Politics – Page 25 – Feminism and Religion

The Need for a Positive Counter-Narrative of Religious Involvement in Feminism by Ivy Helman

I’ve admired JC for years. That’s Joan Chittister, OSB the Benedictine nun of course. I first saw her speak when I was in graduate school and she visited Yale. I’ve also read a number of her books. Her life is an example of how religious people support feminist ideals. There is a story in Beyond Beijing: The Next Step for Women: A Personal Journal that I would like to share with you

Chittister began her historic journey on the Peace Train to the UN Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995. As she entered a conference room to register as a Peace Train participant, she was handed a large manila envelope. To her surprise it was filled with condoms. At first, she thought that the woman who handed them to her meant to hand them to someone else. However, Chittister was told (quite emphatically according to her) that she should distribute the condoms to the health workers she encounters while on the train and in the small towns she visits along the way to Beijing. Eventually after much thought, Chittister decided to do just that and stuffs the manila envelope into her backpack. Trying to find some humor in what she considered an awkward situation for a nun to be in she remarked, “Now all I have to do is to try not to die in front of some bishop with condoms in my backpack.”

My first reaction to this story is to laugh along with her. I am also struck by her thoughtfulness to share the story publicly. She could have been given the envelope, quietly distributed the condoms and then never told a soul. But, no. She includes the account of this feminist action she undertook in her book for the world to read. What an amazing amount of courage and integrity this woman has! Continue reading “The Need for a Positive Counter-Narrative of Religious Involvement in Feminism by Ivy Helman”

Power and Wealth in The Hunger Games by Lisa Galek

Unless you have been living in grim, dystopian world for the past few months, you’ve no doubt seen or heard something about The Hunger Games. The movie, which is based on the first in a best-selling trilogy of novels by Suzanne Collins, debuted several weeks ago to mass acclaim. It has already had the biggest opening weekend ever for a non-sequel and its advanced ticket sales eclipsed that of the most recent installment in the Twilight Saga.

Feminists can rejoice a little in the fact that this movie, which tells the story of strong, female protagonist, Katniss Everdeen, has surpassed the Twilight movies in ticket sales. Unlike the Twilight movies, the plot of The Hunger Games does not revolve entirely around a romantic love triangle. Though two suitors do vie for Katniss’s attentions, the heroine has much more pressing concerns – like whether or not she will be able to survive until morning.

But, aside from the good news that tough, well-drawn female characters can perform well at the box office, the movie has also spawned some interesting discussions about government and politics. In fact, both liberal and conservative commentators have claimed The Hunger Games supports their personal viewpoints (See “Liberal, conservatives embrace ‘Hunger Games’ for very different reasons”). For me, the books and movie fall more squarely onto the liberal side of the fence for one reason – they call into question wealth and power and those who are unwilling to change existing structures of oppression. Continue reading “Power and Wealth in The Hunger Games by Lisa Galek”

Grievances Against the GOP from a (former?) Republican Woman by Katie German

I was raised in a conservative, Republican, military family. I support personal freedom and personal responsibility. I support the military. I support a balanced budget. I support individual rights and the constitution. I support small government. But I find myself increasingly separated from the Republican Party, and this is why:

I cannot align myself with a party that repeatedly acts to restrict the rights of women, to deny women protection from abuse and violence, and to trample the rights of women to make their own medical decisions. I cannot support a party where individual rights and freedoms are only protected for people with a penis (so long as they are not gay).

On February 16, 2012, there was a hearing by the Oversight and Government Reform Committee regarding the Affordable Care Act, which concerned the availability for contraception through insurance provided through religiously-affiliated employers. Out of the ten witnesses called, only two were women. When other representatives asked that other female witnesses be called to testify regarding contraceptives, Chairman Darrell Issa refused their request on the grounds that the scope of the committee was limited to the 1st Amendment implications and not to the matter of contraceptives themselves.

Republicans in Virginia, Oklahoma, Colorado, Wisconsin and Mississippi have advanced “Personhood” acts/bills declaring that a fetus has the full legal rights of a person, beginning at fertilization. Such laws would make in-vitro fertilization, stem-cell research, the morning-after-pill andall abortions (medically necessary or not) illegal. It could also be interpreted to make standard birth control options such as the Nuva ring, the pill, IUDs, and birth control patches illegal. Democrat Vivian Watts in VA attempted to amend the bill in Virginia to specify that contraception would not be banned under the Personhood bill, but Republicans voted 64-34 against adding this amendment. Any abortion or even cases of miscarriage due to negligence could be charged as manslaughter or homicide. Another attempt at amending the bill was proposed by Democrat Jennifer McClellan on Feburary 13, 2012. Continue reading

The Legacy of Original Intentions: The Non Violence of Wonder Woman by Nick Pumphrey

What would a superhero comic be without Pow, wham!, Zap, and even a Boom! (insert your own campy sound bites from Batman). Oddly enough, when psychologist William Marston created the character of Wonder Woman, he did not intend for her to be a violent character. When villains shot their mere bullets, she simply would deflect them with her indestructible bracelets. Instead of stooping to the level of her attackers, she would wield the lasso of truth, capture her foes, and force them to admit their malevolent deeds. Meanwhile, creator William Marston was actually developing the first polygraph using changes in blood pressure as exemplified in Wonder Woman’s lasso. Wonder Woman was not the first female superhero; however, she was the first non-violent one. While other writers like Siegel and Shuster (Superman’s creators) were using their religion as inspiration, Marston drew on the women of his life as example. He intended to have a peaceful, warrior woman, who was more than equal on grounds of “sex,” and could stop the tyranny created by war and hatred (i.e. men) without having to embrace it. He wanted an example for young girls to idolize and a way for boys to embrace feminine power. Continue reading “The Legacy of Original Intentions: The Non Violence of Wonder Woman by Nick Pumphrey”

No One Is Safe from the Parodist (Part 3) by Barbara Ardinger

Vader has lost the helmet and is now old and fat and speaks in a tenor voice. He’s obviously the smartest guy in the room.

I am not the first to mess with Shakespeare. In 1680, a hack named Nahum Tate rewrote King Lear to give it a happy ending (Cordelia marries Edgar and they assume the throne), and in 1699, Colley Cibber “adapted” Richard III. In the 19^th and 20^th centuries, Shakespeare’s plays were operacized, balletized, and Broadwayized (The Boys from Syracuse, West Side Story) In 1868, French operatic composer Ambroise Thomas wrote a Hamlet in which Ophelia sings a long aria and dies. After wild applause, she gets up and sings some more. I’ve seen this opera. I’ve also seen the Reduced Shakespeare Company in person and on DVD—they do the complete works in an hour and a half—and there’s also The Troubadour Theater Company that does Fleetwood Macbeth, which I’ve seen. They wear kilts and Hobbit feet, Duncan does standup comedy before they kill him, and Lady Macbeth sings Stevie Nicks songs. I have also seen Pulp Shakespeare (“If Shakespeare Wrote Pulp Fiction”), which is based on one of Quentin Tarantino’s hyper-violent—and in this case, hyper-conversational—movies, which I quit watching after about 20 minutes. The rest of the audience got it, though. They laughed a lot. It’s good to have fun with Shakespeare. Continue reading “No One Is Safe from the Parodist (Part 3) by Barbara Ardinger”

“If You Allow Gay Marriage…” by John Erickson

“We need to start examining the underlying questions of counter-cultural relationships that view one man marrying many women to be hip because we begin to see that although a polygamist idea of marriage may be sexy from a popular culture standpoint, the thought of legally recognized gay marriage always then gets likened to bestiality.”

… you have to allow polygamy, bestiality, and everything else!” The title for my post this week is a quote from an individual I used to associate with. This individual, haling from a conservative evangelical background, tried to explain to several others and myself the reasons why gay marriage would eventually lead to the repeal of anti-polygamy and bestiality laws across the United States.

The problems that I have with this particular argument are conflating gay marriage with religious freedom. Activists and scholars can draw comparisons to anti-polygamy cases such as the 1878 U.S. Supreme Court case Reynolds v United States and the 1882 Edmunds Act and 1887 Edmunds-Tucker Act that disfranchised and led to the imprisonment of Mormon polygamists. But in the end, gay marriage is not about religious freedom but rather human rights.

I often feel that there is this need both within and outside religious communities to promulgate the idea that LGBTQ individuals want to get married within the sanctified walls of “the church” just as much as heterosexual couples do. Although I do not want to disqualify those who desire to see LGBTQ equality within their faith based communities, buying into a heternormative ideal of what traditional marriage should look like needs to result in LGBTQ individuals asking why marriage should be performed in sacred spaces in the first place The normative traditions that have often defined marriage have also served as shackles keeping LGBTQ couples in the mindset that to achieve fully marriage equality with their heterosexual counterparts is to fully immerse themselves within the same traditions and practices. Continue reading ““If You Allow Gay Marriage…” by John Erickson”

No One Is Safe from the Parodist (Part 2) by Barbara Ardinger

I suppose I should be ashamed to admit this, but I once worked as a freelance copywriter for a multi-level marketing company.

I suppose I should be ashamed to admit this, but I once worked as a freelance copywriter for a multi-level marketing company. (Okay—I needed the money. It was a job.) I wrote the following piece one day when I was supposed to be writing real advertising copy. They were not amused. A few years later, when I was writing Finding New Goddesses (ECW Press, 2003), I pulled it out of my three-ring binder, renamed it Dr. Lucre’s Whoopee Pack, and Found (i.e., made up) Panglossolalia, the Found Goddess of Infomercials. Today, if we want to be politically correct, we recycle and reuse, so here we go again. I’ve changed the names in this infomercial and brought it up to date. When November comes, be sure to vote for the candidate of your choice.

Dr. Mittens’s Whoopee Pack

Good evening, friends, and welcome to my secret garden. I’m your friendly political commentator. I’m so glad you could visit me tonight as we take a short break from biased documentaries and endless negative commercials. Friends, tonight’s movie, Attack of the Jobless Economist, will begin in a minute. But first, this. Continue reading “No One Is Safe from the Parodist (Part 2) by Barbara Ardinger”

No One Is Safe from the Parodist (Part 1) by Barbara Ardinger

Now, with only a minimum purchase, you can save your loved ones—your friends—your neighbors—your business associates—from eternities of suffering and torment. Our new Multi-Level Marketing company guarantees Eternal Salvation for you and your entire downline.

Some days, it’s just not safe to let me watch MSNBC. I think politics is both scary and fun, and the current field of Republican candidates is majorly scary. Well, I did vote Republican once. This was in 1976, when I’d just finished my Ph.D. at Southern Illinois University atCarbondale. I voted for Jim Thompson, one of the governors ofIllinoiswho did not go to jail. But I digress. I’ve decided to help the current Republicans with their advertising. I reached into my three-ring binder again for another souvenir of my days writing for multi-level marketing and found an early version of this ad. Religious issues and identities seem to playing a big part in the campaigns. In November, be sure to vote for the candidate of your choice. Continue reading “No One Is Safe from the Parodist (Part 1) by Barbara Ardinger”

The Rhetoric of Freedom of Religion in the Debate about Contraception Coverage By Elise M. Edwards

Does freedom of religion include the right to impose your religious views on your employees? Should freedom of religion exempt you from financially contributing to a medical benefit for your employees that you consider sinful?

According to an Associated Baptist Press article, Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, “called a new rule [by the Obama Administration] requiring insurance plans to cover birth control — including those paid for by religious employers that believe artificial birth control is a sin — a ‘horrible decision’ that poses a problem not just for faiths that object to birth control” in the January 28 broadcast of Richard Land Live. Land believes that this policy infringes on religious freedom. (Note that the health care policy does exempt houses of worship and religious organizations that employ primarily those of the same faith, but not organizations like hospitals and colleges that employ and serve people of all faiths, or no faith. An article by Religion News Service, posted here, also on a Baptist media outlet, explains the policy in more depth.) Continue reading “The Rhetoric of Freedom of Religion in the Debate about Contraception Coverage By Elise M. Edwards”

Do We Need More “Ministerial Exceptions”? by Kile B. Jones

In a recent unanimous and precedent-setting Supreme Court ruling, a “ministerial exception” was given to Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School regarding employment discrimination. Cheryl Perich, a “called teacher” at Hosanna-Tabor, was fired after issues surrounding her narcolepsy developed. As is well known in the United States, innumerable federal, state, and local laws exist to protect employees from discrimination based on race, sex, age, disability, and so forth. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (1964) prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, or national origin. In the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA, signed in 1990), employers are also held liable for discrimination based on an employees’ disability. The “ministerial exception” excludes religious institutions and ministers from the ADA. It is important to note that the ADA protects employees hired by private companies as well as public ones.

In the slip opinion, the Supreme Court argues that, “The Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment bar suits brought on behalf of ministers against their churches, claiming termination in violation of employment discrimination laws.” The opinion sites other cases where it was ruled that religious institutions are their own arbiters of employment and termination and cannot be compelled by the State to comply with certain national laws (see Watson v. Jones, Kedroff v. Saint Nicholas Cathedral of Russian Orthodox Church in North America, and Serbian Eastern Orthodox Diocese for United States and Canada v. Milivojevich). Justice Alito concurs by saying, “The “ministerial” exception gives concrete protection to the free “expression and dissemination of any religious doctrine.” The Constitution leaves it to the collective conscience of each religious group to determine for itself who is qualified to serve as a teacher or messenger of its faith.” Continue reading “Do We Need More “Ministerial Exceptions”? by Kile B. Jones”