If you’ve ever wondered how Bono got interest in (or found his calling for) Africa, here’s the story. Mother Africa Bono's involvement in Africa began shortly after he performed with U2 at the Live Aid concert in London in 1985, a fundraiser for famine relief on the continent. Over the years, he and his wife, Ali, have worked in the field and behind the scenes on behalf of Africans. In 2000, Bono was a leading force behind the Drop the Debt campaign which sought, in the spirit of the biblical teaching of the Jubilee, to forgive billions of dollars owed by Third World countries to the developed world (see "How to Spell Debt Relief," May 21, 2001, p. 64). When he is asked, though, why he has chosen to give his energy to the aids crisis in Africa, he reminisces about a time just before U2's megastardom, when he was a young, impressionable man who just wanted to help. "All of this started for me in Ethiopia in the mid-'80s, when my darling wife and I went out there as children, really, to see and to work in Africa," he told the congregation at Louisville's Northeast Christian Church. World Vision marketer Steve Reynolds played a key role, he says. "Honestly there is no chance that I would be here if he hadn't called me up and asked me to make that journey. It's a journey that changed my life forever. "I remember waking up in the mornings and watching mist lift, as tens of thousands of people would be walking. They would have walked through the night to come and beg for food, to come and leave their children. "I remember one man, this beautiful man with a beautiful boy, his son. He was so proud. And he came up to me and said, 'Please. Will you take my son? My son will have no life if I look after him. He is sure to die. But if you take him, he is sure to live.' And as Steve Reynolds will tell you, you can't do that. You had to say no. Well, it's the last time I'm saying no." The full article can be found here: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/003/2.38.html
when i read an account like this, i'm struck with the reality that i've never had a bad day in my life...that my worst day would be the best day for many around the world who worry about their ability to merely feed and clothe their children. thanks for posting this, grizzled! always great to see you here!
When I see threads like this I wonder how Americans can weep over Ethipians and yet support the inumane policies in Iraq that have killed so many hundreds of thosands since Iraq pulled out of Kuwait in the Gulf War. I think of how much good could have been done with the $200 billion we just blew in Iraq. How many of the poor in Ethiopia that could have been fed with just a change in priorities. I think of how much waste there is in our $400 billion defense budget (which doesn't even take into account the recent $87 billion for Iraq) when, despite 9/11, we are basically safe from other countries invasions and the legitimate defense against other countries and terrorists requires so much less. I think of how a self proclaimed Christian like Bush can be so heartless and concerned with Halliburton and unconcerned about those people in Ethiopia while claiming to pray daily.
Without defending what is happening in Iraq, Bush has authorized more aid for Africa than anyone before him. I think on that account he genuinely deserves some credit.
Um, he lied. One can promise a trillion dollars, but if you attach strings to it that no one is going to accept it's pointless. It's a pretty good tactic that's worked for the Bushies previously. http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/9574 The AIDS Vote Doug Ireland is a New York-based media critic and commentator. Will AIDS be an issue in the 2004 presidential election? It will if a new coalition that has just launched AIDSvote.org has anything to say about it. A Gallup poll released on World AIDS Day, Dec. 1, showed that AIDS is fourth among America's health care concerns—but for 8 percent, it's the priority issue. There are close to a million Americans who have been diagnosed as living with HIV—the 8 percent represents not only the infected but the families, friends and caregivers of the dead as well as the living, and all those informed enough to know that the AIDS pandemic this year became the greatest killer in world history. The number may sound small, but those for whom AIDS is the top concern are numerous enough to decide a close election—and HIV is a virus that crosses all party, ideological and class lines. Sponsored by dozens of AIDS service, advocacy and treatment organizations, AIDSvote proposes a model platform on what government must do to combat HIV/AIDS—which organizations and individuals are asked to sign. And AIDSVote has circulated a detailed questionnaire to all presidential candidates eliciting their responses, with responses to be posted in January. The Web site is designed as an organizing tool to bring the AIDS issue back into the electoral arena—and with good reason. AIDS worldwide has already killed at least 22 million people, surpassing the previous record set by the 1918 Spanish Flu epidemic (20 million dead), according to numbers just released by UNAIDS and the World Health Organization. In 2003 alone, 3 million have died; 500,000 of them were children. But the worst news: 20 years after the discovery of HIV, infection rates are sharply rising, not falling. Here in the United States, the Centers for Disease Control just reported a 5.1 percent jump in new infections this year. Half of them are among the 13-to-25 year old age group—meaning we're failing to give our kids lifesaving, comprehensive sex education, including information about AIDS-preventing condoms. Among some groups, infections are skyrocketing: half of all new infections are among African-Americans—way out of proportion to their place in the population—and among Latinos infections jumped 26 percent. But even those numbers fall short of the reality, since half of all Americans haven't been tested for HIV, and a third of those who've been tested once don't return for follow-up tests—even if they haven't been celibate since their last one. Around the world, the numbers are even more gut-wrenching: 5 million recorded new infections this year, with more and more every day (and again, the number only reflects those who've been tested). AIDS has now been identified as soaring in Eastern Europe and Asia. In Russia, the Health Ministry projects one in 10 people will be infected by 2005. In India, more than 5 million have HIV, as do half the country's sex workers (prostitutes to you). The UNAIDS report says that "The epidemic is spreading into areas and countries where, until recently, there was little or no HIV present—including China, Indonesia, and Vietnam (home to over 1.5 billion people)." And what is our government doing about all this? Well, after behind-the-scenes White House lobbying to get Congress to appropriate less this year than President Bush had asked for in his much-publicized $15 billion, 5-year global AIDS plan, Congress has been obscenely stalling. The Senate is not even going to get around to a final vote on this year's installment until January (by which time it's estimated there'll be another 500,000 new infections worldwide). And some 90 percent of the $15 billion won't go to the UN Global AIDS Fund, which fights AIDS without regard to religious restrictions, and which Bush has largely bypassed, but will be handed out unilaterally to countries with all kinds of strings attached. Roughly a third of the money will be distributed as patronage to "faith-based" organizations which oppose condom use and are sympathetic to Bush. The Bush administration's decision to withdraw funding for family planning clinics and HIV-fighting groups that offer condoms already has shut down local AIDS-fighting efforts in Africa and Asia, including in Kenya, Liberia, Sudan, Sierra Leone and Sri Lanka. In Ethiopia and Zambia, health services have had their supplies of USAID-provided condoms stopped. These decisions by the Bush administration have signed the death warrant for millions of people whom the president said he would help. Guess who Bush put in charge of his so-called "emergency" plan for AIDS? The former CEO of the pharmaceutical behemoth Eli Lilly, Randall Tobias—a man with zero public health experience who's been a prime mover of Big Pharma's lobby, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Tobias had absolutely no experience dealing with HIV/AIDS when he was appointed (unless you count selling meds at inflated prices), and when he testified before the Senate he defended his widely-criticized appointment to the top HIV-fighting job by saying he would "get a better deal" from Big Pharma for AIDS-fighting drugs—but also claimed that money "wasn't the problem" in the global AIDS fight (a ludicrous assertion). Well, Bush administration restrictions prevent his "emergency" initiative from procuring cheap, generic versions of AIDS-fighting retrovirals being produced in India and a few other Third World countries—meaning the money will go to the Big Pharma companies that hold the patents on those drugs, which could be sold at a tenth of their current price and still make a profit, according to Doctors Without Borders. So far, these multinationals have reduced some of their drug prices only slightly—they're still out of reach for most poor countries; and American taxpayers will continue to pay for them through the nose. And Bush's AIDS-fighting money won't buy as much as it should. The Bush administration is negotiating bilateral trade agreements which will ensure that those impoverished countries are forced to buy their AIDS drugs from Big Pharma at wildly inflated prices. Which they, of course, can't do. As for prevention, it will remain ineffective and pauperized as long as Bush and the Congress continue to peddle their failed, ostrich-like policy of "abstinence only."
Do you ever wonder what the POOREST person in the world would sayi n this sitution? "I'm sure there are..nope.." "I'm not the wors....nope" How do they take consolation out of life? Do they deserve to be angry at God? Are they being ungrateful if they said I wish I wasn't born? I always wonder about that.
Max: Thanks! I still love this place. I just have to ration my time here. Woofer: Well, the bill isn’t dead yet. We can only hope it goes through I guess. Sane: Sometimes in our darkest places the truest parts of our existence can come to light. This is not to say that we should write off the plight of these people as “good for them” or anything remotely like that, just that we can’t know for sure what their internal and spiritual experience is, even as their bodies waste away and their children die in their arms. That seems like a bizarre thing to say, but I believe it to be true. That fact doesn’t absolve the rest of us from responsibility. As Christians were are clearly to act to help the less fortunate, “whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me,” but in terms of what’s going on with each individual, we just can’t know for sure. I pray that God eases their pain, because I just can’t imagine what it would be like to be in the position of having to beg someone to take your son away so that he could live, and to hear the inevitable answer, no. That’s just inconceivable. It clearly had a profound impact on Bono. I’m feeling a real darkness in the world these days, a real gloom. We can’t let ourselves become defeated and hard hearted people. We have to keep the faith, live in love and hang on to hope. Faith, hope and love people, faith, hope and love.
What do I claim to do? Have our government feed em. Sure would make me feel proud to be an American for a change. Take the $4 billion we waste killing Iraqis per week till they do our bidding and feed the starving in Africa. This doesn't make a buck for Halliburton, pay back Bush's contributors, make the macho feel potent or the Evangelical Zionists achieve Armageddon, but it does actually make the starving bellies stop aching and lets them at least live. Got to admit the starving would go for it. You still want to subdue the Iraqis? Or make them Western democrats? Another alternative. Take back the tax breaks to those making over $100,000, and I am one, and give it to feed these people. I know-- easy for me to say. I got a mere pittance compared to the really heavy hitters making a few hundered thousand on up. Another alternative. I just saw a whole ABC program about how our enormous farm subsidy program produces so much corn they don't know what to do with it, so they turn it into corn syrup, the cheapest food product on the planet and then try to put it into every processed food made, leading to a massive subsidy for obesity in the US. Give the corn to the starving Ethiopians. I know many will have a whole line of rationales why this is wrong. This will destroy the will of the starving Ethiopians to take "personal responsibility". Per Jorge, this runs against the market God, as the marginal utility of these people is zero. Per my niece, a devout alumni of a North Houston Evangelical Church, why worry about this too much or at least use her tax dollars, since the Bible says "The poor ye shall always have". Libertarians will call using US tax dollars to feed the starving Ethiopians "theft" of their money. Some conservative Chrisitians will object because this charity "should come form the heart". Some Christian ministries will object because it doesn't pay the salaries of their staffers or help them increase their membership. Whatever. Sorry to put in so bluntly, but after all the title of the thread was eye catching in that it was about the "Christian Left", and not about making the feel good contented Church going religious right have warm fuzzies about merely empathizing with the starving. Having been raised in the Christian Left, I believe most Christian leftists would support some variation of actually using the United States government to feed these people permanently.
glynch -- I appreciate your post. I think God has been convicting me lately on my idolatry of certain American ideals...particularly individualism and some of my political views that I see derived from thinkers like Locke and expressed through people like Jefferson. Not that those are necessarily evil ideas...but that they should in no way supercede God's commands for me. I agree with you entirely that we, as a church, do a ton talking about the poor...but we don't live out God's kingdom on earth ("on earth as it is in Heaven") nearly enough. Not even close. Man, I hope that failings of people like me doesn't keep you from seeking God. I hope that churches reading scripture to suit some political goal doesn't turn you away entirely from the scripture, itself. I'm screwed up...God is not. I do believe that charity can't be compelled under the threat of imprisonment for not paying taxes...and I'm still working through some of my thoughts on all that. I do believe that what's required of me as a follower of Christ is far more than writing a check to Uncle Sam to take care of everyone. But at the same time, I understand the call for justice...and see a definite place for government assistance in that. I agree we're entirely wasteful...and that we're entirely selfish. We don't stand alone in that; but we are, nonetheless.
I appreciate the post, Max. I hate to make this seem so personal , though I'm sure it might appear that way since you are about the only one I've discussed these issues with It is true that Christians like Bush who kill tens of thousands unnecessarily, and constantly try to shift money from the poor and middle classes to his cronies and fellow class members, all the while enthusiastically supported by millions of American fundamentalist Christians, who he urges to pray for him daily, doesn't make me feel Christian. It doesn't make me feel like Christianity is any more valid than a religion such as the Muslim faith, which as we can see, also has it fans who don't seem to value life or suffering on this earth much either. . I'll admit from my Christian upbringing it is puzzling why the Evangelical (for want of a better word) Christians in America were essentially alone, among Christian groups, in finding the Iraq war just. It appears imho that they are just a captive of the Republican Party-- and Christian politico-preachers like Pat Robertson. Or is there a moral basis I'm missing for why they differ from the rest of Christianity on this issue? I can understand somewhat the abortion issue from my Catholic background. Couldn't they support Dubya, but tell him "no" on the war? Since we're talking about Christianity and values, it also a mystery to me how so many lawyers, who go to Christian Chuches frequently, can devote their above average intelligence on behalf of so many unworthy causes in their work life. I can understand the role of economic necessity, but most lawyers don't seem to be at the level where realistically that is the issue. Please note I think representing banks, on money matters, is relatively morally neutral.. However, my question is with the many bright church going lawyers who consider it a great career to help the Enrons of the world cheat, discriminate, avoid compensating injuries and pollute etc because they pay very well and/oor they find the legal issues "challenging".. As far as me, myself, I think a good life lived and doing good work is all that a Christian God would care about, assuming one exists.
1. yes...i think it's possible to support bush, or any other candidate, on certain issues and disagree with him on others. i don't think i've ever voted for a candidate whom i felt really represented all i believe. 2. i'm evangelical...but i'm a presbyterian who grew up in an episcopal church...the only reason i'd use the word evangelical to describe me is because i do share my relationship with Christ with others. it seems pretty clear to me the Bible directs me to do that. but i'm not sure how that particular distinction...or command...would make someone vote differently. i suppose the word evangelical really means fundamental...which probably doesn't mean what it should, anymore, either. confusing labels, really, particularly when describing a personal relationship with God. i will say the presbyterian denomination i belong to came out strongly against the war in iraq. 3. i totally agree..whether they be lawyers or whatever, i don't think one can separate one's devotion to God from one's devotion to his work. helping a company or an individual cheat is absolutely wrong...the state bar has come down on this stuff pretty hard since i've been following it...but there is a far greater authority than the state bar! and i think there are higher standards than those that attorneys set out for themselves that we should be committed to. while in law school, i was pretty convinced i couldn't be a lawyer...not that i couldn't do the work, but that i couldn't live the life i wish to live while working all day in that environment. i've been blessed to have a client base that very clearly understands my faith...and i work with people who share that faith.
by the way, glynch...this was all "personal" long before your post. I think God's been on me about this for a little while now. maybe you're his instrument!?
The other day I read that more than 50 percent of the world has never used a telephone. I carry one around in my pocket. We have a lot to be thankful for.
