Digging Deeper on the Issues

The privilege of doing human relations work has shone a light on many things that were outside of my purview before. For example, I find myself regularly noticing how we often lack intentional and honest engagement in dialogue around difficult public issues. It is my experience that during these times, we often defer to those who have been tagged as the “experts”. And, to our detriment, profound, provocative and powerful voices of “regular folks” who are influencing and being influenced by the issues on a daily basis are silenced. Watching the CNN broadcast Reclaiming the Dream, reminded me of my experience.

“So, should the church pass out condoms?” was the question Soledad O’Brien of CNN handed over to Bishop T.D. Jakes, the “religious expert” on the panel. Bishop Jakes, pastor of the mega church Potter’s House in Dallas, Texas, seemed to have been caught unawares by her inquiry. His rather clumsy and partially incredulous reply was, “What did you say?”

After she repeated herself, Bishop Jakes returned with an emphatic, “No”, through a chuckle and a smile. “No, that is not what the church is for.” He went on to say how it is, however, about educating folks, providing them with information and leading them to the places where they can get what they need. The second part of Bishop Jakes’ answer makes good sense to me, while I am challenged by the first part – “No, that is not what the church is for.”

The church has been embroiled in an ancient debate about what it is for. An accessible and contemporary example is how MLK, Jr. was lauded by some colleagues and lambasted by others for making the church the center of operations during the Civil Rights Movement. The simplicity and certitude of Bishop Jakes’ retort belies the fact that the church is an incredibly complex entity and therefore, should be viewed in complex and nuanced ways.

I am sure those present as well as those tuning in by television, heard Bishop Jakes in many different ways. I heard him make a clear, broad and sweeping generalization about the church – not his church or his personal belief -- but the church. While there is a chance, within the confines of his own mind, he could have prefaced his comments with, “It is my opinion” or “My personal theological understanding tells me”, -- the fact is, I don’t read minds and if he did think as such, he did not say it out loud.

Adding to my curiosity and frustration is that it was clear from the editing of the broadcast, the panelists’ answers and rejoinders were cut and spliced, resulting in a truncated conversation to those of us in TV land. I am left wondering what others on the panel had to say about this issue, and if they had different perspectives. Interestingly during my reflection, I reached back to a memory of about 10 years ago when I heard Dr. Michael Eric Dyson (an ordained minister and former pastor) shock a congregation boldly and brashly declaring from the pulpit, “If I were a pastor, I would pass out condoms on the offering plate.” He said he was serious – and having gotten to know Dr. Dyson over the years through his work, I tend to believe that he would have at least tried it. While my personal truth is probably somewhere between his and Bishop Jakes’, my point is it’s a different perspective. Further, I am sure there is a range of ideas out in the world about this issue and all of the good ones don’t necessarily rest in the hallowed theological interpretations of the “religious experts.”

Although I am concerned that media use their professional platform to encourage complex discussions and provoke the public to think critically, I am not sure how to have influence there. I am advocating that we as leaders are intentional about creating the space for a diversity of voices beyond those of the usual suspects to sound off on the issues and challenge others to do the same.

In this case, I wish I could have heard from someone other than the “religious expert” – from another panelist or perhaps an audience member. If this had happened, I do not know for sure exactly what would have come of the conversation, but I am inclined to believe it would have been more robust and complicated than, “No, that is not what the church is for.”

But, I am Black!

“Sterling, I don’t see you as black. I’m colorblind”, were the words that innocently cascaded from the lips of my friend as we were having the familiar Why Can’t We Just Get Past Race conversation. The words resonated deeply and disturbingly, and I am happy to say I was excited about the opportunity to engage in a very important dialogue.

I explained to my friend how his comment, seemingly nonthreatening and conciliatory, actually landed with me. Our conversation ended sooner than I would have liked, but here is where I was going.

To be sure, my friend was well intentioned. Notwithstanding good intentions, it remains an easy step for him into the land of color-blindness and a harder one for me. I asked my friend, “Do you ever think about being white?” There was a pregnant pause. “I think about being black all the time” was the revelation I offered that got us off the dime.

How I identify rests in my hands, not in the hands of my friend. Black people have a long history of being told who they are and are not, whether in bold overt ways (think Jim and Jane Crow) or reserved covert ways (the media message of blacks as the “looters” during Hurricane Katrina). I believe it‘s a privileged act for my friend to try to define me on his terms, which gives him license to try to deal with me on his terms. His erasing of this part of my identity causes me to call to question his knowledge about just how complicated my blackness is and whether he chooses not to deal with that.

The notion of him looking past my blackness causes me to question whether or not he finds something deplorable about being black. I happen to like being black. My blackness is rooted in a tradition of survival, innovation and creative resistance and existence. Where I live, black is powerful, resilient, beautiful and complicated. Black is brilliant. Black is full of grace. Black is my mother and my mother’s mother. It’s not only skin deep – it’s experience deep. In all of its pain – black is hope. I embrace that and should not be subjected to someone, by the power of privilege and/or the power of guilt, stripping me of that part of my identity.

Finally, the well worn and romanticized version of MLK, Jr. comes to mind. “Dr. Martin (originally Michael which is significant to me) Luther King, Jr. fought and died for a color blind world. He said his dream was to live in a world that judged him by the content of his character and not by the color of his skin.” Yes, MLK, Jr. did say these things. And I would add, he did not say don’t see me as black; he said don’t judge me because I am black. There’s a difference. King’s bid was to shine a light on the farcical caricature of blacks engorged with racial stereotypes and interrogate it – to the end of “liberty and justice for all.” In that “all” King did not suggest black people fade into the innocuous ether of color blindness, but rather show up more prominently in the beautiful and colorful mosaic of all of creation.

Sure I am more than black. I am a man, a heterosexual man, a committed husband and partner, a responsible parent. I am a Christian minister, who is in constant theological crisis and enjoying it, as I relish free thinking. I am a determined reader, with healthy curiosity and a commitment to continuous learning. I am a lover of the symphony and appreciate Yo-Yo Ma. I like to bump to hip-hop and listen to KRS1 drop the science and TI just drop it. I’ve been known to bop to bee-bop, swing to Benny Goodman and his big band, kool out to the smooth jazz of Marsalis crew and throw my hip out dancing the salsa. I am as comfortable talking junk on the corner with my boys from the hood as I am presenting to executives in a board room oozing with intellectual pedigree. I believe in lifting others up and I believe in personal responsibility. On some things I am a little left on others more moderate, maybe slightly right – it’s complicated.

I embrace it. I welcome it. And I join with all those who want to advocate for racial reconciliation, equity and harmony. My simple truth to my allies is, while beating the path of this protracted journey – I am and will remain, black.

Community College Access for Undocumented Students

Dear Fellows,

Blue Ribbon Mentor-Advocate has been an advocate for children of undocumented immigrants to have opportunities to pursue post-secondary education. We need your help right now to make this happen.

You may have seen in the news that the North Carolina Community College System issued a policy memo to the state's 57 community colleges directing them to admit undocumented individuals. Previously, about a third of the state's community colleges had policies that denied admission to undocumented individuals. About a third more had no formal policy on the issue, but had practices that effectively barred undocumented individuals from attending.

The new policy brings the community college admission policy into alignment with the existing UNC system admissions policy. Both policies say that undocumented students cannot be barred admission if they meet academic and other requirements to be let in. But, the students must pay out-of-state tuition since they are not legal North Carolina residents.

The negative reaction to this has been swift and furious. However, one frequent argument doesn't apply. Several opponents have already said that they can't believe taxpayers would be required to pay to educate people who are here illegally. But the NCCCS says that the typical out-of-state tuition rate of $7,400 per year is well above the $5,375 it takes to educate a student each year. Therefore, admitting undocumented students is actually a way for the cash-strapped community college system to save taxpayers money!

Furthermore, there is much research that demonstrates that higher levels of education lead to less criminal behavior (i.e. less taxpayer money spent on criminal justice, which is significantly more expensive than education), more job-related income (i.e. more taxes paid into local and state coffers), and more integration into society.

Over at NC Policy Watch, Chris Fitzsimon has a great piece on why it matters that these are "Children, not Illegals or Aliens." I'm not going to rehash his comments here. I'll just emphasize his point that this policy change is really going to benefit children who were brought here innocently by parents who crossed the border.

Blue Ribbon Mentor-Advocate works with the children of undocumented immigrants every day. These students care deeply about becoming educated, and they have a lot to offer to their new home if only we would let them.

See, when kids are in school they learn more than the curriculum. They learn the American Dream. Every day they hear "If you work hard and get your education, you can be whatever you want to be." Except that for these kids, the rug gets pulled out from under them as soon as they graduate from high school. Their options for pursuing post-secondary education are limited and they have no way to pursue legal work or citizenship.

Morally, I think it's anti-American to pitch the American Dream to children who want to contribute to our society and then withhold education and opportunity from them. Economically, we need these students fully participating in our workforce to sustain our economic strength in the 21st century. As UNC's Dr. James Johnson has been explaining for years, changing demographics in the U.S. are leading us towards a severe labor shortfall. To sustain our economy, we will have to add immigrant labor to our workforce over the next 20-30 years AND to educate every single child currently enrolled in U.S. public schools (including children of undocumented immigrants). Obviously, the debate about community college admissions is just a tiny example of why comprehensive immigration reform is so badly needed.

What will happen now? Will the current media cycle on this issue die down? Maybe, but the political cycle is likely to continue.

The current North Carolina Community College System President, Martin Lancaster, is due to step down next year. While it's likely that Lancaster took action on this now because his term is ending, it's not clear whether or not he had the support of his board. The board has appointed a new President, Scott Ralls, who has not spoken publicly on this issue. He is the president of Craven County Community College which does currently admit undocumented students. Will he stand behind this policy? Will the board?

Because the legal precedent came from the Attorney General's office (when Mike Easley held that position), there is already pressure on Roy Cooper to rule on the policy. And you can be certain that a bill will be introduced in the legislature to overturn the policy and ban "illegals" from community colleges. Such a bill might also seek to overturn the UNC system admissions policy.

In the meantime, there are a few things supporters of thes children can do.
-Send a letter to NCCCS president Martin Lancaster (LANCASTER@nccommunitycolleges.edu) telling him you support this decision.
-Write letters to your local papers supporting the policy.
-Call on Community College Board Members to uphold the new policy and hire a president who will do the same.
-Call on legislators to resist any attempt to intrude on the Community College's autonomy by banning enrollment of undocumented students.

These are good kids. They want to be teachers, firemen, mechanics, and even politicians! It's time to end shortsighted attempts to fix immigration policy by punishing children. Do we really want them to be both uneducated and working illegally? There are clearly better alternatives.

Graig Meyer (03-05)
Blue Ribbon Mentor-Advocate
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools
750 S. Merritt Mill Rd.
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
919-918-2170
gmeyer@chccs.k12.nc.us
www.chccs.k12.nc.us/brma

lenny salzberg post " A perfect Friday Fellow Issue for Discussion"

I have an issue I'd like for the Friday Fellowship Community to discuss.

Recently my daughter's first grade class (and the majority of her K-2 public school) got to attend "The Magic of Christmas."This event was a field trip for the students. Their parents had to sign a consent and pay $7. Those students whose parents did not pay or did not grant consent got to stay back at school and do work.

"The Magic of Christmas" was a musical extravaganza. My daughter loved it. She told me that it was mostly Christmas songs, and the best part was the end where they sang about the birth of baby Jesus. When I heard about this (after the fact- my wife signed the consent) I was FURIOUS.

Over 50% of the kids in my daughter's school are on free or reduced priced lunch due to low income. A handful of students (believe it or not) are not Christian in my daughter's school.

Should their children be given the choice to either go to a show about the birth of Christ or stay back and do work? Recently there was controversy in the Fayetteville schools when bibles were being distributed in a fifth grade class. When one child opted not to take one, he was ridiculed by his peers. Imagine the ridicule your child would face if you chose not to sign the consent and they had to stay back and do work rather than go see a play!

Any thoughts?

Lenny Salzberg (95-97)

December 14, 2007 3:17 PM

Your Fellows' Dialogue Blog

What is the Fellows' Dialogue BLOG?

Fellows, we created this blog for you to dialogue in cyberspace about anything that you choose. As you have made a choice to visit here, the dialogue is open-- you may advocate, question, challenge. Prior to posting, we ask you to remind yourself of the guidelines that we use in the Fellows community. Here are a few...no shaming or blaming, use I statements, try on new ideas, remember both/and. Also, accept non-closure and be in the mode of discovery and learning. This is a place to engage.

The WLI community is a place where we can have courageous conversations. Too often, we take the "easy" route of avoiding difficult or controversial topics or sharing our true thoughts on issues or perspectives. We hear often that WLI is one of the few places where Fellows can try on being courageous in dialogue, engage authentically and civilly in conflict. So, here is a tool for you to do that together. The Fellowship is a place to practice that courage in leadership. Please seize the opportunity to continue to practice with your fellow Fellows here. Remember that being messy is encouraged and this community is about integrity, intention and inclusion. Let's hear your voices!

11/29/07
by Kathleen Clark
Delete
1 – 1 of 1