Brené Brown’s book is: Braving the Wilderness: The Quest for True Belonging and the Courage to Stand Alone. Even in a state somewhere between purple and light blue, and a fairly liberal city, it still takes real courage for us to denounce racism and misogyny, homophobia and transphobia, and every other form of bigotry, and to resist those who would enshrine those evils in our laws.

But that is how we can hold hands with strangers, and help them belong. In the process, we will truly live up to the words we recite at the end of each service at Beverley Hills: “Our mission is to welcome all people as they are, to grow together in Christian faith and fellowship, and to share Christ-like love in word and deed.” Amen.

Republished by permission.

**********************

My friend Steven A. Honley is the Director of Music at the Beverley Hills Community Methodist Church in Alexandria, Virginia, A Reconciling Congregation, where my wife Cathy and I are members. He is a retired Foreign Service Officer and former Editor-in-Chief of the Foreign Service Journal (2001-14). Steve is a frequent contributor to the Washington Post’s “Style Invitational,” and a passionate advocate for inclusion and equal justice for all persons in America.

Here’s another timely piece on promoting justice and resisting bigotry in today’s America from the San Francisco Chronicle: ‘We are the real face of America’: Local faith and civil rights leaders call out racism, division https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/We-are-the-real-face-of-America-Local-17529396.php.

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

PWS

10-24-22

U.S. JUDGE THWARTS (FOR NOW) TRUMP REGIME’S PERSECUTION/PROSECUTION OF HUMANITARIAN AID WORKERS – Regime’s Religious Hypocrisy Runs Deep!

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-no-more-deaths-religious-liberty_n_5e3adf4ec5b6d032e76d1313

Carol Kuruvilla in HuffPost:

A federal judge has ruled that President Donald Trump’s administration, which often boasts about defending religious liberty, has violated the religious rights of a group of volunteers at the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Trump administration has spent years cracking down on the work of No More Deaths/No Más Muertes, a Unitarian Universalist ministry in Arizona that provides water and food to migrants crossing a treacherous stretch of desert along the border where dozens have died. Various members of No More Deaths have faced fines and even jail for what they consider to be faith-based, life-saving humanitarian aid.

But for the second time in months, a judge has ruled that the government shouldn’t be punishing these volunteers for putting their faith into practice.

U.S. District Judge Rosemary Márquez ruled Monday that four volunteers who left water and food for migrants at the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge were acting according to their “sincerely held religious beliefs.” As a result, the government substantially burdened the volunteers’ religious liberty by prosecuting them for this work, Marquez said.

“Given Defendants’ professed beliefs, the concentration of human remains on the [refuge], and the risk of death in that area, it follows that providing aid on the [refuge] was necessary for Defendants to meaningfully exercise their beliefs,” the judge wrote.

Márquez’s ruling reversed the decision of a lower court, where another judge dismissed the volunteers’ religious liberty claims and sentenced them to probation and fines last March.

A federal judge has ruled that four volunteers who left water and food for migrants at the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge were acting according to their “sincerely held religious beliefs.” From left, they are Natalie Hoffman, Madeline Huse, Zaachila Orozco-McCormick, and Oona Holcomb.

The case against the four volunteers ― Natalie Hoffman, Oona Holcomb, Madeline Huse and Zaachila Orozco-McCormick ― goes back to December 2017, a year when 32 sets of human remains were recovered from the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge. The volunteers were charged with misdemeanors for entering the wildlife refuge without proper permits and leaving behind jugs of water and cans of beans, which the government called abandonment of property.

The volunteers’ defense hinged on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 (RFRA). The law states that if a defendant can prove that the government is substantially burdening her “sincerely held religious beliefs,” then the government has to show that it’s using the “least restrictive” path to achieving its goals.

This ruling shows that religious freedom is not just for the Christian right, as the Trump administration would have us believe.Parker Deighan, spokesperson for No More Deaths

RFRA initially had broad bipartisan support. But more recently, the religious right has been using RFRA as a way to secure exemptions for conservative beliefs about abortion and LGBTQ rights. The evangelical Christian owners of the Hobby Lobby craft stores famously used RFRA to avoid paying for insurance coverage for contraception.

Under Trump, the Department of Justice has urged a narrow reading of RFRA claims made by people of faith who do not share the administration’s policy goals, according to Katherine Franke, faculty director of Columbia University’s Law, Rights, and Religion Project.

“The Trump Department of Justice has taken a biased approach to defending and enforcing religious liberty rights under RFRA, robustly protecting the rights of conservative Evangelical Christians while prosecuting people whose faith moves them to oppose the government’s policies,” Franke told HuffPost in an email.

Michael Bailey, the Trump-nominated U.S. attorney for Arizona, said his team has no issue with Márquez’s finding that strong religious beliefs motivated the defendants’ acts.

“We highly value religious freedom without regard to where on the spectrum one’s beliefs might fall,” Bailey told HuffPost in a statement.

A volunteer for the humanitarian aid organization No More Deaths delivers water along a trail used by undocumented immigrants in the desert on May 10, 2019 near Ajo, Arizona.

Subscribe to the Politics email.

From Washington to the campaign trail, get the latest politics news.

No More Deaths is a Unitarian Universalist ministry. But all four volunteers are technically religiously unaffiliated, which means they are part of a growing group of Americans who decline to identify with any specific religious tradition.

During testimonies, the four described feeling a spiritual calling to volunteer, inspired by beliefs about the sanctity of human life. They also spoke about taking moments of silence in the refuge to reflect on the suffering of those crossing the desert.

Holcomb said that she had constructed a “personal altar” at her home that included a ring of water bottles she picked up in the desert.

“There is … for me, I will say, like a deep spiritual need and a calling to do work based on what I believe in the world,” Holcomb testified, according to the judge’s opinion.

In its response to the volunteers’ appeal, the government argued that their beliefs were not truly religious because they didn’t explain how they fit into a “particular system of religious or spiritual beliefs.” The government also asserted that the volunteers were “draping religious garb” over “secular philosophical concerns.”

In her opinion, Márquez said that the volunteers’ RFRA claims can’t be dismissed just because they described their beliefs in broad terms and don’t belong to an established religion. She pointed out that religious and political motivations overlapped in the Hobby Lobby case. ThatSupreme Court verdict has shown that government faces an “exceptionally demanding” obligation to be minimally restrictive while imposing on a person’s religious exercise, Márquez said.

Ultimately, the government had failed to demonstrate that prosecuting the volunteers was the least restrictive means of achieving a compelling governmental interest, the judge said.

Scott Warren, a volunteer for the humanitarian aid organization No More Deaths, walks into Organ Pipe Cactus National Monument to deliver food and water along remote desert trails used by undocumented immigrants on May 10, 2019, near Ajo, Arizona.

Márquez’s decision comes months after another No More Deaths volunteer, Scott Warren, was acquitted of a federal misdemeanor charge for leaving water jugs in the Cabeza Prieta National Wildlife Refuge for migrants. The judge in that case also acknowledged that Warren’s action was protected by his right to religious freedom. That was one of the first times progressive religious beliefs related to immigration have been protected in this way, the Law, Rights, and Religion Project told HuffPost in November.

Franke said there are other cases where progressive people of faith are making religious exemption claims. The Rev. Kaji Douša, a New York pastor and immigrant rights activist, claims the federal government violated her religious freedom when she was detained and placed on a watch list for ministering to asylum seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border. The government has “trivialized” Douša’s RFRA claims and urged the court to dismiss them, Franke said.

In Philadelphia, the DOJ is trying to prevent a faith-based overdose prevention organization from opening a safe injection site, arguing that its “true motivation is socio-political or philosophical — not religious — and thus not protected by RFRA.”

Franke said that when Congress passed RFRA in 1993, the statute was meant to protect the religious liberty of people across a wide spectrum of beliefs, “not just some, and certainly not only those who hold religious beliefs that were shared with the current federal administration.”

Parker Deighan, a spokesperson for No More Deaths, told HuffPost that Márquez’s ruling on Monday reaffirms that “providing humanitarian aid is never a crime.”

“This ruling shows that religious freedom is not just for the Christian right, as the Trump administration would have us believe,” she said. “We hope that that Judge Marquez’s ruling signifies a shift towards religious freedom exemptions being used to protect the work of people and organizations fighting on the side of justice, such as migrant solidarity organizations and indigenous peoples fighting for protection of their sacred lands and traditions, rather than protection for discrimination and bigotry.”

******************************

So, here’s the deal.

The Trump (the least religious and most immoral President in U.S. History) regime uses a bogus “religious protection” rationale to cloak far-right programs of hate, intolerance, dehumanization, marginalization, and cruelty directed at people of color, the LGBTQ community, migrants, refugees, women, children, Muslims, Jews, and other vulnerable groups. According to the regime, “religious freedom” is limited to the “extremist religious right.”

Then, the regime attempts to misuse “the law” to punish those who actually “show Christ-like love in word and in deed.” To her credit, U.S. District Judge Rosemary Márquez “just said no” to this disingenuous nonsense.

The only way to stop the intellectual dishonesty, mockery of religious humanitarian principles, and misuse of our laws is to oust Trump and his enablers from office at every level. Otherwise, we can expect the persecution and cruelty to continue.

And don’t be surprised if the “J.R. Five” on the Supremes find a way to manipulate the system to enable the persecution of others to continue and grow worse. It’s what complicit “judges” do in the face of tyrants.

While the regime is using your tax dollars to pervert the law to persecute humanitarian workers, they are simultaneously violating our Constitution, our statutes, and our international obligations, with the connivence of the Supremes and Federal Appeals Courts who choose to look the other way rather than standing up for individuals’ rights against authoritarian overreach.

It’s time to stand up for our Constitutional rights, human rights, and human decency. Throw the corrupt and immoral GOP and their collaborators out of office at the next election, and bring in Government officials, legislators, and life-tenured judges who are willing and able to stand up for their oaths of office!

Due Process Forever!

PWS

02-06-20

GONZO’S WORLD: AG’S LATEST SCAM, “RELIGIOUS LIBERTY TASK FORCE” @ USDOJ WIDELY PANNED!

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/twitter-sessions-religious-liberty-task-force_us_5b5f92bae4b0b15aba9bfcff

Mary Pappenfuss reports for HuffPost:

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced Monday that the U.S. Justice Department is launching a “religious liberty task force” — and Twitter erupted.

The new unit will aid the department in fully implementing the religious liberty legal “guidance” issued last year under President Donald Trump’s direction, Sessions said in a speech at the Justice Department’s Religious Liberty Summit in Washington.

The attorney general charged that the freedom to practice religion in America has come “under attack” in the nation’s current “cultural climate.”

A “dangerous movement, undetected by many, but real, is now challenging and eroding our great tradition of religious freedom …. It must be confronted … and defeated,” he added.

“We’ve seen nuns ordered to buy contraceptives. We’ve seen United States senators ask judicial and executive branch nominees about dogma …. We’ve all seen the ordeal faced so bravely by Jack Phillips,” Sessions added, referring to the Colorado baker who won a religious liberty challenge to LGBTQ anti-discrimination law in the U.S. Supreme Court after refusing to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple.

Sessions called freedom of religion “indeed our first freedom being the first listed right in the First Amendment” and said that the Trump administration is “actively seeking to accommodate people of faith.”

Sessions touted his department’s prosecution of attacks on religion, among them court actions shielding about 90 plaintiffs from Obama-era requirements that employer health insurance cover contraception, an amicus brief “we were proud to file” on behalf of Phillips, and indictments in an arson attack and threats directed at two mosques.

Twitter exploded, with critics charging that the Religious Liberty Task Force was a front to protect religious zealots attacking LGBTQ rights and an unconstitutional push to marry church and state on the altar of Christianity.

******************************

Read the entire Article, including the “Twitter Storm” at the link. Some pretty funny but “right on” reactions!

Yet another taxpayer-financed scam by our corrupt and bigoted Attorney General. Obviously this is a thinly disguised effort to use Government funding and power to promote and establish far right-wing Christian views and biases.

Don’t expect any help for Muslims targeted for hate crimes, irrationally excluded under the “Travel Ban,” or targeted by anti-Muslim pronouncements of Administration officials and GOP right-wing politicos. Don’t expect any assistance or protection for those religious groups actually engaged in “God’s work on earth” and carrying out Christ’s true humanitarian, forgiving teachings by providing help to migrants and resisting inhumane and illegal Administration policies. Don’t expect any help for Bhuddists, atheists, deists, or any other non-right-wing Christian groups trying to vindicate their First Amendment rights. Don’t expect any help for members of the LGBTQ community whose rights are being trampled upon by so-called Christians who promote intolerance, discrimination, humiliation, de-humanization, and hate in the name of false “religious expression.”

Interestingly, Sessions himself has been charged within the Methodist Church (of which my wife and I are members) with violation of teachings of Christ and the Church’s own rules and values.

He’s a total scofflaw and a fraud, seeking to impose his corrupt, inhumane, intolerant views on the rest of us by abusing his Government position and squandering taxpayer funds on an anti-Constitutional attempt to establish particular “so-called Christian views” as the law of the land.

PWS

08-01-18

RELIGION: JIM WALLIS @ SOJOURNERS: Can The Real Jesus Who Preached Kindness, Mercy, Forgiveness, Tolerance, Peace, Humility, Sacrifice, and Stood With The Most Downtrodden In Society Be Reclaimed From The Clutches Of The Religious Right? — “Would Jesus talk this way about immigrants, act this way toward women, use such divisive language of racial fear and resentment, show such a blatant disregard for truth, prefer strong-man to servant leadership, and really say that one country should be ‘first?'”

What About Jesus?
Jim Wallis

Just recently, a Washington lawmaker asked me a question over breakfast that has stayed with me ever since. The national legislator is a Christian, but genuinely was having a hard time understanding the message and motivation of the evangelical “advisers” to President Donald Trump. He posed the sincere query, “What about Jesus?” It is exactly the right question and I have thought about it since our conversation: “What about Jesus?”

What do these evangelicals do with that question as they listen and talk with and for Donald Trump? Would Jesus talk this way about immigrants, act this way toward women, use such divisive language of racial fear and resentment, show such a blatant disregard for truth, prefer strong-man to servant leadership, and really say that one country should be “first?” What do we do with Jesus? That is always the right question, including when it comes to politics, and especially if we say we are followers of Jesus Christ.

I ask you to watch this short four-minute video in which several Christian elders from across many traditions and racial lines ask that vital question in their message of Reclaiming Jesus in a Time of Crisis. Listen to their voices and the core teachings of Jesus they are raising.

SEE THE VIDEO

***********************************************

Of course the “Biblical Jesus” would “just say no” to the rhetoric, philosophy, and corrupt actions of the Trump Administration. Stomping on the poor to aid the rich? “Suffer the children to come unto me” so that I can can separate them from their mothers and put their mothers in prison? Denying protection to the vulnerable stranger? Adultery? Sexual humiliation and abuse of women? Lies? Elevating the material over the spiritual? Putting one’s own “cult of personality” and financial interests ahead of God’s? Self aggrandizement as opposed to self-sacrifice? No Way!

If Jesus were among us, He certainly would be one of the members of the “Migrant Caravans” waiting with the vulnerable to see how we will judge Him and whether He and those around him will receive mercy and justice. There is no way He would be “hanging out” with the Trump Administration and their vile dehumanizing actions and false narratives!

PWS

05-20-18

A MESSAGE FOR MIGRANT MOTHERS FROM THIS MORNING’S SERVICE AT BEVERLEY HILLS COMMUNITY UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, ALEXANDRIA, VIRGINIA!

And Jesus said, “Come!”

To all mothers and all children he said: “Come!”

To the motherless and the childless he said: “Come!”

To all who long to be mothered, he said: “Come!”

Come unto me, all ye who labor and are heavy laden

and I will give you rest.

Take my yoke upon you and learn from me,

for I am gentle and humble of heart

and you will find rest for your souls.

***********************************

Compare this with the decidedly un-Christlike messages on immigrants, strangers, the poor, and those that differ that we get on a daily basis from our Government.

PWS

05-13-18

SLAMMED AGAIN! — 4TH CIR. FINDS CLEAR ANTI-MUSLIM BIAS IN AGAIN REJECTING TRUMP’S BOGUS TRAVEL BAN! — SUPREMES WILL HAVE LAST WORD!

https://www.buzzfeed.com/zoetillman/a-federal-appeals-court-ruled-that-trumps-third-travel-ban

Zoe Tillman reports for BuzzFeed News:

“A federal appeals court on Thursday ruled that President Donald Trump’s third attempt at a travel ban is likely unconstitutional, writing that it “continues to exhibit a primarily religious anti-Muslim objective.”

The US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit upheld a lower court injunction that blocked the Trump administration from enforcing key parts of the travel ban, but put its order on hold while the US Supreme Court takes up the issue of the ban.

The president’s third travel ban is already before the Supreme Court, after the 9th Circuit ruled in December that it violated federal law. The 9th Circuit did not rule on the issue addressed by the 4th Circuit — whether the ban amounts to religious discrimination in violation of the US Constitution’s Establishment Clause — but the justices asked for briefing on the constitutional question as well.

The 4th Circuit sided in favor of the groups challenging the ban in a 9–4 decision. Chief Judge Roger Gregory wrote in the majority opinion that the government’s “proffered rationale for the Proclamation lies at odds with the statements of the President himself.”

“Plaintiffs here do not just plausibly allege with particularity that the Proclamation’s purpose is driven by anti-Muslim bias, they offer undisputed evidence of such bias: the words of the President,” Gregory wrote.

Gregory cited Trump’s “disparaging comments and tweets regarding Muslims,” the president’s repeated references to a Muslim ban, the fact that Trump’s previous travel bans were focused on majority-Muslim countries, and statements by Trump and his advisers that the latest order has the same goals as the previous ones.

A Justice Department spokesman did not immediately return a request for comment.

Cecillia Wang, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, who argued the case for the travel ban challengers in the 4th Circuit, said in a statement, that, “President Trump’s third illegal attempt to denigrate and discriminate against Muslims through an immigration ban has failed in court yet again. It’s no surprise. The Constitution prohibits government actions hostile to a religion.”

After federal courts struck down the president’s first two attempts at a travel ban, Trump on Sept. 24 signed the latest set of travel restrictions. It in large part suspended travel to the US by nationals of five majority-Muslim countries covered under the previous travel bans — Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen — as well as two new countries, Chad and North Korea. The presidential proclamation also placed travel restrictions on certain government officials in Venezuela and their family members.

In October, federal judges in Hawaii and Maryland issued injunctions blocking enforcement of the ban, which the Trump administration appealed. The Supreme Court issued an order on Dec. 4 allowing the ban to go fully into effect while the appeals in the 9th Circuit and the 4th Circuit went forward. The justices wrote at the time that it expected that the appeals courts would rule “with appropriate dispatch.”

The 9th Circuit, which heard arguments on Dec. 6, issued its opinion on Dec. 20. But the 4th Circuit, which heard arguments two days later, did not rule until Thursday.

Gregory wrote in the main opinion that even if the proclamation was “facially legitimate” — that the text on its face didn’t run afoul of the constitution — it failed the test of whether the government had a “bona fide” reason for adopting it. The administration argued that the proclamation was rooted in national security concerns, but Gregory wrote that Trump’s statements undermined that.

Gregory said that even setting aside Trump’s statements during the campaign calling for a Muslim ban, the president had continued to make statements that “convey the primary purpose of the Proclamation—to exclude Muslims from the United States.” He quoted Trump’s tweets supporting his original travel ban executive order, which multiple courts determined was likely unconstitutional, as well as a tweet expressing support for an unverified story about a general who killed Muslims using bullets dipped in pig’s blood and his retweets of anti-Muslim videos.

“Plaintiffs offer undisputed evidence that the President of the United States has openly and often expressed his desire to ban those of Islamic faith from entering the United States. The Proclamation is thus not only a likely Establishment Clause violation, but also strikes at the basic notion that the government may not act based on ‘religious animosity,'” Gregory wrote.

The court upheld US District Judge Theodore Chuang’s preliminary injunction, which blocked enforcement of the proclamation’s travel restrictions with respect to nationals of Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen who have a “credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States.”

**********************************

The Administration continues to trip over the out of court statements by Trump and his sleazy subordinates which reveal the real agenda of bias and hate beneath his actions.

No matter how the Supremes come out (and Trump could win the cherished right to discriminate and carry out his bogus hate agenda) the stain on America being caused by Trump, Sessions, Miller, the other White Nationalists, and their supporters and enablers will take a long time to wash away!

PWS

02-15-15

THE SPLC ANALYZES TRUMP’S CONTORTED AND CONTRIVED MESSAGE OF HATE, INTOLERANCE, & DIVISION!

Follow SPLC

FIGHTING HATE // TEACHING TOLERANCE // SEEKING JUSTICE

FEBRUARY 3, 2018

“In his State of the Union address this week, President Trump congratulated his administration for having “taken historic actions to protect religious liberty.”

It certainly was historic in October when Trump became the first sitting president to give the keynote address at an annual summit hosted by an anti-LGBT hate group, the Family Research Council.

And it was historic when his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, issued religious freedom guidance eroding protections for LGBT people after he consulted with another anti-LGBT hate group, the Alliance Defending Freedom.

But it was an anti-immigrant hate group, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), whose talking points laced the State of the Union address this week.

CIS presents itself as an independent think tank, but it began as a project of the anti-immigrant hate group Federation for American Immigration Reform and was founded by white nationalist John Tanton.

CIS frequently manipulates its findings to achieve results that further its anti-immigrant agenda. Last fall, for instance, CIS staffer Jessica Vaughn published a report exaggerating how many people would enter America via a process that CIS calls “chain migration” — the hate group’s preferred phrase to stigmatize the idea of immigrant families reuniting.

The phrase “chain migration” appeared twice in this week’s State of the Union, alongside dangerous and hateful misinformation about immigrants taken directly from CIS talking points.

Given the State of the Union’s author, that should be no surprise.

Senior adviser Stephen Miller, who took the lead writing the speech, served for years as an aide to Jeff Sessions, who has himself endorsed CIS’ work, spoken on a CIS panel, and taken whispered counsel from a former CIS staffer during immigration debates on the Senate floor.

When Sessions hired Miller fresh from Duke University, he did so at the recommendation of anti-Muslim extremist David Horowitz. Now in the White House, Miller has been claimed and praised by extremists for advocating policy on hate group wish lists and pushing anti-immigrant narratives like the one we heard in the State of the Union.

“For decades, open borders have allowed drugs and gangs to pour into our most vulnerable communities. They have allowed millions of low-wage workers to compete for jobs and wages against the poorest Americans,” Trump said Tuesday, reading Miller’s text off a teleprompter.

But studies consistently show that immigrants help — not hurt — the U.S. economy.

“Most tragically, they have caused the loss of many innocent lives,” Trump said Tuesday — despite study after study finding immigrants commit crime at rates lowerthan native-born Americans, not higher.

Hate groups should not have a seat at the table on matters of national policy or influence what talking points to highlight in the State of the Union.

But thanks to Stephen Miller, they have exactly that.

The Editors

P.S. Here are some other pieces we think are valuable this week:

What kids are really learning about slavery by Melinda Anderson for The Atlantic

How the far right has perfected the art of deniable racism by Gary Younge for The Guardian

Indian slavery once thrived in New Mexico. Latinos are finding family ties to it by Simon Romero for The New York Times

The terrifying rise of alt-right fight clubs by Bryan Schatz for Mother Jones

View this email in your browser.”

************************************************

Yup. Sadly, Trump and his cohorts Sessions & Miller are out to divide, not unify America (except in the sense that they are unifying all decent Americans against their White Nationalist, racist agenda). For years, the GOP right-wing has “talked around” the racism and White Nationalism inherent in many of their programs and actions, using euphemisms like “reform,” “streamlining,” “right to work,” “combatting voter fraud,” etc. And, while occasionally it earns them a mild “tisk, tisk” from so-called “moderate” or “mainstream” Republicans, for the most part the spineless leadership of the GOP has given racism, White Nationalism, and xenophobia a “free Pass.”

Just look at the “hero of the GOP moderates,” Mitt Romney. “The Mittster” appears poised to reenter politics as the Junior Senator from Utah, replacing the retiring Orrin Hatch.

While carefully steering a moderate line on immigration during his governorship of “Blue State” Massachusetts, once nominated for the Presidency, Romney hired the notorious racist/White Nationalist/vote suppressor Kris Kobach as his “Immigration Advisor.” He then proceeded to largely adopt the White Nationalist line in immigration, including the famous Kobach initiative that sought to make life so miserable for hardworking, law-abiding undocumented residents (known in White Nationalist lingo as “illegals”) that they would “self-deport.”

Who is the real Mitt Romney? Nobody knows. But, my guess is that he’ll stand with the White Nationalists on immigration.

Although he has been sharply critical of Trump at times, it’s likely that when push comes to shove, he’ll line up behind the Trump-far right agenda just like other so-called “critics” such as Sen. “Bobby the Cork” Corker, Sen. Jeff Flake, Sen. John McCain, Sen. Susan Collins, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski when it came to “sticking it to America” with the GOP Tax ripoff. After all, remember how quick Mitt was to “pretzel himself up” and grovel before Trump on the off-chance that he would be allowed to serve the Great Con-Master as Secretary of State!

PWS

02-03-18

Republished by permission.

🇺🇸 Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Due Process Forever!

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts:

Related posts: