#TimesUp
Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony and story about being sexually assaulted by Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh is well known at this point, and as this post went to press, she is presenting her case to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
But seeing what she went through these past two weeks brought to mind a biblical character: Saint Stephen, the first Christian martyr.
But maybe not in the way you think…
The Hearing and the Mob
In the New Testament book of Acts, chapters 6-7, Stephen is the first person to die for telling the story of Jesus Christ. Stephen isn’t an Apostle. He wasn’t a Disciple. He didn’t know Jesus in person, except perhaps at a distance or in the crowd. He wasn’t A-Team, he wasn’t varsity.
But in the story of Jesus, Stephen found his calling to tell this story about Jesus. And he began to tell others about it, right up until his final speech in front of the religious authorities of his day. He got a bit sloppy at times, got some dates and places wrong in his stories, but his heart was in it.
Reading the text carefully, we see that Stephen was speaking up that day because of Fake News: false accusations planted by the religious authorities so that Stephen would be called on the carpet and accused. He had a choice: deny his experience, or tell it even more forcefully. He chose the latter, a long speech and he called the church’s leadership to accountability and conversion to Jesus Christ.
And they took him outside and stoned him to death, even as he finally saw with his own eyes an image of God incarnate.
Stephen suffered at the hands of Fake News, and was forced into an unjust hearing before his accusers, and was publicly harmed by a mob without a trial by the governing authorities (the Romans, who legally could execute Jesus, did not stone him: the religious authorities did).
The First to Speak Up
We want to believe we are better people than biblical times, that we embody different values, that we offer fair judgment to people’s stories and experiences of injustice, harm, defilement, and dehumanization.
But in many ways, we haven’t become much better:
- We want to believe that churches are safe places for children, and then the Pennsylvania diocese releases decades of complaints of their own priests, some of which had transferred out and continued working in churches.
- We want to believe that women in the workplace, especially clergywomen, can operate safely, but we find out all too many have been assaulted like victims of Harvey Weinstein, restricted from advancement like employees of Mike Pence, and locked in unsafe environments like victims of Matt Lauer.
The first people who complained about this priestly abuse or predatory male bosses were ostracized, disregarded, ran out of town, everything short of being stoned. Such experiences had a chilling effect in many cases, discouraging others from speaking up with their stories. Silence reigned, and abusers continued to be predators.
But today, such experiences are coming up thanks to brave victims and social media. Thanks to social media Hashtag #WhyIDidntReport, we see the systems and commonalities that kept these experiences from being talked about
History on Repeat
While I’m inclined to believe Dr. Ford’s story, we don’t know anything about the truth of Dr. Ford’s testimony and story. That’s the difference between Saint Stephen and Dr. Ford: We know that Stephen was telling the truth of the story of Jesus Christ (Okay, Christians believe that).
But we do know that the process surrounding both persons telling their story has frightening parallels, including the lengths that
We want to believe that Dr. Ford will be treated better than Saint Stephen, and surely better than Anita Hill, but it looks like history is on repeat. Like Stephen, Dr. Ford has suffered from Fake News. Like Stephen, an unjust hearing will exclude due process. And like Stephen, Dr. Ford has already suffered harassment and harm and threats (to her family) long before the circus court could even render a verdict.
Like Stephen telling of his experience of Christ, the experiences that are shared first are always the most harshly treated. Stephen died for his story, but we hope for a better ending to Dr. Ford.
Not About a Judge
Stephen’s story was not held in a just manner by the powers-that-be frightened of what that story could mean. At risk in today’s political process is not the election of a judge that will outlaw abortion–that will happen regardless with this regime.
Instead, at risk is the legitimacy of women’s testimony. At risk is the consideration of stories of rape and sexual violence. At risk is the allowable lengths persons who speak against this regime will be stoned in public by the mob.
At risk is nothing less the basic building blocks of patriarchy, and if Dr. Ford’s story topples this process, then the powers become more vulnerable, and the victims of this regime become a lot more powerful. The judge is inevitable and will bring decades of harm. But the chipping away at patriarchy will echo into eternity.
Will this story be the moment? Or will the stones, the mob, and the scared Powers silence it yet again?
Your turn
Thoughts?
Thanks for reading, commenting, and sharing on social media.
I take offense to this article and it’s whole premise. My parents named me after Saint Stephen, someone who was resolute in spreading the truth about Jesus Christ. Someone who was dedicated to saving lives by spreading the truth of Jesus, his resurrection, and his grace.
Dr. Ford on the other hand is part of a liberal conspiracy to derail the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh. Tearing apart a good man by half truths and innuendo. Whereas she may believe it was Judge Kavanaugh who was there that night, there is no corroborating evidence. In fact, others whom she said were there that night have denied it.
She, along with the other accusers, were sought shortly after Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. Their stories and information were purposely withheld until the last minute to delay and possibly derail his nomination. If approved, Judge Kavanaugh may help to overturn Roe vs. Wade (and this is the hope of Traditionalists like me), which like St. Stephen would be saving lives. And, Dr. Ford and others are trying to stop the saving of lives. So, she is actually the antithesis of Saint Stephen.
So, yes, I take great issue with your comparison of Dr. Ford with Saint Stephen, my namesake.
Your loving brother in Christ,
Steve
If you are SO sure she is not telling the truth, why would she be willing to face death threats in order to testify against Kavanaugh? Wouldn’t the very all to common negative reaction to women who report abuse not be the reason it was stated at the “last minute.” Perhaps she really was reluctant to share her truth.
She is the one claiming she has received death threats. What if she is lying about those along with her claim against Judge Kavanaugh?
I understand she was one of the organizers of the so called Women’s March. The “death threats” enhance her credibility in the looney liberal world.
Judge Kavanaugh deserves a fair hearing with due process. When we have people jumping to conclusions based on one woman’s unsubstantiated claim, we have Tawana Bradley, Duke Lacrosse team, etc. results. That is trying someone in the court of public opinion rather than an orderly case of due process and presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Of course social justice warriors seem to believe the means justifies the end when it comes to conservatives.
Donald Trump doesn’t have the slightest bit of integrity regarding false accusations. Here is a story about how Donald Trump took out an ad demanding the Death Penalty for 5 black teenagers who were falsely accused of rape and were coerced into giving confessions a few years back and even spent years in jail. https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/10/3/1801111/-That-time-Donald-Trump-falsely-accused-5-boys-of-rape-and-ruined-their-lives?detail=emaildkre MOST people are not demanding the death penalty for Kavanaugh but rather a FULL investigation of Ford’s claims. You have already decided she is lying, whereas I say we should do a full investigation. I don’t like Kavanaugh, even if he is not guilty of harassment, because he would likely vote to strike down environmental protections. Striking down laws which encourage greater gas efficiency in car and restrict such things as methane emissions can kill people as well as the planet. Making abortion illegal will not stop Abortion, but rather just make it more dangerous. Kavanaugh will also vote to strike the Affordable Care Act. Just think of how many already born children will die because of the lack of healthcare. And of course, Kavanaugh doesn’t care about me as a Gay man, either.
This isn’t about Trump or the woman, this is about Judge Kavanaugh. Look, I get it, you don’t like his conservative views. I felt the same way about Kagan and Sotomeyer. The thing is the Republicans didn’t destroy either Kagan’s or Sotomeyer’s reputation. They were respectful to both judges.
The democrats have taken it to a more heightened level of nastiness. After the initial hearings before the Judiciary committee, it was obvious the woman only had uncorroborated accusations. Witnesses she said were there that night, ALL denied being there in sworn affidavits. There was no need for further investigation, it was obvious she was lying and it was a delaying tactic. The FBI report hasn’t been released yet but I am confident it will not validate her claim. If any of the 4 witnesses change their story they can be prosecuted for perjury. Speaking of perjury, I hope the Senate prosecutes the woman for perjury to the fullest extent of the law. We need to make it painful so that the next time a woman thinks twice about bringing unsubstantiated charges against a good man whom she happens to disagree with his politics.
As for politics, I hope the Supreme Court with Judge Kavanaugh strikes down every EPA regulation pertaining to “climate change”, strikes down ACA, Roe vs. Wade, and Obergefell. Like President Trump says it is time we Make America Great Again.
Oh, and I am hoping that Trump gets to replace Ginsburg with Amy Coney Barrett to ensure a conservative Court well after I am gone and can protect this country from the enemies within, for my children and grandchildren.
Again, the Republican hypocrisy. Republicans weren’t respectful to Merrick Garland who they didn’t even grant a hearing because they wanted a right wing Judge to replace Scalia. And it is a Republican lie that every witness *denied* Ford’s claim. One merely didn’t remember (It was a long time ago), but said she believed Ford. Kavanaugh clearly lied under oath about his drinking. There are many witnesses to his getting inebriated from alcohol. He claimed he never got drunk. Kavanaugh probably also lied about the meaning of his year book. And about climate change, polls even show that a plurality of Republicans don’t deny human made climate change. They just want the planet to be destroyed just to spite the Democrats. It is sad you believe women should be punished for pressing rape charges when they might not have absolute proof of them. And no, there is NOT absolute proof against her charges. Her charges should be given a hearing. Donald Trump should be prosecuted for taking out full page ads in 1989 calling for the Death Penalty for four young black men who were later found to be innocent.
And hopefully, if Democrats take back the Senate, they won’t even hold hearings for any Right Wing Judge who Trump nominates who believe the planet should be destroyed by human made climate change and who believe LGBT persons should have no Equal Protection under the Law. The Constitution DOES talk about Equal Protection.
So you approve of destroying a man’s reputation with unsupported accusations because you don’t like methane. Curious set of values you have.
That isn’t exactly what I said. What I said is that if someone brings charges, there should be a full investigation. We shouldn’t automatically believe or disbelieve the woman. I disagree with the assertion that a woman should be prosecuted just because she couldn’t prove her assertions. That being said, I don’t think anyone who doesn’t care about the survival of the planet by, for instance be for looser Environmental Laws or believes that LGBT persons should have an inferior status in terms of the Law of the Land should be confirmed to the Supreme Court. I personally don’t wish him harm, but he shouldn’t be on the Court.
With respect, the supposed link/parallel fails. Stephen was a committed follower of Christ who died due to his allegiance to Christ. The efforts of the left to obstruct the appointment of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the SCOTUS are more closely related to the political machinations that took place in the trial/condemnation that occurred in the early morning hours of Passion Friday.
I listened to her testimony today and I believe her. I hope the stones won’t be the story
Thank you for your post. She truly represents the crucified body of Christ today. We who are willing to witness her sacrifice are transformed by the courage she displays. The leaders today are as frightened as those of old. Those in power never give it up easily. But if we can- it sets us free. Blessings on her and all those who come forward.
Daniel,
The Republicans were not nasty nor disrespectful to Merrill Garland. They simply ignored Obama’s nomination, which is their right. Yes, they wanted a conservative Justice to replace Scalia. But again, they didn’t do anything that tarnished his reputation as the Democrats did to Judge Kavanaugh.
As for the 4 witnesses, you are right one said she couldn’t remember. Stil, none of the 4 could corroborate the woman’s accusation.
I don’t remember Kavanaugh saying he never got drunk. I remember him saying he never blacked out. Big difference and based on what Ihave heard/read is not a lie as no one has come forward to say he passed out while drinking.
As to climate change, there is no way to isolate all the factors that contribute to changes in our climate to say that any change is specifically due to a single factor. See the Scientific Principle. There is a history of cyclic changes to our climate, which is most probably the reason we observe changes. As the impact of man’s actions on climate can’t be proved, I don’t believe in all the climate change hysteria and certainly I don’t believe in spending tax dollars to stop climate change or extreme regulations to try and stop something that can’t be proven to be harmful. Like with Judge Kavanaugh, you need proof and not just allegations.
I never said that women should not press rape charges without having absolute proof of them. First, there was no rape but an accusation of sexual assault. Big difference. I said we need to ensure a woman thinks twice before bringing unsubstantiated charges. She can’t remember the time or place and the number of people who were there keeps changing. She admits to drinking that night and the 4 people she says were there can’t corroborate her story. She has already had a hearing and it was a farce. I have a daughter and if anyone ever abused her I would want that person prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But there has to be proof of accusations before you convict someone. So far, Judge Kavanaugh’s accuser has provided no proof.
Yes, the Constitution does contain the Equal Protection clause but as to gay marriage it doesn’t apply. Homosexuals always had the right to marry someone of the opposite sex, the same as straight individuals. However, homosexuals wanted more than equal protection. They wanted to marry someone of the same sex. Thus, the Constitution doesn’t cover that. It would be like me claiming an NBA team must hire me to play basketball because I can shoot the ball (albeit poorly). Equal protection doesn’t mean we all get to do what we want.
As for Donald Trump’s calling for the death penalty for the black men, I don’t know any law that was broken. Donald Trump was expressing an opinion, covered under Freedom of Speech. The same as us expressing our opinions on these boards. If one or more of the men think his claims were libelous, they can bring a suit against him for defamation of character and try to get a DA to pursue libel. However, given that the men were convicted at the time and Trump was just calling for a harsher sentence, there is nothing that appears to meet the definition of libel.
Like most liberals, you want to make decisions based on feelings, not facts. Luckily, we have a Constitution to protect us against accusations based on feelings. Thus, the important need to have a conservative Supreme Court to ensure that prosecutions are based on facts and proof and not unsubstantiated accusations, or “feelings”.
You talk about facts not feelings, but the facts DO support human made climate change. It is not just a matter of “feelings.” Recognizing only Heterosexual marriage in terms of the Law is like recognizing only right handed persons. Marriage conveys a lot of legal protections that should not be restricted to Heterosexuals. Opposing Gay Marriage is similar to opposing mixed race marriages, which used to be strictly illegal. You personally may believe your Religion teaches against Gay Marriage, but remember we have a non Establishment of Religion clause in the Constitution. Banning Gay Marriage discriminates against those Denominations like the United Church of Christ and the Unitarian Universalist which do recognize and perform Gay Marriages. Similarly, banning Abortion “establishes” a particular Religious dogma that a fetus has a Soul at the moment of Conception. Not all Religions agree with this. I don’t think Kavanaugh’s life has been nearly as ruined as the persons Trump called for the Death Penalty for. Trump wreaks of lynching in his ad. These persons spent years in jail because of 45.
As I said before the facts do not support human impact to climate change. Climate change is a result of numerous factors – Earth’s orbit, intensity of the Sun, etc. As there is no way to isolate all the factors except human impact, you cannot scientifically attribute climate change to human impact. So, no the facts don’t support it. Now a considerable number of “scientists” will try and tell you that climate change is due to human impact but they can’t prove it. They are chasing the research monies to study the issue and aren’t being honest with their so-called conclusions.
As to gay marriages, as you well know our laws are based on Judeo-Christian laws which provided for marriage between a man and a woman for hundreds of years. Again, banning gay marriages does not discriminate against gays. They have the right to marry a person of tthe opposite sex the same as any straight person. They are asking for special rights beyond what others have. As to the non Establishment of Religion, I have no idea what you are talking about. Banning gay marriages does not establish religion. Just because it may invalidate some beliefs of some religions does not mean it is establishing a separate religion. Satanism is legally considered a religion but cutting the heads off animals is still a crime, even if done in the name of religion.
As to banning abortion, at conception the fetus is a living being, albiet dependent upon its mother for sustenance (scientific fact). It is entitled to the Equal Protection clause the same as the mother. Thus, killing the fetus is murder the same as killing anyone else. How any person can call themselves a Christian and believe in killing an unborn child is beyond me. Any such person should not be allowed anywhere near a church much less in any leadership role.
This is an article https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/abortion-in-jewish-thought/ about Jewish law which states that a fetus is NOT a living person and does not have a soul in the first 40 days.
“Jewish law does not share the belief common among abortion opponents that life begins at conception, nor does it legally consider the fetus to be a full person deserving of protections equal those accorded to human beings. In Jewish law, a fetus attains the status of a full person only at birth. Sources in the Talmud indicate that prior to 40 days of gestation, the fetus has an even more limited legal status, with one Talmudic authority (Yevamot 69b) asserting that prior to 40 days the fetus is “mere water.” Elsewhere, the Talmud indicates that the ancient rabbis regarded a fetus as part of its mother throughout the pregnancy, dependent fully on her for its life — a view that echoes the position that women should be free to make decisions concerning their own bodies.”
It may be true that Orthodox Jews don’t approve of abortion in as many cases as Conservative and Reform Jews would, but it is obligatory for Orthodox Jews to have an abortion to save a life of a mother. I am not saying where I personally stand on abortion, but to make ALL abortions illegal DOES impinge on the religious freedom of at least Jews, because they don’t accept the idea that a fetus has a soul from conception. Banning abortion is based on the assumption that a fetus has full personhood from conception, which is something that is not part of the Jewish religion.
You mention Judeo Christian heritage as a reason to reject Gay Marriage, but it is also true that Conservative AND Reform Jews do accept Gay marriage. You would equate most MAINLINE Protestant Denominations with Satanism, because most of them DO accept Gay Marriage. Banning Gay Marriage would criminalize what most of these religions which accept and perform Gay Marriages. One thing I DO hate about Orthodox Christian attitudes is that at times they can be SO intolerant of other religious beliefs. To use the power of the state to suppress religions that don’t agree with Orthodox Christian beliefs if a very scary thing. It reminds me of the inquisition.
“Human life begins at conception” per the American College of Pediatrians. Per the Ten Commandments, thou shalt not kill. It doesn’t get much simpler than that. Abortion is murder and should be treated as such. The “right” of the woman as to control of her body ends the moment she has unprotected sex. Once conception occurs that fetus has as much right to life as the mother.
I don’t concern myself with what other denominations believe or don’t believe. I would rather concern myself with what the Bible says, as that is the word of a God. But you hate orthodox Christian attitudes because they are intolerant of other religious beliefs? Isn’t that rather hypocritical? I mean there are conservative/traditional UMCmembers such as myself who have different beliefs than progressive/liberal UMC members, yet you are intolerant of my beliefs?
What I don’t like about your beliefs is that you would use the power of the State to impose your own version of Christianity on the whole society. But I would surmise that not all Evangelicals believe that this country should be a Theocracy. Some might limit trying to impose this viewpoint on the Church, but not on the larger society.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has some interesting thingsto say about the American College of Pediatricians.
Lastly, how was Kavanaugh’s reputation really ruined? Many people in your camp will probably support him even if it is proven he raped the woman. Progressives, on the other hand, won’t support him, no matter what. And also, we don’t need absolute proof not to confirm someone to the Supreme Court. We do need it to convict someone of a crime in a Court of Law. A job interview is not the same thing as a Jury Trial.
Every time Judge Kavanaugh comes in contact with someone new, the false accusations of the Democrats and that woman will potentially bias the person’s impression of Judge Kavanaugh. It undermines his credibility. There is also the damage done to his daughters. They have to go to school with other students teasing them about their father. No parent wants that for their children, especially when they can’t control it.
The results of the FBI investigation are beginning to come out and they do not corroborate the woman’s accusations. No we don’t need absolute proof to confirm someone to the Supreme Court but we do need due process. We also don’t need unsubstantiated allegations, lies, innuendos, or someone perjuring themselves. It appears Judge Kavanaugh will be confirmed on Saturday and this country will be a bit safer having him on the Court.
Again, I hope the woman is prosecuted for perjury, is convicted, and either is fined, sent to jail, or both. The example the Democrats have set can’t be followed in any subsequent hearings. We can’t let this be precedent. Luckily, the American people seem to see through the Democrats’ tactics as Republican candidates have risen in the polls for Senate. Hopefully, we will still have a Republican House and Senate, enjoy continued economic growth, lower taxes, and prosperity that Trump has brought. Whereas I don’t always agree with his tactics or how he goes about things, I do appreciate the results he has provided. After the mid-terms, I look forward to getting the border wall built, the ACA repealed, more tax cuts, and more EPA regulations gutted.
Daniel,
So it’s okay to use the power of the State to implement liberal beliefs (ACA, abortion, gay marriage, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, minimum wage, etc.), but not conservative ones? RIGHTTT. . .
Your loving brother in Christ,
Steve
However, if somehow had a religious objection to any of these things, then they shouldn’t be forced to participate. Neither Churches nor Pastors should be forced to conduct Gay Marriages. Churches shouldn’t even be forced to ordain women by the State. But the State shouldn’t, as you suggest, punish Churches who DO perform Gay Marriages. Similarly, Jehovah’s Witnesses should not be forced to say the Pledge of Allegiance, nor Quakers should be forced to be in the Army.
Some argue that the religious objections to purchasing contraceptive coverage under ACA, baking wedding cakes for same-sex couples, and a host of other activities should also be afforded the very same exemption from forced participation. After all, the First Amendment guarantees the free exercise of religion (not that of worship, as Hillary Clinton has so often claimed). Certainly, consistency in application would warrant that.
Religious Denominations should not be forced by the state to accept Gay persons within their Churches, such as in Ordination and Marriage. However, in the larger society, Gays should be protected against discrimination, and do believe that discrimination against us by Businesses should be illegal. A long time ago, I read this article by a conservative Lawyer Case Hoogendoorn https://www.clsnet.org/sslpage.aspx?pid=401 by the state who said that Gay People should have all rights within the larger society, but within the Church they should be ostracized. This article is probably 30 years old and it was published in a Legal Journal. Of course, I don’t agree that Churches should ostracize Gay or Transgendered persons, but within Churches, the state shouldn’t force them to accept them. The United Methodist Church SHOULD change its stance to include Gay persons in responsible relationships, but it shouldn’t be the State that forces it to change. The change should come from within, and I will be a part of it.
Thank God this sham is over and Kavenaugh can assume the vacancy. His only crime was his conservative values. One has to wonder if the Republican Party will go scorched earth next time there is Democrat in the White House and a Democrat majority in the Senate. I hope Republicans will be bigger than that, but the other side keeps lowering the bar in their desperation to prevent a Republican president from appointing a conservative judicial nominee. Can we now return to informed discussions as to why we need to pray that the Holy Spirit guides the General Conference to maintain our adherence to Holy Scripture and to accept the Traditional or Traditionalist plan (as if the name matters) and its progressive enforcement procedures so Bishops and clergy will follow the oaths they took before God at ordination to follow our Book of Discipline?? We can only continue to pray.
Let us all pray hard that the Church doesn’t choose to double down on its persecution of persons because of their Sexual Orientation or their Gender Identity. We should remember that Jesus said that the most important thing is that we Love one Another. This is far more important than being Heterosexual or Cis gendered.
You seem to forget the scorched earth approach the Republicans took towards Obama on the Affordable Care Act and in blocking many of his appointments to many Courts. Republicans were mainly motivated by racism in their opposition.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has some interesting things to say about the American College of Pediatricians.
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/american-college-pediatricians
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-southern-poverty-law-center-has-lost-all-credibility/2018/06/21/22ab7d60-756d-11e8-9780-b1dd6a09b549_story.html
The Southern Poverty Law Center has lost all credibility per the Washington Post. I agree. Of course, I never thought it had any credibility in the first place. It is a sham.