Rabbi Sharon Sobel is the Regional Director for the Canadian Council for Reform Judaism. Rabbi IIlyse Glickman is the National Social Action Coordinator for the Canadian Council for Reform Judaism and is also the rabbi at Am Shalom Congregation.

At the Canadian Council for Reform Judaism's (CCRJ) regional Biennial last week, Human Trafficking was a highlighted social action theme. Paving the way in our region is Montreal's Temple Emanu-El-Beth Sholom, which has formed a congregational committee against Human Trafficking and hosts an annual Human Trafficking conference at their synagogue - they even won aURJ Fain Social Action Award for their work in Human Trafficking. With the aid of the members of this committee, the Biennial program offered a workshop dedicated to the education of our delegates on the subject of trafficking of persons. As part of this workshop, a survivor spoke to her personal experience having been a trafficked person in the sex industry; bravely, she is one of the first survivors to speak publicly about her trauma.

In addition to the workshop, the communal hands-on art project for the Biennial was devoted entirely to Human Trafficking. Our artist in residence was Temple Emanu-El-Beth Sholom's Religious School Principal Ilana Kuska. With her guidance and expertise, our delegates created a banner that will henceforth be used as a teaching tool in our congregations to bring the issue of Human Trafficking to the fore. It was at this regional Biennial that the CCRJ adopted Human Trafficking as its new national social action initiative. Human Trafficking is a serious crime and a violation of one's human rights, one that is happening both in our backyards and across the globe. According to the Department of Justice Canada, trafficking in persons involves the movement of people across or within borders; threats or use of force, coercion and deception; and exploitation, whether forced labour, forced prostitution, or other forms of servitude.

The U.S. Department of State's Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons (G/TIP) provides the tools to combat trafficking in persons and assists in the coordination of anti-trafficking efforts both worldwide and domestically. Of note is a fact sheet titled "The Link Between Prostitution and Sex Trafficking", which states that of the estimated 600,000 to 800,000 people trafficked across international borders annually, 80% of victims are female, and up to 50% are minors. Research shows that 60-75% of women in prostitution are raped, 70-95% are physically assaulted, and 68% met the criteria for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Human Trafficking is a serious issue in Israel as well. One organization, ATZUM/Avodot TZdaka U'Mishpat - Justice Works, works to confront and remedy injustices in Israel. ATZUM's work is founded on the belief that Israel should serve as an example for the rest of the world in addressing social problems and crises. To that end, ATZUM has created a Task Force on Human Trafficking because it sees that Israel is a destination country for human trafficking. Approximately 2,500 women a year illegally enter the country as modern day sex slaves (nearly all are from the Former Soviet Union). Once in Israel, victims are repeatedly sold and resold to pimps and brothel owners; forced to work in slave-like conditions; and ruthlessly abused and exploited, suffering severe beatings, rape and sometimes even starvation. ATZUM works tirelessly to compel the Government to commit significant resources to combat trafficking in Israel in the areas of prevention and border closure, protection of women who escape their owners, and prosecution of smugglers and pimps.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 11:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

This week, major news outlets brought the world the appalling story of Abraham Biggs, a young Floridian, who committed suicide while an entire chatroom community watched via webcast.  He posted a suicide note.  He posted the drug cocktail he would use.  He set up his webcam, and by the time he slipped into unconsciousness, 181 people were watching the video.  And only then, did anyone call the police.

Sadly, this is not the first such situation.  The New York Times has reported other suicides that were watched by people around the world, comparing these chatrooms to the group of people who stand at the bottom of the building yelling "Jump! Jump!" to the man on the ledge. And almost any student in psychology 101 knows the horrifying story of Kitty Genovese who was murdered in an alley while countless people watched out their windows.

Mr. Biggs' story is merely one more small-scale portrait of the apathy, the indifference to the plight of others that we see daily on a national and global scale.  Oftentimes, we see ourselves as too far removed from the plight of others, separated by oceans, by continents, by the abstract world of internet.  But we must not forget that "as a human being, you don't watch someone in trouble and sit back and just watch."  We are all connected in some way be it by global markets, by shared history, by shared religion, simply by the fact that we are all human.

We are not wholly without hope.  Although he was too late, one man did try reaching police in Florida to tell them about Mr. Biggs...all the way "from his home in India." Well known celebrities like George Clooney spend their spare time using their status to keep the situation in Darfur in the public consciousness.  Unknown concerned individuals spend their lives using every tool in their arsenal to keep changing the world for the better.  Each of us can and must play a part.  We can respond to a friend's cry for help or tell the President to respond to a people's cry for help, but we cannot merely sit back and do nothing.  

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 11:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

So the next time you are told that health care reform is too expensive or simply can't happen, try using some of these reasons:

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 5:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Andy Goodman is the President of the Union for Reform Judaism's Greater New York Council and a partner in the law firm of Garvey Shubert Barer, where he chairs the East Coast Litigation and Security Industry Practice Groups.  All views expressed are his own.

On November 12, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum, nominally a free speech case, but at its core perhaps the first example at the High Court of a phalanx of troublesome issues likely to arise from the Court's 2005 Establishment Clause decision in Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S. 677. Summum is a small religious organization believing that Moses came down from Sinai with "Seven Aphorisms," not the Ten Commandments. Pleasant Grove rejected Summum's offer to donate a monument of the Seven Aphorisms to stand in the town's Pioneer Park, in which there already stood a monument to the Ten Commandments, donated in 1971 by the Fraternal Order of Eagles, and the lone non-historical monument in the otherwise aptly named park. Summum judicially challenged Pleasant Grove's rejection, arguing that the municipality was unconstitutionally barring private speech (the erection of the Seven Aphorism monument) in a public forum. Pleasant Grove countered that the Ten Commandments monument was permissible government speech so that the city was not required to accept Summum's monument. Summum prevailed in the Tenth Circuit, and the Supreme Court granted Pleasant Grove's cert petition.

The predicate which founds Pleasant Grove's argument is that its Ten Commandments monument was permissible governmental speech; if that were not so then the entire basis of its position evaporates.  Indeed, the very first question at oral argument, by Chief Justice Roberts, in fact challenged the town's position on that count.  Pleasant Grove's counsel parried in reliance on Van Orden which upheld a Ten Commandments display as permissible government speech on virtually identical facts.  Van Orden was decided on the same day as McReary County v. ACLU of Kentucky, 545 U.S. 844 (2005) where the majority (Stevens, O'Connor, Ginsburg, Souter and Breyer) found a Ten Commandment display unconstitutional, in large measure since it reflected a sectarian purpose in which a governmental authority displays a religious preference.  However, in Van Orden Justice Breyer split with the McReary majority, and wrote a concurring decision which joined Justices Scalia, Thomas, Rehnquist and Kennedy in holding permissible the Ten Commandments display there at issue.  Although not joining in the opinion of the other four justices in the majority, Justice Breyer reasoned that the display in Van Orden did not implicate religious-based divisiveness and therefore passed constitutional muster.  In her book earlier this year, Liberty of Conscience, University of Chicago Professor Martha Nussbaum presciently noted (at p. 263) that "Justice Breyer, by failing to reaffirm the equality/endorsement theory [of McReary] in addition to his own theory, leaves us with a disturbing theoretical gap.  Should we really say that a display that everyone likes and that isn't stirring up trouble, because the offended minorities are too powerless to make trouble, is for that reason constitutional?"
 
Pleasant Grove appears as the first case to march through that gap.  Now, courts are confronting the question of how to level the religious playing field in the public arena to safeguard our treasured heritage of religious pluralism and equality in the face of permissible government-sponsored religious iconography.  Thus, Pleasant Grove is framed as government speech vs. private speech.  But in truth the central issue is a content concern.  As Justice Breyer observed during oral argument, "But what's interesting to me is, are we bound in these cases to apply what I think of as an artificial kind of conceptual framework or are we free to ask what seems to me to be at the heart of the matter?"  Similar content endorsement concerns also drove inquiries by Justices Souter and Ginsburg; whereas Justice Scalia repeatedly shifted the context to the narrow government vs. private speech question, seemed to support Pleasant Grove's position that there are no limits on the government's ability to speak freely, and explicitly stated that the Government "could disfavor homosexuality just as it could disfavor abortion. . . ."  As disturbing as this is as a stand alone comment, its implications are potentially even more draconian when viewed in the light of Justice Scalia's religious Establishment jurisprudence, where he joins Justice Kennedy in believing that the government may endorse certain religious views, but cannot proselytize or coerce; and public displays are not coercion.  (Nussbaum, p. 267).
 
Pleasant Grove's rationale for rejecting the Summum monument is so rife with content based discriminatory potential that reversing here could open the door to virtually limitless government speech, and eviscerate free speech as a rationale for protecting against governmental endorsement of religion.  Pleasant Grove justified its refusal of the Seven Aphorisms monument on the grounds that it permits only monuments which have "historical relevance to the community" or where the donor is "an established Pleasant Grove civic organization with strong ties to the community" or has a "historical connection with Pleasant Grove City."  (In fact, the donor of the Ten Commandments statue had only been in the Pleasant Grove community for two years at the time it made the donation.)  Imagine the following hypothetical: Pleasant Grove accepted for construction in Pioneer Park a Christian icon from the Mormon Church, on the rationale that the Mormon Church is such an integral part of the history of Utah; and then rejects a monument donated by the local Reform Synagogue of a Star of David.  This is not so far fetched, since Justices Scalia and Kennedy have already asserted government endorsement of religion does not violate the Establishment Clause so long as it is not coercive; that at least Justice Scalia views no public display as coercive; if the Court in Pleasant Gove decides that erection of monuments in a public park is government speech and that the government is free to express its disfavor so long as the Establishment Clause is not violated.
 
So, this is why I say that Pleasant Grove is at heart an Establishment case.  Once the constitutional restriction on government endorsement of religion is no longer vigilantly safeguarded, we start down a slippery slope.  Where do we then draw the line at what government can or cannot say about religion? How do we safeguard our cherished right to practice as we personally determine without government's even implicit disfavor?
 

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 10:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Rabbi Ana Bonnheim is the Assistant Director for Education at the Union for Reform Judaism's Greene Family Camp. All views expressed are her own.

I went down to Austin this week to testify before the Texas State Board of Education (TSBOE) to keep intelligent design out of our public schools. Rabbi Nancy Kasten, Dr. Cynthia Schneidler, Cheryl Pollman, and Max Brodsky joined me on the trip from Dallas.

The TSBOE is currently revising the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) standards. Groups of teacher-writing teams wrote solid drafts of K-12 science curricula; the TSBOE asked a group of six experts to review the draft. Two of those experts advocate language that opens the door to introducing religious teachings in the science classroom. The third expert, Stephen C. Meyer, is head of the Discovery Institute, which is known for pushing the teaching of intelligent design in public schools.

When we arrived at the meeting, we found a new draft of the science TEKS standards. The language in the second draft was far worse than in the first draft. Instead of asking students to apply the scientific method to learning science, the draft encouraged students to look at "strengths and limitations of scientific explanations."

In light of the new changes, the five us of quickly sat down to revise our written testimonies. Between us, we addressed many arguments against such poor language in the TEKS standards -- most notably the importance of church/state separation and of teaching Texas kids solid science.

I felt proud to meet so many other people committed to keeping religion and pseudo-science out of our public schools. We met professors from Texas' best universities, clergy members of different faiths, caring parents and committed graduate students. Listening to the varied testimonies was a reminder to me of how essential it is that thoughtful, committed citizens take part in our political process, even when it isn't through traditional methods like lobbying congressional representatives.

On the other hand, though, four of the 15 TSBOE members, in particular, said more and more disturbing things the longer we stayed at the meeting. Chairman Don McLeroy (District 9), Cynthia Dunbar (District 10), Ken Mercer (District 5), and Terri Leo (District 6) refused to consider how muddy TEKS language could open the door to teaching religion in science classrooms. While they didn't respond to the majority of testifiers who testified for better scientific standards and language, they did warmly thank every creationist who testified and asked them whether they thought evolution was widely-accepted (predictably and incorrectly, the answer was, "No"). Even more disturbing, one member of our group heard Chairman McLeroy tell a friend during one of the TSBOE's breaks that he is a creationist.

Yesterday's hearing was a discussion meeting, meaning that the board heard testimony but did not vote. The vote on this issue will probably happen sometime in January. After my experiences yesterday, I know that I will do my best to be at that vote. The TSBOE may well vote poor science standards into the curriculum, inviting the teaching of intelligent design. Such a vote, while a terrible loss, would signal the beginning of a long fight to keep religion out of our public schools and would bring renewed national attention to Texas' schools and the TSBOE.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 11:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Supreme Court decisions get plenty of press, as journalists and pundits debate why the judges ruled the way they did, and legal scholars speculate about the Constitutional implications of each case. However, it is often hard to see how the rulings of the highest court in the land will actually affect our daily lives, and how we can be involved in the judicial process. This week, an EPA Appeals Board ruling provides a preview of what Massachusetts v. EPA, a 2007 case about regulating carbon emissions, might mean for the future of environmental regulations in our country and for the fight against climate change.
In Mass v. EPA, a 5-4 majority ruled that the EPA has the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate CO2 emissions from automobiles. However, the court did not say that the Agency must regulate emissions, instead allowing EPA to decide if and how to implement this authority. While the EPA has previously refused to regulate CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions (which is why the case was brought in the first place), the Agency's Environmental Appeals Board decided this week to deny a permit for a proposed coal-fired power plant in Utah, asserting that the plant must have a plan to limit carbon emissions before it can be built. The catch is that, since the EPA has not regulated CO2 emissions as a pollutant in the past, emissions reductions standards for coal-fired plants are unclear and outdated, where they exist at all. As these standards develop over the coming months, a broad reading of the EPA ruling effectively eliminates the possibility of new coal plants, the single largest CO2 emitter in the country.

The Sierra Club is claiming the EPA Board ruling as the green light for EPA to impose strong CO2 emissions regulations, especially when read alongside Mass v. EPA. Looking to the future, the case provides grounds for a more progressive Obama EPA to enforce stronger limitations for all emitters including both power plants and automobiles. These cases could prove to be a turning point for U.S. climate legislation enforcement, especially following the President-elect's most recent commitment to make climate change a priority for his administration.

However, this is only the beginning of what promises to be a prolonged debate over the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. The EPA Appeals Board decision is under review, and its implications and exact relation to Mass v. EPA remain unclear. For the time being, the EPA is still debating whether CO2 emissions are a danger to the public health, the threshold for regulation under the Clean Air Act. In order to protect our environment and the public health, submit your comments supporting CO2 emissions regulations to the EPA before November 28. As we keep an eye on the courts, we can ensure that our laws are fairly and properly enforced, even as we attempt to unpack the meanings of these decisions.

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 9:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Congressman Rush Holt (D-NJ), issued "the first statement by a member of Congress in support of" the effort by the National Religious Campaign Against Torture (NRCAT) to urge President-Elect Obama "to issue an executive order upon being sworn in banning torture across all government agencies." 
In a press release issued last week, Congressman Holt said:
"Torture tarnishes our nation's values and damages our credibility," Holt said. "I have worked for years to end our government's use of torture. While an executive order will not remove the need for legislation on the issue, it is a way for President-elect Obama to put an immediate halt to our government's use of torture during interrogations and to prevent secret detentions. By exercising his authority and acting quickly, he will begin to restore our moral leadership on the issue and repair some of the harm that has been done to our international reputation."

The Congressman also provided a few suggestions of what should be included in the Executive Order:

"1) Bar the use of interrogation techniques which we would not find acceptable if used against Americans.

2) Create one national standard for the interrogation and treatment of prisoners for all personnel affiliated with all U.S. forces and agencies.

3) Require that we acknowledge all detainees to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and allow the ICRC access to them.

4) Require that we allow all detainees to have the opportunity to defend themselves in court.

5) Bar transport of people to other countries where there is an expectation of torture.

6) Provide for transparency in our confinement and interrogation procedures, including the videotaping of all interactions between prisoners and American personnel.

7) Make clear that any U.S. official who authorizes, implements, or fails to prevent the use of torture will be held accountable."

I urge you-- join Congressman Holt, Rabbi David Saperstein, the Reform Jewish Movement and over 250 religious groups of all denominations in signing NRCAT's Declaration of Principles telling President-Elect Obama to put an end to torture now!

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 3:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The issue of equality, respect, and basic human dignity is an ongoing struggle that will be marked as a test of our generation. While we have seen victories for equality for transgender equality, too often the stories we read are about discrimination, mistreatment, and unfounded hatred. Today is the Transgender Day of Remembrance, and the Human Rights Campaign has put out a commemoration video. I encourage you to go to www.hrc.org/transgender to learn about what actions you can take and what you can do to help.

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 2:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

I have been trying to figure out what I think about the request from the "Big Three" automakers for federal support. (GM, for example, makes it case inthis You Tube video.)

I should acknowledge that my interest in, and thoughts about, the "bailout" are certainly shaped by having grown up in Flint, Michigan. When I grew up in Flint, it was a city of 200,000 and nearly 90,000 worked for General Motor. Today, it's a city of 114,000 with some 9,000 autoworkers. I think it's fair to say that the people of Flint (even those of us who no longer live there) know better than anyone how dramatically, and tragically, the American auto industry has failed.

Former (and future?) Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney argues in today's New York Times that it is time to "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt." More specifically, he calls for a "managed bankruptcy," saying that,

A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension, and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.

On the radio yesterday morning, I heard Romney say that this would include the Federal government "standing behind" carmaker's warranties. That is, to say the least, an interesting suggestion for a conservative to make.

On the other hand, this week's New Republic has a powerful article by Jonathan Cohen ("Panic in Detroit") in which he argues that the automakers are well on their way to making the very type of changes for which Romney (and so many others) are calling. He writes:

GM, Ford, and Chrysler are taking precisely the sorts of steps everybody says are necessary--or, at least, they were taking those steps until an unexpected trifecta of high gas prices, vanishing credit, and a deep recession hit. Rescuing the auto industry is not, as so many people suppose, a question of giving Detroit one extra shot at transformation. It's a question of giving Detroit a chance to finish a transformation that was already underway.

I keep coming back to the fact that American autoworkers (and those who work in industries which primarily support the auto industry) are among the victims of the industry's hubris. Workers who had no input into the decisions that have proven so wrong-headed will be punished for those decisions. As the auto industry flails, these workers are likely to be turned out into a destitute employment arena where they'll struggle to (and possibly fail to) land new jobs, provide for their families and figure out how to stay afloat in an economy that's the worst it's been in decades. At the end of the day, it's these blue-collar workers who will undoubtedly suffer most from the corporate missteps they had no part in making.

I agree that the industry needs to reinvent itself. I hope that Cohen is right that GM, Ford, and Chrysler have - at long, long last - come to understand that. And I hope that our government will find a way to soften the blow which will be felt, first and foremost, by those clinging to the lowest rungs of our economic ladder.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 11:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 

Emily Schwartz is a senior at The George Washington University and an intern at the Religious Action Center.

The message is clear: an Israeli-Palestinian peace initiative must be a priority for the Obama Administration from the first day in office.

The Union of Progressive Zionists has launched a new campaign urging President-Elect Barack Obama to follow up on his promise to "help Israel achieve the goal of two states, a Jewish state of Israel and a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security." College students have printed 10,000 "We Can't Wait" postcards to be collected and sent to Obama's transition team in December.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 7:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Hundreds of citizens gathered on Capitol Hill yesterday to demand that our next Congress and Administration make climate change a priority during their first 100 days in office. In an event organized by the 1Sky campaign and a host of other environmental groups, these activists came together to demand that President-elect Obama honor his campaign promises to confront the climate and energy crisis. Despite freezing temperatures (yes, I realize the irony of talking about the urgency of global warming on a cold winter day), they joined with one voice to declare that the United States MUST start tackling climate change in a meaningful way if we are to avoid disastrous environmental and economic repercussions. Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and Bill McKibben, environmental activist and founder of 350.org, inspired the crowd with speeches on the importance of climate change.

The first goal of the rally was to ensure that the President-elect send representatives to the international conference on climate change in Poznan, Poland in December. The world community will come together at this conference to decide how to tackle climate change moving forward, and it is vital that the U.S. represent itself at this meeting to show the world that we are finally ready to meaningfully engage and confront the climate crisis. As the activists in Washington presented a symbolic plane ticket to Poznan, thousands across the country met with the staffs of over 200 Members of Congress to ensure that they will work with the new President to cut our carbon emissions.

We are at a critical moment on this issue, as scientists agree that we are nearing (if not past) a climate 'tipping point,' after which we may not be able to mitigate or adapt to the worst effects of global climate change. A grassroots movement around the country is sending this message loud and clear to our government, and the Jewish community needs to be a vocal member of this coalition. Our obligations to care for our Earth and to speak out for the most vulnerable among us mean that confronting climate change is a moral and religious obligation, and a central piece of our task of 'tikkun olam.'

To take part in the effort, you can fill out the RAC action alert urging President-elect Obama to make climate change a priority in his first 100 days in office, and visit your local elected official to send the same message in person. Visit the 1sky campaign for more information and resources, and to join the movement to make sure that this urgent problem is addressed beyond this day of action.

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 3:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Rabbi Fred Guttman serves as rabbi of Temple Emanuel in Greensboro, N.C. and is a member of the Union for Reform Judaism's Commission on Social Action. All views expressed are his own.

The Faith-Based Initiative has been a colossal failure and has had very little effect on the partnerships between local social service agencies and Faith-Based Institutions. This has now been shown by research by some of the very best social science researchers in the United States, including our congregant Bob Wineberg.

Bob is trying to get this narrative "out there" because soon President-elect Barack Obama will have his plan out which keeps the core of the Bush plan minus the religious hiring controversial issues. He is pretty sure that Obama is taking his tips from David Kuo and John Dilulio - both are very bright but very misguided on what the reality is in communities.

The films below show findings extremely similar to his 1992-1994 findings in Greensboro, which were blown off when this march to the faith-based initiative was in full swing in the mid-'90s. Bob has watched, almost helplessly, as bright articulate people do the wrong things confidently. We are on the verge of doing it again and now, there is much more research, besides Bob's, that says Bush's Initiative had no impact on the indigenous partnerships in communities. It is like saying the earth is not flat and not the center of the universe and fighting against very powerful voices whose Christianity undergirds this whole push.

Here is the connection.

PART 1:


PART 2:

Posted by Religious Action Center at 9:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

A high school friend of mine and I have differing viewpoints on nearly every social issue imaginable - marriage equality, reproductive rights, gun control, the works. As you can imagine, it occasionally leads to some heated battles that leave us both struggling to find the balance between respecting one another's views while still defending our own. For once, though, I think she and I have found something we can agree on.

Anti-abortion activists, disheartened by and disappointed in the government's failure to overturn Roe v. Wade and completely outlaw abortions, have turned to a new tactic - prevention and care. In this Washington Post article, reporter Jacqueline Salmon writes, "Although the activists insist that they are not retreating from their belief that abortion is immoral and should be outlawed, they argue that a more practical alternative is to try to reduce abortions through other means."

Recognizing that poverty and economic stability directly correlate to many women's decisions to terminate pregnancies, this new division of anti-abortion activists is pushing for government funding to provide pregnant women with services they can't otherwise afford - health care, child care, money for college tuition. Activists hope that once such services become available to these women, fewer will choose to terminate their pregnancies.

(A side note: I'd take it one step further by advocating for comprehensive sexuality education in schools, but the coalition has opted not to take a position on this one. By finding the root of the problem and lowering the number of unwanted pregnancies that occur in the first place, we can reduce the need for abortions - something that even the most pro-choice among us see as the ultimate goal.)

Regardless of the stance the coalition has (or, in this case, hasn't) taken on sex ed and no matter the coalition's underlying goals, any proposal to help provide genuine, medically accurate services to women in need should be welcomed wholeheartedly. President-elect Obama, a supporter of women's right to choose, spoke throughout his campaign of the need to reduce abortions and find middle ground between those who stand on either side of the abortion debate. Some within the anti-choice movement have labeled these activists' new tactics as "selling out" to the pro-choicers, but I see it the way Obama does - as a step forward for progress. I welcome the opportunity to work for measures of social justice we can all agree on.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 6:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

At the Reform Movement Biennial Convention in December 2007, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, President of the Union for Reform Judaism, urged Reform Jews to take action in their home communities to expand access to affordable health care, stating:

"We live in a country with a pitifully inadequate health insurance system that causes horrors every day so tragic that they could rip the heart out of a stone.... The time has long since passed when our leaders should have done what every other advanced country has somehow managed to do: provide all its citizens with essential health care....But we need not look only to Washington for answers."

Across the country, Jews are taking this message to heart, doing everything from running free health clinics to lobbying their state legislators. Check out this Reform Judaism Magazine article, "Action: Confronting the Health Care Crisis," written by former RAC Legislative Assistant Donald Cohen-Cutler, about what Reform Jews are doing on health care.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 11:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Joanna Blotner is a former Legislative Assistant at the Religious Action Center. She currently works as Religion & Faith Program Coordinator for the Human Rights Campaign. All views expressed are her own.

Emotionally processing the results of this year's election has been a very confusing, exhausting and heart-wrenching process for me. On the one hand, I am overjoyed that our nation sent a stronger majority of LGBT-friendly legislators back to Congress. On the other hand, I am nothing short of disgusted that two more state constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage passed in Arizona and Florida; that voters in Arkansas have barred single parents and gay couples from adopting children in need of loving homes; and that California voters decided to revoke equal marriage rights granted constitutional by the state Supreme Court. As MSNBC's Keith Olbermann said in his special comment on Proposition 8, it is one thing to further deny civil rights that have never been granted, but it is another thing entirely to "take away the legal right which [someone] already had" - Olbermann's comments are by far the most powerful and beautiful I've heard yet. 

In the wake of the passage of Proposition 8 in California, thousands of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and allied activists have taken to the streets to protest discrimination. This past Saturday in cities in every single state across the nation, there were hundreds, in some cases thousands, of demonstrators demanding marriage equality in rallies organized by individuals connected with Join the Impact. I attended the rally here in Washington, D.C. and was quite impressed.

When I arrived at the Capitol Reflecting Pool, the sun was shining and about 500 people were gathered with signs and flags. Signs read everything from "Seper8 is NOT Equal" and "Equal Marriage NOW" (courtesy of the National Organization for Women) to "Now can I vote on your marriage?" and "My mom had 3 marriages, all I want is 1." After about 30 minutes of peaceful protesting at the Capitol, we marched down the National Mall to the White House, chanting and cheering for equal rights the whole way. Despite the torrential downpour that occurred halfway through the march, we kept on going, picking up protesters along the way. Though people were clearly angry about the hateful votes in California and elsewhere, there was little rage conveyed by the crowd; instead, people were incredibly affable and enthusiastic about the protest, despite the rain. I often question the usefulness of protests and rallies, but this one was unique to me, perhaps because it wasn't really directed at Congress or the Bush Administration or perhaps because it was not intended to be a typical "numbers game" type of rally. There was such a sense of camaraderie to this particular protest; the way it organized and empowered the LGBT and ally community was truly moving.

In the fight for equal civil rights for the LGBT community, nothing can be taken for granted, and mobilizing against Prop 8 was very much a wake up call in our organizing efforts. For now, it is back to the drawing board on how to be better organized, better funded, and better prepared for upcoming battles - but I have a feeling this nation will slowly bend toward equality and justice. Just before we reached Lafayette Park at the White House on Saturday, a faint rainbow appeared in the sky - almost too fanciful to believe - and I can only hope that this is a sign that in the end, love will win out.

Posted by Religious Action Center at 6:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

There is no question that the approval of 4 ballot initiatives limiting civil rights for the LGBT community marked a serious step backwards for equality for all.  However, the fight is not over yet!
A number of court cases have been filed in California to reverse the passage of Proposition 8.  The filings can be found on the California Supreme Court's website.  

While the legal arguments are lengthy and full of lawyer-speak, the main point is this: to strip the civil rights of a group of people is such a vast revision of the constitution that more scrutiny is required--a ballot referenda is not enough.

I plan to keep up-to-date and urge all you avid RAC-blog fans out there to do the same.  The LA Times is probably your best bet for staying in the loop.  An article they printed on November 11th does a nice job of explaining the foundation of the legal challenges being raised and this article from today's paper talks a bit about the history of similar challenges and federal precedent.

It will undoubtedly be an uphill battle, but I am hoping that my overwhelming positive thinking will help me develop ESP and coerce a friendly decision from the California Supreme Court.

While I don't expect that I will acquire superpowers, there are some real things to feel positively about in the world of civil marriage equality.  On October 10th the Connecticut Supreme Court overturned a ban on same-sex marriages.  The New York Times ran a piece on the first marriage licenses awarded and CNN has a short clip on the same topic.

Finally, if you are looking to be inspired and maybe a little teary-eyed, check out how Keith Olbermann signed off from MSNBC on November 10th.  He just might be my new hero.

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 2:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

On Wednesday morning, I ventured to Capitol Hill to attempt to hear an oral argument at the Supreme Court.  I have walked by, ogled at, and even taken pictures in front of this majestic and imposing building, but until Wednesday, I had never been inside. 

I was hoping to hear the oral argument for Pleasant Grove v. Summum, an interesting free speech (First Amendment) case that explores whether monuments donated to public parks qualify as private speech or government speech.  This case seems to have gotten more press attention and generated more public interest than other Supreme Court cases this term. (For more details on the case, see the posting entitled, Preview: Pleasant Grove v. Summum.)

Unfortunately, this increased public interest manifested itself as a long line of people, waiting in the cold, hoping to get inside the Supreme Court.  Even though I arrived nearly an hour and a half before the argument was scheduled to begin, I was not among the few people who were able to get a seat for the duration of the arguments.  Instead, I joined hundreds of other people who transitioned to a different line, which would allow us to go inside for only 3 to 5 minutes. 

Despite my disappointment at not being able to hear an entire oral argument, I was excited to be inside the Court for the first time.  I was escorted into the court room, which was much smaller than I expected.  It was clearly designed solely to serve its purpose as place where cases are argued and not to accommodate the hundreds of people who wait outside its doors each morning.  The room wasn't opulent by any stretch, but its décor was grandiose, with red velvet curtains, hefty marble columns, leather chairs, and intricately patterned ceilings. 

I was excited to see the nine Justices, all of whom I have learned so much about in the past few months.  Even in the few minutes that I was observing them, they transformed from celebrities or political figures into real people with exceptional grasps of Constitutional law and the acuity to ask direct and pointed questions of the lawyers before them.

Being inside the Court certainly inspires humility-- both because you are in the presence of such great minds and because you are able to witness our unique system of checks and balances at work.  It is an experience that I hope to repeat many times and one that I highly recommend to all who find themselves in our nation's capital.

While I was waiting outside in the cold, the Justices announced their first decision of the term in the case Winter v Natural Resources Defense Council.  The typical conservative voting bloc and Justice Kennedy joined together for a majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice Roberts, which will allow the Navy to continue its use of sonar for training exercises off the coast of Southern California, despite the potential negative impact on whales in the area.

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 5:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

On November 5th, the Knesset passed new legislation enabling pre-divorce distribution of property. Previously, husbands could refuse to grant their wives a divorce, subjecting them to extortion and preventing them from receiving a fair share and moving on with life. By allowing property and assets to be distributed before the formal divorce, albeit under several condition, the law gives women in Israel much greater power over their lives. Anat Hoffman, executive director of the Israel Religious Action Center, describes this as "a tremendous victory for Israeli women," and Robyn Shames, executive director of the International Coalition for Agunah Rights, commented that the "new law is a major breakthrough...it greatly reduces the opportunities for blackmail by husbands in dividing up a couple's assets and will assist women in obtaining a get."

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Some very interesting reading this week on Jim Wallis' "God's Politics" blog. 

Wallis, the President of Sojourners and author of "The Great Awakening: Reviving Faith & Politics in a Post-Religious Right American" (2008) and "God's Politics: Why the Right Gets it Wrong and the Left Doesn't Get It" (2005) has solicited brief (usually one paragraph) letters from an interesting array of religious leaders to President-Elect Obama.  (This press release serves as something of a table of contents for the letters.)

The authors include Sister Helen Prejean (on ""A Time for New Transparency,") Bono (on "Obama's Harmony of Intellect and Intuition"), Kathleen Kennedy Townsend ("Building the Capacity for Neighbors to Help Neighbors"), Nicholas Kristoff ("An International 'Teach for America'"), and Marian Wright Edelman ("A Covenant with Every Child").

Posted by Religious Action Center at 1:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In coalition with a broad array of religious groups and faith communities, the Union for Reform Judaism has sent the following letter to President-Elect Barack Obama urging him to make reproductive health a priority in the first months of his administration. The decisions people make about whether or when to have children are among the most sacred and monumental that people consider in their life. We are hopeful that the New Year will shine a light on the morality and value of addressing these issues and that the administration makes them an immediate priority.

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 9:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

At the most recent Commission on Social Action meeting, Commission members agreed that as we grapple with how to help each other and our country deal with the economic downturn, we must also work to educate ourselves about the economy to make sure this situation doesn't repeat itself.  These two episodes of NPR's This American Life do a good job of explaining the economic crisis and feature some personal stories that will help you put a face on the various people, from main street to wall street, who are affected.
About the Mortgage Crisis: Giant Pool of Money

Issues Surrounding the Government Bailout Bill: Another Frightening Show About the Economy

Also check out the URJ's website that has resources about how your congregation can help its members and community in this time of economic need.

For legislative options, look for RAC action alerts later this week that will call for a real, green stimulus of our economy.

Many congregations are already working to reduce the weight of the crisis on their synagogue, on their members and on local aid organizations. If your congregation has an effort, big or small, to help lift the economic burden, please let me know so I can share your ideas with others. Feel free to email me at MHellman-Tincher@rac.org or call at 202-387-2800.

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 6:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

When our newly elected government takes office in January, one of the top issues on the agenda will be energy and climate policy, and one of loudest voices for the environment will be the faith community. If you still need evidence that the environment has become a religious issue, look no further than the newly released Green Bible. A joint project of the Sierra Club, the Humane Society, and the National Council of Churches Eco-Justice Program, the Green Bible aims to "equip and encourage people to see God's vision for creation and help them engage in the work of healing and sustaining it."

More than a trendy spin on traditional religious text, the Green Bible is the basis for a plan of action for the Christian Creation Care movement. In addition to highlighting hundreds of passages related to the environment, the Green Bible includes essays from scholars and spiritual leaders including Pope John Paul II and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and advice on how to get more involved with the environmental movement. Practicing what it preaches, the Green Bible is printed on recycled paper using soy-based ink, with a cover made from natural cotton and linen fibers. The release is gaining wide attention, with mentions in the New York Times and ABCNews. With Bible sales between $400 and $600 MILLION annually in the U.S. alone, and specialized Bibles for everyone from couples to sports fans, this attention comes as no surprise.

I commend the National Council of Churches for taking part in this ground-breaking effort to incorporate care for the earth into the fabric of religious life. The environmental Bible sends a clear message about the interests and priorities of contemporary Christians. This effort is both a market- and faith-based push for environmentalism, combining two of the major greening forces at play today.

The Bible carries a powerful message about our responsibility to care for our planet. The Jewish community can look to this project as a model as we continually reexamine our own liturgy. While some may be skeptical of a 'new take' on the text, it is not necessary to modify the Torah to use it as a teaching tool- the message is already there. As we are told in Genesis, "The human being was placed in the Garden of Eden to till it and to tend it."  Jewish environmentalism is fundamentally based in our sacred texts, and the Green Bible serves as yet another reminder of how strong a message these texts send.

Posted by Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism at 4:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Emily Kane is a former RAC Legislative Assistant and a law student at the University of Arizona's James E. Rogers College of Law.

Like many former RAC LAs (Class of 2004-05), I find that my life is often not far removed from 2027 Massachusetts Avenue. Not long after I co-launched the Southern Arizona Election Protection Team through the Lawyer's Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, I found out that the RAC had endorsed the Lawyer's Committee's work as well. It was fitting to share this common purpose with the RAC, the place that gave me so many of the tools to lead this effort. I'd like to use this forum to tell you a bit about how we spent November 4 in Tucson, AZ.
On November 4, 80 volunteers - mostly law students from the UofA - hit the streets of Tucson committed to the phrase on their matching black t-shirts: "Election Protec