POS 388 - Midterm Paper

               Recently, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released their Sixth Assessment Report, stating that it is “unequivocal” that humans have had a distinct influence on global climate change (Masson-Delmotte, V., et. al., 2021). Almost as soon as the report came out, Pope Francis, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, and Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, released a joint statement, calling on political leaders and Christian faithful all over the world to come together to battle climate change, stating that this problem poses a grave threat to the global poor, whom they are called upon to keep safe (Pope Francis, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, 2021).

               Though Christian influence in the environmentalism movement is not new, the Pew Research Center estimates that less than 50% of American Christians are concerned with environmental issues (Religion and Views on Climate and Energy Issues, 2015), and it would seem that the calls for bold climate action from the likes of Pope Francis in “Laudato Si” are on the fringe, when there is actually a deep relationship between Christianity and environmentalism. Wayland Baptist University in Plainview, Texas, offers a lesson in what they call “The Two Books Theology,” a philosophy that, through Biblical teachings, encourages environmental stewardship, which can be traced back to the earliest founding of the Christian Church. They reference two early saints who both preached that taking care of the environment was a testament of appreciation for God’s creation (Biblical Foundations for Christian Environmental Stewardship, n.d.).

               And yet, even with all of these Biblical teachings, Christians are still woefully behind on the international stage when it comes to the global climate crisis. According to an article in the Bulletin for Atomic Scientists, most American Protestants believe that the environmentalism movement has too many ties to the neo-pagan movement, and that, because “the end times” are near, there is no need to worry about the state of the planet (Zaleha & Szasz, 2015). In addition to this, because Christians tend to inhabit some of the wealthiest countries, there is a tendency to “export” environmental problems from their countries to less religious countries that have larger problems with pollution, like China (Skirbekk, de Sherbinin, Adamo, Navarro, & Chai-Onn, 2020).

               If we go back to the Pew Research study (2015), we also see a huge disparity between Catholics and Protestants on the issue of science and its compatibility with the teachings of the Bible. Hispanic Catholics, by and large, do not see a huge disparity between the teachings of the Bible and scientific fact. But White Evangelical Protestants do. As a religious person, though Jewish, and a woman of science, with a bachelor’s degree in Anthropology already, the fact that nearly half of all Christians polled believe that humans have existed in our current form since the dawn of time completely boggles my mind. And then reading later down the same line that a third of those polled believe that science doesn’t think humans evolved made me even more upset. It’s no wonder that mainstream Christian’s believe that climate change is a hoax. If there isn’t even a consensus that science believes in evolution, why would there be a consensus on climate change? To the average, science-minded person, these beliefs just do not mesh well at all.

But science does not exist in the minds of an evangelical Christian the way it exists in the minds of an average American college student. For one, science is not fact. As stated in an op-ed for the Washington Post, science itself is an impressive means for ascertaining facts, but ultimately fallible and because it is, indeed fallible, one could argue that facts could exist independent of science (Schloss, 2015). This is ultimately the crux of the evangelical argument against evidence-based research on climate change.

So how do we reach the evangelical Christian community and bridge this gap? Clearly it is in the best interests of the wider Christian community to become more self-aware and responsible for the environment. We are hurtling ever faster towards a point of no return. With Christianity being the dominant religion of the Western World, it has become paramount that we reach this segment of society and get them to care about the world that their God gave them dominion over.

It lies within that single word: dominion. Encouraging new research, cited in an article for the Pacific Standard, states that when evangelical Christians are approached using terms such as “stewardship” and “dominion” instead of science-based terminology, they are much more likely to become engaged in the climate change conversation (Jacobs, 2019).  Assistant Professor of Communication Studies at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Emma Frances Bloomfield, lists “avoid relying on science” in her top three strategies for encouraging communication on climate change with evangelical Christians, along with treating conversations as dialogues and locating common values (Bloomfield, 2019). Moreover, even within the Evangelical community, stewardship and dominion are becoming buzz words with regards to conversations about the environment. Focus on the Family, a popular Evangelical radio broadcast program, has devoted an entire section of their website to answering questions about Christian perspectives of environmentalism and how the Bible encourages sustainability and conservation through the lens of dominion and stewardship (Christians and the Environment).

Christianity and environmentalism were never incompatible. It was always the language with which we chose to speak on these topics and the fervor with which we use science to back up our position. Changing how we approach the subject could not only help us secure a healthier planet but win ourselves allies in the political arena as well. As Dr. Evan Berry, of Arizona State University, states in his book, Devoted to Nature,

“Environmental ethics does not hinge on our ability to articulate political solutions but on our willingness to accept that environmental politics is tied up with the very problem of being itself. In the face of technopolitical certitude in contemporary policy debates about climate change, perhaps remembering that the environmental imagination is religiously rooted can help us remain mindful that our relationship to the natural world is fundamentally a cultural condition. Reclaiming and reappraising the ethicoreligious basis of American environmentalism can help refresh the imaginative possibilities with which we respond to contemporary challenges. (2015, p. 186).”

 

Works Cited

Berry, E. (2015). Devoted to Nature: The Religious Roots of American Environmentalism. Oakland, California: University of California Press.

Biblical Foundations for Christian Environmental Stewardship. (n.d.). Retrieved from Wayland Baptist University: https://www.wbu.edu/about/green-initiative/biblical-foundations.htm

Bloomfield, E. F. (2019, Aug 05). Understanding Christians Climate Views Can Lead to Better Conversations About the Environment. Retrieved from The Conversation: https://theconversation.com/understanding-christians-climate-views-can-lead-to-better-conversations-about-the-environment-115693

Christians and the Environment. (n.d.). Retrieved from Focus on the Family: https://www.focusonthefamily.com/family-qa/christians-and-the-environment/

Jacobs, T. (2019, Mar 22). How to Convince Christians to Take Action on Climate Change. Retrieved from The Pacific Standard: https://psmag.com/environment/how-to-convince-christians-to-take-action-on-climate-change

Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Pean, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J. B. R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekci, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.). (2021). Summary for Policymakers in: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. United Nations, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Full_Report.pdf

Pope Francis, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew. (2021). Joint Statement for the Protection of Creation. Retrieved from https://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/sites/abc/files/2021-09/Joint%20Statement%20on%20the%20Environment.pdf

Religion and Views on Climate and Energy Issues. (2015, Oct 22). Retrieved from Pew Research Center: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2015/10/22/religion-and-views-on-climate-and-energy-issues/

Schloss, J. (2015, Aug 03). ‘Faith vs. Fact:’ why religion and science are mutually incompatible. Retrieved from The Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/science-and-theology/2015/08/03/77136504-19ca-11e5-bd7f-4611a60dd8e5_story.html

Skirbekk, V., de Sherbinin, A., Adamo, S. B., Navarro, J., & Chai-Onn, T. (2020, Oct 06). Religious Affiliation and Environmental Challenges in the 21st Century. Journal of Religion and Demography, 7(2), 238-271. Retrieved from https://brill.com/view/journals/jrd/7/2/article-p238_5.xml

Zaleha, B. D., & Szasz, A. (2015, Sept 01). Why Conservative Christians Don't Believe in Climate Change. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 71(5), 19-30. Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0096340215599789

---------------------------------------------------

Grade: 145/150

Professor Comments:  I must admit, it's hard to grade when your argument is so closely related to the topics in my own research. I have a bunch of things to say, but for the purposes of this class, this is strong work.

POS 388 - Module 3 Discussion

 Prompt: 

Identify a nation that is characterized by the strong presence of religious nationalism (i.e. religious nationalism accurately describes the governing party or a powerful opposition party). The may select one of the nation's we've focused on already in the study materials, or you may select another nation of your choosing. Drawing on terms, concepts, and themes from the course thus far, summarize how and why religious nationalism became emboldened in that specific context.

Reply: 

Israeli Pride?

Israel, up until the current government took power, was being held hostage by Jewish nationalists known as the Haredi, who are now in direct opposition to the current government. The Haredi are ultra-Orthodox Jews who not only think that their way of interpreting Jewish law is the only correct way, and indeed they have taken control of the religious life in Israel, making it all but impossible for non-Orthodox Jews to get married or be buried in Israel, restricting access for non-Orthodox women at the Western Wall, controlling the religious court systems in Israel to favor Orthodox men (which they use to hide sexual predators, domestic abusers, and men of ill repute), systematically erasing women from advertisements on billboards, and making life in Israel miserable for anyone who does not wish to adopt a Haredi way of life. They breed like rabbits, marrying their children off at younger and younger ages, some as young as 15, and teaching them that it is their moral obligation to repopulate the Jewish people that were lost in the Holocaust until these children have 14 or more children themselves. The Haredi do not work. They live off government subsidies, community donations, and local handouts. Men will go to synagogue to study Torah all day while the women are left to tend to their massive families, keep up with the housework, and often will have low paying jobs themselves, since the Haredi do not believe in providing women with secular education beyond rudimentary middle school classes. But because of these large families, the Haredi outnumber the smaller secular Israeli families and were able to take control of the Israeli government for many years. And they ruled with fear. The Haredi live in a world without television, movies, and radio. They dress like 19th century Polish nobility. They eschew most modern conveniences in favor of a more traditional lifestyle. Secularization pollutes their godly lifestyle and turns their focus away from scripture. The Haredi will put the fear of God into you. They ruled by majority. When you come from a community where smaller families are still more than 6 people large, you are quickly going to become outnumbered. Are they popular? Well Benjamin Netanyahu sure liked them. He was their greatest ally. And they are staunchly pro-Israel, believing that Israel is given to the Jewish people by God, at the cost of everyone else, including the Palestinians. Populism. Nationalism. Authoritarianism. And Majoritarianism. The Haredi have it in spades. What’s worse is that the Haredi don’t just exist in Israel; they are also on American shores as well. They exist in small Jewish enclaves throughout the United States, poisoning the well with their nationalist ideas about how the Jewish people are far superior to all other races, and how Israel is the motherland that we should all aspire to return to. They see no irony when they clap shoulders with Trump supporters who secretly think they control the world’s banks, as they walk away and whisper about the “goyim.” Israel has a lot of problems, but the most prevalent of them all is the control that the Haredi have on religious life within the nation state, and, up until recently, control of the Knesset as well.

--------------------------------------------------------

Grade: 50/50

Professor Comments: None

POS 388 - Module 2 Discussion

 Prompt:

In her post in the Berkley Forum, Elizabeth Hurd argues that "the time has come for Congress and the Biden administration to dismantle the religion bureaucracy." Do you agree or disagree with Dr. Hurd? Why or why not?

Reply: 

Married to a Jewish Refugee

I agree completely with Dr. Hurd. I think that the idea of religious freedom has gotten too muddied up with the ideas of oppression. Where do we draw the lines? I’m drawn to the quote in Marsden (2020):

“When people are categorized by religious belief, then they are incentivized to frame demands or requests for asylum in the language of religious rights, thereby strengthening the religious freedom advocacy regime’s framing schema (…). This contributes to a desecularising trend in international politics (…), in the sense that it universalizes an American or Western interpretation of religion, overlooking other causal explanation for events in international politics, and opens up space for all aspects of international politics to be religionized (p. 10).”

My husband and his family arrived here in 1990 as refugees from the former Soviet Union. They were granted political and religious asylum on the basis that they were Jewish and unable to live without fear of oppression from the communist government. However, they were not religious in the slightest and their main complaint wasn’t religious but economic. Religious freedom was granted to them, and they were quickly absorbed into the Jewish community here in Phoenix, where they once again faced ostracism for being basically atheist, as their experiences in the USSR had disillusioned them from religion altogether (since being religious meant you couldn’t work). Hurd makes an excellent point when she says, “Instead of calming tensions, elevating religion above other factors hardens divisions between communities by defining identities and interests in religious terms (Shakman Hurd, 2021).” My in-laws didn’t want to come here to openly practice Judaism. They still don’t openly practice Judaism 30 years later. They came here because they wanted to earn money. They couldn’t earn money in the USSR because they were Jews and Jews were places in a lower socio-economic caste than the rest of Russian society, no matter the occupation. Even though they were engineers with master’s degrees, they were living in a one-room apartment with barely enough food to eat because they were born into a religion they did not choose to practice. They were forced into occupations they didn’t want (my mother-in-law famously wanted to be an astronomer but was forced into engineering) and were paid pittance because they had Jewish last names. They sought asylum the only way they knew how: as political and religious refugees. And they were granted asylum under those terms. But that’s not why they wanted to immigrate. They wanted to immigrate for economic reasons, to give their only son a better shot at having a decent, middle-class life and his own bedroom. If we abolished these terms of religious freedom and started looking at the more complex issues underneath, maybe we would see these issues underneath.

Works Cited

Marsden, L. (2020, May 21). International Religious Freedom Promotion and US Foreign Policy. MDPI Religions, 1-18.

Shakman Hurd, E. (2021, July 13). Statement of Elizabeth Shakman Hurd, Hearing on The State of Religious Freedom Around the Globe. (E. Shakman Hurd, Performer)

----------------------------------------------------

Grade: 50/50

Professor Comments: None

POS 388 - Module 1 Discussion

Prompt: 

Religion is something that shapes foreign policy. Religion is also a topic for foreign policy experts. Which of these two connections is more interesting to you, and why? If possible, please point to concrete examples or real-world issues in your response.

Reply: 

The Jewish Abortion

I personally am more interested in how religion shapes foreign policy than I am interested in how it is a topic for foreign policy experts, because to me, foreign policy is more prevalent to my daily life. Policy experts may discuss the issues at play, but the actual policy is what shapes my everyday life. One of the main issues that currently affects my everyday life is the United States’ war on women. The United Nations developed a list of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and Goal 5 was Gender Equality but all over the world we see that Women’s Rights are not being met. Indeed, in our own country, we are facing a religious attack on women’s bodies with the new “Fetal Heartbeat” bill in Texas. As a Jew, this affects me personally, because my religion allows for abortion up to 18 weeks without any needed reason, and even further if the mother’s health is in danger, because Judaism believes that the baby is not a life until it takes its first breath outside of the womb. Safe access to abortion is, as such, a religious freedom that should be guaranteed by our United States Constitution. However, the U.S. Supreme Court, stacked by Donald Trump and the Republican Senate he enjoyed during his tenure, is looking the other way due to favoritism by their heavily Christian base, a religiously based policy that is infringing on my religiously protected freedoms. And we’re not alone in this policy. All over the world, women are being denied access to safe medical care because of religious belief systems that they should not be able to seek out basic care like annual pap smears, birth control, or even get treatment for STIs because the local religious communities view women as less-than. So, I, personally, would like to spend a lot less time talking about how religions affect foreign policy and more time doing something about it. And I think that the time for religion interfering with women’s bodies has come due.

--------------------------------------

Grade: 50/50

Professor Comments: None