Friday, June 17, 2005
Women's Division letter takes up rights for detainees
This article from the United Methodist News Service reports the Women's Division's plans to address human rights issue for the detainees, and other related issues, such as those immigrants facing deportation to Pakistan because of change in laws since September 11th, 2001. The article sites instances where men were deported to Pakistan who lacked certain paperwork and were not even allowed to notify their spouses and children living in the US. Check it out for some other specific stories.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Beth,
Do I see hypocrisy?
After reading this article, I go to the sidebar and click on the United Methodist Women site and see that after "prayerful consideration" they have voted to participate in the "Save Women's Lives: March for Freedom of Choice". What lives are we saving? Abortion has taken the lives of millions of women (and men) who would be alive and well today.
In this article on detainees, it says the Women's Division is making "a plea to become the voice of these voiceless persons". But, yet, we will stand by and even fight for the right to kill those who are truly voiceless -- a defenseless baby in the womb.
I also see there's the UMW Anti-Hate Campaign. I wonder if the worst kind of hate is to support (and encourage) a mother to take the life of her own child.
To quote Mother Teresa: "By abortion, the mother does not learn to love, but kills even her own child to solve her problems. Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want. This is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion."
It breaks my heart that we (UMW) would not stand up as women of God and truly take a stand for the defenseless, voiceless children.
Instead of putting time and energy into a march, we could use our time and energy to volunteer and financially support the many pregnancy centers who are out there every day helping mothers (and fathers) choose life for their unborn children.
Cathy - Only you can answer if you see hypocrisy. I certainly don't. If you are not pro-choice, that's certainly your decision, with many reasons (i certainly see both sides of abortion issues), but many responsible and caring Christians *are* pro-choice, also with many reasons, from rape and abuse issues, health issues, as well as issues of preparedness for parenting and quality of life for the children. Either way, to call the Women's Divison work for detainees and others hypocritical is not helpful. It doesn't negate the essential work they are doing. There are many who are voiceless. Let's not undermine good work being done.
Beth,
I appreciate your response.
I am pro-life and, yes, that is my choice. You are pro-abortion, and that is your choice. But for the United Methodist Women to represent "us" (???) at a march that promotes the killing of millions of innocent human lives is unbelievable. I wonder how many mothers justified aborting their children because the "church" said it was OK.
Beth, there will always be the tough cases like rape & incest, but there are ministries and people out there to help those that are in that situation to work through it without sacrificing the life of the innocent party. And these "tough" cases are rare in the reason women abort.
As for the "quality of life" issue, are you saying that a mother should just end the child's life because they can't give it a "good quality of life"??? Have you thought about adoption. And are we (UMW), promoting adoption? How many couples do you know that would love to adopt and give a child a wonderful home to grow up in -- I've known many!
Beth, what I would like to see is the UMW organization do more to help crisis pregnancy centers. Instead of heading to Washington, why don't we hold baby showers in our homes and give the gifts to our local crisis pregnancy center; why don't we participate in a local walk-a-thon to help these centers raise money to continue operating; why don't we encourage our local churches to volunteer a few hours a month to help out at a center. When I see the UMW doing that, I'll then rescind my hypocrisy statement.
Cathy, I'm quite sure some local UMWs do the things that you mention, but the Women's Division's task is to do things on a bigger scale. Their actions are only in line with our own UMC policy about abortion that is in our Social Principles. That is where you should really be pushing for change if you want it - like I hope to see change about gay and lesbian persons there - but I still don't expect agencies in the meantime to do things that are not in line with our social principles.
As for the adoption issue, I think adoptions are great. I'd like to adopt children someday, because here's the reality: There aren't so many parents out there who want to adopt that there still aren't many, many, many children left in foster homes, in orphanages, as wards of the state. If there are so many couples ready to adopt, then why are there so many unadopted children?
by my "quality of life" comment, I didn't mean "a bad life" like not enough toys - I mean if a person is not going to be able to provide in any way for a child, or might be harmful to a child, or etc., why are we thinking that having them care for a pregnancy is going to be healthy and best for a child? And especially, I mean in terms of children who have health issues, medical concerns that make their quality of life so poor that it seems more cruel for them to be living then for them not to have to suffer.
Anyway, I still say, all this is great conversation, but does that mean the UMW shouldn't do anything else and focus 100% of their energy on an issue that is not supported by the Disicpline and deeply divides women in our church? I don't think so. So, back to rights for detainees - that is what this post is about, and I think it is important work to care about the people who *are* living - don't they deserve life, real life, too?
Since when do Christians believe that their bodies are there own? Do you and others not understand that God is in control, not you? Don't you know that if they are in the will of God that either that wouldn't happen or that He will bring them through it? Aren't we, as Christians here to help those who need us? I'm appalled that you are using the UMC name, and a Christian front, in your fight for whatever it is you are fighting for. I can't even tell anymore! Do you want people to live or die, love or hate? Care or just get their way because it's convenient? I agree with Cathy's assessment of hypocosy! God wants all humans to live and come to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, not just those whose mothers decide to bare and take care of them. Who is to say what joy and contibution these children would have made to the world? Shame on you for using your liberal views as if they are all the same views as all Methodist Women. I'm a Christian first and foremost and believe that our right and our obligation is to LOVE and you cannot love and take the life of a human that God intended for life. Shame on us all for letting this get this far.
wow, marie. my views seem pretty clear: i wrote a post about the rights of detainees. Their bodies are not ours either - they also belong to God. Their lives are not ours to take or abuse. I certainly don't claim my views to be the same as all UMC members. Your views are not the same either. That does not make me less of a United Methodist. Shame on me? For what exactly? Writing a post highlighting the work of the UMW in protecting the rights of other humans. What nerve I have!
Beth,
I find myself deeply offended by your blind support of abortion in this post. As a Methodist, I'm outraged that you would have the audacity to presume to speak for me on this issue. I, I...
Oh. Wait. You didn't mention abortion even once in this post? It was about a group of women advocating for the humane treatment of detainees. Apparentally, my head was once again firmly lodged in...
Anyway. Anecdote? Analogy?
When I was a kid, the pastor of my village church got up front one Thanksgiving season and announced to the congregation that this year the church was not going to put together care baskets for the poorer folks in the community as they had done in years before. Why? Because there were people starving all over the world, and a few care baskets wasn't going to solve that.
This sort of thinking, of course, is the thinking of twits.
Something more relevant?
I'm a vegan. I have strong more objections to the use and consumption of animal products. I have lots of reasons for this that I won't get into right now. I also happen to write checks every month to organizations-- The Rescue Mission, UNICEF, Christian Children's Fund, etc-- that do not promote veganism. It's more than a sinking suspicion; I've watched The Rescue Mission serve chicken legs and meatballs with my own eyes. Why do I write these checks?
Because "agree with me on everything or nothing you do has value" is also the thinking of twits.
To my knowledge, The Rescue Mission isn't full of hypocrites. It's just not staffed with lots of little mes.
Post a Comment