Weary of the Moon

Celebrate International Women's Day

Each year on March 8, people across the globe stop to celebrate the role of women in society and advocate for equality and justice for women.  Here are a couple of sites to give you some background and history of International Woman's Day (IWD):

• Wikipedia on IWD
• The history of IWD
• The United Nations on IWD
• internationalwomensday.com

Growing up I never heard of IWD.  In fact, the first time the day entered my consciousness was March 8, 2003 when I had the good fortune to spend the day celebrating with friends in Russia, where IWD is a national holiday.  Of course I also didn't grow up paying much attention to the inequality and injustice faced by women around the world, including right here at home.  I repent of that selfish blindness.  I now see that I have not done enough to pursue equality, to pursue justice, to make level the playing fields, and to counter the lies so prevalent that tell women, from the time they are young girls to the time of their old age, that their inherent value is not so inherent but rather a result of their body or their role as a mother or their ability to cook and clean. 

And so today, joining with millions of others globally to celebrate women, small as it may be, I offer up a reminder of the true value of all women, a value that is the result of bearing the imprint of God. 

Do not pervert justice . . .

As part of a post a couple of weeks ago on how we made our decision to adopt, I cited a number of passages from the Bible showing God's heart for the orphan, and really beyond just the orphan, for the marginalized and oppressed.  One of those passages is Deuteronomy 24:17 which says "You shall not pervert the justice due an alien or an orphan . . . ."  Yesterday I read a news account that both sickened me and broke my heart.

It seems that at a hospital in the Russian city Yekaterinburg, it was discovered (by a woman with a camera phone) that nurses were taping shut the mouths of newborns with "sticking plaster" to keep them quiet.  All of the babies were orphans.  You can read the BBC account here and an account from the English-language daily Mosnews here.  As reported in Mosnews,  an "unidentified woman doctor said her staff was overworked and underpaid and the practice of taping the babies’ mouths shut saved a great deal of time by preventing pacifiers from being spit onto the floor."  According to Russian prosecutors, this was a systematic practice.  The woman with the camera phone was told to "mind her own business."  Thankfully, she considered this to be her business. 

Of course having two children adopted from Russia, this story touches a personal nerve.   When an orphan is born at a hospital (and it is not uncommon for a woman to show up, give birth, and relinquish parental rights or just leave), the baby stays at the hospital for a couple of months before being transferred to a baby house.  I am certain that the hospital staff is underpaid and overworked.  I am certain that it is tiring to deal with the constant crying of the babies, and I suspect this practice, while perhaps not isolated, is not widespread.  Nevertheless, it is beyond disturbing.  These are children that have come into the world with NO mother, NO father, NO family at all, NO baby blanket or new pacifier or arms to hold them.  Of course they are crying.  All babies cry, but it seems to me that these babies, in particular, are experiencing a profound separation.  And what they received from those charged with caring for them was plaster over their mouths to keep them quiet lest they become an inconvenience.

Beyond writing this post, I don't really know how to deal with stories like that.  I'm not a Russian prosecutor so I don't have an immediate ability to take some tangible action at that place.  What I believe is that God cares for the orphan -- so I can entreat him to intervene.  What I don't know is what that would look like.  Maybe it looks like a woman with a camera phone who refuses to "mind her own business" and reports the abuse to the authorities.

It strikes me that this story, as disturbing as it is, offers a picture of what happens on a daily basis around the globe.  The most vulnerable, the HIV children of Africa, the Dalit of India, the migrant workers on the Texas border, the jobless in Michigan, the homeless in Dallas, are, rather than being protected and cared for, systematically silenced so as not to create an inconvenience.   Maybe we need to be the woman in the Yekaterinburg hospital with the camera phone, refusing to "mind our own business" and speaking up for those who lack the voice to speak for themselves.

• Oh Lord, you have heard the desire of the humble; you will strengthen their heart, you will incline your ear to vindicate the orphan and the oppressed that the man who is of earth may cause terror no more. (Ps 10:17-18)
• Learn to do good; Seek justice, Reprove the ruthless, Defend the orphan, Plead for the widow. (Isa 1:17)

What about Madonna?

Because it has been a recurring spot the past week or two on nightly news programs and entertainment gossip shows, the story of Madonna’s adoption of a boy in Malawi is generating a good deal of discussion.  Today, for instance, you can check out CNN and see three major stories about the adoption, the push-back from various human rights groups, and the bleak story of AIDS orphans in Africa.  The story has caused me a good deal of angst.  A couple of months ago I wrote a post on my secret love for Angelina Jolie.  I explained that despite tales of her eccentricities, she appears to me to be walking the walk when it comes to caring for orphan and widows.  She appears to me to be using her position of influence to advocate for those who lack a voice.  So the question arises for me, “What about Madonna?”

The short answer is “I don’t know.”  I don’t know what to think of her.  I don’t know her motives in adopting the child.  I don’t know why she sought to be exempt from the Malawian law that requires a foreigner to live with the child in Malawi for 18 months before adoption.  I don’t know why she picked this child or this country.  She doesn’t have the track record on human rights issues for me to have a good feel for those things.  Maybe some day she will, but for now, I don’t know.

The story for me goes beyond Madonna.  The fact that she is a lightning rod for criticism combined with the fact that she was exempted from the residency requirement and able to take the child out of the country have raised concerns from child advocates and Africa advocates, concerns that have made headlines themselves.  There have been numerous articles recently discussing the problem of child trafficking and removing children from their community.  As an adoptive parent with children from a country far from my own, these issues strike a nerve.  “Wait,” I want to yell, “these kids are without family, without a home, and often without hope.  Adoptive parents, whether domestic or international, can provide those things.”  To the question of whether to allow international adoptions I explain “The countries allowing international adoption don’t have good track records of domestic adoptions for a number of reasons.  Without international adoption these children will remain in more desperate conditions even where lovingly cared for by orphanage workers.”  I want to say those things, but I still know that for many questions remain. 

Here’s where I am on these thoughts.  International adoption is not in itself inherently wrong.  Like anything else it can be abused and, based on the fact we’re dealing with children, the most helpless members of society, should be carefully safeguarded through well-drafted legislation, international treaties, and continued follow up. [As a side note, I think this is my biggest issue with the Madonna situation:  she worked around the law.]  Pre-adoption screening and education and post-adoption follow up and support are a vital key to protecting the children.  All that said, so long as there is evil in the world, there will be those who prey on children.  We must be vigilant in fighting against such predators. 

While I am an obvious (and self-interested) proponent of international adoption, I recognize it is woefully inadequate to address the systemic problems of orphaned children around the world.  In Russia there are between 600,000-700,000 orphans living in state-run institutions.  It is estimated there could be 2 million living on the streets.  Not all of these children are even eligible to be adopted as their parents have relinquished them to the care of the state unable or unwilling to raise them but equally unwilling to relinquish their parental rights.  The UN estimates there are over 40 million orphans on the continent of Africa.  International adoption cannot solve that crisis.  The crisis of these children is systemic requiring a systemic and comprehensive answer.  That answer must come from more than parents desiring to bring children into their homes.  It has to come from individuals, churches, synagogues, mosques, communities and governments.  Simply put, it is a global problem in need of a global solution.  While for some of us that may start with adopting, it can’t end there.  We all need to advocate for these children.  We all need to find ways to improve the economic and health situations in their countries to provide hope. 

There really isn’t a way for me to “conclude” this post because my life is wrapped in concern for orphans.  I have brought two to live with me and my heart beats to give them a family and hope – to tell them they are no longer orphans.  Rather than conclude, I’ll leave you with a few sites of interest – individuals and groups working to better the lives of orphans in various parts of our globe.

ServLife International, Inc. (among other ministries, providing for children in India and Nepal)

Robert & Ann Fuqua (working with orphans in Russia)

Friends of Russian Orphans (obviously working in Russia)

Ryazan Baby Home (our son's first home)

Children's Rescue Outreach International (working in Liberia and a client of mine)

International Justice Mission (advocating and providing rescue and follow up care to the oppressed)

World Vision (among other ministries, helping children in crisis)

These are only a few people and organizations caring for orphaned children around the world.  There are many more.  Where can you help?

Darfur: Staying informed

This is the last in a series of posts about the crisis in Darfur.  Following are a few links to help you stay informed on the current news in the Sudan.

• savedarfur.org
• passionofthepresent.org
• Google news on Darfur

A couple of other sites you might want to check out:

• ServLife International (a holistic missions organization of which I am honored to serve on the board of directors)
• two and two makes five (Steve Nicholson's blog -- he and his wife Amy are working with ServLife in Africa)
• allthings2all (the blog of Catez Stevens in New Zealand -- besides having a number of good posts about Darfur, Catez has also put together 3 Spotlight on Darfur collections which are on her blog)

Darfur: Who should go?

This is the third in a series of posts about Darfur.  The first post presented a brief introduction to the genocide taking place in the Sudan.  The second post looked at the people of Darfur who are suffering.  This third posts relates to a question a man walking down our street asked Terri when he saw our savedarfur.org yard sign:  "Who do you want to save them?"

My response?  Anyone who has the power.  I'm in the middle of reading Exiles by Michael Frost.  Toward the end of the book he writes about raising criticism, and he distinguishes between situations that we as individuals can individually change (e.g. showing generosity, etc.) and situations that take the effort of a larger power such as a government.  Frost suggests that in those latter situations, our personal responsibility is to advocate for change, for justice.  I suppose that's what this series of posts is about for me.  I'm not getting on a plane to go to Darfur.  I can, however, lend my voice to the voices of others calling for world governments to take action.  Who do I want to save them?  I want all of us to save them -- because they can't save themselves -- that's the issue with powerlessness.  Jesus taught that those with power, those with a voice, those with some authority are to advocate on behalf of those without.  As westerners, we have all those things,  We have therefore are obliged to make our voices heard.

All that said, who should go?  What should be done?  That's the rub.  The African Union contingent is too small.  The Sudanese government in Khartoum is refusing a more sizeable UN peacekeeping force.  Our military is stretched thin in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Who should go?  That's the million dollar question.  My personal belief is that the aid has to come from the international community acting in unity.  We have something for that, right?  It's called the UN.  This is the type of situation to which the UN must respond. 

Darfur: Save Who?

Yesterday, I posted a brief introduction on the crisis in Darfur.  As I said in that post, I recognize there is a great amount of coverage of Darfur on the web and in the news.  Nevertheless, I also recognize many people have no idea that genocide is taking place every day in the Sudan.  That's not so difficult to reconcile I suppose.  For example, Arlington, Texas, my hometown, is a long way from Darfur.  I don't see women being raped when I drive over to Tom Thumb.  I don't see men being brutally beaten by janjaweed while I am out on a peaceful walk through my neighborhood.  And I don't see children being recruited to be soldiers when I drop off my own kids at school.  But all those things are happening . . . right now . . . as you read these words.  One response is apathy.  Another is engagement -- learning what is going on and crying out for justice.

We have a sign in our yard (a small thing, I know) that says "Save Darfur."  We also have t-shirts with the same message.  On Sunday Terri wore her t-shirt to church and generated conversations about Darfur.  Some started with people asking, "Who is Darfur?"  A man walking by our house yesterday asked the question "Who should save them?"  I think both of these questions are valid.  I'll take on the first one today.

Who is Darfur?  The questioner no doubt wondered if Darfur was a person who needed to be saved, not a place.  But it brings up a good point -- it isn't about a place or a country, it is about the people.  So just who are the people?  Let me give you some information culled from the website savedarfur.org.

• The Darfur region, located in a drought-prone area of western Sudan, is roughly the size of Texas and had a pre-conflict population of approximately 6 million people.

• Sudan is the largest country in Africa with a population of 39 million people.  Like so many countries in Africa and the Middle East, it is an “artificial” country – its national borders are the result of British and Egyptian rule.  Many diverse tribal and ethnic groups are located within the Sudanese borders, including more than thirty in Darfur alone.

• Currently, Sudan’s ruling party is the National Islamic Front, an Islamist dictatorship led by General Omar Al-Bashir.  Bashir has proved to be one of the cruelest and most dangerous dictators in modern Africa, allowing Osama Bin Laden to live and operate in Sudan for five years in the early 90’s. 

• The policies of the regime against ethnic African villagers have had racial and ethnic overtones and involved struggles over resources.  Though the tribes of Darfur are Muslim, they are not of the hardline movement favored by the National Islamic Front government. The Darfur Muslims do not follow the strict criminal code of Khartoum's Wahhabi-style sharia. For years Khartoum has treated the black, Sufi Muslims of Darfur as second-class citizens.

• Throughout Bashir’s reign the people of Darfur have been systematically refused representation, deprived of resources, and harassed by the government. This tension between the government and the people of Darfur eventually broke out into direct conflict in early 2003.

• As a response to the long-standing abuse from the government, rebels in Darfur rose in opposition to the government, attacking a government installation.  President Al-Bashir responded by giving governmental support and money to Islamic militias, also known as the Janjaweed – or ‘Devils on Horseback’ in Arabic – to combat the rebels and civilians in Darfur instead of sending the military to intervene.

• These militias have been accused of ethnic cleansing by systematically eliminating entire communities.  Government air strikes frequently precede the militias’ vicious raids. Villages are razed; women, men, and children are raped, tortured, and murdered. The Janjaweed also target and destroy Darfurian food and water supplies, threatening the victims' hopes for their future survival.

• The Janjaweed militias steal cattle, destroy wells, and pursue a scorched-earth policy, where crops and buildings are destroyed.

• Civilians who have survived village destruction have fled to camps lacking adequate food, shelter, sanitation, and health care in Darfur and across the border in neighboring Chad.  Hundreds of thousands of Darfurians are at risk of starvation and disease.

• The government continues to restrict international humanitarian access, which threatens mass starvation. 

• 80% of the children under five years old are suffering from severe malnutrition. Seventy percent of the deaths in the camps are children under five.

• Children, as well as young women, are abducted by Janjaweed, often with the complicity of Sudanese troops.  Women are often forced into sexual slavery, and young boys are made to watch over stolen livestock.

• It is estimated that over 400,000 people have been killed in the last three years while more than 2 million civilians have been forced to flee their homes and now live in refugee camps.  More than 3.5 million people depend on international aid for survival. 

Who is Darfur?  Darfur is a group of people fighting to stay alive.  They face Sudanese troops and militia on one side and dangerous groups of rebels on the other.  They are caught in the middle.  They need access to humanitarian aid right now, but due to the violence, they aren't getting it. 

Darfur: An Introduction

Our family is not what I think of as social activists.  We haven't participated in a bunch of marches or rallies.  We haven't routinely written letters to Congress and the President.  We live in suburban America and our lives reflect that.  Some of that is changing -- and I'm grateful for the change.  This post is a part of that change.

Within the world of blogs (and if you look closely the media as well) the genocide of Darfur is well-documented.  However, despite the atrocities being committed in the Sudan, so many remain uninformed.  I haven't written much about Darfur for a couple of reasons.  One, I'm not an expert and therefore don't really know what to say.  Two, I supposed everyone else was hearing and reading what I was hearing and reading.  Having recently come to understand that second point may be a false premise and that everyone may not know about the struggle for life in Darfur, I recognize I can no longer remain silent, even if I am no expert.  This blog doesn't have a wide readership, but for those of you reading, I hope you will have an understanding of the deadly conflict and horrifying conditions that exist in our world at this very moment.

Rather than start by giving my understanding of the conflict (which would no doubt be oversimplified), I will point you to a very brief introduction at the website savedarfur.org.  The site has a great deal of information and ways to get involved.  At a minimum though read the background I've linked to.  Let your eyes be opened.  Why?  Listen to the words of Elie Wiesel, Auschwitz survivor, journalist, Nobel Prize for Peace winner:

That brutal tragedy is still continuing, now in Sudan’s Darfur region. Now its horrors are shown on television screens and on front pages of influential publications. Congressional delegations, special envoys and humanitarian agencies send back or bring back horror-filled reports from the scene. A million human beings, young and old, have been uprooted, deported. Scores of women are being raped every day, children are dying of disease hunger and violence.

How can a citizen of a free country not pay attention? How can anyone, anywhere not feel outraged? How can a person, whether religious or secular, not be moved by compassion? And above all, how can anyone who remembers remain silent?

ESPN.com - NCAA - NCAA bans American Indian mascots in postseason

Link: ESPN.com - NCAA - NCAA bans American Indian mascots in postseason.

Okay, so the title of the article is fairly amusing in and of itself.  It makes it sound as if the NCAA is discriminating against mascots of American Indian descent.  But no, it is simply banning schools with mascots of a certain nature (hostile or offensive) from hosting postseason events and having the mascot name on the uniforms (along with presumably banning the poor mascot from the building or stadium).  I especially enjoyed the fact that starting in 2008 the cheerleaders and bands will be forced to cover the mascot name on their uniforms during postseason competition.  Wow.

So who decides what is hostile or offensive?

***Updated to include hostile/offensive team mascots***

After posting the above, I decided to assist the NCAA (as I am certain many others will be doing) in creating lists of hostile and offesnive mascots.  Aside from such obvious offendors such as the Mississippi College Choctaws (Terri's alma mater) and the like (Arkansas State Indians, Central Michigan Chippewas, Florida State Seminoles, Illinois Fighiting Illini, and Louisiana Monroe Indians) there are a number of other interesting yet offensive mascots:

Arizone State Devils (obviously hostile and certainly offensive to evangelicals);

Duke Blue Devils (it doesn't matter the color);

Wake Forest Demon Deacons (offensive to Baptists everywhere);

Texas Tech Red Raiders (who are they raiding and why?);

East Carolina Pirates (pirates, by definition, take what does not lawfully belong to them);

Seton Hall Pirates;

Idaho Vandals (really?);

UNLV Rebels (rebellion is hostile);

Ole Miss Rebels (a whole different reason and actually quite offensive);

South Carolina (when was the last time you saw a ballcap with "Game" in front of "Cocks"?);

USC Trojans;

Michigan State Spartans (again, very hostile);

Notre Dame Fighting Irish (stereotypical);

Louisiana Lafayette Rajun Cajuns (again, stereotypical of Cajuns everywhere in southern LA);

Hawaii Rainbows (ahem).

Of course mascots such as Hawks, Wildcats, Tigers, Lions, Wolverines, Bears, etc. are also hostile. 

Now, Aggies, I find that to be very innocuous.

I hope this is helpful to the NCAA subcommittee on all things hostile and offensive. 

Around the Corner

Thad has linked to an important article that needs to be read to disavow misconceptions that seem to be running rampant with college football on the horizon.  I saw the article yesterday and should have posted a link then.  My sincere apologies.  Read it now.