Like Folknotions, I didn’t leave YAR because I thought YAR was a bad place or because anyone had angered me. Rather…

1. I’m not Mennonite anymore, even though Anabaptism still influences my thinking and theology.
I started attending a Mennonite church with my family when I was 12. I left that church a little over a year ago, at 25, because of some undesirable circumstances that culminated and made clear to me in an instant that it wasn’t the church for me anymore. I haven’t set foot in that building for anything church-y since, and have had only limited contact with its members since. (My family still goes there, though, and I have lots of contact with them.)

When I left initially, I took a few weeks off from faith communities. I decided to check out a United Church of Christ congregation in the small town where I was living at the time. My dad’s side of the family is all UCC, so I felt a little more comfortable checking out a UCC church than the Methodist church next door, to which I had no pre-existing connection. I felt a need to participate in a faith community, but my finances had become such that I needed a church to which I could walk. Since I was planning on moving from that small town, I knew from the start that this congregation would be a transitional church for me.

It was a relatively “safe” place for me to be at that time in my life. I had broken off an engagement to someone I loved very much, and he was still making me miserable through stalking me and some other measures. In contrast to the Mennonite church I’d left, where there was an insanely high percentage of twentysomethings, this UCC church was highly concentrated with people above 70 years of age. It had the “new and different” appeal to me of being a fairly liturgical church and following a more formalized pattern of rituals than the Mennonite congregation. I know it’s backwards to most people for anyone to “discover” liturgy as something “new and different,” but I guess you’ll get that when every church you’ve regularly attended your entire life has eschewed any connection to the lectionary.

I moved a month and a half ago. I’m back in the city where I grew up, but I’m experiencing it in quite different ways than I had before. I’m working at a credit union with a very urban (read: black and poor) membership, and I’ve started attending another UCC church. This one isn’t so white-haired, and it’s allegedly the only “progressive” church in a four-county area. Maybe that’s just considering UCC churches, I don’t know. Anyway, this faith community is all about “accepting and affirming” people of all sexual orientations, gender identities, ages, ethnicities, native languages, ability levels, income levels, etc. And, they’ve most impressively affirmed me as a vegetarian, which tends to weird-out people in church settings. I’ve only been there a short time, but I’ve felt more welcomed and encouraged to flourish than I have anywhere else. Time will tell if their actions back up their words, of course, but it’s incredible even to have the words.

I’m still a pacifist, I still look askance at infant baptism (don’t ask me about the Catholic baptism-of-a-two-year-old I participated in as the godmother in Bolivia, long story), I still love multi-function practicality of spaces, and yes, I still love playing Dutch Blitz. I didn’t learn much four-part harmony in any Mennonite settings, so that association for me is null. I have yet to veganize whoopie pies, but someday I might. I don’t have a “Mennonite last name” and likely never will since I have no intentions of changing my name if/when I get married. But, then, well over half the people in my former Mennonite congregation didn’t, either.

2. I was losing interest in YAR.
This was happening before I left the specific Mennonite congregation where I spent 13 years. If I remember right, a lot of the active conversations were just too high-intellectual and high-theology for me to feel like I really had anything to contribute, and I reached my saturation point with reading them, too. While YAR was fresh and interesting to me when I first discovered it as a happy accident in the course of doing my job as a local news reporter, a few years later… eh, I could take it or leave it.

If that makes me sound shallow or as if I prefer participating in chit-chat than in talking about deep stuff, I wouldn’t know about that. :-p Seemingly-menial conversations also have a place in cementing a well-rounded community, on or off the Internet. I honestly don’t know what specifically I’d change about YAR or what it would look like. A chatroom might be fun, though. I am not a teenager, really.

Guatemala’s attorney general on Monday said 2,286 pending foreign adoptions have been placed on hold for at least a month while officials review related paperwork.

The decision was prompted by a request from lawmakers to review adoptions on a case-by-case basis, top prosecutor Baudilio Portillo said.

Additional DNA testing could be required to ensure that babies are being given up by their birthmothers and not handed over by intermediaries, said adoptions council chief Elizabeth de Larios. Her council was created in January to overhaul an adoptions system plagued by fraud and corruption. […]

MSNBC article
But this one tries to personalize it a bit and doesn’t do so hot, in my opinion.

Jeff and Diana Kerr fell in love with the Guatemalan baby girl the moment they saw her photograph. The Minnesota couple decorated her pink and white nursery with pictures of flowers and butterflies, but now they don’t know if the 8-month-old will ever become their daughter.

The Kerrs are among thousands of Americans trying to adopt 3,700 babies who are caught in limbo as Guatemala’s lawmakers debate new rules that could all but shut down a largely unregulated system that has become the speediest place in the world to finalize an adoption.

“It’s an emotionally taxing process,” said Jeff Kerr, a 44-year-old financial adviser from Lino Lakes, Minn. “Every day you look at her picture and wonder if you’re going to bring her home.” […]

The reporter picked the right people to highlight in the opening vignette if s/he wants to create sympathy for the people trying to adopt, but not for the children and birth parents caught in the middle of all of this. Other things in the story, like emphasizing how fast adoptions get done in Guatemala, and quotes from the parents about how they wouldn’t want to try to adopt after this, make me think this reporter is downplaying the potential benefits to ordinary Guatemalans.

Thoughts? Since I’m not as informed about the entire situation as some are, I can’t really comment on the actual information contained in these two stories on the same event.

Time story

It’s even stranger to get to the end, do a little more searching for what is being said about this person elsewhere online, and come out feeling quite conflicted about the whole thing.

Examiner story
Machetera story

For those who are reading this post before going back and reading the links, I should clarify what I mean by “know.” I am currently spending five months doing volunteer work at the Stansberry Children’s Home and Daycare in Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia, and one of the people on the board of directors of Stansberry is Ron Larsen, a US-born cattle rancher who is fighting with the government to keep the thousands of acres of ranch. I can’t say I know him well, but I have met him a couple of times and engaged in run-of-the-mill chit-chat about who we both are and what we’re doing in Bolivia. He is thought of well around Stansberry, as far as I can tell. Several times Larsen has invited the kids, staff, and others in connection with the children’s home out to the ranch for extended weekends, where based on the pictures they take, the kids hike, sit around in hot tubs, eat lots of food, and all kinds of fun things they don’t stop talking about for weeks.

And now Larsen is accused of all kinds of nasty things I don’t like. The laundry list includes slavery, sedition, robbery, keeping government officials hostage, assault of unarmed government employees, and what seems to be the main thing: owning lots and lots of land that some believe should belong to the indigenous people of western Bolivia.

Whether it’s 141,000 acres or less than 25,000 acres, it’s a lot more than any poor indigenous person alone has, that’s for sure.

So while I’m inclined to feel sympathetic when people here at Stansberry tell me Larsen is hiding out and is afraid for his life, another part of me wonders if he is really as benevolent as I’ve been lead to believe. It’s not really about him as much as it’s about these big political discussions of private property rights, systems that create poverty, and choosing one’s own destiny. It takes a personal twist for me because I’ve seen Larsen express what looked for all the world like kindness and compassion toward the kids at the daycare. It’s also personal because I know the vast majority of the parents of the kids at the daycare came to Santa Cruz looking for work because there were few opportunities in their home communities in central and western Bolivia.

Whether Larsen is really guilty of all those accusations or not, the point that no one seems to dispute is a small amount of people own most of the land in Bolivia.

I’m torn between the capitalist/elitist and the humanitarian in me. I hear my parents and grandparents in one ear saying they have the right to keep the land they bought and prosper if able. I hear people like YARs in the other ear talking about systems of oppression that keep people down and with little chance to improve their situations. I like the image of the downtrodden trumping over The Man, but I hate it when that image is painted in blood.

The other voice I’m hearing is the vegan I wish to be someday, the voice that raises questions about the rightness of cattle ranching and industry centered around the use of non-human animals.

I own no land myself. My most expensive possession is my computer. I really don’t have a desire to own hundreds or thousands of acres. Still, I have probably a hundred times more earning potential than any of the daycare parents because I’m white, from the US, college-educated and well-connected to other people with similar earning potentials. If I needed to just up and leave on the next plane out of here, I could. The only other people here I know who could do that, too… would also be gringos. Maybe a couple of Bolivians. Most of the Bolivians I know either were born in Santa Cruz or spent their last dollars just trying to get to this city to vie for one job with thousands of applicants telling similar stories. Either way, what counts as “being financially well off” to them vs. to me are quite different. I went to a friend’s two-room home for dinner last night. I can’t think of anyone I know in the US who would be that proud of that small a space.

So, this is what is running through my head on election day. It’s pretty quiet around here since vehicle traffic, church services, and other things that would keep people away from the polls to vote on Santa Cruz’s autonomy is prohibited today. Another niggling thought in my mind is whether Stansberry’s connection with Larsen could also put people here at risk. Whatever the case is… I’m not leaving the grounds until I’m sure it’s safe.

If we had smilies on YAR, I’d use the one where the character jumps up and down excitedly with a giant grin.

Since this will be my first trip to the Third Word—technically I was in central Jamaica when I was three, but I don’t remember it—I know I have a lot of mental work to do in the next two months. I can never be fully prepared. I expect to be changed a lot while I’m there. But there’s no reason I can’t start that personal process in the mean time.

What/who do my fellow YARs recommend I read, listen to, watch or talk to before I go? If you’ve been to Bolivia, or Santa Cruz, or even this orphanage (like Denver), what do you wish you would have known before you went? What should I pay close attention to while I’m there? What surprised you the most? What do you wish people would ask you about?

I’m not talking about what I need to do legally or transit-wise. I’ve got that covered. Those questions are much more straightforward.

For what it’s worth, I already speak Spanish. It’s not as good as it will be, definitely, but I didn’t just let my Spanish die after graduating from college with a Spanish minor. I spent a semester studying abroad in Spain in 2003. I experienced a small amount of culture shock with that, given that Spain is a lot more like the U.S. than Bolivia is like the U.S. My questions and passions about life and faith are a little different than they were then. I’ve kicked myself plently of times for opting to go to Europe instead of Latin America. (Don’t ask. It’s embarrassing.) Through my various immigrant friends, most of whom are Guatemalan, Mexican and Columbian, I’ve already had these Nationally Debated Issues brought into a deeply personal context for me. It will be interesting to go, myself, to one of the many places from which people are emigrating.

Also, when I filled out the volunteer application, it asked if I or anyone in my family have struggled with alcoholism, drug abuse, addictive behavior or homosexuality. (Such a wonderful list in which to include sexual orientation, eh?) Since they asked… I talked about my aunt, who came out as a lesbian about ten years ago, and the turmoil that caused since she was married to my uncle and had two young children. Then I clarified that I don’t believe it’s a sin to be lgbtq (I didn’t use that abbreviation, though) and Christian standards on promiscuity apply to all people regardless of their sexual orientation, in my view. It doesn’t seem like that belief is going to stall my application, though, based on the response I received today.

The first responder to my application also cautioned me about to whom I reveal my profession. I’m going as a volunteer/tourist, but I was trained and have worked as a reporter. It’s not like I’m going to magically not be a reporter en mi ser because I’m washing dishes and wiping snot from toddlers’ noses. I have zero media contacts in Bolivia… but knowing me, if something big did happen in Santa Cruz, and I had the right sources… it’s conceivable I could write something and sell it to AP. But that’s pretty unlikely. In the mean time, I suppose I put down my profession as volunteer or something. If anyone asks what I did before being a volunteer, I’m not going to lie. I have nothing to hide.

My question is, when should we insist on peace and nonviolence? When should we, as people committed to the peacemaking roots of our church tradition (and not because it is our tradition, but because we believe it, too), stand up and say, “Nope, I’m not going to let this get watered down”? If a person with a U.S. military background comes into our churches and says, “Don’t tell people in Palestine not to throw rocks when people point guns at them,” how do you respond? Should we insist on peacemaking and nonviolence for ourselves but decline to comment on how others live? Can we live in church fellowship with those who say otherwise, and if so, does this mean asking them not to promote their beliefs in our churches?

I spoke with a pastor earlier this morning who said he notices Mennonite churches in this area losing touch with the reasons to believe in peace. We don’t have a draft compelling our young men to go to war or find a way out of it, he said, so we get caught up in our cushy lives. (At least one other YAR probably knows who this pastor is, but I wasn’t thinking at the time, “I want to post this on YAR,” so I didn’t get permission to use the pastor’s name in this venue.)

A Palestinian man who lives in Bethlehem, Israel, will soon visit my area on a speaking tour. From what I’m told, he will talk about why he believes in peacemaking and nonviolence for his homeland, and why he has hope. If a U.S. Christian believes s/he should not comment on the violent situations in countries far removed from his/her experience, how would s/he receive someone like this Palestinian man? “Hey, I’m glad to hear you say it, but I won’t openly agree with you because my opinion doesn’t and shouldn’t matter”?

Yes, I’ve asked a lot of questions. I don’t have very many answers. Maybe some of you do.

How does what you wear communicate something about you to other people? Do you use your clothing as a medium consciously?

Are you more interested in the production of said clothing than what the style, cut, and extras have to say about you? (Sweat shop labor concerns and the like)

How do you keep clothing from being more important an issue than it ought to be? I know a woman who wears plain, roomy dresses she makes herself not because she’s trying to look Amish (not that there are any Amish people in her town in England, anyway), but because it helps her focus on important things and not her body shape and size. Those of you who have worked in medical settings where scrub uniforms are required may know the feeling of liberation by not having to think about what you’re going to wear to work that day.

Is there clothing you just won’t wear? Why or why not?

But for the others, are these topics that don’t interest you? Would you like to start talking about them more?

Chosenness (2 posts)
New Monasticism (1 post)
Consumerism (4 posts)
Corporations (1 post)
Death Penalty (1 post)
Economics (2 posts)
Education (3 posts)
End Times (1 post)
Environment (2 posts)
Ethics (2 posts)
Ex-Gay (1 post)
Excommunication (2 posts)
Foreign Policy (4 posts)
Gaza (1 post)
God (4 posts)
Guns (1 post)
Hamas (1 post)
Hate (1 post)
Illegal (1 post)
Immigration (3 posts)
Indigenous (3 posts)
Israel (2 posts)
Judaism (3 posts)
Loyalty (3 posts)
Music (4 posts)
Objective (4 posts)
Palestine (1 post)
Peace (4 posts)
Polarization (4 posts)
Poll (4 posts)
Pope (2 posts)
Rape (1 post)
Reviews (1 post)
Schism (2 posts)
Science (1 post)
Sex (4 posts) (Compare this to 8 under “Homosexuality” and 28 under “LGBTQ”)
Sports (1 post)
Stewardship (2 posts)
Stories (2 posts)
Theater (1 post)

No poll can completely reflect the myriad of possibilities, of course. I remember saying the Pledge sometimes as a homeschooled student, but most days we got right into whatever we were working on with just a prayer. It wasn’t an issue anyone made a big deal over. But then, my family didn’t start going to a Mennonite church until I was 13. Someone in our homeschool co-op wanted the kids to pledge allegiance to the Christian flag, but that didn’t go over real big. The story I heard was the Christian flag is really more of a Baptist flag, and we’re supposed to be pledging allegiance to God, not to a flag someone made and decided to call the Christian flag.

I tend to say the Pledge of Allegiance once or twice a week now since it’s the way most of my school boards, villages and cities begin their meetings. One village doesn’t, but they don’t even do a roll call of council members, and I’m pretty sure they don’t care about following Roger’s Rules of Order. I say the Pledge when everyone else does because I don’t feel like explaining to anyone why I’d rather not. I don’t want to have the focus on me and what I think, anyway.

But, I know Mennonites to whom this is a serious matter. A local Mennonite school experienced public scrutiny a few years ago when someone decided to publicize that the school’s sports teams stand respectfully before games while the other teams say the Pledge. I’m sure some people would lambast me as a bad Mennonite for having said the Pledge. Oh well, I’m not in this to impress anyone.

Is the Pledge a big deal to you? If it is, do you also oppose taking oaths?

Someone mentioned common objections Anabaptists have against the RCC, namely heirarchy and gender issues. I know Catholics who quit tithing to the RCC when the priest-sex-abuse scandal broke because they don’t want their tithes to become part of a payout. Then you’ve got infant baptism, obligatory First Communion, war, lgbtq, transubstantiation and the list goes on.

What is attractive about the RCC? I think I might “get” part of it, having visited many Catholic cathedrals, monestaries and schools, and having read Cloister Walk, but other aspects of “what it might mean to be Catholic” turn me off. Each congregation will vary, of course. There’s just something freaky to me about the idea of one human non-God person (the Pope) making declarations that all living people in that church are supposed to follow. Do any Catholics still believe the Pope is error-free anymore? I’m sorry if that seems flippant or dismissive, but it’s a real question. But then, sometimes we Anabaptists live like we believe a committee is error-free, so maybe it’s no different.

As much as I cringe at the writings of some popes and bishops on the issues of gender and lgbtq, I wonder how much it’s really different in Anabaptist churches. We’ve got our own baggage. Some of us can remember when men and women sat apart in church. Some of us still wear the clothes that declare to the world “I believe in specific gender roles!” Why would I cringe to be associated with expressions of the same thing in the RCC, when it doesn’t horrify me in the same way in my own denomination? Or is it not the same thing?

I’ve heard some Catholics complain even American Protestants have more respect for the Vatican than many European RCC priests. Maybe it’s more fun to be Catholic there.

*If my sources are correct, the “Catholic Church” includes more than the RCC. It is also the Greek Catholic, Byzantine Catholic, and sometimes Anglican churches. Yes, I am familiar with the “worldwide” definition of “catholic.”

**If this post seems unfocused and rambly, my apologies. I’m mostly trying to get the discussion started.

Now, I’m not one of those reactionist people who gets wild-eyed at the mere mention of such belief systems, and I’m not freaked out to see such symbols. I did a little bit of reading online and discovered some Christians in the Middle Ages used the pentagram to symbolize the five wounds of Christ, the five senses, and five aspects of good health. That’s certainly not how I think of pentagrams, nor probably most who would see it if I wore it.

If I choose not to wear this necklace, I want it to be for an actual, thought-out reason, not just “it’s evil.” It’s a nice necklace. I have no lack of jewelry, though, so I could give it away and never notice its absence. But I tend not to wear religious symbols of any kind unless there’s a specific reason I’m doing it. (Crucifixes are part of my RenFaire costume, for example.)

Thoughts? I realize this is a periferal issue to what we usually talk about on YAR. But, it could bring up how we view pagans, Wiccans and Satanists. That might be a good reason to wear it: it may prompt thoughtful discussion with people I meet. Or then again, it could just prompt eyerolls and disdainful comments.

Numbers 1:5-16

“These are the names of the men who are to assist you: from Reuben, Elizur son of Shedeur; from Simeon, Shelumiel son of Zurishaddai; from Judah, Nahshon son of Amminadab; from Issachar, Nethanel son of Zuar; from Zebulun, Eliab son of Helon; from the sons of Joseph: from Ephraim, Elishama son of Ammihud; from Manasseh, Gamaliel son of Pedahzur; from Benjamin, Abidan son of Gideoni; from Dan, Ahiezer son of Ammishaddai; from Asher, Pagiel son of Ocran; from Gad, Eliasaph son of Deuel; from Naphtali, Ahira son of Enan.” These were the men appointed from the community, the leaders of their ancestral tribes. They were the heads of the clans of Israel.”

:-D

A couple of times I’ve seen people on YAR say they don’t hold to the same ethic on this as the Christian Church has taught during at least our lifetimes. I have always heard from the Christians in my life that it is a sin to have sex in any form (or get close to it) with anyone other than the person to whom one is married. Having sex at any point before the wedding ceremony (in whatever form it takes) is a sin, they tell me.

Any manner of consequences for such behavior are predicted, ranging from the believable (you might compare your life-long spouse with past lovers in bed) to the outrageous (God has a special Hell set aside for such transgressors.)

Someone posted the following list of Bad Things That Happen Because of Premarital Sex on a message board. I haven’t changed it.

>> Disobedience to God (Rebellion against his Holy standards)
Idolatry (becoming a slave to sexual desires)
STD’s (sexually transmitted diseases)
Dealing with sexual attachments with former lover(s)
Having offspring by former lover(s) that could be abusive of offspring, child becoming rebellious against the absent parent who’s moved on and married someone to raise children with, child being withheld from parent/other family members etc… pregnant lover having abortion.
Sexual sin passing on and generational curse
Developing an attitude of premarital sex is ok as long as you love each other.
Cohabitional relationships
Single parent who has child struggling in poverty
Increase risks of out of wedlock children getting involved in drugs, premartial sex, crime/prison.
No respect for God
Lack of self esteem
Cheating
Difficulty forming lasting commitments.
Making comparisons between spouse and exlover
Daydreaming more about former lovers than of your spouse
Secret Perversions
Inability to have great sex with spouse
Depression <<

OK, Skylark talking again. I don’t want to mock the person who made this list in earnest, hoping to persuade people to avoid bad situations. But, part of me wonders… It strikes me that all of these things can happen with or without sex in a relationship, and I know many people who have healthy marriages now, when they did sleep together before they got married. On the other hand, some never even talked about sex before they married, believing that would be a sin. And now they discover they’ve got opposite libidos, or they don’t find each other sexually attractive… or whatever. Yet I constantly hear Christians promising if both people are virgins when they get married, the sex will be great. C’mon, virginity’s not a cure-all for every possible problem.

Where’s the middle ground? Is there One Truth on this that can be applied to everyone? Does God have clearly-communicated expectations on this? I’ll leave the Scripture-citing for someone else. Perhaps some of you who are more scholarly than I can tell me where the academics are leaning on this.

They have T-shirts, too, for those interested in short snippits for chuckles. My favorites are “Jesus loves you. But then again, he loves everybody,” “I want to be a pastor’s wife,” and “I love cheeses.”

http://www.larknews.com/june_2007/index.php

This is perfect for when you’re tired of processing theology or annoying trolls and just need to unwind.

Who is wise and understanding among you? Let him show it by his good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. Such “wisdom” does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, of the devil. For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.

 But the wisdom that comes from heaven is first of all pure; then peace-loving, considerate, submissive, full of mercy and good fruit, impartial and sincere. Peacemakers who sow in peace raise a harvest of righteousness.

————

This comes immediately after the well-known “taming the tongue” section of James. I’m not really quite sure what to say to go along with this BVotD because it reminds me to keep quiet when I don’t have any real wisdom to share. Since I don’t want to blather on to hear myself talk, I’m keeping this short.

I had way too much fun swing dancing this weekend. When I sat down to blog about it on my personal blog today, I started realizing just how much gender roles are infused into that seemingly-innocent passtime. I thought back to my comment in response to Tom’s giving-up-music post, how it was admirable to be willing to give up something you like because something else is more important. I realized swing dancing might be that for me. Now, I know I only just got back into it, and it’s not an ingrained part of my life (yet; it very well could be soon). When near a thrift store today, I stopped in to see if they had any heel-less shoes I’d want to wear dancing.

The difference between music/secular music and dancing is the music is a personal morality issue, which the prolific YAR posters tend not to be concerned about, while the dancing definitely could contribute to social sexist pressures and all that.

Further analysis:
It seems sexist because the primary initiators were men, men were the “leaders” while women were the “followers,” the “leader” part involved deciding what to do and communicating that to the “follower” who was obliged to do it, and men got to wear comfy shoes while women were faced with fashion vs. sustainability. Not to mention the whole setup was decidedly heterocentric. A few women, probably straight, did dance with each other for lack of men, but I’m quite sure straight men would not have done the same thing if there had been more men than women.

On the other hand, some women did ask men to dance, and I didn’t hear any women, including me, get turned down. As I’ve heard in other dance settings, the man’s job as leader is not to draw attention to himself, but to make the woman look good. That could be seen as counter-patriarchy, but it also could be used as a way to make women look like ornamental objects to be viewed by men.
While the “experienced” men were glad to help teach the “inexperienced” women the moves, the “experienced” women did the same for the “inexperienced” men. I hear it’s interesting to try, as a follower, to teach another person how to lead.

What do y’all think? Am I being too serious about this? Should I just go, have fun and leave conversations about gender, roles and sexual identity to a different setting? Is this something I should discuss with the friends with whom I went?

The real reason for my post is to talk about vegetarianism and animal rights/welfare. This is another topic on which many Christians (perhaps especially Mennonites in rural areas) have only vague notions of why anyone would decide not to eat meat. It seems silly, pagan or perhaps even anti-Anabaptist when you’re talking about “meat canned in the name of Jesus for the missionaries to eat.”

It’s with some trepidation that I write this. I don’t want to come off as a zealot who believes everyone has to do as I do. There’s just so much misinformation out there it’s hard to know where or how to begin. It would certainly be encouraging to discover YARs aren’t scared to talk about something that is at once philosophical and immensely practical for those of us who eat three meals a day.

As some of you know, I’m a vegetarian. I’ve been a lacto-ovo vegetarian, meaning I eat plant foods, eggs and dairy, since I was 16. Just in case there’s any confusion, a vegetarian is someone who doesn’t eat the flesh of any animal: cow, pig, fish, chicken, etc. Some vegetarians eat only plant foods, and they’re called strict vegetarians. Those who eat only plant foods and don’t use animal products like leather, silk and wool in their lifestyle are called vegans.

As a Christian vegetarian, my motivations are mainly to oppose cruelty to animals. I believe God created animals not to fulfill every human whim but because they have some intrinsic value, too. If someone needs biblical proof of this, Proverbs 12:10 talks about wise people caring for the needs of the animals in their care. I believe it does matter how we treat animals and the rest of the world, not just how we treat other humans. Diligent parents frequently caution their children to take care of the pet dog or cat because the animal shouldn’t suffer for the children’s lack of responsibility.

The atrocities in some of these factory farms just blow my mind. It’s like any kind of big business: Cost is all that matters. In industrial-size poultry and pig farms, the chickens and pigs live their entire lives inside large, crowded buildings. While it may be a bit silly to say that they all “want” to see daylight, every creature with nerve endings wants to live as pain-free as possible. I’m not interested in anthropomorphizing. There’s just something really wrong with intentionally inflicting pain on another creature for my benefit. That doesn’t seem very Christlike or pacifistic. It would be one thing if I had to in order to live, but I don’t. I, and many others, live quite well without eating flesh foods. I decided since this was all completely unnecessary, I wouldn’t be a part of it. So I quit eating meat. One day I hope to cut out the eggs and dairy, but right now I’m just working on reducing how much of those I eat.

And no, I’m not a big fan of PETA. Their passion is certainly admirable, but I don’t like everything they’ve done.

Do I think it’s a sin to eat meat? No. I mean, not exactly. If I went out and ate (fill in the blank with a flesh food), I would betray my conscience. Because I’m in this to treat all of God’s creatures with compassion, for me it might be a sin. Is it a sin to decapitate your pet cat? What changes when it’s a chicken? Why do we create these categories for animals, that it’s OK to eat certain ones, but others are for companionship? Why do we look down on Chinese societies in which it’s acceptable to eat dogs? Could not the same bloodthirst that prompts people to glamorize war also prompt people to enjoy hunting? I know plenty of hunters. Most say they enjoy it. (“Overpopulation” is a side reason for most hunters I know.) I’m not sure if they just like the thrill of pursuit, or if they enjoy the actual act of killing another creature. From the perspective of the deer, though, they probably enjoy living their entire lives in the wild and then get shot down, rather than living in a small cage, being force-fed, and then slaughtered like many factory-farmed animals.

I’m not talking about anyone’s family farms here. Everyone’s got an “Uncle So-and-So who treats his cows like children.” Most of the meat, dairy and eggs in the U.S. comes from these factory farms. (Yes, I’m speaking to myself on the dairy and eggs.) It’s rather hard to avoid all their products when eating at restaurants or shopping major grocery store chains. Please don’t get me wrong—I’m not expecting everyone to jump up from their computers and dash straight to a farmers’ market to buy fresh produce. (Good thought, but it’s far too early in the growing season for farmers’ markets where I live.)

So, what IS to be done? Is there any defense from an Anabaptist theological perspective for intentionally disregarding pain and/or cruelty humans inflict on animals in the meat industry? Most people I know simply don’t care. Some take offense to the idea they’d do well to thoughtfully consider the impact of their food on others. Others see it as inevitable humans will eat animals, and those who abstain are stupid not to join in. Some think opposing cruelty to humans and animals are mutually exclusive.

How do you see it?

I remember a recent race and church discussion here in which someone said straight white males should step down from church leadership to give women and minorities* back some of the power. How much does YAR function as a pulpit? We know more people are reading than simply those who post and comment. We’re even going to give periodic summaries of our discussions to an Anabaptist publication.

My fear is that with several straight white males being so adept at sharing their (thoughtful and insightful) views on the subject, the women and minorities* who would like to speak up will see YAR as ultimately no different than any other straight-white-male-dominated venue. I’m not one to just shut my trap on here, heh, but not everyone is like me. Hopefully those who know far more than I ever could will find this a safe place, too.

Maybe I made some of you mad. Good! If I’m wrong, tell me so. Come up with a better solution. Tell me which are the right questions to ask.

*I’m including GLBTQ in “minorities.” Hopefully that’s not a problem.

I wonder how the people in his church responded when he told them that story.

Here’s why I thought I could do it: While overall I oppose war and violence, I have a lot of questions and issues with the war in Iraq. The CPW was a response to that war specifically, not a call to disband the U.S. military or whatever. The more I learn about Iraq, the more I realize it’s an intensely complex situation that has no easy answers. I don’t pretend to know what should be done there. Not to mention I didn’t seek out the CPW—it came to me when the local trip coordinator contacted my editor to see if we’d do a story. I looked at the info and realized it would be a much better story if I went with them. My editors know our readers eat it up when local people do interesting things, so I ended up doing a front-page package deal of three stories and lots of photos for Sunday’s paper.

It was with that questioning mindset that I went into the CPW trip. I didn’t know ahead of time and couldn’t have known that all but two of the 32 people on the charter bus would self-identify as Mennonites. I figured it would be a bit more mixed, like the rest of the CPW. I didn’t wear the green “Mennonite” armband the leader passed around. I could have, but that would have taken away from my credibility as a reporter.

I talked with every single person on that bus on the way to D.C. I highly recommend it, too! When I would go on trips in high school and college, I’d talk to people next to me on the bus, but I never made a point to talk to everyone.

A steno pad of notes and three stories later, I’m ready to pursue my questions. (It’s only a conflict of interest if I make up my mind before the story is done. After that, I can do what I want.)

What should happen in Iraq? Is pulling out now and possibly leaving helter-skelter the best way to insure stability in Iraq?

How can Christians in the U.S. encourage Muslims in Iraq to get over their differences and stop killing each other? I asked this of a pastor on the bus, and he said it’s a tough issue, but winning them over for Christ would be most effective. Then he said the Christian Peacemaker Teams have been sent out of Iraq, and they cannot possibly have an impact if they aren’t allowed in. He said the teams set up crisis mediation centers where Muslims can come to work out their issues without fighting. So do we have to convert these people before they will listen to us? Do we honestly have nothing practical to give them other than coming in on an evangelical mission that will supposedly give them the tools to be peaceful? This is the post-modern in me coming out, but I’m uncomfortable with overtly evangelical efforts because they have the potential to view a person only as a soul and not as a mind, spirit and body with real needs. I know many service workers who try to meet people’s needs in the hopes the needy people will see Christ in it. Going the opposite way doesn’t really work for me.

And then there’s my skepticism that Muslims will be interested in coming to Christian mediation centers to work out their differences. I know if I were having a problem with another Christian, I wouldn’t be interested in going to a non-Christian mediator. I need to research that, obviously, because for all I know it could be wildly popular in Iraq.

Do we actually think President Bush and legislators will listen to us? A religion teacher on the bus referred to Christians as “legal aliens” in their countries of residence because our first allegience is in God’s Kingdom. I asked him why a country’s leaders should listen to legal aliens. It’s because we choose to be here willingly and are working to improve the country, he said. Patriotism does not consist of rubber-stamping every decision the country’s leaders make. (I’m in full agreement on the patriotism part.) Considering that we’d be legal aliens wherever we went, by his rationale, I have to wonder how willingly we’re here. It’s not like we can just go be part of only God’s Kingdom right now. What’s the alternative—suicide?

Does diplomacy always work if you do it long enough? What other means are available to people who oppose war and violence? If people aren’t being honest and humble in their diplomacy, how do we encourage them to become better at open communication?

What point is there in civil disobedience and getting arrested, like some 220 people did at the White House on Friday night? Yeah, it gets media attention, but is that a good enough reason to break civil laws that don’t conflict with God’s laws? I know of nothing in the Bible that says “If there’s a police line, you should cross it and pray at the fence in front of the White House.” That’s different than civil disobedience that protests an unjust law, like Rosa Parks sitting in the front of the bus. Unfortunately, some local readers who commented on the arrest story went too far on the other end and said the Bible compels Christians to obey ALL laws in their countries of residence. That’s not my understanding. Obey the laws except when necessary to follow God, and be willing to accept the civil consequences for the laws you break: That’s the way I read it.

Last but not least: Is democracy the best governmental structure for Iraq? Is democracy the “most Christian” of all existing forms of government?

Gee, did I pose enough questions to respond to, or what?

—What’s the racial/ethnic composition here at YAR? I don’t know most of you yet, so maybe you’re not all white Anabaptists.
—For those of you who aren’t white, how should white people talk about racial issues? What’s actually helpful? I feel discouraged when I read or listen to a discussion on race and then realize all the participants are white. If white folks decide how to “fix racism” primarily by themselves, I doubt we’ll find anything lasting. It’s not enough just to talk about treating everyone right—we have to make sure everyone’s participating in the conversation.
—For those of you who aren’t white, how much do you see racism in yourselves? How do you overcome that? Is it different than for a white person, perhaps because you’ve been on the receiving end of it? How do you decide what is offensive?
—How do we as Christians decide when and which causes and passions to pursue? I can’t do it all. I don’t want that to be an excuse to do nothing. How can someone who may not currently dedicate the better part of her time to racial equality still make it a priority?
—For those of you who aren’t white, what’s the most effective way to knock down media consumers’ perceptions? For example, if a black doctor opens a practice in a very white community, should the feature story in the newspaper mention s/he is black? Would running a head-and-shoulders photo accomplish the same thing without saying it overtly? Does this give the impression it’s unusual for black people to be highly educated?

Just some of the many questions. Perhaps because I have more questions than answers I like being a reporter. I let other people know stuff. ;-)