I never thought I would have to defend a woman’s right to cancer screening. For all of the mean-spirited rhetoric in the public square, I could not imagine having to fight that battle. But, the next chapter in the assault on women’s rights and women’s lives has begun.

The Planned Parenthood luncheon yesterday was an upbeat event, despite the reality that a major foundation contributor, Komen for the Cure, has ended their longstanding support for the breast cancer screenings offered by Planned Parenthood that have saved so many lives. Komen’s decision eliminates funding for 170,000 cancer screenings a year, primarily for low income women without other access to this critical medical care.

Komen, over the years, has been a major supporter in the work to address breast cancer. They have raised a great deal of money and done great work.

Why this current change? Why would a foundation committed to women’s health eliminate funding for one of the most effective deliverers of those services?

“Komen says this isn’t about choice, but it recently changed its funding guidelines to exclude any organization under investigation by Congress, knowing that a baseless investigation into Planned Parenthood had been opened by Republican Representative Cliff Stearns at the request of anti-choice groups.

And Komen has strong links to the anti-choice movement. Its new vice president of public policy, Karen Handel, ran for governor of Georgia in 2010 on an aggressively anti-choice platform, part of which was a pledge to defund Planned Parenthood.” 

It would be easy to hear this news as just the latest attempt to roll back the progress of the last half century. Easy to understand it at the political level and … move on. But real lives are at stake. That is my frustration with so much of the political discourse and cultural commentary we are hearing in this election season. It misses the reality that we are talking about real human beings, in this case women, who  would be punished because of an attachment to an abstract principle.

There is no commitment more fundamental among Unitarian Universalists than that of women’s empowerment and the right of a woman to control and care for her body. But we know that many, based on their religious principles, do not share our point of view. Those folks are, I believe, deeply misguided, but I know that they feel just as strongly that we are.

We need, however, to talk about the reality of life and act based on its real challenges. The social safety net in this country is fragile and continues under attack, on many fronts.

 Those among us with the means have access to cancer screenings. But we know that the least affluent are at a far higher risk for later detection and treatment for cancer, diabetes and even high blood pressure. Forty-eight percent of Planned Parenthood clients are Medicaid recipients. The playing field is far from level.

Political debate is appropriate, but it needs to be grounded in reality, not abstraction. If your principles result in harm and your principles require you to be heartless about that, it is time to inspect your principles.

Here are links to both Planned Parenthood, for updates on their response, and MoveOn, for opportunities for advocacy.

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/

http://pol.moveon.org/komen/?rc=homepage.sidebar

Blessings,

Bill

As I acknowledged when we began our focus on “Creation,” there are hundreds of religious stories about how we and our earth came into being…and why we are here. Several of you have been kind enough to share your particular favorite stories, some touching, some difficult to understand and at least one even funny.

One way to think about the creation is to focus less on the objects and creatures which fill space and live in time, and to focus more on the creation of that space itself. There is a challenging wisdom in this approach. Often it is necessary to “create a space” for the Spirit of Life.  It requires a giving up of “busyness,” a putting down of the “to do” list. For creation to operate in our lives, emptying is often necessary.

This emptying is close to the heart of much Buddhist practice, but the idea of creating space before creation can take place occurs in several religious traditions. In Unitarian Universalism we speak of the spark of divinity that resides within each of us. This grounds our affirmation of the inherent worth and dignity of each person. But for that spark of divinity to burn, we need to create space for it.

Here is one telling of the creation story from the Hassidic Jewish tradition. I am indebted to Rev. Jim Nelson of Neighborhood UU Church in Pasadena for this version.  You will, I think, feel the resonance of this story with our religious tradition.

“In the beginning, or in the time before the beginning, before history, before there was anything other than God, God decided to create the world. Why is a mystery; perhaps God was bored or lonely; maybe God had read a self-help book about expressing one’s inner artist.  No one knows for sure. 

But there was nothing but God, the tale says, and so in order for the world to come into being, God had to make room within his or her Self; God had to create space, a place of emptiness into which the world could become.

And the space God created is known as the shekinah. This is a word used often in the Hebrew Bible and usually refers - the translation is difficult- to the presence of God, the sense of God’s holiness. 

 It is a feminine word – Hebrew has genders, so it is perhaps the feminine aspect of God’s presence. In any case, as the world was created into the empty space of God, bits of the shekinah were embedded, so that everything that exists has a bit, a spark of the sacred, a piece of the holy in it. 

Our task as humans, it is thus believed,  is to see the sacred in everything and so release it [how that happens is a mystery] until ultimately God will be one again.  We must make the space within ourselves, however, to recognize these sparks of the sacred.”

In the Jewish traditions, the work of allowing those sparks to connect and allowing God to be one again, is called Tikun Olam.  It is often translated as “healing the world,” and that is language that we often use.  But the whole process hinges on space being made and space being held.

When we approach difficult conversations and invoke our covenant of respect and care, as we resist the temptation to demonize and dismiss those with whom we disagree, as we strive for real honesty with ourselves, we are creating and holding space. We are making a place where the holy can live and where healing can happen.

“Making space” and “holding space” can themselves seem like too much mystery. For our faith, mystery may certainly be involved, but not miracles.  We “make space” intentionally.  We do it every time we promise to respect another and attempt to listen as deeply as we can.  We do it every time we gather in prayer and silence. We do it whenever we are most honest with ourselves.  Holding that space is part of our calling as religious people and part of our hope for the healing of the world.

Blessing,

Bill

As the national election drama begins in earnest, I find myself hoping that we will be able to have some of the conversations that are long overdue in the public square. My hope is tempered, however, with fear that we will be able to talk only in emotionally laden code words and that our conversations will move us deeper into denial rather than toward the Beloved Community.

The current attacks on “vulture capitalism” are a case in point. As Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital is used to discredit his claims to understand job creation, other voices warn that any such discussion will threaten our “capitalist” system. At the same time, President Obama is described as our greatest “food stamp” President and accused of being a “socialist.” I should note that these arguments are all taking place within the Republican ranks. But Democrats will have their turn. I fear to think what the discourse will be like once the Republican nominee is selected.

Both those terms, “capitalist” and “socialist,” obscure the realities we should be discussing. The truth is that we have a very mixed system. Our economy operates with considerable freedom, but also with considerable constraints, incentives and privileges put in place by our elected representatives (“we the people”). There are those voices calling for fewer constraints and a greater tilt toward unfettered markets. Other voices, including mine, critique the results of unconstrained greed, and want our society to set tighter boundaries within which markets can operate and sustain a broader safety net to protect the most vulnerable.

Setting “capitalism” or “socialism” for that matter, as an absolute value will guarantee an unproductive debate. If we make either an idol to be worshipped and served, we will have failed. Human life is not in the service of any abstract economic system. Our economic system should be in the service of human life. The measure of the decisions we make, it seems to me, should not be how closely they approximate some ideal (or idol), but whether they enhance and sustain human living.

So, with both our citizen and Unitarian Universalist hats on, let us remember two things:

First,  that our government is charged to support and protect “we the people,” not a particular economic philosophy.
And, second, let us remember both our Seven Principles, and our final Source that “counsels us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn(s) against idolatries of the mind and spirit.”

I believe this election season will be a test of our ability to have a better conversation, and a test of our ability to resist rhetoric that obscures the impact on real lived experience. May our voice always strive for those better conversations in which human thriving is the highest value, those conversations which help us move toward our vision of the Beloved Community.

Blessings,

Bill