The Colors of My School

By Sue Dickson

Daviny sat next to me in the school’s cafeteria, her head bent closely to the paper as she bit her bottom lip in concentration. We were in La Aguada, a rural school in the FARC controlled mountains of northwest Colombia. She was showing me that she could write the letters of her name. Her parents do not read or write—but she does. Daviny is nine. She wants to be a teacher. She walks a couple of kilometers on mountain trails to school every day. Violence is part of Daviny’s life. Her older brothers have been recruited by the FARC. When a group of FARC militants showed up at the door of the family’s hut, they knew: they could either join the guerillas or be killed. As Daviny and I worked, one of the brothers was watching us from the edge of the jungle. In another world, at another time, he would have been a student in the school, too. He is fourteen. Now, he was a militant watching from the margins.

The school is three concrete-block rooms, painted bright yellow with blue trim—the colors of Colombia. Large windows look across a grassy field and out over the valley and jungle-wrapped mountains. There are no other buildings in sight. These mountains are exquisitely beautiful and they are exquisitely dangerous for outsiders. They are remote, undeveloped, sparsely inhabited and therefore a perfect hideout for the FARC. In the valley to the north, the paramilitaries remain in control. In the middle of that valley, a military base stands watch. Violence is commonplace.

Peace and Preservation

By Emily Wirtz

Just to piggy-back off of some of the other environmentally-based posts on here, I figure it’s worth discussing why we seem to think “the Earth is just a dead thing you can claim” (of course it was necessary to use a Pocahontas reference). We infect our own environment with pesticides, noxious gases, and waste and then take the good stuff from it—deforestation, city expansion, war destruction—and still expect the world to be a-okay.

[This is no joke. Residents of Toledo are presently warned not to drink the water since it comes out of the water source looking like the image to the left. The cause is an algae bloom in Lake Erie from phosphorus used in farming fertilizers. —Ed.]  

Vanessa Inaru Pastrano, “Inaru,” is a dedicated member of the United Confederation of Taino People, an elder of the Bohio Atabei Council and coordinator of the Peace and Dignity Journey’s Caribbean region. As an indigenous Native American, this Taino woman feels a strong connection to our environment: “Those trees, that grass, those insects all have a language of their own, and just because it’s not English or Spanish doesn’t mean we should ignore it.”

Inaru returned to Ohio to partake in Youngstown’s Taino Summer Solstice ceremony on June 21^st, during which I had the opportunity to listen to her talk about her community involvement and environmental passions. Companies like Monsanto that advertise as “sustainable agriculture” yet use harmful pesticides and GMOs in their crop production, she explains, are a big part, but only one part, of the disintegration of Earth’s health.  Sure, “the Earth is going through its natural processes,” she continued, “but we are escalating it.” Waste from ships, deforestation in the Amazon and bombing in the Middle East are a few other issues she feels are “destroying the lungs of the Earth.” We seem to think, she explains, that nothing’s wrong unless we can see it directly affecting us. We ignore the destruction of the Earth because media doesn’t cover it. “We have to think like an Indian. Everything has life and purpose and meaning. Everything on this planet is alive, and the Earth is dying, and we are destroying it.”
 

The Violence We Want to Hear About

By Craig Hovey

It’s one thing to charge American media sources for being biased in favor of either Israelis or Palestinians (here is one example). But some commentators (like here and here) have been trying to make sense of the fact that Israel-Palestine gets more airtime than other conflicts, that the violence currently in Gaza is prompting much greater American media response, public protest, and analysis than violence in Syria, Ukraine, and northern Iraq. 

One commentator highlights the phenomenon by pointing to the fact that, last weekend, there was a higher death toll in Syria than total casualties so far in Gaza. He also cites a reporter for the Pakistani newspaper Al-Hayat who tweeted about anti-Israel protests in Pakistan but no anti-Syria protests even though Syria has 320 times the death-toll. 

This report (and this analysis) likewise show the relative lack of concern for Syria compared to Gaza, so much so that a Youtube video of Syrian children being used as human shields was largely ignored until it was re-posted with the false claim that it shows Hamas and children in Gaza.

There just seems to be something about the Israel-Palestine situation that consistently registers much more highly for the average American than other current conflicts. A former student of mine remarked that in his town people are wearing pro-Israel or pro-Palestine t-shirts like they are sports fans. 

Contrast this with the situation in northern Iraq. There are stories reporting ISIS’s order of female genital mutilation for the women of Mosel and the rape and murder of Iraqi Christians in Mosel while “the West is silent.” Why the silence?

I worry that no explanation is very flattering. Perhaps Americans are so fed up with Iraq that we simply don’t want to hear about it any more. It could also be that the idea of a persecuted Christian minority is embarrassing for some western believers for whom Christianity is a conquering force, or else is incongruous for western secularists for essentially the same reason, together with the assumption that these conflicts are only about politics and not about religion. 

Still more reasons must include the closer connection many Americans feel with Israel due to the large proportion of Israel that claims European or American ancestry. There is also a cultural connection in which western political and moral ideas such as democracy and how to wage war justly may be thought more plausibly to be expected of Israel compared to Arab nations. These last two points might help explain both opposition to Israeli policies and the prominent place that the Gaza situation has on the radar. We don’t have anti-Syria protests like we do anti-Israel protests because, according to the Al-Hayat reporter, the “only reason I can think of is Muslim killing Muslim or Arab killing Arab seems more acceptable than Israel killing Arabs.” 

It’s of course hard to know how to account for it all, but it strikes me that there is more going on than merely a need for journalistic balance or “equal time.” We actually seem to want to hear about some things and not others. 

The Toughest Job You’ll Ever Love

By Emily Wirtz

During my short month in Costa Rica—and it was much too short—I had the most incredible experiences, made some crazy friends and met some of the most amazing people. Ultimately, one of my goals while in this beautiful country was to learn more about the peace-keeping environment for which they are known. I had the opportunity to meet and talk with David Kaufman, “Don David,” the director and founder of the Conversa program and Peace Corps member.

After receiving a Spanish degree from Ithica College, Kaufman became a dedicated member of and language instructor in the Peace Corps in the Dominican Republic. Then going on to serve as the Spanish Language Coordinator in Puerto Rico, he was inspired to create the programs in Conversa based upon the same values.

Of his time in the Corps, Kaufman was more than eager to discuss. A lot of people are reluctant to join due to an environment foreign and possibly dangerous. “You’ll get frustrated, you’ll get sick,” he

explained, “but they take care of you.” The opportunities within the Corps as Kaufman describes them are endless and open to a variety of experience and skill levels. If a program doesn’t work, it gets adjusted. “The toughest job you’ll ever love” was a life changing experience for this American tico.

Conserva, Conserva - Student Report from Costa Rica

by Josie Schave

“So, in the United States, is it common for people to leave the lights on all the time?”

I blushed as I realized that I had left my room light on, and rose from the couch to go correct the situation.

“No, no, it’s fine—“

“No, no, I—“ My sentence was cut off as I tripped over one of Kevin’s toys. Blushing furiously now, I went to my room and shut off the stupid light. My host dad, Mauricio Cordero, was still sitting in the armchair, laughing at my goofiness. Oh yeah; I guess I should mention that all of this took place in Spanish.

From May 17^th through June 14^th, I had the immense pleasure of taking part in the AU in Costa Rica program in order to have an authentic immersion experience and obtain credits toward my Spanish major. During this time I stayed with Mauricio Cordero and Laura Calvo Alfaro, and their children Allison (age eight) and Kevin (age four). During my all-too-brief stay in Costa Rica, I realized that Costa Ricans have a true passion for protecting the environment— a passion that I could use some work on. Since the school I was attending was clearly a friend of the environment (one of their logos reads, “Conversa, Conserva”, or “converse, conserve), I decided it would be a logical place to start.

I decided to interview Sergio Álvarez, one of my teachers from Conversa, on the subject of conservation. I had noticed his passion for the environment during my second week at Conversa when he showed all of the students around campus and taught them all about the different trees and plants. The following interview was conducted primarily in Spanish (and secondarily in my third language: Spanglish).

My first question related to the history of conservation in Costa Rica: “Has Costa Rica always been friendly to the environment?” According to Sergio, it hasn’t. Between the 1940s and 1970s, Costa Rica had experienced 70% deforestation. In response to this, reforestation efforts started in the mid-1970s. Since then, 50% of the deforestation has been recovered, and 25% of Costa Rica is part of the system of National Parks and Reserves. Sergio remarked that part of the reforestation efforts had to do with improving tourism.

Hobby Lobby: Private and Public is the Real Issue

By Craig Hovey

The real issue with this week’s Supreme Court Hobby Lobby decision isn’t primarily religion; it is what counts as private and public. Religion is a factor, but only secondarily: religion is private (so is sex); state interests are public. The interesting development that has everyone talking—though it is an extension of the Court’s logic in the Citizens United case of 2010—is that corporations are now not only “persons” with rights, but the freedoms of corporations now include religious liberties on matters of individual conscience. (Some people, playfully, detect a sick irony in the idea that “corporations have a conscience.”) 

But I think all of this is secondary to the real issue of public v. private. 

The pro-choice Roe v. Wade (1973) decision famously asserted or upheld the right to privacy for individuals and backed away from personhood arguments for fetuses. I believe we are now witnessing the pro-life side using both the personhood and privacy arguments in their favor. If a fetus can’t be a person, how about a corporation? If pregnancy is a private matter in which the state has a very limited role, why shouldn’t the “personal conscience” of corporations be safeguarded from the state (in this case, from the mandates of Obamacare)? Some might cynically conclude that all of this rights-talk gets hauled out by either side only whenever it suits them and that this ad hoc deployment of such powerful legal arguments fails to account for how they can be turned around to argue the opposite. (The philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre predicted this in his 1981 book After Virtue—“rights” are floating free from more substantive moral traditions). Let’s test this. 

Suppose I have religious objections to war. As a matter of conscience, then, I might also object to whatever portion of my tax dollars that goes to support the Pentagon. Should I be

Two Presidents and the Quest of a Warless World

by Craig Hovey

This may seem like a non-sequitur, but today I’m thinking about two presidents: the president of the United States and a past president of Ashland University. Bear with me.

President Obama won’t have the United States fund just any old Syrian rebels with $500 million. We’ll only fund ones who have been “Appropriately Vetted.” I wonder what this vetting process involves given the administration’s stated goal of protecting Syrians against both the regime and extremists. We’ve also learned about the president’s announcement, in a speech at West Point, of plans to create a $5 billion counterterrorism fund to be used in the Middle East—$4 billion of which will go to the Pentagon. Meanwhile, the National Security Council maintains that “there is no military solution to this crisis [in Syria].” And of course 300 American military advisors are right now on their way to Baghdad. 

I’m struck by how readily military means are edged up to problems that admittedly have no military solution. If we zoom out, I think it’s clear that there was no military solution to the problem of Saddam Hussein over a decade ago, or at least it’s clear that Iraq’s current problems are partly the result of how a military “solution” failed to bring peace. War and peace are strategic issues and we discuss how effectively or ineffectively peace may be achieved through violence. 

Now, because Ashland University gets a new president this week, I’m also thinking about what a past president, J. Allen Miller (1866-1935; Ashland College president 1899-1906), thought about war. He wasn’t interested in the strategic questions, but in moral, spiritual questions and matters of conscience. Here’s a quote from a sermon he preached called “The Quest of a Warless World”:

“WE ARE CONSCIENTIOUS NON-RESISTANTS. This is the Historic position of the Church. We insist that MORAL and SPIRITUAL issues can not be arbitrated by FORCE. War is basically a moral issue. An appeal to ARMS is an appeal to brute force. Force can never make a wrong and an injustice, right and just, whether as between man and man or Nation and Nation. We refuse to be partners to the settlement of a moral issue on the basis that might makes right.

How to avoid the same old mistakes in Iraq

As events in Iraq continue to intensify, the United States government is trying to determine the best way to respond in light of all of the lives and money that have already been sacrificed in trying to create a democratic government in that country.  In the U.S. News and World Report article shared here, Michael Shank and Yemi Melka of the Friends Committee on National Legislation address reasons why the U.S. should not use military force in this conflict.

Forget military strikes. The U.S. should address sectarian tension by promoting regional cooperation.
By Michael Shank and Yemi Melka
Published June 18, 2014
 http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2014/06/18/how-obama-can-avoid-old-mistakes-against-isil-in-iraq


As fighters from the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, known as ISIL or ISIS, and bands of insurgent groups seize new cities and head south toward Baghdad, Iraq’s escalating humanitarian and security crisis necessitates a radical rethink in how the West handles this threat. If America wants to help the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi families impacted by this violence, it must be willing and ready countenance a completely different foreign policy path forward.
Washington’s current proposal for a military strike will only increase the volatility of the situation and imperil the population on the ground even more. In the nearly 10 years of the most recent American warfare in Iraq, the strong military arm of the Defense Department failed to guarantee stability and security in the country. More of the same approach, then, will similarly fall short.
What must be considered, instead, is first an understanding of how the West failed Iraq and, secondly, how it can help remedy these failures. To be clear, this current uprising resulted, in part, from devastating sanctions followed by years of bombing and the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. Whether it was the overlooked importance of political reconciliation, the lack of sustainability and accountability in Iraq’s security force training or missteps in recruiting regional cooperation, Iraq will continue to witness instability unless these points are addressed promptly.  Read more here...



    Michael Shank, Ph.D., is associate director for legislative affairs at the Friends Committee
                        on National Legislation.

Yemi Melka is a legislative intern with the Friends Committee on National Legislation.

Thoughts on Practical Ethics and Privilege

By Dan Randazzo

Last week, I surprised a burglar who had come into my house.

My spouse had just left the house. I was still home, as I was going to be working from home today. My spouse hadn’t locked the back door. I was sitting in my bedroom, when I heard footsteps on the stairs. I looked up, and then suddenly saw this large face peer into my room. I yelled, jumped out of the bed, and started to run after him. The burglar ran out of the house while I chased after him, yelling with some rather incoherent anger. At that moment, I didn't feel violated. Instead, I felt ANGRY; my thoughts followed the general theme that this is MY house, MY sanctuary, and how DARE you invite yourself in!

There's been a rash of burglaries in the neighborhood. It seems as if my area of Baltimore is being targeted by a group of people who are looking for houses where people are likely to have good “stuff,” and where people aren't likely to be home during the day.

I called my spouse immediately after I ensured that the person had left (as he admittedly had, and in a hurry), and she asked me if I was going to call the police. At this point, between the shock and adrenaline, I also felt an unusual constellation of ethical conundrums emerge.

For one, the man that I saw was definitely African-American. I questioned whether I should call the police with a very vague description of what was effectively a random African-American male. I truly didn't know anything else besides that. I definitely saw an African-American male who was wearing a grey t-shirt, dark boots, and dark gloves; that was the entirety of my memory of the person. I thought that if I told this description to the police, they might do exactly what they would up doing: canvassing the neighborhood, stopping anyone walking along who might fit this very vague description.

Rethinking Zero Tolerance Policies in Schools

NPR ran a story this morning (May 14) on Restorative Justice, the justice that actively promotes healing as a way to defuse potential conflict.  At the heart of the process in this case is the circle process, specifically a healing circle, in which the people in the dispute come together to explore the dispute, their anger, and their relationship.  As the teacher involved says "Conflict starts with  people exchanging words, so why can't they heal with people exchanging words."  

Listen to the students describe the importance of listening.

Here is the link to the full story -- 3:54; it's worth the time.

http://www.npr.org/2014/05/14/312411336/more-school-districts-rethink-zero-tolerance-policies

Conversation about Otherness

Craig Hovey and Sharleen Mondal, professors at Ashland University, had a conversation about otherness that ranges into issues of race, the state, violence, pedagogy, and how history gets told.

Craig Hovey: There is a lot of talk about "otherness" in some circles, especially when there is some political or other threat, real or imagined. I'd be interested to start off by talking about whether there are special kinds of difference that lend themselves to being spoken about in this way. In other words, what are the qualities of the differences that are most entrenching when it comes to the us-them divide? 

Sharleen Mondal: There are certainly special—or at least, specific—kinds of difference that seem to emerge frequently in discussions of otherness.  Racial, religious, class, and gender differences are among these, though I find it less useful to isolate them as such, given that each intersects with the others (so upper-class women of color, for instance, are "othered" in very different ways from women of color living in poverty).  If we are restricting our discussion to the current U.S. context, it would appear that those who do not conform to, or who are read as not conforming to, a particular norm are othered in certain contexts.  The norm of which I am speaking is shaped by structures of racial, gender, and economic power and privilege.  The structures are also shaped by the U.S.'s long history involving racism, class struggle, and the fight for gender equality, as well as perceptions of certainly religious traditions as uniquely American (and of others as foreign to America).

CH: Right, the question about what constitutes a "real American" often involves a lot of these kinds of identities. In California, where I'm from, I've noted anxiety among some whites at the prospect that we will be outnumbered by Latinos several years from now. I've always interpreted that anxiety as rooted in dwindling cultural clout for the white population, and the loss of economic privilege that goes along with that. There may be other factors, such as anxieties about bilingual education. But it strikes me that it may not really matter how much these are real or perceived realities. It seems to be enough that there is fear. Another example from the news I've been thinking about is how language is increasingly becoming a factor of division in Ukraine, with Russian speakers facing discrimination in the western part of the country. What do you think we can say about what makes a norm significant enough to generate this othering response for those who do not fit it?

Big-Tent Peace

by Craig Hovey

Even though ACN is a relatively small organization (though with big ambitions!), I am struck by the many different reasons people have for valuing peace and nonviolence. I’m sure this is true more generally. What do you think of when you think about nonviolence and peace? Do you think about the “classic” 20th century theorists and practitioners such as Martin Luther King, Jr. and Gandhi? Maybe you think about the anti-war movement in the US in the 1960s. Perhaps you think about local or global matters of justice and rights. Do peace and nonviolence resonate with you as religious convictions?

The fact is that there are a lot of different associations that we draw. ACN, like many similar organizations, is a “big tent.” We recognize shared concerns and work together on common projects even though many of us probably would begin to part ways at some level if we doggedly pursue questions like: What is your vision of peace? How do we get there?

For example, I think about the question of the extent and possible limits of nonviolence. Based on her research, Erica Chenoweth found that nonviolent political movements are statistically much more successful than violent ones. Nonviolence can be strategic in achieving political goals. But what about when it fails? Are the political goals so overriding that this is the point at which we take up arms? Or is nonviolence “deeper” than this—like an article of faith that we stick to no matter what? The Civil Rights movement witnessed groups of both attitudes.

Or take another example. Do peace and nonviolence commit a person to a place on the left-right political spectrum? Many people assume that peace is “liberal,” and not without some good historical reasons. “Peace” here is saying more than “peace,” though; it is shorthand for a particular social and political vision on the left. At the same time, leftist political movements can produce just as much violence as rightist ones. One thinks about Che Guevara, for example.

Laughing with Muslims

 Jamal Rahman

  By Dr. David C. Aune, AU Religion Department

        Why should I take the time to listen to a Muslim guest speaker on the topics of religious differences and sacred laughter?  Can I really learn anything new from someone who directly challenges some of my core beliefs?  And why should I care about religious issues anyway: what differences do they make?  These are the questions that many of us may be asking ourselves when we hear that Muslim interfaith speaker Jamal Rahman will be giving two presentations on Tuesday March 11 and Wednesday March 12 (both at 7PM) on the AU campus.   

       As associate professor and chair of the Religion department here at Ashland, I am in a good position to answer these questions.  Years of teaching and scholarly activities have convinced me of the value of learning about other religions and engaging in inter-religious dialogue.  Particularly when it comes Islam, there are many misconceptions and misunderstandings that continue to be promoted in our world.  But Jamal Rahman will provide some valuable insights in a creative, entertaining and thought-provoking way.  He is a nationally known personality who has written and spoken extensively about Islam and Sufism (a spiritual movement within Islam).  For over ten years now he has appeared along with a Rabbi and a Protestant minister as one of the three “Interfaith Amigos.”   See his website at jamalrahman.com.

On Tuesday, March 11^th at 7:00 pm (in Myers Convocation Center at Ashland University), Jamal will share on the topic of “Encountering Irreconcilable Differences.”  This title intrigues me because so much of the interfaith discussion these days seems to overlook obvious disagreements in our respective faith traditions.  Jamal approaches the topic by not just celebrating similarities but also by honoring the dignity of differences.  For him, the goal is not to change other people but to get to know them on a human and personal level.   And, in perhaps the most important part of his presentation, he will ask the question, “How does it feel to be the other?”  By taking the time to listen to and interact with Jamal, I anticipate that we will gain skills for understanding and dealing with various kinds of differences (not merely religious ones). Empathy is something all of us could develop further in our lives.

Jamal’s Wednesday March 12^th presentation (at 7PM in the Student Center Auditorium) will be on the topic of “Sacred Laughter: Awakening the Soul through the Sacred Laughter of the Sufis”.   Honestly, this topic intrigues me even more because, while I can relate to the value of laughter, I don’t know much about what the Sufi spiritual masters have to say about it (or how and why it might be considered “sacred.”)  Could it be that the ability to laugh at ourselves and focus on the playfulness and joy in life is actually a spiritual gift that connects us with others and enhances the life that God intends for us?  Again, this is an experience that all of us might find beneficial and surprisingly enjoyable.

So I’ll be encouraging everyone I know to attend Jamal Rahman’s presentations.   His presence at Ashland will certainly enhance and enrich our lives.

For more information on the events, visit www.ashland.edu/acn

For more information on Jamal Rhaman, visit www.jamalrahman.com

Matters of Faith:  Religion, Conflict, and Conflict Resolution

By Bridget Moix (taken from “The Handbook of Conflict Resolution”)

            “A brief survey of the most entrenched, deadly conflicts around the world suggests an urgent need for increased understanding of the role religion plays in human disputes.  From the Middle East to Northern Ireland, Sri Lanka to Sudan, the Balkans to Nigeria, from the poor Acholi region of Northern Uganda to the financial centers of New York City and London, the destructive power of religiously motivated violence has been a stark, horrific reality for people around the world.  Read more…

War Has Almost Ceased to Exist: An Assessment

By John Mueller

“In 1911, the eminent British historian, G.P. Gooch, concluded a book by elegiacally declaring that ‘we can now look forward with something like confidence to the time when war between civilized nations will be considered as antiquated as the duel, and when peacemakers shall be called the children of God.’  And in that year’s edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, Sir Thomas Barclay predicted, in the article on “Peace,” that ‘in no distant future, life among nations’ would be characterized by ‘law, order and peace among men.’“  Read more…

Drones, Accountability and Authorized Use of Military Force

Blogs by Michael Shank

“Armed drones, at first blush, are a boon to America's military toolkit, as President Obama reinforced in his counterterrorism speech [recently]. Drones, in the short run at least, could mean fewer U.S. troops deployed and fewer American lives lost.”  Read entire blog here

More blogs from Michael Shank:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/05/23/drones-obama-michael-shank-editorials-debates/2356555/

http://www.rollcall.com/news/keeping_america_accountable_in_the_war_zone_commentary-226316-1.html

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2013/05/24/congress-must-sunset-the-authorization-for-use-of-military-force

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/09/afghanistan-us-military

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/may/05/authorization-use-military-force-blank-check

Martin Luther King and Loving Your Enemies

by Peter Slade

Just before Christmas, I read in the Guardian the surprising story of Anita Smith. She is the widow of Ronnie Smith, the American teacher in Benghazi shot down in the street by Islamic militants. The photograph accompanying the article shows an attractive young couple and their child in Austin, Texas: a scene utterly removed from the people and streets of Benghazi. The reason Anita  made headline news around the world is that she claimed in a CNN interview that “I don’t want any revenge --I want them to know that I do love them and I forgive them.” In her interview she explained why Ronnie and his family went to Benghazi, “He wanted to shine the light and the love of Jesus to the Libyan people . . . it was just about the love and forgiveness that we know from God.”

Anita acknowledged that her response to Ronnie's violent murder seemed unlikely: “It may sound crazy,” she told Anderson Cooper, “but it is God’s Spirit putting this inside of me.” The Spirit had led her to write a letter. “I want all of you--all of the people of Libya--to know I am praying for the peace and prosperity of Libya. May Ronnie's blood, shed on Libyan soil, encourage peace and reconciliation between the Libyan people and God.” When Cooper asked Anita how she would explain Ronnie’s death to their son Hosea, she said she will tell him, “There is no greater thing to live your life for than for Jesus.”My initial reaction was one of dismissal: how can her announcement have any grounding in reality? It seemed like a weird and inappropriate response; she is just saying what she thinks she has to say; she is falling back on religious platitudes. Does she even appreciate that these people might try and kill her too? How irrational, how naïve, how foolish.

I confess that my prejudices and presuppositions lay somewhere behind my incredulity.  I am used to hearing such things from Mennonites and Quakers, but it is not what I expect from a white evangelical from a large multi-campus, non-denominational church in Austin, Texas.

Analyzing my reaction, I realized there was more at work than my own prejudices. I realized that for me, the irrationality/naïveté/foolishness of loving your enemies only hit home when someone with enemies actually said they love them. I suspect this is true for others. After all, most of us play with the notion of loving and forgiving enemies far from the context of actually having to deal with enemies. I usually file this commandment away under the category How To Deal With Annoying People not under How to Respond to Someone Who Wants to Kill Me.

This Martin Luther King Day I would like to suggest that we need to revisit the well worn stories of Martin Luther King Jr. and the civil rights movement and ask ourselves why we don’t react to them with the same surprise and incredulity.

Drone Strikes and Daggers

By Dr. Craig Hovey

Last month we learned that a US drone strike on suspected Al-Qaida terrorists killed at least 13 people in Yemen who were on their way to a wedding. Many, perhaps all, were innocent.

Let’s talk morality. Too many of our public debates over violence and war are only legal debates, not moral ones. Discussing the second amendment in the gun debate is useful when debating law, but it is beside the moral point. After all, the first amendment legally protects your right to gossip, but doesn’t make it moral. Even though we will disagree on the particulars, let’s acknowledge that many more things are legal than are moral.

And nevermind accusations that the US drone program is illegal. But for now: What makes it immoral?

Remembering Nelson Mandela

By Dan Lehman

Professor of English

Ashland University

The death of Nelson Mandela this week took me back to an evening in 2004 during the tenth anniversary year of South African independence when I first truly understood the significance of Mandela and his impact on history. Like many North Americans, I had followed for several decades the struggle against South Africa’s racist system of apartheid. I had even joined a few anti-apartheid protests during the 1980s and thrilled to the Special AKA’s runaway ska dance hit, “Free Nelson Mandela.” And now, here I was, in South Africa myself for a year of teaching, and I was getting to know a young white Afrikaans English professor in the English department at Stellenbosch University near Cape Town.

We were comparing notes in that way that people do when they first meet one another and see the potential for a deeper professional friendship. Both of us named Daniel, both of us growing up within racist systems some 8,000 miles apart—he in South Africa under Apartheid and I during the 1950s in then-segregationist Virginia. Both of us recalled being trapped by the privilege of our skin color in a system with which we deeply disagreed. Both had worked in our own small ways for its eradication.

Upcoming Events - Fall 2013

Justice in Motion: Responding to Changing Needs with Nicaragua’s Poor

Wednesday, October 30, 2013 7:00 p.m.

Ronk Lecture Hall, Schar College of Education Ashland University

Speakers are Pat and Kathy Floerke, members of the Jubilee Project. 

Kathy and Pat Floerke come to us from the Center for Development in Central America (CDCA), the Nicaraguan project of the non-profit, faith-based organization, the Jubilee House Community (JHC).  Before moving to Nicaragua in 1994, the JHC operated shelters for the homeless and battered women in Statesville, NC.  Working in Nicaragua for the past 19 years, the CDCA seeks to respond to human needs created by poverty in the second poorest nation in the western hemisphere. The CDCA focuses on justice now, working towards freedom from poverty, helping communities become self-sufficient, sustainable, democratic entities, specifically in the areas of

·        sustainable economic development

·        organic agriculture

·        appropriate technology

·        education

·        health care

They say, “The CDCA has been called to work with, and speak on behalf of, the poor in our area of Nicaragua, and to share their lives and stories with folk in the U.S., to bridge the gap between us and our neighbors.”  Tax-deductible donations & proceeds from craft sales go to the operating expenses of the project.

The event is co-sponsored with the Department of Foreign Languages, as part of the College of Arts and Sciences Against Indifference Symposium.

 ____

Slow Money

            Keeping dollars spent by consumers in the local community is a challenge and a goal for the economic well-being of communities such as Ashland.  Two programs in February will focus on local entrepreneurship development and how it benefits the local economy and the community.

“Slow Money” is a term that denotes keeping local money working in the local economy.  These “slow money” programs should be of interest to anyone who wants to support existing local businesses or think about starting a new business.  

The first program will show what has been done in southeastern Ohio with the Appalachian Center for Economic Networks. The second will focus on the possibilities of Ashland Main Street and will feature a panel of Ashland area entrepreneurs.

The first program, “Slow the Money; Invigorate the Economy”  will feature Leslie Shaller, director of programming for the Food Ventures program, a business incubation project of the Athens-area Appalachian Center for Economic Networks (ACENet). The presentation will be Tuesday, February 19, at 7 p.m. in the Ridenour Room, Dauch College of Business and Economics, on the Ashland University campus.

Candle Light Vigil: Honoring Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Remembering Sandy Hook School

Candle Light Vigil: Honoring Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Remembering Sandy Hook School 

When: Monday January 17, 2013 at 7 p.m.

Where: The upper level of Jack and Deb Miller Chapel on the Ashland University Campus.

A candlelight vigil against violence honoring Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and remembering those who were lost in the Sandy Hook School, Newtown, Connecticut tragedy will be held in the upper level of the Jack and Deb Miller Chapel on the Ashland University campus Monday, January 21, at 7 p.m.  The campus and the community are encouraged to attend.  The event is free and open to the public.

During the vigil the names of those lost at Sandy Hook will be read aloud with each name followed by silence to express solidarity with those directly affected by this tragedy.

The vigil has been initiated and organized by the Ashland Center for Nonviolence, which has an organizational vision of “seek[ing] a world in which human conflict at all levels can be resolved without resorting to violence and in which social justice can be realized.”   

“it seems fitting to honor the memory of King’s work by remembering some of the people whose lives have been lost to violence,” said  John Stratton, Executive Director of the Ashland Center for Nonviolence.  “This is a not a political statement,” he noted, “but a time to reflect on what is lost to the community, when lives are taken senselessly.”  

The public is welcome and encouraged to attend this one-hour vigil.