The Texas Fillibuster

Last night, Texas Sentaor Wendy Davis spent 11 hours in a fillibuster, designed to prevent a bill from passing that would impose heavy restrictions on the practice of abortion in the stae of Texas. The basic premise of the bill stated that, if it passed, in order for a medical location to perform an abortion, the doctors performing said abortion must have priveleges at a hospital that is no more than 30 miles distant from the clinic where the abortion is being performed. Because Texas has such a large rural communit, should bill have passed, only 5 of the 41 existing clinics would have remained open, thus greatly limiting women's access to abortion services. You can imagine the excitement of the pro-abortion crowd when the vote finally took place, a little too late, preventing the bill from passing.

My initial reaction to this is, why are you so bound and determined to make sure that people have easy access to abortions? First of all, the bill would not have shut down abortions, just made it more necessary to plan ahead and make sure you can be there for the procedure at a convenient time. I was talking with a friend about this (who is on the other side of the issue) and her response was that given that low income women are the ones who generally wind up with unwanted pregnancies, needing to make a trip anywhere to get it done will greatly affect their income because they'll have to take time off work, etc. While this may true, and while it is definitely true that there are a lot of rural communities with hospital access no closer than 1-2 hours away, the last time I checked, they were open 7 days a week. All that means, is that you go on your day off. In addition to that, simply keeping hte baby to term is actually cheaper than trying to pay for an abortion.

The other response I was given was that women who are forced to carry a baby to term and then choose to give it up for adoption tend to suffer from mental illness as a result. While this may be true, it is also true that the woman who got pregnant chose to have sex. Even if she was practicing contraception, it is not fullproof 100% of the time. If the reason for the abortion is because the parents (single or married) cannot afford another mouth to feed, then the mental health risks from the child being "unwanted" is really a moot point. It's not like the mother in this case does not love her child, she simply can't afford to take care of it. That's a completely different situation. However, if it is true that carrying the child results in mental health problems, we should also do research to find out why mental illness results from such a pregnancy. If you know you aren't keeping it, then carrying it for 9 months doesn't seem like it should be the end of the world, unless of course the mental health problems come as a result of becoming attached to the life growing inside of you and then giving it up later. Which would make sense, but abortion leads to mental health issues as well. (In fact, according to this study mental illness as a result of abortion is higher than that which results from carrying a baby to term, and then giving it up. What a shock!)

Now, naturally, this conversation led to sex education and access to contraceptives. Since Texas has one of the largest teen pregnancy rates, it would stand to reason that their "abstinence only" education isn't working. And in our society, that's probably true. It is also true that most students are not receiving information about the results of sex beyond pregnancy, such as STD's. Is this information they should have access to? Absolutely. But not in the way that most sex education teaches it. Instead of presenting contraception as the be all and end all of preventing unwanted consequences from having sex. I know from the sex ed unit I had in high school the abstinence was something that was thrown out as an option at the very end, but largely in such a way that it was obvious the curriculum expected teens to have sex, and that astinence was something they were required to mention, but nothing more.

Which raises another question. In the state of Texas, the age of consent is 17. That means, that if you are under the age of 17, whether you agreed to it or not, it is illegal to have sex. The question then, is why are we pushing to make sure that condoms and contraceptives are available to 11 year olds? (see the news story here about Plan B age limits) The fact remains that our society has determined that it is acceptable for teenagers to be sexually active, regardless of what the law says. Because of this abortion centers are deemed necessary. Abortion is viewed as a form of emergency contraception, and as such tells you that no matter what your actions are, there will be no consequences.

Those who are fighting for better sex education and more access to contraceptives mention over and over again the decision making aspect that is brought into such education, emphasizing the fact that you can't make a responsible decision if you don't have all the facts. But maybe,if kids weren't being told that their actions don't have to have consequences so long as they use a reliable form of contraception, there wouldn't be such an influx of teen parents. Maybe instead, they would weigh the consequences, knowing all the facts about pregnancy and STD's, and knowing that regardless of what they do to prevent it, having sex carries with it a high risk of unwanted consequences. Maybe if our society hadn't provided so many opportunities for a way out after the fact, people would stop and think. And maybe, just maybe, if they stopped to think before they did something, then the necessity for such things as abortion would begin to decline, and all of this would be an irelevant conversation. But I don' see that happening any time soon :P

DOMA

Over the last couple of days there has been a lot of things happening on the social jusice front. In CA yesterday, the Deffense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, was overturned by the Supreme Court, effectively making gay and lesbian marriages legal in that state.

First of all, DOMA was an attempt on the part of those who are religious to maintain the status quo, or to keep the term "marriage" as one that applies to only a union between a man and a woman. The reason that they wanted this was because "marriage" is a religious term that has been adopted by the world at large. However, the legal union between a man and a woman has been around since the beginning of civilization. Given that the beginning of civilitation was strictly religious based, the history of the term can be traced back to religious roots. The main argument, then, is not that we who are religious are trying to dictate who you as a person are allowed to love, or even who you are allowed to spend the rest of your life with. We're not even trying to say that you don't deserve a legal union recognized by the state, with all the benefits that come with it. We are saying that because of the background of the term "marriage" it should only apply to what it has always applied to. That is, a union between a man and woman.

Having said this, since the other side is determined to ignore the roots of the word "marriage," in addition to being determined to paint us as the bad guys who don't want homosexuals to be allowed to have relationships, I propose this alternative. Those who want a religious legal union that is recognized by the state, should be given the right to call it something different. Since our term for such a union has been "redefined" by the state, to no longer mean what it once did, then we should also have the right to "redefine" what our unions are called. The original words in Hebrew and Greek that have been translated as "marriage" in our Bible have more the denotation of a union between a man and a woman, anyway. We've simply used the word "marriage" to depict that kind of union, so that how it is translated. So let us pass a law that allows us to change the term. Concede the word to the other side. It's just a word after all. The meaning for us stays the same, whether the term used to describe it does or not.

Unplugging

I have noticed a change in myself over the past several months. I am more easily annoyed, and generally more irritable, or at least I feel like that anyway, even if others haven't really noticed it (no one has said anything). This could be attributed to my crazy schedule (working 80 hours a week, and getting only 5-6 hours of sleep a night has a tendency to make people more irritable :P) However, it started before I started working so much. It seems that the general exhaustion is just bringing out an underlying problem. That problem, I think, is that I am too connected.

Let me explain. When I find myself checking Facebook every 10 minutes to see if there are any notifications, I am too connected. When I  check my e-mail every 20 minutes, or less, to see if I have a new e-mail, I am too connected. When I check my phone every couple of minutes to see if I have missed a text message, I am too connected. All of this is simply creating more stress in my life, not less. When I am so worried about what someone's Facebook status is, or an e-mail that can be answered an hour or two after it is sent, I am too connected. I am too worried about largely insignificant forms of communication, and that tells me I am far too connected.

So I have made a decision. I have now disconnected the 3G on my iPhone. In the next couple of weeks it will be going back to Verizon (funny thing though, I'm actually making money by giving it back to them. Apparently, it's worth more than what I originally paid for it :P) Why Do I need to sell the iPhone back? Perhaps it would be better to use it just as an iPod? The problem with that is that I'll still be on it every time I have a wifi connection. And the whole point is to limit my accessibility to the internet.

I have also made another decision. I'm not paying for internet at my apartment. I have free access in the office, or I can go to Starbucks, or McDonalds. Internet is not so all important for my life right now that I have to have it at my fingertips. So I'm choosing not to.

Instead, I'm choosing to read, and to relax, and to unplug. I'm choosing distance. I'm choosing self. I'm choosing growth, and I'm choosing God. I'm choosing to make those things which are all important the most important. Because all those other things do is steal, and I've chosen not give to them any longer. I'm choosing life. The best life possible. The life that comes with being unplugged.
 

International Women's Day

Until today, I did not know this existed. I also did not know that March is Women's History Month. Amidst all of the posts about empowering women, and women's equality today, for which I am grateful, the first thing that comes to mind is a scene from Mona Lisa Smile.

Julia Roberts plays the part of Katherine Watson, a progressive woman in the 1950's trying to change the role women play in society by teaching at a women's college. In this scene she is talking to one of her students, Joan Brandwyn (played by Julia Stiles). Joan has two strong desires: to be a lawyer, and to have a family. She gets accepted, but decides to pursue having a family instead. This is how things play out when Katherine learns of her decision.

Katherine Watson: There are seven law schools within 45 minutes of Philadelphia. You can study and get dinner on the table by 5:00.

Joan Brandwyn: It's too late.

Katherine Watson: No, some of them accept late admissions! Now, I was upset at first, I can tell you that. When Tommy came to me at the dance and told me he was accepted to Penn, I thought, 'Oh God, her fate is sealed! She's worked so hard, how can she throw it all away?' But then I realized you won't have to! You can bake your cake and eat it too! It's just wonderful!
Joan Brandwyn: We're married. We eloped over the weekend. Turned out he was petrified of a bit ceremony, so we did a sort of spur-of-the-moment thing. Very romantic.
[Katherine is stunned]

Joan Brandwyn: It was my choice, not to go. He would have supported it.

Katherine Watson: But you don't have to choose!
Joan Brandwyn: No, I have to. I want a home, I want a family! That's not something I'll sacrifice.

Katherine Watson: No one's asking you to sacrifice that, Joan. I just want you to understand that you can do both.

Joan Brandwyn: Do you think I'll wake up one morning and regret not being a lawyer?

Katherine Watson: Yes, I'm afraid that you will.

Joan Brandwyn: Not as much as I'd regret not having a family, not being there to raise them. I know exactly what I'm doing and it doesn't make me any less smart. This must seem terrible to you.

Katherine Watson: I didn't say that.

Joan Brandwyn: Sure you did. You always do. You stand in class and tell us to look beyond the image, but you don't. To you a housewife is someone who sold her soul for a center hall colonial. She has no depth, no intellect, no interests. You're the one who said I could do anything I wanted. This is what I want.

The thing that always strikes me in this scene is that as much as Katherine fights to give her girls the opportunity to have anything they want, she almost completely dismisses the fact that some of them are not simply conforming to society. What some of them truly want is to stay at home and raise a family.

In today's world, women have more choices than ever, but with that comes a shift in societal expectations. As we celebrate the the progress made for women in in our world, lets remember that with that progress remains the right to do things traditionally too.

Waiting

I've never been much of a patient person. If I see something I want, I immediately start making plans for how to make it happen, whether it was making a visit to Virginia after high school graduation, or transferring to a private school I had absolutely no way of paying for. And God has been faithful. He has allowed me to make the mistakes that my head strong nature often often leads me to, without too many repercussions. But now it seems, He is telling me to wait. You see, That private school never did fall within my price range, and so far God hasn't seen fit to miraculously bail me out of the mountain of debt I have buried myself under. But that doesn't mean He hasn't provided for me. He has given me a good job, and an affordable place to live, both of which have allowed me to remain independent.

But waiting is hard. I've had to learn to slow down, to say no to things I would normally say yes to. And I've had to learn to hold on to my dream, even though I can't have it just yet. I've had to learn that if it really is worth having, it is worth waiting for. But that's not all God is teaching me.

I know that this time of waiting is by just waiting for the sake of waiting. God is using this time to shape me, to make me into the person I need to be in order to serve Him the way I need to serve Him. I just finished reading the book "Kisses from Katie" which, if you haven't heard of it is a story about a 19 year old girl, just out of high school, who gives her heart to Uganda. In her first year there, she adopts 9 little girls, and 5 more in the years to follow. She gives up everything she has so that se can do her best to make a difference, but does it with the knowledge that just changing one life is enough. She knows that God is the one doing the work, and she is simply the person He chose to do it through. In her words "In the days of Jesus, He expected EVERYTHING of His disciples. Do I believe He requires the same today? I do. And I want to live like I believe it." Reading those words, I know I'm not ready to give my everything. But I also know that that is, at least in part, what this period of waiting is for.

She says later that "The hard places can seem unbearable. It's dark and it's scary and even though I know God will never leave me or forsake me, sometimes it's so dark that I just can't see Him. But then the most incredible thing happens: God takes me by the hand and walks me straight out of the hard place and into the beauty on the other side...ALWAYS on the other side is something beautiful because He has used the hard place...to align my desires with His. I realize that it was there that He was closest to me, even in the times when I didn't see Him."

It's hard to read that and not stop and think. And it makes me wish that I had faith like that. So I wait, and I pray, because I know God is preparing me for something great. I just need to do it in His time, and not my own.

Realization

Timeline. I hadn't thought about it before. My timeline is to move overseas sometime within the next five years. I was looking at adoptable dogs online the other night and it hit me, a dog could be up to a 15 year commitment. Patches was 13 years. I'm not planning on staying here that long. As much as I want a dog, I can't have one, because I can't commit that much time and I certainly can't take him with me. If I get a dog here, that would mean committing to stay here for longer than I think I need to. And I can't do that. As much as I desperately want a dog, the dog will have to wait :/

Hearts Cry Out

Proud, poor, free. The land of Jamaica is one of beauty and individuality. The first thing you notice as your plane skims over the water is how gorgeous this island nation is. But amid all the beauty is a people whose hearts cry out for more. Jamaica is the first country I've been to where you can't use the word "Christian" and get your meaning across. There, everyone is a "Christian." In Jamaica, there is no such thing as an atheist. To say that God does not exist is blasphemy to them. Of Course He exists. How else did the world come to be? The schools there still do basic devotions at the beginning of the day. Yet even with all this religion, very few really understand what it means to be a follower of Christ.

The overwhelming majority of people will respond with a yes if you ask them if they are a Christian. But you will get quite a different response if you ask them if they follow Christ. To them, to follow Christ is to do everything right. If you smoke, drink, have pre-marital sex, or even have tattoos, in their minds, you are going to hell. You must have your life cleaned up before you can be a Christ follower, because otherwise God will not accept you. They do not understand the meaning of grace. In their minds, your salvation is determined on the number of good things you do. This is not as common among believers, but the culture there says that you must act like a Christ follower in order to go to Heaven.

The reason for this is that there is so much wrong that happens in their everyday lives. 75% of children in Jamaica grow up with no father. The culture says that in order for a man to be a man, he needs to have many children, and several women. But with this cultural expectation of physical manhood, there is no maturity expected along with that. If a man fathers a child, it is no big deal for the man. He is allowed to leave and do whatever he wants. The women are left to raise the children on their own.

This broken family dynamic also plays a large role in the Deaf culture in Jamaica. I learned in my American deaf culture classes about Deaf pride, and Deaf power. Here in America, the Deaf are proud of who they are. No one should ever try to change their circumstances, because they like being Deaf. In Jamaica, it is the complete opposite. Up until fifty years ago, the Deaf on Jamaica were treated much like animals. They were locked inside their houses, refused education, and largely ignored. It wasn't until the Caribbean Christian Center for the Deaf (CCCD) started in Jamaica in the 50's that things began to change. They opened Deaf schools, and provided access to JSL (Jamaican Sign Language). That's when circumstances began to change. But this shift in perspective is still so recent that many of the stigma's that originated with a hearing person's perspective of the Deaf still persist. Many Deaf are still thought to be stupid, or unteachable. Many hearing parents of Deaf children wind up dropping them off at the Deaf school, and having as little to do with them later on as possible. It is easier this way, to give the responsibility to someone else. Hearing people don't understand why it is hard for a Deaf person to learn to read. They don't understand why they learn differently than hearing kids. And so they are branded as less than. And the sad thing is, many of the deaf people there agree with them. They are more willing to let the hearing people run the show than they are to lead themselves. And they suffer as a result.

The deaf in Jamaica look at Christianity as a hearing person's religion. Why is that? Because it is so much more accessible to hearing people. We have Bibles in written format that we can read and understand. They are left with asking the hearing people to explain it them. With such a situation its no wonder that they feel like only the hearing people can really read and understand the Bible. But not only that, when a person looks at themselves as incapable, they are less likely to step up and take a position that requires capability. If you don't think you are able to lead, then you aren't going to do it.

There are 10,000 Deaf people on the Island of Jamaica. Only 10% of them are Christians. They have one pastor. His role is to travel to different churches on the Island and give the Sunday sermon, but that means that each church only rarely gets to have him. The rest of the time, they fellowship and learn as best they can. The Deaf community in Jamaica is crying out for leaders, but so few are willing to step forward and take that role.

One of the most important lessons that I learned while in Jamaica was how crucial it is for any Deaf missions project to be run by a Deaf person. The hearing Americans are more likely to have an education that fits the role, but if it is not run by a Deaf person, then the Deaf will never own it. It will be relegated to the area of "Hearing only." The reason that I needed to learn this lesson? Because it shifts my expectations of what my role will be, and it shows me that I will most likely have a different role than I originally expected. It also means that my possibilities are greater. Rather than being so focused on one small area of ministry, it is my job to be focused on the larger aspect of helping the Deaf to become leaders themselves, no matter where I am. Whether that be through education, through witnessing, or through some other avenue, my job is not to start something that I'm better at than a Deaf person (because really, that doesn't exist within Deaf missions. They will always be better at reaching other Deaf people than me!). My job is not to do work for the Deaf, but to work with the Deaf, to enable them to lead themselves, to use my education, and my talents, and my passions in service to them, regardless of what that looks like. And most of all, it is my job to humble myself, and say that they know better than I do, because they have lived it! No matter what area of missions I work in, discipleship needs to be the goal, because without it, the Deaf around the world won't lead themselves, and they absolutely need to.