What Is Right and What Is Easy

I find myself in an awkward position regarding the Church and social morality. Well, it's not awkward on all fronts: I find that any "Christian" agenda which fails to provide for the poor and despised in our society is no Christian agenda at all. That's simple. I can even feel a bit smugly (self-?)righteous in the "caring for the despised" category, because not everyone is able to see this obvious point. But in the field of sexual morality, things get complicated. Largely because I can see traces of smug self-satisfaction in both the major visible camps, traces I can see in myself whichever stance I take.

I have grown up in a conservative environment. I've long understood the arguments against abortion, and I agree with them. I've long understood the arguments in favor of limiting sexual relationships to a heterosexual monogamous context, and I cannot disagree with them. Abortion is bad because it kills humans. God created sex for a purpose, and that purpose is clearly outlined in the Bible. Fairly simple.

Unfortunately, it got more complicated when I encountered a liberal environment. I understand the arguments against-against abortion (few, I find, are simply "for" it), and I agree with them. I understand the arguments in favor of permitting sexual relationships in a variety of contexts, and I cannot entirely disagree with them. Abortion can save lives. I find myself disgusted by finding some "pro-life" arguments which show exactly the sort of misogynistic anti-choice logic which I had dismissed as abortionist anti-life caricature. (But I never would argue for the life of the fetus over that of the mother without the mother's consent!) (But some would.) (But I would never demand that an unviable fetus be carried to term at the risk of the mother!) (But some would.) (But I don't want to punish women for promiscuity by refusing birth control, demanding they raise the baby, while permitting the man freedom from judgment! That would be totally contrary to even the Law of Moses!) (But some would.) As for alternatives to heterosexuality (yes, alternatives plural, for those concerned about a monolithic "homosexual agenda") - well, here's where I get into the really murky waters.

It is easy for me to condemn the sins which tempt me little.

It is easy for me to condemn the sins which I have buried in shrouding denial.

It is easy for me to condemn the sins which, condemned, still permit me to maintain my familiar lifestyle.

It is easy for me to condemn the sins which permit me to pretend love and Christian concern.

It is easy for me to condemn the sins which permit me to hate my enemy, curse them that curse me, do evil to them that hate me, and pray against them which despitefully use me and persecute me.

It is easy for me to condemn the sins which permit me to hate my neighbor as I hate myself.

I find that it is easy for most Christians to do these things. We want to take bold stands for Christ and stand for the right thing in despite of the World, the Flesh and the Devil, but we want to do so at the least possible cost to ourselves. History demonstrates that Christians have always been divided sharply when the time came to choose between right and wrong. I will be the first to point out the large role of the Church in abolition - but other members of the Church used the Bible, with more ease, to justify slavery, because abolition would involve change, discomfort, and an admission of sin. I will be the first to point out the large role of the Church in the Civil Rights movement - but other members of the Church used basic common sense to show how "unnatural" such indiscriminate Christian brotherhood would be.

I cannot take the liberal step of assuming the heterosexuality issue is identical to these previous issues. I cannot say that that which is inborn is inevitable. But I can and must note that conservatives have long declared homosexuality (let alone other sexualities) so impossible that it is invisible in much of the conservative community. It's one of the easy sins of the "other". Abortion is redefined as the lazy, cowardly, or callous slut's easy way out, and becomes one of the easy sins of the "other". So, conservatives: how do we know the Lord's will on sexuality is more literal and obvious in the Bible than His will on slavery or racial mixing? And every frickin' person debating abortion: how do we know the point at which the cells transform into an independent human being? Because those who assert the answer without considering it are less concerned with human rights than with the rights of the human they choose to like better.

I know, it's a set of tired, tired debates. But I worry that the divide in the Church is largely along the lines of what is easy for each side to declare right, and therefore making it possible to make what is easy = what is right. And what is right is rarely the same thing as what is easy. And the right way to determine what is right in a heated debate is rarely the same thing as the easy way to determine what is right.

Katrina

What's in a hurricane?

I'm a little callous about natural disasters, generally. Possibly because most of my memories of surviving Hurricane Hugo are quite pleasant - Dad buying ice cream (which had to be finished immediately in the power outage!), camping out in the hallway, playing on the new jungle gym of fallen trees. So when a disaster strikes with warning, I kind of tend to assume that everyone will be okay, that everyone will sensibly and safely evacuate, and if not, well, maybe they can go swimming a lot closer to home than usual.

Then today I was informed that, in my town in North Carolina, gasoline was going to be out of supply from 6:00 PM tonight until at least Monday, thanks to Katrina. That slightly cloudier, slightly windier day we had the other day had spent itself wrecking our nation's petroleum ports and refineries.

I've never heard of one storm having such a wide effect in the States. It started me wondering about the depth. I'd been avoiding the news stories, you see, because I've been sticking to reading every moment I'm not working. But tonight I look it up, and discover that the death toll is likely to be in the thousands.

In the thousands.

One storm. And this isn't a tsunami striking without a decent warning system. This is one we've been watching approach for days. We've known for at least two days that it was likely to hit New Orleans and the surrounding area. We have sophisticated communication and transportation systems. Why couldn't we avert the tragedies? Property damage is painful, but loss of human life is ...

is...

.

And I can't understand it. Why should rescue missions even be necessary? Why in Heaven's name were there more than a tiny handful of people left, and why were any people left outside, say, the Astrodome?

It probably has to do with logistics and complications I don't know about. Who knows what kind of glut was on the highways out? How many stubborn souls simply refused to move? Who was forgotten, left behind as evacuees streamed by on every side...

I recall hearing that people will be dying of dysentary and dehydration because of the impossibility of maintaining a supply of drinking water. How little it takes for our society to crumble. I may not see my sister this weekend, because her roommate may not be able to refill her tank upon reaching this place. Suddenly, a few hundred miles have grown from a few hours away to an impassable distance. I'm trying to imagine how it is where there are no roadways left above water.

And I'm imagining floating in a little boat on a lake, with maybe some treetops and alligators, but fun enough in the end, right? *sigh* I really am too callous about disaster. Now to go get that stupid song (I'll let you guess which one specifically) out of my head.

Thinking in italics

And this was right. And it was fate that had let Edward recognize this just when he'd got his Plan. And it was right that it was Fate, and the city would be Saved from its ignoble present by its glorious past. He had the Means, and he had the end. And so on... Edward's thoughts often ran like this.
He could think in italics. Such people need watching.
Preferably from a safe distance.

Terry Pratchett, Men At Arms

I love Terry Pratchett. Very perceptive man. Okay, so the Discworld books are silly books, meant to be taken lightly. I'm going to commit the grievous sin of taking this seriously. Because it's true.

Thinking in italics is a very dangerous talent. Although truth be told, if all those without the talent tried to watch all those with it, those without would find themselves severely outnumbered. Most people think in italics at least some of the time. The right way to live. The best literature/theater/food/wine. If nothing else, we find ourselves thinking along the lines of how wrong it is to always think in italics, the way everyone [else] does.

Thinking in italics ought to be treated as carefully as morphine. It's addictive, it's dangerous, and in large quantities it's poisonous. One is tempted to ban it entirely. Yet in some extreme cases, it's the only solution. If slavery isn't wrong, it will be tolerated for its many economic conveniences. If honest dealing isn't right, Enrons will abound.

I'm not good or wise enough to say exactly how italics should be allocated. I do say that we should try to be aware of our italicized thoughts, and subject them to particular scrutiny.

And now I shall return to Discworld and silliness.

Drug Treatment Courts

I started this blog because I was tired of seeing hate becoming the main language of truth. I feel like it ought to be possible to love the sinner and hate the sin at the same time. I'm hardly an expert at it. But I can see some awesome work on that front being done by my father. He's currently doing a lot of work with Drug Treatment Courts, in North Carolina in particular but also in the world at large. It's a radical way of looking at the system. We have a problem with drug addicts turning to crime to fuel their addiction, and returning to crime after punishment. The Drug Treatment Courts are concerned with treating the disease of drug addiction so that these people can stand a fighting chance at living a decent, healthy life.

Why am I bringing this up? Because today I got an email from my father with this information:

Drug Treatment Courts, among other worthy court and intermediate
sanction programs, are on the legislative chopping block this year. It is just wrong to continue to underfund treatment, the courts and worthy programs while expanding prisons. In 1995 the President of the American Bar Association spoke to the first drug court conference and spoke these words that are sadly just as relevant today. Please read and follow the attached infromation. I once heard that in order to triumph, evil only needs good people to do nothing...

"My how we love prisons. Forget the extraordinary costs we incur today. We love prisons so much we are threatening to steal any available funding from education system in most states just to build, staff and operate our prisons. As Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy has so eloquently pointed out: 'We must not view our collective ability to build more prison space as a sign of success in our society.'

Yet the public continues to respond to harsh and superficial rhetoric. And worst of all, far too many of our fellow Americans continue to operate under the delusion that we can shock, scare or punish people into abandoning drugs. We make it sound so easy. And we want it to be easy, for the sad truth is that it suits our convenience. For if we simply put people away for using drugs, we never have to deal with the underlying desperation which drives so many people to the hopeless and painful life offered by narcotics.

But each of you has seen the hopelessness of our current policies. You have determined that a simple, basic human act the act of compassion and understanding may well hold the key to this problem. You have seen or you would like to see this nation deal with the narcotics problem on medical as well as criminal terms.

And, at the very least, you are willing to try something else other than a re-hashed version of the failed policies of the past. And so, it will take courage and persistence to keep going, to seek new partners in your communities for your efforts. But, please, please, I implore you to keep trying, to keep fighting. For what you do is more than dispensing justice. You're saving lives!

Most importantly of all, you are giving people hope: hope to those who thought they'd been forgotten, hope to those who don't feel the goodness of life, hope to those who think they are all out of chances. You give hope, you give opportunity and you restore dignity.

That is as close a definition to doing justice as one could ever
find."

Later in the letter, there is a forward outlining effectiveness and strategies. Feel free to skip to the "What Can I Do?" section - the rest is included for the statistically-minded.

The Drug Treatment Court (DTC) Programs are in jeopardy of losing funding. Your advocacy is needed to ensure continuation of these vital programs. DTCs began in Mecklenburg County 10 years ago (02/09/95). These programs have been so successful that they have now grown to 30 such adult, youth and family treatment courts throughout North Carolina. Please note the following program features:

What are Drug Treatment Courts?

- Adult DTC: Works with non-violent repeat offenders facing prison time

- Family DTC - Works with parents/guardians who are in danger of permanently losing custody due to abuse or neglect charges.

- Juvenile DTC - Works with non-violent juvenile offenders whose drug/alcohol abuse is impacting their lives at home, school, and within the community.

- DWI Court works with individuals convicted of Levels 1, 2, and 3 or multiple DWI offenses.

DTC Facts – Recidivism

- 80% of criminal offenders in the justice system are drug and/or alcohol involved. Most are addicted.

- Over 75% of abuse and neglect cases have parental drug and/or alcohol abuse as a major cause.

- An independent evaluation of NC DTCs shows that DTC graduates are rearrested at half the rate of non-graduates. 18% of DTC graduates were rearrested in the 12 months after discharge compared to 44% of the comparison group members.

DTC Facts - Cost Effectiveness

- It costs approximately $2,000-$2,500 annually to provide community treatment and supervision as compared to $23,000 annually to house an offender in a NC prison.

- A recent St. Louis study showed that for every dollar in added costs to operate DTCs, taxpayers realized a savings of $6.32. This represents the expenses that would have been incurred by the taxpayer over a four year period had the DTC client been placed on regular probation

What Can I Do?

The time has come to institutionalize funding for drug treatment courts. Their value has been well established and the best interests of the community require the requisite level of support be provided. For offenders who can meet the program’s requirements, the DTCs offer a way out of the costly, dehumanizing spiral of substance abuse that ruins lives and costs taxpayers a bundle. To help preserve the Drug Treatment Court Programs in this community your advocacy is needed. Please take a moment to:

1. Visit the following web address and log your support for Drug Treatment Courts.

http://www.petitiononline.com/savedtc/petition.html


2. Send a letter, E-mail or make a phone call to your local elected officials expressing your support for the Drug Treatment Court Programs and ask that they examine the record on DTCs and create a sustainable way to provide permanent, recurring funding for North Carolina’s Drug Treatment Courts. You may find the members of your local delegation by going to the North Carolina General Assembly page and selecting “House” and/or “Senate” and then “Member List.”

Thank you for considering support of this very worthwhile and cost effective program.

Janeanne Tourtellott

If you're not North Carolinian, you can still express support. Then get out there and find out what your state is doing. Because far too many places are abandoning the hard, effective method of love for the easy, ineffective method of Institution.