Nothing Makes the News

Colin Kaepernick sat down for the playing of the national anthem in a preseason NFL game. He upgraded to kneeling in a second one. A few others have followed his lead.

And it’s news.

Why?

I am not sure. It’s nothing.

No, really. It’s nothing.

He sat down during a song in which it is traditional to stand. People have sat down before and people will do it again.

This is the biggest nothing since a gold-medal winning young lady didn’t put her hand over her heart for the national anthem.

At least she was standing up.

Undeterred by the common sense of priority and reality, the news media is making a big deal out of Kaepernick. It’s a $100 worth of news coverage on a twenty-five cent story. The reason is simple: The story is about Colin Kaepernick, not what Kaepernick says it should be about.

Kaepernick says did it to protest injustice that takes place under the American flag. He said that while being oppressed to the tune of millions of dollars which he will not earn by playing since he won’t be starting.

That means he will be sitting a lot. On one hand, I suppose he is getting in midseason form by sitting down. On the other hand, he has done nothing for the cause he claims to be concerned about.

In a moment of irony he surely missed, he showed up at a news conference to protest oppression while wearing a shirt with Fidel Castro’s picture on it. Protesting oppression alongside a Cuban dictator. Ironic!

On second thought, that’s not irony. It’s way past irony.

But I digress.

Here’s the big problem: No one is talking more about injustice than they were last month. Instead, they are talking about Colin Kaepernick, the NFL quarterback who has nothing to complain about.

All he accomplished was to spark a debate about how important it is to stand up for the national anthem and whether or not employers should mandate it.

Let Kaepernick sit down if he wants to. The flag and anthem he used to protest is what enables him to protest.

But if you want to do something about injustice, then get up off your seat. Sitting down while you make millions in on the back of a free college education isn’t exactly being Jackie Robinson. Or Martin Luther King, Jr. These days it’s not even being Doug Williams. (ICYDK, Williams was the first black quarterback to win an NFL league championship and Super Bowl.)

If you want to do something about injustice, it will take more than sitting down during the national anthem of an NFL preseason game. You are going to have to talk about real issues.

Let’s start with the fact that thousands of African-Americans are denied the basic justice of life itself every day. It’s called abortion. The Democrats stand firmly behind this systematic extermination of the black community. They won’t lift a finger to stop it. Instead, they are doing everything they can to prolong and protect this extermination. Republicans are scarcely much better. It helps to get them elected, but that’s about it. There’s no one speaking up much for the unborn. And Kaepernick didn’t change that.

Let’s continue with the fact that thousands of African-American children have no father in their home or even in their life. The government has become their daddy, doling out the basic needs of life while letting men have sex without consequences. Why should they care? They get to do their thing with their honey for the night (who may not be their honey tomorrow night), and they have a rich uncle (Uncle Sam, that is) that will take care of the few who make it long enough to see the light of day over the machinations of Planned Parenthood and the Democratic Party. Kaepernick’s sit-down didn’t spark any conversation about fatherhood. That’s ironic given the fact that Kaepernick was adopted and raised by two white people because his own father fled and left a single mother. If anyone knows, it should be Kaepernic.

How about the fact that thousands of African-Americans will suffer in substandard schools because the government forces them to stay there rather than giving them true school choice. And their parents don’t care enough or don’t have enough leverage to force change. Those kids will live in bad neighborhoods and go to bad schools. And some of them will end up like a young man a few blocks away from here who, a couple of weeks ago at the ripe old of age of fourteen, was paralyzed for life by a gunshot to the neck. Now the state of Michigan has decided that failing schools don’t have to close until 2019, meaning three more years of failing education for kids with all the results that come with it. Kaepernick’s seat on the sidelines won’t give these kids a new seat in the schoolroom. They are consigned to failure with no alternatives.

We haven’t even talked about the fact that thousands of African-Americans will have no mentors who will teach them there is a better way. No one will teach them how to work, how to shake hands, how to dress and talk appropriately, how to be a husband and a dad (in that order). There will be no women to help the young ladies learn to respect their bodies and their future, to get an education, to learn how to nurture children, and pick a good man and stay with him for life. Almost none of them will get a free ride to play football or basketball, or anything else. The only free ride they might get is in the back of a squad car. Kaepernick isn’t provoking anyone to talk about how to mentor the young people.

Kaepernick’s sit down isn’t sounding the message that a black person’s chances of being killed by the police are between slim and none, and none is a lot closer than slim when you do what you are told, even if you think it is unjust. There’s a place to fight police brutality and systemic racism. But you can’t do it from a casket. Kaepernick’s sit-down isn’t getting people to talk about that.

You see, this is simple: Sitting down for the national anthem won’t address any actual problems. And even if it got people talking about it, it won’t change anything because talk never does.

We don’t need more talk about it. Round tables simply go around. We need action. We need serious people with serious solutions. We need people who will get past the rhetoric and the talking points and start looking for things that work.

We need people who will move in to communities, coach ball teams, get involved in the local schools, hang out and play basketball with kids on the street, and talk straight to them when they need it.

We are past the point where sitting down for an anthem while preparing to make a few million playing a game will make much of a statement.

We need more. Stand up Colin. Do something meaningful. It won’t make the news. But it might make a difference.

Around the Horn – 7/29/16

At first is a political speech worth hearing or at least reading. Governor Rick Perry of Texas delivered this speech to the American Legislative Exchange Council. In it, he speaks of the failure of conservatives to reach out to Black Americans, to show that “it is Republicans—not Democrats—who are truly offering black Americans the hope of a better life for themselves and for their children.” It is filled with stories of Texas. It also notes the reality that in “the cities where the left-wing solutions have been tried over and over again…places like Detroit and Chicago and Baltimore…African-Americans are falling further behind.” What’s the solution? I am guessing “more of the same” is what many people think. I am not sure why. If it hasn’t worked yet, why will it work now? Perry has some good ideas, IMO. I don’t know why he didn’t get more traction in the presidential race.

At second Matt Walsh talks about why the nomination of Hillary Clinton sends a horrific message to the women of this country. Walsh is a strong writer, sometimes caustic, usually very pointed, and like many a preacher, one-third to one-half as long as he needs to be. But his point should be acknowledged. The nomination of Hillary Clinton sends all the wrong messages to the women and particularly the young women of our society. Walsh, like me and many others no doubt, says, “Call me sexist, but I don’t look at my little girl and think, ‘I hope you grow up to be just like Hillary Clinton.’” The question is who, knowing just what is available to be known, would say that? And why? What kind of person do you have to be to honor what Clinton has revealed about herself over forty years of public life?

At third, continuing on the theme of the election, Wayne Grudem lays out a case for Why Voting for Donald Trump is a Morally Good Choice. You might disagree but Grudem makes some reasonable arguments. It’s worth considering. I continue to think the strongest issue in presidential campaigns are judicial nominations. Grudem makes a strong point about that issue.

Last today is an old virtual symposium of commentary on the pro-life movement and the killing of abortion doctors. No doubt most of us would consider it wrong to kill abortion doctors though we might make a philosophical case for it. Here are sixteen people who discuss it from various angles.

Here’s My Take on the NBA, Sterling, and Race

You probably heard that NBA owner Donald Sterling made some racist comments recently. People are all up in arms. Everybody is weighing in to condemn this is no uncertain terms. And it should be condemned in no uncertain terms. It was an unconscionable statement with no place in civil society.

On Tuesday, the NBA responded with a life-time ban from anything NBA related, a $2.5 million fine, and will apparently try to force him to sell the team.

Here’s my take: this was easy. Too easy. Good, but easy.

It takes no great moral courage to sound off on this one. This was a soft lob right down the middle. You don’t have to be Miguel Cabrera to drive this somewhere long and deep.

It’s easy because it won’t require you to change anything in your life. You can say your piece, and go right on back to the way things are.

The problem is exactly that: It’s easy. This was a politically incorrect thing to say, and an easy target for response. When it comes to real issues, few are willing to take a similar stand. Why? Because it’s harder. As the old saying goes, what’s good for people isn’t good for politics.

I don’t know that that’s an old saying. In fact, I may have just made it up. But it’s true.

President Obama weighed in on Sterling and said it was bad. Good for him.

This is the same guy who, just a year ago, couldn’t muster up a word about a guy who murdered hundreds, maybe thousands, of black people.

Apparently telling your girlfriend you don’t want her being seen with black people is horrible.

Killing black people? Not so much.

Why? Because Kermit Gosnell was an abortion doctor. And one thing worse than killing little black babies is making it so little black babies can’t be killed.

Or saying you don’t want your girlfriend taking pictures with black men.

You see, Sterling was a old rich white guy with a young girlfriend who could work a recording device. Gosnell was an abortion doctor who killed babies for decades. Those two things aren’t equal. One deserves vicious tirades and substantial punishment. The other is painted as an anomaly and quietly goes to trial in hopes that the outcome doesn’t damage women’s abortion rights.

In another incredibly brave example of courage and social consciousness, word comes that UCLA turned down a $3 million grant for kidney research because it came from the Donald Sterling Foundation.

Imagine that conversation: “Yes, we were close to finding a cure for you, but the money that would have helped was offered by a man who man who didn’t want his mistress-girlfriend posting pictures with black guys, and it was important for us to make a social statement. But don’t worry, we still have our dialysis machine, and we will send flowers to your funeral.”

I won’t pretend to understand the complexities of race, economics, community, education, and all the related things, so I won’t pontificate on that. You probably don’t understand either, and you shouldn’t pontificate either.

I won’t pretend to think I can change the world. You can’t either.

Here’s what you may not know. The NBA didn’t learn anything new this week. Sterling didn’t change his views last weekend. This has been known about Sterling for years and years. And no one did anything. Stern sat on his hands while his wallet and the NBA’s wallet got exponentially fatter.

Now, new NBA commish Adam Silver doles out lifetime ban to Sterling. Whoopeee!!! He’s eighty-one years old. Eighty-one. 81. Yes, they gave a lifetime ban to an 81-year old. What courage. What a statement.

Oh yes, and they are going to force him to sell his team. Or at least try to force him. You know what that means? It means that Sterling’s $12.5 million purchase in 1981 will probably net him somewhere north of $750 millions. I don’t even know what the rate of return is on that, but please, punish me with such force.

NBA, you want to make a difference in race issues? Don’t make symbolic gestures. I am not saying reinstate Sterling. I don’t care. It doesn’t matter. Seriously. It doesn’t. No one’s life is changed or not changed by this.

If you want to make a difference, get serious about decimated family structures in urban areas. Start by leading the charge to make sure every black baby actually gets born rather than being eradicated from its mother’s body like some sort of cancer.

Figure out a way to help men take responsibility for their children. Start by getting serious about the children your players have with multiple women. $10K a month in child support is no substitute for dad loving mom, and being around the house, teaching their little boys to be men, and teaching their little girls to be women. And realize that a very large number of black children are growing up without active fathers. That’s far worse than Donald Sterling spouting off in private.

Do something about education. No, I don’t mean send a player to read a book for thirty minutes to a class in some upscale school district for a photo op. I mean figure out a way to make a meaningful difference in kids’ lives so that they can learn the basics of life, and have a shot at moving out of the urban ghetto they have grown up in.

Do something about black employment. I know your own employ is more than 75% black, but what how about start some urban initiatives for places where half that percentage are chronically unemployed. Do something about the situation where many people don’t look for jobs because they actually lose when they find one.

Be creative. Do something substantive. Take some of those billions you make and start addressing real racial problems.

By all means, keep Sterling out of the NBA for life. Take his $2.5 mill fine and spend it on some charitable organization addressing race. Sell the Clippers to a minority group led by Magic Johnson, Oprah Winfrey, or whoever.

But don’t think you killed the big one because it took you thirty years to make a non-meaningful social statement that won’t actually change anything.

And don’t sit on your laurels and think it was anything other than a non-meaningful social statement.

The real work starts now. So get busy.

50 Years Since “I Have a Dream”

Today, August 28, 2013, is the fiftieth anniversary of Martin Luther King, Jr’s “I Have a Dream” speech delivered on the mall in Washington, DC.

Fifty years later, race is still an issue in our country. It is an issue far too complex for my knowledge and experience, and far too complex for a simple blog article.

Today I encourage you simply to think about the image of God in man, and what that means for how to we think about and treat others.

As gospel-believing, Jesus-loving people, we should, no must, love everyone who is in the image of God, regardless of their outward appearance, their socio-economic status, their neighborhood, or any other outward thing.

We must love them in their sin and treat them with the dignity that the image of God deserves.

James wrote of the tongue:

But no one can tame the tongue; it is a restless evil and full of deadly poison. With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God; 10 from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be this way. (James 3:8-10).

Should we merely refrain from speaking these things? Dare we think that because these thoughts never made it to the tongue that they are therefore acceptable? I highly doubt James would grant such an exception.

Brothers and sisters, do not look askance on those who have been made in God’s image while getting ready to worship God tomorrow.

You don’t have to agree with MLK, Jr.’s politics to embrace his dream of a world without racial divides.

After all, that isn’t just the dream of MLK, Jr.

It is the promise of God that looks forward to a day when, in a world freed from the curse, those who have been purchased by the blood of Christ from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation are unified is glad worship before the throne of God (Revelation 5:9-10).

At least part of those “other people” (whoever “other” is for you) is the body which Christ purchased with his own blood. Dare we love them less than the Savior does?

Civil Rights and the 60s

On Monday night, I watched American Experience on PBS. It was about the civil rights movement in America and the freedom riders. It was a fascinating and disturbing episode.

I was born in 1968, which was the year Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated, so for much of the civil rights movement, I was not even alive.

It boggles my mind that these conditions existed so recently.

It boggles my mind that people could make the kind of statements that were made (and still are in some places).

It boggles my mind that many churches were so late to the fight on this topic.

It makes me wonder what the big issues of our day are.

What is it that our children will look back on with embarrassment because we did not step to the front and use our voices?

Ethnicity, Belief about Jesus, and the Makeup of Churches

Consider the following two statements:

1. Jesus died and came back to life.
2. Believing in Jesus makes a positive difference in a person’s life.

Now, consider this:

[20-29 year old] African-Americans have stronger agreement with both statements about Jesus than any other racial or ethnic group. Almost all African-American young adults (98 percent) agree that Jesus died and came back to life, and eight out of nine agree that believing in Jesus makes a positive difference in a person’s life. [My note: That’s over 20 points higher than the average.] On the other hand, only 59 percent of Anglos believe in the resurrection. Hispanics were similar to the total group, as 70 percent agreed that Jesus returned to life. Agreement that believing in Jesus made a positive difference in a person’s life was 75 percent for each of the non-African-American groups (Ed Stetzer, Lost and Found, pp. 28-29).

Here’s my question: Since 98 percent of young African-Americans say that they agree with us on these two very basic and foundational premises of Christianity, why are churches so seemingly underrepresented by young African-Americans?

It would seem that these would be right “in our wheelhouse” so to speak because we do not have to convince them of the truth of the resurrection or the impact of Jesus on a person’s life.

I think there are several reasons for consideration (anecdotal and observational, rather than scientific).

First, there is the influence of culture. African-Americans are typically brought in a more religious setting than non-African-Americans. It is part of their culture. They know the religious terminology. Most of them have grandmothers who took them to church, and talked to them about God. It’s particularly interesting to me to think of the number of people that I have talked to personally who claim to go to church, but don’t know the name of it, or where it is (aside from “that church over there”).

In my experience in my community, most African-Americans that I talk to claim to go to church and can actually identify the church that they claim to go to. Non-African-Americans are less likely to claim to attend church, and much less likely to be able to identify the church that they attend. Nonetheless, African-American culture seems more religiously knowledgeable and inclined than other cultures. 

Second, there is the influence of education. Stetzer reports that among young adult with college experience, “belief in the resurrection drops from 92 percent among the less educated (high school or less) to 63 percent among those with some college or a degree” (p. 31).

If it is true that African-Americans are less likely to have some college experience, it stands to reason that fewer of them have been talked out their received traditions. That is to say that they claim belief, but perhaps only because no one has talked them out of it yet. That’s not intended as any kind of slight. Remember, the percentages of all ethnic groups go down after some college experience. So those who have attended college are more likely to abandon belief in the resurrection, no matter their ethnicity.

It would be interesting to know the numbers broken down by ethnicity and education.

Whatever the case, it strikes me that perhaps at least some of this is our church culture. Before the “progressives” cheer and the “conservatives” tune out, let me say, I am not sure how important that is to worry about.

I think our church culture needs to reflect the gospel in our community. We do not necessarily need to reflect the community in our gospel. We need to understand our community culture, and minister inside of that culture as much as possible.

Of course we should not adapt the sinful elements of culture. But we should remember that we have no cultural mandate. We have a gospel mandate. And therefore, our entire community is our mandate.

Race Maps

Here are some interesting maps of some US cities color-coded by race. I recognized the top one as Detroit as soon as I saw it. The north red-blue dividing line is probably the famed 8 Mile Road. The pocket of red in the middle of the picture is probably the New Center Area and Wayne State University area. The pocket of orange in the center, just below the middle of the picture is Mexicantown. Our church is located just to the right of the blue section at the bottom of the map.

The data used to make this map is ten years old, but it is interesting nonetheless, not just in terms of racial grouping but also in terms of population density. My suspicion is that 30-40 years ago, this map would be more similar to the NYC map in terms of population density.

Here's a page with some information about the various neighborhoods in Detroit.

I wonder how this type of data might be useful for church planting. It seems that certain types of people are often best able to reach certain types of people. It seems to me that willingness is important, but it is not the sum total of a call to a particular location. I think there is a place for churches to steer people into places of ministry that they might best be suited for.

Obviously, there are some dangers with that. We don't have a heirarchy of bishops that assigns men to places of ministry. But we do have churches, knowledgeable pastors, and community residents who should be able to assess background, gifts, desires, and abilities to help guide young men (or older men) into ministry situations that best fit his ministry skills and heart.

The fact that someone feels called to a particular area is a start, but it is not the end. I have seen some good men fail at church planting because they were doing something that they apparently were not gifted to do, or perhaps doing it in an area to which they were not well-suited. This leads to great frustration, wasted money and effort, and sometimes abandonment of ministry altogether.

I think the local church's role in ordaining and commissioning pastors should be taken very seriously. How all that works out in a particular local church is obviously up to that church. But I would call us to consider the idea.

Coral Ridge Ending Age-Segmented Worship

So proclaims Out of Ur, citing an unlinked article in The Christian Post.

What are they actually doing? They are actually ending their practice of having a traditional and a contemporary service, something that dates back to the days of D. James Kennedy. Now, Kennedy’s successor Tullian Tchividjian says it’s time to do away with that.

Here’s a quote of interest:

The megachurch pastor also said he doesn't view separate worship services by style or age as any different from racial segregation, except that it's more subtle.

Allowing for the fact that Tchividjian may not have actually said this (there is no link and it’s not a direct quote), this is an interesting ploy that, to me, smacks of silliness.

It seems these days, that whenever someone wants to make a really strong statement on something, they often connected it to race because almost everyone cares about race and virtually no one wants to come down on the wrong side of that.

But how, in the name of anything rational, is having multiple services of different styles similar to racial segregation?

Simple answer: It’s not.

People choose which church they want to attend, and which service they want to attend. They are welcome to sit where they like (unless they get there late and the back seats are already filled). No one looks at their appearance and then funnels them into certain places. I was at Coral Ridge one Sunday, as a relatively young man, and went to the traditional service. No one tried to get me to go somewhere else. It was completely voluntary.

Racial segregation was not. It was enforced, both legally and culturally.

In other words, this argument by Tchividjian is, quite frankly, just a dumb argument. It sounds pious, but it makes no sense. It does injustice to real racial problems, and it doesn’t solve anything.

I am all for having one type of service, and one service rather than multiple services. I think young people should be in at least part of the service with older people because “One generation shall praise your works to another,” which is hard to do when the generations are separate (Psalm 145:4).

But whatever a church does with its services, let’s see through cheap ploys to appeal to people’s sensibilities by playing the race card.

We have enough race problems and worship problems in our churches without confusing the two.