Rape Prevention

I've been preparing to teach some classes on personal safety and self-defense for young women. As a martial arts and self-defense instructor, I have read my fair share of material on this subject. I can honestly say that the following rape prevention tips, if followed, would be enormously successful, far more so than any other tips I've read.

Please pass them on to everyone you know.





-- Posted from my iPhone

Most popular posts???

While doing a little blog housekeeping, I installed a widget that displays my five most popular posts of all times. I'm disappointed in what I learned.

I mean, really? Why not one of my posts about how amazing grace is? why not one of my humorous posts? why not one that brags about how incredible my offspring are?

But, instead, we have the ones about wacky teachers. That's what I'm known for? Controversy?

[said somewhat in jest...but I was surprised...] 

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Setting the record straight

As a martial arts and self-defense instructor, I am continually surprised at a number of the myths that people present as facts.

One of the newer myths that some men are attempting to perpetuate, without any sort of proof (because there is none) is that women are just as violent as men, and that women abuse their spouses as often or more often than men do. I just ran across this on the Bayly Blog:

The violence and victims literature tells us women are every bit as violent as men, and lesbian couples are the most violent of all. Even when asked to report on prior heterosexual relationships, lesbians report their present homosexual relationship to be more violent than any prior heterosexual relationship.

No footnotes, of course.

A quick Google search turned up the following:

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, between 1998 and 2002:

• Of the almost 3.5 million violent crimes committed against family members, 49% of these were crimes against spouses.
• 84% of spouse abuse victims were females, and 86% of victims of dating partner abuse at were female.
• Males were 83% of spouse murderers and 75% of dating partner murderers
• 50% of offenders in state prison for spousal abuse had killed their victims. Wives were more likely than husbands to be killed by their spouses: wives were about half of all spouses in the population in 2002, but 81% of all persons killed by their spouse.

  Matthew R. Durose et al., U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 207846, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Family Violence Statistics: Including Statistics on Strangers and Acquaintances, at 31-32 (2005), available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fvs.pdf

In a 1995-1996 study conducted in the 50 States and the District of Columbia, nearly 25% of women and 7.6% of men were raped and/or physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, or dating partner/acquaintance at some time in their lifetime (based on survey of 16,000 participants, equally male and female).

Patricia Tjaden & Nancy Thoennes, U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 181867, Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence, at iii (2000), available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/181867.htm

Sexual Assault According to the National Violence Against Women Survey:

• Women are more likely to be victims of sexual violence than men: 78% of the victims of rape and sexual assault are women and 22% are men.
• Most perpetrators of sexual violence are men. Among acts of sexual violence committed against women since the age of 18, 100% of rapes, 92% of physical assaults, and 97% of stalking acts were perpetrated by men. Sexual violence against men is also mainly male violence: 70% of rapes, 86% of physical assaults, and 65% of stalking acts were perpetrated by men.
• In 8 out of 10 rape cases, the victim knows the perpetrator. Of people who report sexual violence, 64% of women and 16% of men were raped, physically assaulted, or stalked by an intimate partner. This includes a current or former spouse, cohabitating partner, boyfriend/girlfriend, or date.

  Patricia Tjaden & Nancy Thoennes, U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 183781, Full Report of the Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, at iv (2000), available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183781.htm

• Another national survey found that 34% of women were victims of sexual coercion by a husband or intimate partner in their lifetime.
  

  Kathleen C. Basile, Prevalence of Wife Rape and Other Intimate Partner Sexual Coercion in a Nationally Representative Sample of Women, 17 Violence and Victims 511 (2002).

The National Women's Study, a three-year longitudinal study of a national probability sample of 4,008 adult women (2,008 of whom represent a cross section of all adult women and 2,000 of whom are an over sample of younger women between the ages of 18 and 34), found:

• 13% of adult women had been victims of completed rape during their lifetime
• 22% of rape victims were assaulted by someone they had never seen before or did not know well.
• 9% of victims were raped by husbands or ex-husbands.
• 11% were raped by fathers or stepfathers.
• 10% were raped by boyfriends or ex-boyfriends.
• 16% were raped by other relatives.
• 29% were raped by other non-relatives, such as friends and neighbors.

  See Dean G. Kilpatrick et al., Rape in America: A Report to the Nation (1992); Heidi S. Resnick et al., Prevalence of Civilian Trauma and PTSD in a Representative National Sample of Women, 61 J. of Consulting and Clinical Psychol. 984 (1993); Dean G. Kilpatrick et al., A 2-Year Longitudinal Analysis of the Relationship Between Violent Assault and Substance Use in Women, 65 J. of Consulting and Clinical Psychol. 834 (1997); Kilpatrick et al., Rape, Other Violence Against Women, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: Critical Issues in Assessing the Adversity-Stress-Psychopathology Relationship, in Adversity, Stress, & Psychopathology 161-176 (Bruce P. Dohrenwend ed., 1998); Dean G. Kilpatrick, Rape and Sexual Assault, Aug. 7, 2006, http://www.musc.edu/vawprevention/research/sa.shtml

11% of lesbians reported violence by their female partner and 15% of gay men who had lived with a male partner reported being victimized by a male partner.

Patricia Tjaden, Symposium on Integrating Responses to Domestic Violence: Extent and Nature of Intimate Partner Violence as measured by the National Violence Against Women Survey, 47 Loy. L. Rev. 41, 54 (2003).

• One survey found that same-sex cohabitants reported significantly more intimate partner violence than did opposite-sex cohabitants. Among women, 39.2% of the same-sex cohabitants and 21.7 of the opposite- sex cohabitants reported being raped, physically assaulted, and/or stalked by a marital/cohabiting partner at some time in their lifetime.
  

  Patricia Tjaden & Nancy Thoennes, U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 181867, Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, at 30 (2000), available at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/181867.htm

• 15.4% of same-sex cohabiting men reported being raped, physically assaulted and/or stalked by a male partner, but 10.8% reported such violence by a female partner.
  

  Patricia Tjaden & Nancy Thoennes, U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 181867, Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, at 30 (2000), available at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/181867.htm

Physical Injury and Medical Treatment

• The U.S. Department of Justice reported that 37% of all women who sought care in hospital emergency rooms for violence-related injuries were injured by a current or former spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend.
  

  Michael R. Rand, U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 156921, Violence-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency Departments, (1997) available at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/vrithed.txt

• Women are significantly more likely than men to be injured during an assault: 31.5% of female rape victims, compared with 16.1% of male rape victims, reported being injured during their most recent rape, and 39-42% percent of female physical assault victims, compared with 20-25% of male physical assault victims, reported being injured during their most recent physical assault.
  
• 35.6% of the women injured during their most recent rape and 30.2% of the women injured during their most recent physical assault received medical treatment. Approximately 21.5% of male victims of intimate partner physical assaults that resulted in an injury sought medical treatment.
  

  Patricia Tjaden & Nancy Thoennes, U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 183781, Full Report of the Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, at iv (2000) available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183781.htm; Patricia Tjaden & Nancy Thoennes, U.S. Dep't of Just., NCJ 181867, Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, at iv (2000), available at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/181867.htm

Ninety-two percent of women who were physically abused by their partners did not discuss these incidents with their physicians; 57% did not discuss the incidents with anyone. Additionally, in four different studies of survivors of abuse, 70% to 81% of the patients studied reported that they would like their healthcare providers to ask them privately about intimate partner violence.

Panagiota V. Caralis & Regina Musialowski, Women's Experiences with Domestic Violence and Their Attitudes and Expectations Regarding Medical Care of Abuse Victims, 90 S. Med. J. 1075 (1997); Jeanne McCauley et al., Inside 'Pandora's Box': Abused Women's Experiences with Clinicians and Health Services, 13 Archives of Internal Med. 549 (1998); Lawrence S. Friedman et al., Inquiry About Victimization Experiences: A Survey of Patient Preferences and Physician Practices, 152 Archives of Internal Med. (1992); Michael Rodriguez et al., Breaking the Silence: Battered Women's Perspectives on Medical Care, 5 Archives of Fam. Med. 153 (1996).

From: "Violence by Intimates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current or Former Spouses, Boyfriends, and Girlfriends, U.S. Department of Justice, March, 1998"

• Estimates range from 960,000 incidents of violence against a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend each year to 4 million women who are physically abused by their husbands or live-in partners each year.

• While women are less likely than men to be victims of violent crimes overall, women are 5 to 8 times more likely than men to be victimized by an intimate partner.

• Violence by an intimate partner accounts for about 21% of violent crime experienced by women and about 2 % of the violence experienced by men.

• 31,260 women were murdered by an intimate from 1976-1996.

• Females accounted for 39% of the hospital emergency department visits for violence-related injuries in 1994 but 84% of the persons treated for injuries inflicted by intimates.

Over 500,00 women are stalked by an intimate partner each year.

5.3 million women are abused each year.

1,232 women are killed each year by an intimate partner.

Domestic violence is the leading cause of injury to women.

Women are more likely to be attacked by someone they know rather than by a stranger.

[from the American Institute on Domestic Violence]


I have no idea what "violence and victims literature" Tim Bayly is referring to, since he does not actually cite any, but this unnamed "literature" cannot be credible if it contradicts the most reliable sources.

As for the article referenced in the Bayly Blog: What sort of man, instead of calling the police, instead of leaving his wife, would sign "a contract with his wife that entitles her to attack him once a week"? Why not sign a contract that entitling him to live free of attack from her? Why not go to her kung fu sifu and demand that she not be allowed to misuse her martial arts? Something about this story is very fishy indeed...almost as fishy as the unsubstantiated statements Tim Bayly makes about domestic violence.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Still thinking of voting for Obama?

If you are not 100% pro-abortion (as opposed to pro-life or undecided...or genuinely pro-choice...) you may want to consider this before casting your vote.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice at the bottom of the sidebar. Thank you.

Sad anniversary

Recently I heard something on the radio about Terry Schiavo; apparently it was the anniversary of her death. I had written quite a bit about the controversy back in the beginning days of my blog. The post I'd like to most remember her by is this one.

This post, along with my entire blog, is copyrighted. Please read and honor the copyright notice on the bottom of this page. Thank you.

Seminar caller

For background, read here.

Since I've been accused of being a "seminar caller", I have to admit that I'm full of curiosity to discover what exactly it is that I supposedly am. So I googled "seminar caller" for answers.

I've cut and pasted the following from Wikipedia. Yes, I know it's a ridiculous source and that any fool can write any nonsense he wants, but I thought it might be a passable source for slang terms:

A seminar caller is someone who telephones a radio talk show for the purpose of astroturfing, which is the mass promotion of a particular product, service or political point of view as if it were genuinely spontaneous, or grassroots.

Many seminar callers try to portray themselves as regular people, claim to agree with the host's point of view, then begin to read a contrary opinion from an agenda or list of talking points widely circulated by a group known to oppose the views of the host.

Seminar callers get their name from the seminars they attend to learn how to most effectively get their message on the air. However, faxes, e-mails and newsletters are more common modes of disseminating astroturf messages to seminar callers.

Before the 2004 U.S. presidential election, seminar callers began to tell more elaborate stories to establish credibility, behaving as if they were actors playing the role of someone with beliefs opposite of their own, in an attempt to erode the opposing candidate's "base" of political support.

The term "seminar caller" was most likely coined by conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh, but is in wide use among talk show hosts and audiences. See Also: Astroturfing

What can I say?

This accusation is one of the funniest things that has been said about me in a loooong time. But, just in case any of my accusers are reading my blog (and I don't flatter myself that they are bothering to do so) let me state for the record:

You got me. I'm not a regular person. In fact, I'm part of a group of people that has a definite agenda. I regularly attend meetings and read materials that, in part, teach me how to get our message across more effectively. In fact, just this morning I was reading a book that's sole purpose is to teach readers how to communicate our message fearlessly.

However, I don't tell elaborate stories to cover up my involvement with this group. In fact, I'm quite upfront about my agenda and about my message --- although I need to be much, much more bold about it than I am.

I'm sure most, if not all, of my readers know about this message and about the meetings I attend, because I've written about it quite openly on my blog.

I'm not a regular person. Well, to be accurate, I am and I'm not. Through nothing special in myself, but entirely by the grace of God, I am a new creature in Christ Jesus.

I belong to the Body of Christ.

My message, my main message, has always been the gospel, that glorious story of God's grace. (Look at my sidebar under "Most Important Posts on my Blog".)

And, yes, I'm trying to learn to communicate it more effectively.

If that makes me a seminar caller, I will accept that title gladly and unashamedly, because I am not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

But...somehow I don't think that's quite what was meant by the accusation...

Christian discourse

Those who have known me online for any number of years know a number of my faults: I tend to be too sarcastic at times. I'd like to think that's all in the past, but I'm afraid it is still a besetting sin that clings to me. I'd also like to think that I am now a much kinder, gentler person. I cringe when I recall some of my diatribes and debates in the past, when I was...well, long on zeal and short on tact.

So I have a soft spot for bloggers and debaters who share some of my faults, past and present. Sure, I can only take some of them in infrequent small doses, but I find myself sympathetic to the lack of diplomacy, the harshness, the having to be right at all costs, the "in your face" rhetoric, the trampling of other people, etc. Not that I approve of these things...it's just that I struggle with the same things and recall the days when I was, regrettably, insistent that I was right in behaving this way.

Grace, of course, won out. Not that I demonstrate that grace adequately, but Jesus has tenderized my heart.

So when I'm looking for those who point me to Jesus, who remind me of grace, who exemplify the fruit of the Spirit (love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control) there are certain blogs that I visit.

But --- and I regret to say that this still happens --- when I want to be entertained by debate that makes no pretense at being loving, joyous, peaceful, patient, kind, etc., there are certain other blogs that I visit.

So recently I found myself visiting the Bayly's blog and, against my better judgment, involved myself in discussion. Just this morning, I posted the following, which has since vanished:

Singingowl, thanks for saying so much better than I did what I was trying to say.

And, Tim --- yes, of course there are some gender-specific commands. Wives, submit to your husbands as unto the Lord is the one that usually comes most readily to the minds of many. Then there is the less popular "Husbands, love your wives as Christ loves the church". There are others of course. But the vast number of commands are, I strongly believe, not gender-specific. Love one another. Do not consider yourself more highly than you should. Put on the full armor of God. Be strong and courageous. Fight the good fight. Do not be weary in well-doing. Etc., etc.

Frankly, I fully appreciate why some of my ultra-conservative sisters balk at the above commands and want to pretend they are "blue" commands. My flesh balks at them as well. "Do not be weary in well-doing" is hardly what I wanted to hear or obey on those horrible days when I was puking my guts out with all-day-long sickness, trying to teach my older children, and having to change toddler diapers --- and then the mere thought of cooking dinner after all that! And "Be strong and courageous" seemed hideously unfair to say to a woman during the pregnancy following a second-trimester miscarriage. Surely God didn't mean ME. Why, those must be masculine commands!

Certainly whatever our hand finds to do we are to do heartily unto the Lord, whether that is working in the kitchen or providing for our family in some other means or serving those outside our family...

Tim, I found it interesting that you quoted the verse about not providing for one's own family. I understood you to be saying that Custis James is, according to you, disobeying this verse by not being a kitchen wife. I would agree with this if this meant that her family was not provided with meals. However, does this verse really mean that we are forbidden from delegating tasks to others or forbidden from hiring out domestic duties? How many meals can we eat out in a restaurant before we are guilty of not providing for our own families? Was I guilty of not providing for my family last night because my son cooked dinner? How many times can we call the plumber before we are in sin? Must the husband provide all the lawn-mowing and yard maintenance or can he delegate this to his son? Would it be more sinful for him to hire it out to a stranger? Would my husband be in sin if he didn't provide me with a knife rack he made himself but instead bought one?

I'm curious because I've never heard this application of that particular verse.

One more thing. Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to what a "seminar caller" is. I have to confess that I'm not a fan of talk radio, so I have no idea what this phrase means, and am curious as to what it is that I'm being accused of. (No, I haven't been to any seminars in a very long time.)

Donna, you wrote: "I have no explanation for some of her ideas."

Which ones? the idea that our highest calling is to be servants of Christ? I admit that I once actually made someone laugh by saying this, many years ago, and I was told that I was crazy...and brainwashed by having a pastor for a father. I guess it is somewhat of a crazy idea to some. I hope that's not the idea of mine that you find no explanation for.

You also wrote: "I wish that she would not dodge the issue of Mrs. James' misuse of Scripture. "

Tell you what, Donna. When I've finished some huge ongoing projects around the house, have caught up with a number of things that need my attention, and have read through the stack of books I've been meaning to read for a long time, then I'll consider turning my attention to reading Custis James. I'll probably start with the lone book of hers that I think I still have around here somewhere, the one I dimly recall reading during some pregnancy or another and being encouraged to study God's Word more diligently. Which book do you suggest I read next? And what language resources do you suggest I study in order to gain an intelligent perspective on the Hebrew? I'm not just putting you on the spot, Donna. In fact, I'd like others here to weigh in. Which books would you suggest I read first in order to get the best picture of how Custis James uses or misuses Scripture? Which resources do you use in your study of Hebrew?

Then, a little bit ago, I attempted to post the following, only to get some sort of warning about my comment pending approval because of suspected spam:

I'm not sure why my earlier comment of this morning has disappeared. But, Tim, I wanted to thank you for provoking a wonderful study of 1 Timothy 5:3-16. When I asked my husband about his understanding of the "if anyone does not provide for his own household" warning, he --- as usual --- encouraged us to look at the verse in context. This is a great example of some very gender-specific commandments. Although I've heard of a widower who tried to claim that his family needed to support him, I think the Bible is quite clear that this passage deals with widows, not just with gender-unspecified people whose spouses have died.

Those who know me know that we have a number of widows in our family, including a young widow, and reading this passage was convicting to us as well as providing interesting family discussion.

However, I'll admit that we still don't see that this passage is forbidding wives from hiring out the cooking. I really wish you would address the questions I'd raised earlier in my comment that has since seemed to have vanished.

Donna, I didn't want to seem as if I was sidestepping you, so I decided to spend a little time searching the internet to see if I could find some direct statements, in context, that Custis James makes about Ruth. I did, and I posted this to the discussion:

"Excuse me for not offering a remotely scholarly or even well-researched perspective. But the whole topic of your perspective on the book of Ruth has come up elsewhere, so I set off in search of more information and landed here.

I'll freely admit that I've always been a bit baffled about the whole concept of "finding your voice". This may be due to the fact that I grew up in an extended family where, for the most part, my more carefully-considered opinions were very much valued and appreciated. In fact, because of that, it took me a few years of marriage to figure out that my mother-in-law had not spent her entire life in eager anticipation of hearing my every opinion on every topic. If anything, I had to learn the wisdom of silencing my voice.

However, this [quoting Carolyn Custis James in bold] did resonate with me:

“It’s a man’s world,” we’re told. To succeed as a leader, we must adapt ourselves to the world of men. We must learn to think and speak like a man.

While I don’t want to discount the importance of understanding men and how they think and operate, we aren’t men and are giving up something central to who we are if we lose ourselves by imitating them. We end up distancing our very selves from the message we proclaim. We can routinely prepare and deliver messages without connecting our words to our own hearts and struggles, without tapping into the rich perspectives God has given us as women or drawing out of our personal histories with God.

Back in my single days when I was out in the work force, I had a number of rather heated discussions with other women because I was rather stubbornly fond of my notion that I did not need to sacrifice my gifts and perspectives as a woman in order to be successful. As I would often say, "I have no interest in becoming a cheap imitation of a man." (Yes, my voice was a bit lacking in diplomacy at times.)

But I just finished re-reading the 2nd chapter of Ruth and I have to admit that I don't find in it what you have described here, at least not quite in the way that I think you are saying.

I see Ruth as someone who is a wonderful example of loyalty and of being protective. Her mother-in-law attempts to send her away, but Ruth insists on going with Naomi. Finally Naomi, seeing how determined Ruth is and that there is no persuading her otherwise, says no more (Ruth 1:18)

It is, I believe, that devotion and loyalty that initially attracts Boaz to Ruth. It seems to stir up in him loyalty, devotion, and protectiveness towards Ruth. I believe it is her example that speaks volumes. But I don't necessarily see this as an example of "finding one's voice", unless I am oversimplifying what you mean and taking the phrase way too literally.

I also don't think Ruth necessarily took on a leadership role here. But I need to qualify my opinion by saying that I think our culture is way too obsessed with leadership and tends to try to see it everywhere. It's as if we all feel that every situation calls for a leader. If my friend and I decide to bake a cake together, do we really have to make sure that one of us is leading and the other one is following? Isn't that silly? Am I leading when I say, "Hey, let's beat these eggs a bit longer" but then she's leading when she decides to put in more vanilla than the recipe calls for?

I simply don't see leadership in this wonderful account. I see a degree of loyalty on the part of Ruth that puts me to shame. I see devotion and concern and protectiveness on her part. And I see how God rewarded her through Boaz, who saw her devotion and rewarded it with devotion, loyalty, and protection of his own.

Of course, most importantly, the whole concept of Boaz as the kinsman-redeemer is a beautiful picture of Christ.

What am I missing and why?"

Here is my question to my readers, and I ask you to be --- if need be --- brutally honest: Would you have removed my first comment? If so, why? How could I have worded it in a way that was more in keeping with good Christian discourse?

Good laugh --- but all too true

I found this hilarious video via the TrueWomanhood Blog. Unfortunately, there is way too much truth in it!




This was a good reminder to me that we need to use true Biblical discernment --- and not sensationalism, hysteria, poor logic, and a lack of integrity --- whenever we examine the teaching and practices of those who profess to be Christian. Discernment is surely lacking in the American church today, and it is something that we need to seek after. By the way, this video would make a great exercise for homeschoolers: see how many logical fallacies you can identify!

Updated to add the following:

Apparently the church responsible for the above video has a number of other humorous videos. I thought this one was just as funny.

Thoughts on racism (part 13)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

Thatmom has an excellent post about racism on her blog. I just commented:

Karen, thanks so much for this post. You've expressed the issue so well --- and you've inspired me to take a more "organized" approach in teaching my children about racism.

I am deeply grieved that certain homeschooling circles have shown themselves to be a haven for racists. It reminds me of the accusations leveled against the "Christian Day School Movement" years ago. Apparently when more and more schools were integrated by busing in children from different communities and ethnic groups, some churches quickly started their own private schools in order to be able to continue keeping their children isolated from other races. When I was in college and a friend of mine heard that my younger brother attended a church school --- and that I worked at that same school --- she was upset that I would participate in such a racist institution. I was shocked because this is the first time I'd ever heard about the racist beginnings of some church schools. Our own church school was quite diverse; in fact, I was able to quote the statistics off the top of my head because I had just finished an ethnographic study of the school population.

Fast forward quite a few years. When we first began homeschooling, two of the women in our small but growing ISP/support group were concerned that they were perceived as doing something that was "white". While they never felt anything but loving acceptance from us, it bothered them that the homeschooling movement was seen, especially by outsiders, as a mostly white, middle-class phenomena. I would hate to think that, for some people, that might be its main attraction.

Thoughts on racism (part 12)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

From the Internet Monk:

Racial issues and racial respect are huge parts of my life because of my ministry setting. My own life history has been deeply effected by my beliefs on racial justice. My own integrity requires me to make a “zero tolerance” stand on racism. I don’t talk with racists. I don’t put up with them in class. I don’t listen to it in casual conversation. I get up and leave. To me, my witness to racial justice is one cloth with my commitment to Jesus as Lord.

Amen.

Thoughts on racism (part 10)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

One of the arguments for kinism goes somewhat like this: "But we're just trying to pass on our European culture to our children and grandchildren!"

I'm not buying that argument. If that's all the kinists were concerned about, instead of trying to convince people of their segregationist arguments, they would be doing what my parents did to pass on their culture:

1. My mother taught us to speak her native language.

2. My mother taught us to read her native language.

3. My parents taught us a number of the traditional children's stories of their cultures.

4. My mother cooked "traditional" foods from both cultures, and both parents introduced us to music, art, architecture, history, legends, folk tales, and more.

5. My parents included their own cultural elements in our celebrations of holidays and birthdays.

6. Most importantly, my parents taught us to examine our two cultures critically, from a Biblical perspective, and to accept the good while rejecting the bad. They taught us to be nonconformists and to stand by principle, rather than by culture or by popularity.

They felt no need to segregate us from other ethnic groups or cultures in order to teach us about either of their cultural heritages.

I don't think kinism is about preserving and passing on a culture. I think it's about prejudice.

Edited to add:

The best cultural heritage my parents passed on to us, and continue to pass on, is our family culture. This culture is interwoven with our faith, and includes such things as prayer, Bible study, ministry, hospitality, "house music", strong marriages, lots of love, good food, laughter, hard work, an appreciation for art and beauty, and a lot of other things that permeate our lives and homes. Again, we didn't practice these things in isolation. In fact, we practiced them within the culture of the Body of Christ --- and that enriched us far more than avoiding other family and ethnic cultures ever would have.

The most important culture to preserve is one based on the truth of God's Word. Your family culture may look different --- your food and music may be different, for example --- but what binds us together is that we are all part of His Body.

Thoughts on racism (part 9)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

I've had some not insignificant differences of opinion and even theology with R.C. Sproul, Jr. But, as a friend of mine says, "Even a broken watch is right twice a day." I think Sproul, Jr. is right more often than that, and he was certain right in his open letter to Harry Seabrook, a kinist. Read it here.

More articles on racism, from the Highland Study Center publication "Every Thought Captive", can be found here.

Thoughts on racism (part 8)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

I'd been warned: when kinism gets discussed online, someone had commented over a year ago, all hell breaks loose. I've seen other discussions generate into ugliness, in the past and more recently. That's why I took the unusual step, for me, of moderating the comments on this blog.

But I'm just a little blog, read by few, and I don't think I have a whole lot to fear.

But, at the same time, it's been unreal. Kinist symapthizers (who get a little upset when you call them on their defense of kinism and kinists) are an interesting lot, to say the least. There's been a tremendous amount of dancing around the mulberry bush, hair splitting, contradictory statements, accusing others of lying, etc.

Although this is not at all an actual quote, this is how I summed up a recent long conversation:

Me: On the kinism.net website, they made Statement A, Statement B, Statement C, and Statement D. I find kinism contrary to the word of God because of this scripture and that scripture.

Kinist Sympathizer: Yes, but did you find the name of my favorite kinist sympathizer anywhere on those statements?

Me: No, I'm just looking at what the Kinist Institute believes, according to their own statements. Besides, they don't sign their names to every statement.

KS: How can you lie about my favorite kinist?

Me: I'm not even talking about your favorite kinist. I'm just trying to examine kinist beliefs and hold them up to Scripture.

KS: You're such a liar. You claim that kinists are opposed to mixed race marriages.

Me: I just quoted that in their own words from their own website.

KS: You also lied when you said that kinists want their own territories that would exclude people of other races!

Me: But I was just quoting that from their website. Are you saying that kinism.net doesn't say what kinists really believe? Can you point me to more accurate statements of their belief?

KS: Why do you keep attacking my favorite kinist?

Me: [groan] I give up!

Maybe that's the point.

I do know that the antidote to kinism and to being sucked into sympathizing with kinism is love --- the love of God.

All the law and the prophets can be pretty much summed up with what Jesus said were the two greatest commandments: that we love God and that we love others as much as we love ourselves. There is no room for loving our own race more than other races in there. There is no room for dividing the Body of Christ along racial or ethnic lines. Love God. Love others. Real love. That's the answer.

Thoughts on racism (part 7)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

Why kinists hide in the shadows (from kinism.net):

Open Letter To A Self-Important Gossip

While we find ourselves bemused that our comments on the hothouse strangeness, outright idiocies, and virulent gossip of the anti-patriarchism crowd, and Cynthia Gee in particular, have engendered such an impassioned response, we are not so foolish as to believe she has anything in mind other than the febrile attempt to expose us to public scrutiny and try us in the court of fashionable (heretical) opinion, in the hope that such personal exposure might provide impetus to a smear campaign similar to that being conducted against a former Kinist, once associated with this website. This is why we write under a nom de plume (or nom de guerre, if you will). The champions of “free speech and open discourse” seem to enjoy placing anonymous calls to employers and pastors when they can’t shout down your ideas with insults. Since we have mouths to feed, we’ll, pass on the ritual seppuku.

Hhhhmmmm...if kinism is so Biblical, so non-racist, and so impossible to refute (the anonymous author of the above later wrote, "While we don’t hold out hope that she will prove more formidable than any of Kinism’s previous opponents, who now speak into their beards, as it were...") then what on earth do kinists have to fear from anonymous calls to employers and pastors? They should be able to quickly convince these men as well. Or perhaps they are really afraid of more of their own numbers becoming "former kinists"?

These men so lack the courage of their convictions that they lurk in the shadows. My only hope is that they possess enough of a conscience to be rightly ashamed of the philosophy they espouse. If so, may that shame grow into true repentance.

CORRECTION: While the author's name (John Marshall) does not appear on the article page itself, it does appear on the main kinism.net page linking to the article. Of course, this is probably just a "nom de plume", but I wanted to be accurate.

Thoughts on racism (part 6)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

But what about interracial marriage? Why do the kinists oppose it?

Here is some interesting info about interracial marriage in the U.S. I had forgotten that it wasn't until 1967 that the laws forbidding interracial marriage were overturned. The kinists, of course, would like to bring back those laws.

Thoughts on racism (part 5)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

I had no idea. No idea whatsoever. This was such a painful read for me, taken from "The Garbage Man: Why I Collect Racist Objects" (written about the Jim Crow Museum)

A thick naiveté about America's past permeates this country. Many Americans understand historical racism mainly as a general abstraction: Racism existed; it was bad, though probably not as bad as blacks and other minorities claim. A confrontation with the visual evidence of racism -- especially thousands of items in a small room -- is frequently shocking, even painful. In the late 1800s traveling carnivals and amusement parks sometimes included a game called "Hit the Coon." A black man would stick his head through a hole in a painted canvas; the background was a plantation scene. White patrons would throw balls -- and in especially brutal instances, rocks -- at the black man's head to win prizes. A person living in the 21st century who sees that banner or a reproduction gets a glimpse of what it was like to be a black man in the early years of Jim Crow.

And then this:

Near that time, I took a colleague's students into the Jim Crow Museum. I showed them the ugliness, the Mammy, the Sambo, the Brute, the caricatured sores foisted on black Americans. I showed them. Showed it all. And we went deep, deeper than ever before, deeper than I meant to go. My anger showed. After three hours they left, all but two -- a young black woman and a middle-aged white man. The woman sat, paralyzed, transfixed, and stunned before a picture of four naked black children. The children sat on a riverbank. At the bottom of the picture were these words: "Alligator Bait." She sat there, watching it, trying to understand the hand that had made it, the mind that conceived it. She did not say a word, but her eyes, her frown, the hand at her forehead all said, "Why, sweet Jesus, why?" The white man stopped staring at the items and stared at me. He was crying. Not a sob, a single tear stream. His tears moved me. I walked toward him. Before I could talk, he said, "I am sorry, Mr. Pilgrim. Please forgive me."

He had not created the racist objects in the room, but he had benefited from living in a society where blacks were oppressed. Racial healing follows sincere contrition. I never realized how much I needed to hear some white person, any sincere white person, say, "I am sorry, forgive me." I wanted and needed an apology -- a heartfelt one that changes two lives. His words took the steam out of my anger. [emphasis mine]

May we all be sincerely contrite...God forgive me...God forgive us all.

More:

The 21st century has brought a fear and unwillingness to look at racism in a deep, systematic manner. The hedonistic desire to avoid pain (or anything uncomfortable) is counter to our method of directly confronting the ugly legacy of racism. Moreover, there is a growing desire among many Americans to forget the past and move forward. "If we just stop talking about historical racism, racism will go away." It is not that easy. We may not talk openly about race, but that is not forgetting it. America remains a nation residentially segregated by race. Our churches, temples, and synagogues are, in the main, racially divided. Old patterns of racial segregation have returned to many public schools. Race matters. Racial stereotypes, sometimes yelled, sometimes whispered, are common. Overt racism has morphed into institutional racism, symbolic racism, and everyday racialism. Attitudes and beliefs about race inform many of our decisions, big and small. "Let's stop talking about it," is a plea for comfort -- a comfort denied to blacks and other minorities. The way to move forward is to confront the historical and the contemporary expressions of racism, and to do so in a setting where attitudes, values, and behaviors are critiqued.

Lest we think these racist attitudes have all died:

In the early 1990s I attended an academic conference in New Orleans. I searched local stores for racist objects. There were not many. Ten years later I returned to New Orleans. I found anti-black objects in many stores. This is disappointing but not surprising. Brutally racist items are readily available through Internet auction houses, most notably, eBay. Indeed, practically every item housed in the Jim Crow Museum is being sold on some Internet site. Old racist items are being reproduced and new items are being created.

And:

I will end with a story. One of my daughters plays on an elite soccer team, meaning her practices are never done on time. One day I sat in the van with my other daughter waiting for practice to end. Nearby several white boys were clowning in front of two girls. They were all teenagers. One of the boys wore a blackfaced mask and he mocked the mannerisms of "street blacks." He turned toward us and I immediately looked at my daughter. She had lowered her head and covered her face. If you have a child then you know what I felt. If your skin is dark then you know why I do what I do.

Thoughts on racism (part 4)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

The following is from "Racism: A Christian Response", and especially appropriate to the topic of kinism that I raised in my previous post:

JESUS CHRIST HAS REMOVED ALL BARRIERS THAT STAND BETWEEN HUMAN BEINGS, MAKING PEACE THROUGH HIS CROSS.

St. Paul writes, "But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near in the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who has made us both one, and has broken down the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby bringing the hostility to an end" (Ephesians 2:13-16).

Racism in the church poisons and cripples all sincere efforts "to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace" (Ephesians 4:3). Physical characteristics or cultural customs are made to serve as "a dividing wall of hostility" that separates brothers and sisters in Christ -- to which the only appropriate response must be, "Is Christ divided?" (1 Corinthians 1:13).

Thoughts on racism (part 3)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

Racism takes many forms. One form that has invaded my world lately is something called "kinism". The advocates of this philosophy claim that it is not racism at all, although some of them, when pressed, might go so far as to admit that perhaps some kinists are also racists.

At the same time that kinist leaders are being named, discussed and exposed in an online forum, a number of kinism websites are suddenly being "cleaned up" or password protected. But here is a sample of some of the statements from Kinism.net:

[WARNING: This is really offensive, ungodly, anti-biblical, and ugly stuff. I post it for the purpose of exposing the deeds of darkness and warning fellow believers about a philosophy that is insidiously creeping into a small but growing number of Christian circles.]

"Kinism is the belief that the God-ordained social order for man is tribal and ethnic rather than imperial and universal. Mankind was designed by its Creator and Law Giver to live and to thrive in extended family groups, and all other “alternatives” to this pattern are inhibitory of the chief end of man, which is to Glorify God and to enjoy life with Him forever."

"Extended blood ties are the only natural and workable basis for a healthy society not subject to the horrifying ideologies of fallen man, be they socialist or capitalist, autocratic or democratic. We believe that an extended tribalism is the normative system for our people, the White races of Europe, the Americas, South Africa, Australia, Transcaucasia, or wherever our extended family finds itself in its modern diaspora."

"We at Kinism.net believe that our White peoples have an inalienable, that is, God-given right and duty to seek their own prosperity and existence as distinct nations, apart from all other genetic and ethnic families."

"When Kinism.net publishes materials disparaging of other ethnicities and races, it is for the sole purpose of exposing the incompatibility and essential uniqueness of the cultures of different racial-ethnic groups. "

"This seeking of prosperity and distinctness for our European peoples is primarily to be achieved by conversion to the religion of our only Savior, Jesus Christ. We therefore, we denounce the sin of miscegenation as a violation of God’s created order which has permanent consequences for every heritable trait. We appeal to God’s creation mandate of “kind after kind.” It is the obligation of both church and state to forbid mixed unions according to biblical laws prohibiting unequal yoking."

"Nevertheless, we stand or fall with no other but the White peoples of Europe, and their standards of beauty, their cultural achievements, the achievements of their civilization, established through the confluence of pagan and Christian traditions, are both irreplaceable and vital to our survival as a people."

"Kinism.net advocates an end all non-white immigration. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the worth and value to God of all ethnic division of men and would labor diligently to establish godly, honorable relations with our ethnic neighbors. The borders of a Kinist nation would be secure, and sensible anti-miscegenation laws would be enacted, while suffrage would be restricted to landed white males 21 and older, as we work toward a godly, free republic."

This is the "cleaned up" version of what kinists believe. (Compare their statements to what Scripture actually teaches; for starters, read my previous post.) Until recently, on the same website, it used to say:

“We will work to end all non-white immigration, We believe that all aliens (to include all Jews and Arabs) should be removed to their own areas and separated in due course from Kinist held territories, without respect to persons.”

There is no indication, especially in light of what they still posts as their beliefs and goals, that they no longer believe the above statement.

When I first encountered kinism on a few blogs about a year or so ago, I thought it was just a small group of racist nutjobs who had some disagreements with the so-called "Christian Identity" movement and had decided to go off and do their own thing. While there may be some merit to my initial reaction, I think the situation is far more dangerous and insidious than that.

So I'm posting this as a warning to my fellow Christians, especially those in conservative and/or private/homeschooling circles: this "white-washed racism" (a term coined by a friend of mine) may very well be insidiously creeping its way into your world. I've been surprised to discover a growing number of professing Christians who go out of their way to embrace kinists (even, I've been told, to the point of making sure kinist visitors to their church will not be made "uncomfortable" by the presence of mixed race couples) or to chat them up on their blogs or to defend kinists or to sympathize with their teachings, etc. One leading kinist has attended the church (and was welcomed to join in a picture of the "church family" that was posted online) of James McDonald who, along with his wife, is becoming increasingly more prominent in patriarchal and homeschooling circles. In an online debate, one kinist sympathizer who, while insisting she was not a kinist herself and admitting that some kinists were racists, stated, "Now, I think you are asking me if those at kinism.net are racist. I don’t quite know how to say this, but I don’t see that." She saw nothing racist in the statements I quoted; apparently in her mind, they were just not hateful enough.

What is the antidote to kinism? It's actually simple. Love God. Read His Word. Ask Him to give you a love for the lost. Ask Him to give you a love for the Body of Christ. Ask Him to remove any trace of racism and prejudice from your heart. Be humble. Pray and work for the unity of His Body. Let the mind of Christ dwell richly in you.

Love. The golden rule. Asking God to turn your heart of stone into a heart of flesh. That will go a long way in avoiding sin against your brothers and sisters in Christ.

And...speak out. Expose the deeds of darkness. Don't give a stamp of approval to kinists...don't let them or their sympathizers speak at your churches or homeschooling conventions...mark them as the divisive people that they are. Just because kinists may not have the power to enact their goal of dividing us all along ethnic and racial lines, does not make them any less divisive. Titus 3:10 tells us, "Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him."

That's what we need to do with unrepentant kinists, no matter how nice they may appear to be, and how neatly they may have managed to white-wash their racism. Warn them twice, plead with them, pray for them --- and then, for their sake and for the sake of the Body of Christ --- have nothing to do with them.

Thoughts on racism (part 2)

[To read the entire series, click on "racism" on the sidebar under "POSTS BY CATEGORIES".]

"God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created him." -Genesis 1:27

"Now the man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all the living." -Genesis 3:20

"Do we not all have one father? Has not God created us? Why do we deal treacherously each against his brother so as to profane the covenant of our fathers?" -Malachi 2:10

"I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word: that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me." -John 17:20-24

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise." -Galatians 3:28-29

I love my extended family. I really do. It's wonderful when we get as many of us together as we can. We've joked that we're like a "mini United Nations". All of my cousins on my mother's side are at least bilingual, having grown up in homes where two or more languages were spoken. I love our history, our lore, our food, our many stories. Among the American contingent, in just a little more than my lifetime, we have the American success story ("poor immigrant boy works hard and achieves success"), the pioneer story ("Go west, young man!" complete with a covered wagon...er, trailer), the touching story of parents becoming citizens so their son could better serve our country, etc.

But what I really love about my extended family is our Christian heritage. Most of us are descendants of Abraham, because we belong to Christ. All of our truly exciting stories are testimonies of what God has done and how He has blessed us, protected us, guided us, and shown us His grace and love over the generations. I grew up on "faith stories". If there is one thing that truly defines our family, that makes us one, it is our shared faith in God.

We are all just a part of a much bigger family. Jesus taught that our membership in His family should take precedence over our relationships in our earthly families. (See, for example, Matthew 12:46-50, Luke 18:28-30, Luke 14:26)

But, as followers of Christ, we are not just members of the same wonderful family. We are also --- and it is such a glorious mystery --- the very Body of Christ. 1 Corinthians 12:27 tells us, "Now you are Christ's body, and individually members of of it." Just verses earlier, we are warned to avoid division within the body and to care for one another. We are told, "And if one member suffers, all members suffer with it..."

Racism in all its forms --- whether it is overt hatred or some white-washed version that seeks to divide us along racial lines --- has no place in the Body of Christ. We are all sons and daughters of Adam, along with every other human. Those of us who are followers of Jesus are brothers and sister in Him, and members of His Body. Christ, in Gethsemene, prayed for the unity of His followers. We are one in Him, with previous divisions and barriers (those of race, nationality, society, economy, or gender) removed. When one of us suffers, we all suffer.

Still today, many of our brothers and sisters suffer as a result of racism. In my comfortable, sheltered world, it is all too easy for me to forget that. I should be more grieved and more passionate about this. I should stand with my brothers and sisters, weep with them, pray with them, speak out on their behalf when necessary, and expose the deeds of darkness.

Thoughts on racism (part 1)

[This series of posts is inspired by a troubling discussion elsewhere on the internet, that in turn led to my reading on the topic of "kinism". I am not planning to write some sort of theological treatise or sociological paper. I have been accused of being "hysterical" on this topic. I don't think I am. In fact, I am praying that God would help me to be more passionate about the sin of racism in all its forms.]

I am pale of skin. In my silly youth, I tried many times to get a tan. Actually, as I would joke with a friend of mine, I tried to "de-pale my skin". All I did was turn red, get more freckles, and accumulate some sun damage. Sometimes I lost a bit of my ghostly pallor. One summer that I spent almost every weekend at the beach, I told my co-workers that I had a rare skin condition that caused the sun to bleach my skin. Two of them believed me.

The civil rights movement had a big impact on me as a child, even though I grew up in small towns largely untouched by it.

I was raised in a bi-cultural family. When I was in elementary school, I was teased about my "other" culture, once it was discovered. Sometimes the teasing grew quite ugly and mean-spirited. At least one parent refused to allow their children to play with me because of where my mother was from.

The high school I attended for 10th and 11th grade had a significant number of Hispanic students, reflecting the community demographic. (In fact, my father, a pastor, helped start a daughter Hispanic church that has long since grown to outnumber the "Anglo" congregation.) In our entire high school student body of 2000, there was only one black. The small private school I attended for my senior year was more racially diverse, but still predominantly white.

So what do I know about racism? In many ways, I'm an unlikely person to write anything on the topic.

During my junior high, high school, and college years, a surprising number of people would assume I was Jewish. (This tends to happen in our extended family. It turns out we do have Jewish ancestry. But we also have a lot of Old Testament names among us, and some other aspects to our family life and culture that sometimes lead people to think we're Jewish.) I made more than one Jewish friend that way. But I also learned, especially when I was collecting signatures for a petition regarding the plight of Jews who were "Prisoners of Conscience" in the former Soviet Union, how unashamedly and vocally anti-Semitic a surprising number of people were.

Other than that, I was pretty much --- like most WASPs --- blissfully unaware that all racism had not died out after the civil rights era. Befriending some black students at a denominational college-career camp knocked that naive ignorance right out of me. I was shocked to find college kids --- from California!! in the late 1970's!! --- loudly refusing to swim in the same pool as my new friends, just because of their color. That opened a floodgate, as one night we spent literally hours talking about the subject of race. I was shocked to discover how different the lives of these students were from mine, even though one of them had grown up just three miles from where I lived. I was horrified and grieved to discover that racism was still rampant in the hearts of many --- including those who called themselves Christian.

And I began examining my own heart...painfully...I confessed to my new friends my own prejudices, ideas, and actions, many of them based on ignorance. Some of them they explained and forgave, others they laughed at and assured me that I was hardly a racist or a bigot. ("No, playing with your friend's cute little 'fro doesn't make you racist --- we've all done the same thing!")

Fast forward a few years. I worked for an employment agency. On an almost daily basis, I had to deal with racism. I was flabbergasted, angered, and saddened at how many people didn't want to hire blacks. Some of my clients asked me what race every applicant was. Legally, I was not allowed to answer. I grew more and more outraged at the racism that I was supposed to try to dance around in an attempt to keep our clients happy.

It seemed as if, more often than not, the best candidate for a particular job working for racists would happen to be black. My dilemma: send a lesser candidate, even an unqualified candidate, or send someone into a potentially ugly situation? I tried to follow the golden rule: I certainly wouldn't want to be interviewed by racists who had made it clear they didn't want to hire someone of my race!

Once I sat down a young man and told him, "I've got a job that would be perfect for you except for one thing. The owners of the company are racist. They told me that they are never going to hire another black person, only they didn't put it that nicely. For all I know, if you show up there, they might lynch us both."

"I can handle racists," he said, "I'm willing to take the chance if you are." After the interview, he told me, "You're right. They are just about the worst racists I've ever met. But I'm desperate for work and they're desperate for someone with my unique set of computer skills." They hired him, and he used the job as a stepping stone for a much better job, working for better people. (Not long after that, this small business was closed down and the owners jailed for illegal activities that had nothing to do with their racism. But I have to admit that I was glad to see them end up in jail.)

I grew up with stories of the holocaust. My mother's family had lived, as devout Christians, under the Nazi regime. Their lives had been threatened more than once. God had spared them. Because of those stories, and family friendships with holocaust survivors, racism has always seemed far more ugly and frightening than it is to many others as pale as I am.

Knowing that my family heritage includes a hodgepodge of races and ethnic groups that have been discriminated against and marked for destruction has made the topic of racism more personal as well.

But it's not just personal. Far more importantly, it's a Biblical issue.