Showing posts sorted by date for query FALSE FLAG. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query FALSE FLAG. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Tuesday, June 25, 2024

SPACE

Telltale greenhouse gases could signal alien activity



Detecting intelligent life that’s light years away



Peer-Reviewed Publication

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA - RIVERSIDE

Terraforming 

IMAGE: 

ARTIST'S CONCEPT OF AN EXOPLANET IN THE PROCESS OF BEING TERRAFORMED.

view more 

CREDIT: THIBAUT ROGER/UNIVERSITY OF BERN




If aliens modified a planet in their solar system to make it warmer, we’d be able to tell. A new UC Riverside study identifies the artificial greenhouse gases that would be giveaways of a terraformed planet.

A terraformed planet has been artificially made hospitable for life. The gases described in the study would be detectable even at relatively low concentrations in the atmospheres of planets outside our solar system using existing technology. This could include the James Webb Space Telescope, or a future European-led space telescope concept.

And while such pollutant gases must be controlled on Earth to prevent harmful climate effects, there are reasons they might be used intentionally on an exoplanet. 

“For us, these gases are bad because we don’t want to increase warming. But they’d be good for a civilization that perhaps wanted to forestall an impending ice age or terraform an otherwise-uninhabitable planet in their system, as humans have proposed for Mars,” said UCR astrobiologist and lead study author Edward Schwieterman.

Since these gases are not known to occur in significant quantities in nature, they must be manufactured. Finding them, therefore, would be a sign of intelligent, technology-using life forms. Such signs are called technosignatures.

The five gases proposed by the researchers are used on Earth in industrial applications such as making computer chips. They include fluorinated versions of methane, ethane, and propane, along with gases made of nitrogen and fluorine or sulfur and fluorine. A new Astrophysical Journal paper details their merits as terraforming gases.

One advantage is that they are incredibly effective greenhouse gases. Sulfur hexafluoride, for example, has 23,500 times the warming power of carbon dioxide. A relatively small amount could heat a freezing planet to the point where liquid water could persist on its surface.

Another advantage of the proposed gases — at least from an alien point of view — is that they are exceptionally long-lived and would persist in an Earth-like atmosphere for up to 50,000 years. “They wouldn’t need to be replenished too often for a hospitable climate to be maintained,” Schwieterman said. 

Others have proposed refrigerant chemicals, like CFCs, as technosignature gases because they are almost exclusively artificial and visible in Earth’s atmosphere. However, CFCs may not be advantageous because they destroy the ozone layer, unlike the fully fluorinated gases discussed in the new paper, which are chemically inert. 

“If another civilization had an oxygen-rich atmosphere, they’d also have an ozone layer they’d want to protect,” Schwieterman said. “CFCs would be broken apart in the ozone layer even as they catalyzed its destruction.”

As they’re more easily broken apart, CFCs are also short-lived, making them harder to detect.

Finally, the fluorinated gases have to absorb infrared radiation to have an impact on the climate. That absorption produces a corresponding infrared signature that could be detectable with space-based telescopes. With current or planned technology, scientists could detect these chemicals in certain nearby exoplanetary systems. 

“With an atmosphere like Earth’s, only one out of every million molecules could be one of these gases, and it would be potentially detectable,” Schwieterman said. “That gas concentration would also be sufficient to modify the climate.”

To arrive at this calculation, the researchers simulated a planet in the TRAPPIST-1 system, about 40 light-years away from Earth. They chose this system, which contains seven known rocky planets, because it is one of the most studied planetary systems aside from our own. It is also a realistic target for existing space-based telescopes to examine. 

The group also considered the European LIFE mission’s ability to detect the fluorinated gases. The LIFE mission would be able to directly image planets using infrared light, allowing it to target more exoplanets than the Webb telescope, which looks at planets as they pass in front of their stars.

This work was done in collaboration with Daniel Angerhausen at Swiss Federal Institute of Technology/PlanetS, and with researchers at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, the Blue Marble Space Institute of Science, and Paris University. 

While the researchers cannot quantify the likelihood of finding these gases in the near future, they are confident that — if they are present — it is entirely possible to detect them during currently planned missions to characterize planetary atmospheres.

“You wouldn’t need extra effort to look for these technosignatures, if your telescope is already characterizing the planet for other reasons,” said Schwieterman. “And it would be jaw-droppingly amazing to find them.”

Other members of the research team echo not only enthusiasm for the potential of finding signs of intelligent life, but also for how much closer current technology has brought us to that goal.

 “Our thought experiment shows how powerful our next-generation telescopes will be. We are the first generation in history that has the technology to systematically look for life and intelligence in our galactic neighborhood,” added Angerhausen.

China's Chang'e-6 mission successfully returns to Earth with historic moon samples


The return capsule of the Chang'e-6 probe lands in Siziwang Banner, north China's Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, on Tuesday.The returner of the Chang'e-6 probe touched down on Earth on Tuesday, bringing back the world's first samples collected from the moon's far side. 
Photo by Lian Zhen/Xinhua/EPA-EFE/XINHUA

June 25 (UPI) -- China's Chang'e-6 mission successfully returned to Earth early Tuesday, bringing with it the first-ever samples retrieved from the far side of the moon.

The Chang'e-6 return capsule successfully landed in the Siziwang Banner area of China's Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region at 2:07 p.m. local time, the China National Space Administration said in a statement.

"This marks the complete success of the Chang'e-6 mission of the lunar exploration program, achieving the world's first sample return from the far side of the moon," it said.

With the touchdown ends Chang'e-6's nearly two-month mission to space.

The probe consisting of an orbiter, lander, ascender and returner launched May 3 from China with a final destination of the far side of the moon, where it landed June 2.

Though only on the moon's surface for a few days days, the probe collected samples from a crater known as the Pole-Aitken basin before departing the lunar surface on June 4 for home.

At about 1:20 p.m. Tuesday, the return capsule successfully separated from the orbiter at an altitude of approximately 3,106 miles above the south Atlantic Ocean and entered the Earth's atmosphere about 20 minutes later.

According to the space agency, the capsule then "bounced back" out of the atmosphere over the Indian Ocean as part of an "initial aerodynamic deceleration" before re-entering the atmosphere when he performed a second deceleration maneuver.

When about 12 miles above ground the capsule moved to parachute deployment, which occurred as it was 6 miles from landing.

Prior to landing Tuesday, the space agency sent out a press release announcing Chang'e-6's scheduled return, stating it was coming with "a precious 'gift' from the back of the moon."

President Xi Jinping has extended his congratulations on the success of the mission, state-owned Xinhua reported.

"The Chang'e-6 mission represents a significant milestone in the history of human lunar exploration, and it will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of lunar evolution," Yang Wei, a researcher at the Institute of Geology and Geophysics of the Chinese Academy for Sciences, told the state-owned news agency in a separate report.

"New samples will inevitably lead to new discoveries."

China is the only nation to visit the far side of the moon, with Chang'e 6 being its second visit following the Chang'e 4 mission in 2019.


Chinese probe returns to Earth with samples from far side of the Moon

Agence France-Presse
June 25, 2024

This handout photo taken on June 3, 2024 and released on June 4, 2024 by the China National Space Administration (CNSA) shows the ascender and lander captured by China's Chang'e-6 lunar probe after it landed on the moon. 
© China National Space Administration via AFP

A Chinese probe carrying samples from the far side of the Moon returned to Earth on Tuesday, capping a technically complex 53-day mission heralded as a world first.

The landing module of the Chang'e-6 spacecraft touched down at a predetermined site in Inner Mongolia at 2:07 pm (0607 GMT), the China National Space Administration said, hailing the mission a "complete success".

It comes bearing soil and rocks from the side of the Moon facing away from Earth, a poorly understood region that scientists say holds great research promise because its rugged features are less smoothed over by ancient lava flows than the near side.

That means the materials harvested there may help us to better understand how the Moon formed and how it has evolved over time.

China's space agency said the probe was "functioning normally, signaling that the Chang'e-6 lunar exploration mission was a complete success".

President Xi Jinping said in a congratulatory message that the "outstanding contributions" of the mission command "will be remembered forever by the motherland and the people", state broadcaster CCTV reported.

Chang'e-6 blasted off from a space centre on the island province of Hainan on May 3 and descended into the Moon's immense South Pole-Aitken Basin almost exactly a month later.

It used a drill and robotic arm to scoop up samples, snapped some shots of the pockmarked surface and planted a Chinese flag made from basalt in the grey soil.

On June 4, the probe made the first ever successful launch from the far side in what Xinhua called "an unprecedented feat in human lunar exploration history".

National pride, misinformation

China's burgeoning space exploits are a point of pride for the government, and state media outlets launched rolling coverage of the imminent landing on Tuesday morning.

Live images of the landing site showed workers approaching the landing capsule as several helicopters sat nearby on a broad patch of flat grassland.

One worker planted a Chinese flag next to the capsule, enthusiastically unfurling it into the wind.

Xinhua reported Monday that local farmers and animal herders had been evacuated from the area ahead of the touchdown.

"We hope that our country's space exploration will continue to advance and that our nation will become stronger," Uljii, a local herdsman, told Xinhua.

But the mission has also sparked a torrent of online misinformation, with some users of the Weibo social media platform seizing on the unfurling of the Chinese flag to push the false claim that Washington faked the Apollo Moon landings, AFP Fact Check found.
Space dream

Plans for China's "space dream" have shifted into high gear under Xi.

Beijing has poured huge resources into its space program over the past decade, targeting ambitious undertakings in an effort to catch up to traditional space powers the United States and Russia.

It has built a space station, landed robotic rovers on Mars and the Moon, and become only the third country to send astronauts into orbit.

But the United States has warned that China's space program masks military objectives and an effort to establish dominance in space.


China aims to send a crewed mission to the Moon by 2030 and plans to eventually build a base on the lunar surface.

The United States also plans to put astronauts back on the Moon by 2026 with its Artemis 3 mission.

(AFP)




U.S. to launch satellite to better prepare for space weather
Agence France-Presse
June 25, 2024 12:56PM ET

A SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket is set to carry the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite U into orbit from Florida (Miguel J. Rodriguez Carrillo/AFP)

The United States is aiming Tuesday to launch a new satellite expected to significantly improve forecasts of solar flares and coronal mass ejections -- huge plasma bubbles that can crash into Earth, disrupting power grids and communications.

A SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket is set to carry the satellite into orbit from NASA's Kennedy Space Center in Florida, though weather so far appears unfavorable for the two-hour launch window opening at 5:16 pm (2016 GMT).

The GOES-U (Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite U) mission is a collaboration between the space agency NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency (NOAA).

It will be the fourth and final in the GOES-R series of satellites that have tracked hurricanes and tornadoes, monitored climate and sea surface temperature, air quality and even meteor detections since 2016.

Orbiting 22,236 miles (35,785 kilometers) above the equator, the satellites match the speed of Earth's rotation in order to hold their positions over specific regions and provide continuous coverage.

They "are an indispensable tool for protecting the United States and the one billion people who live and work in the Americas," Pam Sullivan, of NOAA said in a press conference.

GOES-U is the first of the four to include a coronagraph, called the Compact Coronagraph-1 (CCOR-1). Coronagraphs block the Sun's disk and allow observation of its outermost layer, called the corona.

"That allows us to observe large explosions off the sun, called coronal mass ejections that can hurtle billions of tons of matter at millions of miles per hour towards Earth," said Elsayed Talaat, in charge of space weather observations at NOAA.

The ejections, known as CMEs, can disrupt Earth's magnetic field, causing satellites, energy infrastructure, and navigation systems to go down. Collecting space weather data allows authorities to issue warnings one to four days in advance.

In early May, the planet experienced its first level 5 geomagnetic storm in two decades, the highest rating on the scale, which unleashed spectacular auroras worldwide.

With the new coronagraph, the speed and direction of this event could have been better understood from the start, said Talaat.

Major disruptions weren't felt, but some farmers "reported being unable to plant their crops because the precision GPS relied upon by their equipment had malfunctioned," he said.

For the first time, the United States will have a coronagraph observing the solar corona almost continuously, with the CCOR-1 taking readings every 30 minutes.

Currently, such observations are received with a delay of up to eight hours. They are carried out by a satellite launched in 1995, which should cease operating within two years.

"Once operational CCOR-1 will mark a new chapter in space weather observations," said Talaat.

"Although the sun is no more active than in previous generations, our society has changed, and we are more sensitive than ever to the sun's changing mood."


Family sues NASA after ISS space junk crashed through their roof in March

By Brian Lada,
Accuweather.com
JUNE 24, 2024 

A Naples, Fla., family has filed a lawsuit against NASA following an extraordinary incident on March 8, when debris from the International Space Station plummeted from the sky and smashed through their roof, causing significant damage while a family member was inside.

"They are grateful that no one sustained physical injuries from this incident, but a 'near miss' situation such as this could have been catastrophic," said Mica Nguyen Worthy, a partner of the law firm Cranfill Sumner LLP who is representing Alejandro Otero and his family. "My clients are seeking adequate compensation to account for the stress and impact that this event had on their lives."


An external pallet packed with old nickel-hydrogen batteries is pictured shortly after mission controllers in Houston commanded the Canadarm2 robotic arm to release it into space on March 11, 2021. 
Image courtesy of NASA

The space junk was originally a 5,800-pound pallet containing old batteries that were discarded from the International Space Station on March 11, 2021. Shortly after, NASA said the object would "orbit Earth between two to four years before burning up harmlessly in the atmosphere."

Nearly three years to the date, it entered Earth's atmosphere, and a piece of debris survived the fiery descent, eventually crashing into the Florida house.

NASA analyzed the debris and confirmed it was part of the space junk released from the ISS in March 2021.

The object was a fraction of its original size, measuring just 4 inches long and weighing 1.6 pounds, but was big enough to smash a large hole in the roof and damage the house.

Recovered stanchion from the NASA flight support equipment used to mount International Space Station batteries on a cargo pallet. The stanchion survived re-entry through Earth&rsquos atmosphere on March 8, 2024, and impacted a home in Naples, Florida.
 Image courtesy of NASA

NASA said an investigation is underway to determine how the debris survived the journey through Earth's atmosphere and will work to mitigate the risk in the future-something that has become a bigger issue recently.

"Space debris is a real and serious issue because of the increase in space traffic in recent years," Worthy said. NASA has six months to respond to the claims.


NASA calls off spacewalk for second time this month


Image of the International Space Station taken on July 10, 2011. A spacewalk was canceled at the ISS on Monday. \
File Photo by NASA/UPI | License Photo

June 24 (UPI) -- NASA canceled a spacewalk for the second time this month on Monday after reporting a coolant leak on the umbilical unit on one of the astronaut's spacesuits.

Astronaut Tracy Caldwell Dyson reported the leak on the suit's servicing and cooling umbilical unit, or SCU, just before she and Mike Barratt were set to walk outside the International Space Station at about 8:52 a.m., EDT. Both astronauts had already turned on the internal power to their suits for what had been expected to be a 6.5-hour spacewalk.

NASA said Dyson and Barrat had opened the hatch to the space station's Quest airlock before reporting the water-leakage issue.

"The crew is working with ground controllers to repressurize the crew lock section of the airlock before returning inside the station's equipment lock," NASA said in its blog.

The astronauts returned inside the main space station in about an hour.

"I could see the ice crystals were flowing out there, and then, just like a snow machine, there was ice forming at that port on the SCU," Dyson told NASA's mission control, according to Space.com.

Astronauts Butch Wilmore added on the NASA livestream,"It was a pretty impressive snowstorm."

On June 13, NASA called off a spacewalk with Dyson and astronaut Mike Dominick when one of them experienced discomfort. NASA did not say which astronaut experienced the discomfort or give details about the issue.

The astronauts on that walk had expected to scrape microorganisms from the outside of the ISS to study for the possible origins of life.

NASA pushes Starliner return to July

By Ehren Wynder

Boeing Starliner astronauts Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams have stayed aboard the International Space Station nearly two weeks longer than scheduled, but they haven't overstayed their welcome. NASA Screengrab/UPI | License Photo

June 22 (UPI) -- After numerous delays, NASA said Friday that the Starliner crew would return to Earth in July

The agency said in a blog post that it delayed Starliner's Tuesday departure from the International Space Station so it doesn't conflict with a series of planned ISS spacewalks.

The extra time also would afford Starliner astronauts Barry "Butch" Wilmore and Sunita "Suni" Williams more time to review the spacecraft's propulsions systems, according to the agency.

Wilmore and Williams have been on board the ISS for almost three weeks. The two were set to complete a full assessment of the spacecraft while docked to the ISS in less than a week, but mechanical issues and the need to collect more data lengthened their stay.

The astronauts, however, are no strangers to delays. Boeing's first crewed Starliner test flight finally got off the ground on June 5 after concerns such as helium system leaks pushed back the launch date multiple times.

"We are taking our time and following our standard mission management team process," said NASA Commercial Crew Program Manager Steve Stich. "We are letting the data drive our decision making relative to managing the small helium system leaks and thruster performance we observed during rendezvous and docking.

Stich added that, given the duration of the mission, NASA will complete an agency-level review of the mission. NASA said it will share the details on the review at a later media briefing.

Wilmore and Williams are not overstaying their welcome, as there are plenty of supplies on board, and the ISS's schedule is fairly open through mid-August. The two also have contributed to regular station maintenance, scientific research and spacewalks .

"The crew's feedback has been overwhelmingly positive, and they know that every bit of learning we do on the Crew Flight Test will improve and sharpen our experience for future crews," said Mark Nappi, Boeing vice president and Starliner program manager.

Mission managers are considering the dates for future return missions to the ISS after two planned space walks on Monday and July 2.

If all goes well, Boeing will have completed its first successful crewed mission for NASA, but the company has a long way to go to catch up with competitor and fellow NASA contractor SpaceX, which so far has completed 13 crewed missions.

SpaceX, meanwhile has back-to-back Starlink satellite launches set for 1:15 p.m. in Florida and 11:45 p.m. EDT Sunday in California. The former launch from Florida was delayed after a T-0 abort on June 14.

Court trustee shutting down Alex Jones' Infowars conspiracy operation


Alex Jones protests in Dallas on February 28, 2014. On Sunday, a bankruptcy trustee disclosed plans to shut down Jones' Infowars to pay some of the nearly $1.5 billion he owes Sandy Hook school shooting victims' families following a defamation lawsuit. 
File Photo by Sean P. Anderson/Wikimedia Commons
 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/legalcode

June 24 (UPI) -- Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones' Infowars media empire is coming to an end.

On Sunday, a bankruptcy court-appointed trustee said the company will be shut down and sold off, according to an emergency court filing. A timetable was not listed.

Trustee Christopher Murray wrote Sunday that since being appointed, he "began planning to wind-up operations and liquidate its inventory." Jones' media company is Free Speech Systems in Austin, Texas.

Murray wrote he "seeks this Court's intervention to prevent a value-destructive money grab and allow an orderly process to take its course."

Related

Elon Musk reinstates Alex Jones' account on X platform after user survey

The far-right outlet had been accused of spreading dangerous misinformation, prompting a defamation suit filed by the families of victims of the mass shooting of the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Conn. In 2012, a gunman shot and killed 26 people at the school, including 20 children and six adult staff members.

Jones, 50, had said the school shooting was a so-called false flag attack and that the victims were actors. He was sued by family members and eventually found liable in separate lawsuits in Texas and Connecticut for spreading false stories on his radio and online show. He admitted in court his claims were not true. The families were awarded $1.44 billion.

One of the Sandy Hook victim's parents filed a motion in a Texas District Court to be granted custody of all of Free Speech Systems' assets, including Infowars. Some families say this would have delayed the process.

Christopher Mattei, an attorney for Sandy Hook families from Connecticut in favor of liquidating the company, said "this is precisely the unfortunate situation that the Connecticut families hoped to avoid when we argued that the Free Speech Systems/InfoWars case should have remained with the bankruptcy court rather than being dismissed."

In December 2022, Jones filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas.

A bankruptcy judge in Texas earlier this month gave permission to Jones to start liquidating personal assets to pay off what he owed.

Lawyers told bankruptcy judge Christopher Lopez those personal assets include Jones' $2.8 million Texas ranch. Some personal assets, including a home in Austin, are exempted.

He then was allowed to move from a Chapter 11 bankruptcy into a Chapter 7 liquidation of his assets.

Jones last year told the court he had about $9 million in assets. At the time, a judge ruled he could not avoid paying the legal judgments by declaring bankruptcy.

Jones has acknowledged Infowars would likely only continue broadcasting for a few more months.

Sunday, June 23, 2024

The War in Gaza Is Dividing the LGBTQ+ Community


A sign in support of Palestine, seen at a Brooklyn Pride event in Park Slope on Saturday, June 8, 2024. (Laila Stevens/The New York Times)


FIRE ISLAND PINES, N.Y. — In the upscale gay resort town of Fire Island Pines, colorful flags honor LGBTQ+ history makers like actress Wanda Sykes and drag queen RuPaul in a small park near the harbor. For a few hours this month, one flag also honored Rep. Ritchie Torres, the first openly gay Afro Latino member of Congress.

But Torres is also an outspoken supporter of Israel, and not long after his flag went up, it was torn down by the gay activist group ACT-UP, which was also honored at the park, and replaced with two flags, one of which honored queer Palestinians.

Within hours, the flag for queer Palestinians was also torn down by Michael Lucas, a pornographic performer and filmmaker with a history of anti-Muslim statements.

Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times

The dispute on Fire Island, just off Long Island, was just one expression of the tensions over the war in the Gaza Strip that have wracked American public life. But within New York’s LGBTQ+ community, whose members hail from every ethnic and social background and tend to be highly attuned to issues of social justice, the war has touched off some especially raw conflicts.

Those divisions have been on full display during Pride Month, a time typically focused on celebration and solidarity.

The fight over how the community should respond to the war in Gaza has played out in fiery online comments and false accusations of pro-Hamas activity. On Fire Island, the flag conflict has pitted Torres and local homeowners, including Lucas, against the very activists honored at the park. Elsewhere in New York, similar, if lower-profile, disputes have shaken gay bars, LGBTQ+ fundraising dinners and Pride festivities.

“I think queer people are mostly on one side of the debate,” said Afeef Nessouli, a journalist and activist who has been highlighting the stories of LGBTQ+ people in Gaza on his popular social media channels since the war began. “It feels like queer people are coming out for Palestine in a really large way.”

Indeed, members of the LGBTQ+ community overwhelmingly self-identify as politically liberal or moderate, according to polls. A majority of Democrats have disapproved of Israel’s actions since at least last November, one month after the war began, according to Gallup surveys.

The war in Gaza began Oct. 7 after a Hamas-led attack on Israel killed roughly 1,200 people and resulted in 250 more taken to Gaza as hostages, according to Israeli officials. Since then, more than 36,000 people have been killed in Gaza, health officials in the territory said. Almost 2 million people have been displaced from their homes in Gaza, and the region’s civilian infrastructure has been destroyed.

Last month, the top prosecutor of the International Criminal Court said he was seeking arrest warrants for the leaders of both Israel and Hamas on charges of crimes against humanity.

But supporters of Israel, including some vocal LGBTQ+ people, often argue that the community should support the country because, while it lags behind Western countries on some gay rights issues, it is more tolerant than other places in the Middle East.

In Gaza, like in many places in the Arab world, homosexuality remains taboo, and gay life happens largely behind closed doors. Government persecution is not uncommon, and in one high-profile case, Hamas killed a prominent commander after accusing him of embezzlement and homosexuality.

“Did it ever occur to them that Hamas is a barbaric oppressor of Queer Palestinians?” Torres, who represents the Bronx, said in a statement after the Fire Island controversy, in reference to the activists who removed his flag. “A Queer Palestinian is far freer and safer in Israel than in a Gaza Strip ruled by Hamas.”

Pro-Israel social media accounts, including one run by the Israeli foreign ministry, have made similar arguments. One post that was shared by the Israeli government in November shows a smiling Israeli soldier in Gaza holding a rainbow flag against a backdrop of bombed-out buildings. An Israeli tank can be seen behind him.

“The first ever pride flag raised in Gaza,” the foreign ministry said on the social platform X.

Critics of Israel describe these arguments as pink-washing, or the use of a country’s positive approach to LGBTQ+ issues to distract from its poor human rights record in other areas.

“Just because we can’t have a gay pride parade in your town does not mean you deserve to be starved or bombed,” said Mordechai Levovitz, the founder of Jewish Queer Youth, an organization for Orthodox and ultra-Orthodox LGBTQ+ young people in New York, and a critic of Israel’s conduct in the war.

“So much of my family still very much rejects queer people, but I would never want them to be hurt or starved or oppressed just because they don’t accept me,” said Levovitz, who grew up in a conservative religious home. “Rejecting that kind of binary” is an important part of being a member of the LGBTQ+ community, even if it is complicated, he said.

Disputes over the war have erupted elsewhere since Oct. 7.

Large crowds protested a Human Rights Campaign gala in New York in February and the GLAAD Media Awards in Los Angeles in May. They denounced the ties of both groups to pro-Israel organizations or to defense contractors that make weapons for the Israeli military. One of HRC’s donors is Northrop Grumman, a defense company; GLAAD partners with the Anti-Defamation League, a group that combats antisemitism and other bigotry and supports Israel.

In Brooklyn, the nightclub Three Dollar Bill has spent months grappling with the fallout of its decision to host, then cancel, then uncancel a party for Eurovision, the international song contest that faced criticism this year for letting Israel participate. Activists on both sides decried each move the club made, and in recent weeks, it has been hit with a wave of what its owners believe are politically motivated Pride month cancellations.

The divisions have also ensnared The Center, the prominent LGBTQ+ community hub in Greenwich Village, a neighborhood that has played a central role in gay history.

In March, The Center hosted an iftar event for Ramadan, where gay and transgender Muslims, their friends and community leaders gathered to celebrate the daily breaking of the fast.

But The Center’s own fraught history with queer Middle Easterners and Muslims loomed large. It was in the middle of conflict in 2011 after Lucas, the Fire Island filmmaker, successfully pressured it to cancel a pro-Palestinian event.

During remarks at the Ramadan event, Bashar Makhay, a co-organizer of Tarab NYC, an LGBTQ+ Middle Eastern organization, noted that The Center had apologized for the past.

But he also urged it to go further and announce support for Palestinians, “denounce pink-washing, demand a cease-fire and condemn the ongoing genocide.”

The audience cheered. When the applause died down, Makhay continued. “Liberation — including queer and trans liberation,” he said, “is not achieved through silos or silence.”

Fire Island has been a slow-moving summertime refuge for LGBTQ+ people since the 1950s and has welcome prominent vacationers like Calvin Klein, David Geffen, Jonathan Van Ness and Bowen Yang.

The conflict there arose this month after a ceremony at Trailblazers Park, a tiny pavilion on the boardwalk where flags fly honoring notable members of the LGBTQ+ community.

During the ceremony, Iman Le Caire, an Egyptian transgender activist who helped to establish the park, called for an end to the war. She told the crowd that when she said, “Free Palestine,” she meant “free our queer and transgender people” in Gaza and the West Bank.

“We stand for them,” she said. “When we say, ‘Free Palestine,’ we are not saying, ‘Free Hamas.’”

Nevertheless, a homeowner later accused Le Caire on Instagram of using her speech to support Hamas and to engage in antisemitic hate speech, setting off days of acrimonious back-and-forth.

Tensions rose further when members of ACT-UP, an activist group best known for raising the alarm about the AIDS crisis in the 1980s and 1990s, tore down the flag honoring Torres. The group replaced it with the flag honoring queer Palestinians and another to honor Cecilia Gentili, a transgender leader who died in February.

Jason Rosenberg, a member of ACT-UP New York, said group members planned their protest after they learned they would be honored alongside Torres.

“We thought Ritchie was a poor choice to be honored, especially this year, because he has been supporting Israel’s policies,” Rosenberg said.

Lucas, who quickly tore down the pro-Palestinian flag, is well known in the community for his years as an opinion writer on gay news sites. He has frequently criticized Islam and Muslims and once expressed his support for burning the Quran, which he compared to Mein Kampf. He was widely criticized last year after he tweeted a picture of an Israeli rocket with the words “From Michael Lucas, to Gaza” written on it.

Lucas posted a video on social media of himself carrying a stepladder to the park; tearing down the flag, which included ACT-UP’s traditional slogan, “Silence = Death”; and throwing it in the trash. He did not respond to a request for comment.

“We don’t need Hamas propaganda dividing us,” he wrote in the post with the video. “Otherwise this ‘open and diverse’ community will be unwelcome to Jews.”

Torres echoed Lucas on June 2, writing on X that by supporting the Palestinians, members of ACT-UP “openly align themselves with Hamas.”

Eventually, the Fire Island Pines Property Owner’s Association, which acts as a sort of de facto town government for the summer colony, took down all three flags from Trailblazers Park and said it would find a new way to honor Torres.

Its president, Henry Robin, also wrote a letter to the community praising Le Caire, Torres and ACT-UP. He reminded everyone that, whatever their differences, they were all part of the same community.

“It was not the first time, and will not be the last, that different segments of the LGBTQ+ community have been at odds with one another,” he wrote. “Advocacy, protest, and even conflict are all part of LGBTQ+ history, but even amid our disagreements we can continue to build a brighter future together.”

c.2024 The New York Times Company

The American Presidential election is perhaps the last opportunity to preserve the Republic

Mark Bergman 21 June, 2024

Left Foot Forward columnist Mark Bergman gives his latest in-depth look at the US Presidential election


Filmmaker and historian Ken Burns, speaking at Brandeis University’s graduation ceremonies last month, as reported by Jennifer Rubin (“The media and sullen nonvoters should listen to Ken Burns”), could not have been more blunt: “Do not be seduced by easy equalization. There is nothing equal about this equation. We are at an existential crossroads in our political and civic lives. This is a choice that could not be clearer.” In fact, said Burns “[t]here is no real choice this November. There is only the perpetuation, however flawed and feeble you might perceive it, of our fragile 249-year-old experiment, or the entropy that will engulf and destroy us if we take the other route.”

And there we were, marking the 80th anniversary of the D-Day invasion. While President Biden walked the sacred ground of the American Cemetery at Normandy, then Omaha Beach, and honored the sacrifice of American heroes who died on the beaches of Normandy, Donald Trump was in Phoenix accusing America of being a “failed nation” and a “very sick country,” invoking the “great replacement” conspiracy theory, praising Viktor Orban and pledging to “seal the border” and carry out the “largest domestic deportation operation” in American history. On Sunday, the President will visit Aisne-Marne American Cemetery, where 1,800 US Marines killed during World War I at Belleau Wood are buried – Trump refused to visit the cemetery during the 2018 Armistice Day commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the end of WWI because it had been raining, and defended his decision to his then chief-of-staff John Kelly (whose son also a Marine died in Afghanistan), by saying, “why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” Trump would shortly thereafter call the 1,800 Marines “suckers” for getting killed.

On May 30, the first American president without prior government or military experience, the first president to have been impeached twice, the first president to incite a coup against his own government, the first president to be found liable for sexual abuse (and but for a quirk in New York Penal Law would have been found liable for rape), the first candidate for president to refuse to commit to a peaceful transfer of power and the first former president and candidate for president to say that political violence depends on whether or not he wins, is now the first former president and candidate for president convicted of a felony. That verdict underscored the strength of our democracy and one of its central tenets, that no one is above the law.

But no sooner was the 34th guilty verdict announced than the full weight of the Republican Party machine came crashing down on the judicial system, and with it the fundamental tenets of our democracy. The former “party of law and order” found that a verdict it did not agree with warranted threats against judges, the DoJ and the FBI, the jurors and individual prosecutors. And as Trump threatened to prosecute his enemies if he is again president (reminiscent of pre-Watergate times when presidents weaponized the FBI and IRS for partisan purposes), there was hardly any pushback from Trumpworld. In fact, in a sign of the complete surrender of Republican lawmakers to the Trump narrative, during an appearance at the Pennsylvania state House by two former Capitol Police officers who defended the Capitol on January 6th, the officers were met with jeers and walkouts by certain Republican members. Really?

And Trump has amped up his grievance narrative replete with, in the words of Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post, a “gusher of falsehoods about the trial.” As Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank summarized (“As Biden rallies the free world, Trump serves a higher cause: Himself”):Trump’s campaign website proclaimed him to be a “political prisoner” (no surprise after Trump compared his plight in February to that of a real political prisoner, Alexei Navalny).

In a Fox & Friends Weekend interview, Trump said that if he were imprisoned or put under house arrest, he is “not sure the public would stand for it. You know, at a certain point, there’s a breaking point.” This, lest we forget, from the man who repeatedly called for Hillary Clinton to be “locked up.”

At a Phoenix campaign event on Thursday, Trump warned “They’re not coming after me, they’re coming after you, and I just happen to be standing in their way.”
Trump has called Judge Juan Merchan a “crazed” “devil” who “crucified” defense witnesses. If they can do this to me, they can do this to anyone. These are bad people. There are in many cases, I believe, sick people.”

On Fox & Friends Weekend, Trump, echoing Senator Joe McCarthy 70 years ago, warned about the “enemy from within” doing more “damage to this country” than Russia or China. He is completely right, but for a very different reason.

Referring to the DoJ, he warned on Newsmax that “It’s a terrible, terrible path that they’re leading us to, and it’s very possible that it’s going to have to happen to them.” It is a terrible precedent for our country. Does that mean the next president does it to them? That’s really the question.”

In private, according to reporting by the Washington Post, Trump has told advisers and friends he wants the DoJ to investigate former allies and officials who criticized him, wants to appoint a special prosecute to investigate President Biden and his family and wants to prosecute officials at the DoJ and the FBI.

But should we be surprised, since this is the party so many of whose adherents have spent over three years seeking to discredit our election system? As Jennifer Rubin pointed out in an op-ed earlier this week (“Democrats must defend Trump’s guilty verdict against MAGA jury denial”), it was an easy jump from defaming election workers to defaming jurors. And we have seen the broader playbook before – if Trump loses an election, it is because the election was fraudulent, and so if he loses a legal case, it is because the process was corrupt and rigged. And to put this into the broader context of a presidential candidate bent on crushing democracy, as historian Ruth Ben-Ghiat reminded us, whenever authoritarians are ascendant, discrediting judges, prosecutors and the courts is to be expected, because authoritarianism thrives when the rule of law is converted into “rule by the lawless.”

So, can Trump prosecute his enemies? Adam Liptak, in his analysis (“Trump’s Vows to Prosecute Rivals Put Rule of Law on the Ballot”), quotes former counsel in the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush David B. Rivkin Jr. in noting that, while Trump’s threats challenge long-established norms, “[a]s a constitutional matter, the president has broad law enforcement discretion to prosecute anybody. You don’t get immunized because you are the enemy of a president.”

 Liptak quotes Brennan Center President Michael Waldman who posits that for “Trump to be able to abuse power … would require prosecutors to cooperate, would require the FBI and others to shed their independence, and for juries and judges to go along.” More concerning, notes Litvak, is that Trump’s threats serve not only to provide “the red meat of prospective retribution to his base,” but also to undermine faith across society in the criminal justice system.

Unpacking the False Claims


As Trump and his enablers are likely to make the “rigged” trial and “unfair judicial system” central pillars of Trump’s campaign (at least until another target of his ire appears), I offer some thoughts on the falsehoods: “Just so you understand, this is all done by Biden and his people.” No, Trump was prosecuted by the Manhattan District Attorney, who inherited the case from his predecessor, Cyrus Vance, and there is zero evidence that the President was involved. This is classic Trump – projecting on to others the actions he would have taken in the same situation.

“When I announced I was running for president a long time later, they decided to revive this case.” No, the case predates Trump’s November 2022 announcement he would run.
“I would have loved to have testified, but [I was told by my counsel] I would say something out of whack.” This speaks for itself.

“We just went through one of many experiences where we had a conflicted judge, highly conflicted.” The New York Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics found no conflict of interest, and the New York Appellate Division upheld Judge Merchan’s decision not to recuse himself.

“We weren’t allowed to use our election expert under any circumstances.” As Kessler notes, Judge Merchan did not bar the expert, but limited his testimony on federal campaign finance law. The defense elected not to call the expert as a witness.

“I wasn’t allowed by the judge to use, in any form, the standard RELIANCE ON COUNSEL DEFENSE (ADVICE OF COUNSEL!).” The defense decided not to serve up the advice of counsel defense because it would have required Trump to waive attorney-client privilege and Judge Merchan rejected their “presence of counsel” defense .

“The judge hates Donald Trump. Just take a look. Take a look at him. Take a look at where he comes from. He can’t stand Donald Trump. He’s doing everything in his power.”

 “Witnesses that were on our side … were literally crucified by this man who looks like an angel, but he is really a devil.” So said Trump. We have seen this before – an attack on a Latino judge. Recall Trump’s attack on Federal judge Gonzalo Curiel, who oversaw the Trump University fraud class action. These bigoted attacks are nothing short of an attempt to undermine faith in the judicial system. 

 As Adam Serwer noted (“Trump Wishes His Trial Were Rigged”), Trump was not treated unfairly, as any other defendant would have been jailed for contempt for engaging in the conduct that Trump exhibited throughout. Judge Merchan “bent over backwards to overlook his antics. Trump violated gag orders by attacking witnesses and attempting to intimidate Stormy Daniels during testimony that ‘at times seemed to be describing nonconsensual sex’ and attacked the judge’s daughter as a ‘rabid Trump-hater.’”

 Trump “received special treatment precisely because he is an important figure.” Had the case been televised, Trump and his enablers would have had a far tougher time characterizing the process as skewed against Trump.“The case against Trump was politically motivated.” As this was ultimately an election interference case, it by definition would ensnare a politician. Prosecution of any politician of a different party can seem partisan. And the fact that district attorneys are elected can often lead to characterization of cases as politically motivated if they advance the electoral fortunes of the district attorney.

 But even if the case against Trump can be said to have been politically motivated, as David A. Graham pointed out (“If Trump Is Guilty, Does It Matter If the Prosecution Was Political?”), that criticism has no “bearing on whether Trump actually committed the crimes with which he was charged.” 

Political motivation did not determine the verdict, the jury did. Graham noted:Trump was indicted by a grand jury.Trump’s counsel had the chance to challenge jurors, introduce evidence, cross-examine prosecution witnesses, and call their own witnesses, including Trump. And incidentally many legal experts questioned the strategic value of attacking the judge and the legal process, and questioned tactics that could have had only one explanation – Trump insisted on them.

Conviction required a unanimous decision by 12 citizens who had to conclude that a crime had occurred “beyond reasonable doubt.” They did so in two days.

As for the Trump apologists, Quoting David S. Bernstein, Julia Azari and Jonathan Bernstein (“Guilty, They Say”):They should answer the following: Do you think that falsifying business records to deliberately conceal a hush-money payment to influence an election, if true, should be legal? And if not, then which parts of that do you truly believe Trump did not commit? If Trump defenders are unwilling to argue he did not falsify records or that it should not be a crime, they are saying he should be exempt because he is a former president. “If they can do this to me, they can do this to anyone,” Trump said, which is exactly the point, no one is above the law.

Serwer makes a related point: the apologists do not contest that Trump committed the acts charged, but instead that Trump should be free to commit those crimes, because “anything less would be political prosecution.”

And lest we need a reminder, Republicans have unabashedly failed to hold Trump accountable when they had the chance – Trump was impeached twice for interfering in the 2020 election, once for trying to blackmail Ukraine into falsely implicating his political opponent in a crime, and once for inciting an insurrection to prevent the constitutional transfer of power.

 And as Serwer crystallizes the reality so clearly, aside from House Democrats who impeached Trump twice, Trump has only been held accountable by ordinary Americans – the jury in the E. Jean Carroll case and the 12 members of the jury in the case brought Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, as well as by Judge Engoron in the case brought by New York Attorney General Letita James (as there was no jury). The jurors “showed more courage in convicting Donald Trump, knowing that they could be hounded for doing so, than nearly the entire conservative elite has in the past decade. 

Small wonder that this same elite is so terrified of the possibility of Trump facing another jury of his peers, an American institution that has so far proved itself resistant to Trump’s corrupting influence.”The Alvin Bragg case was the weakest case. This is beside the point. The other three cases are in limbo. 

Jack Smith’s case awaits a ruling by the Supreme Court on immunity. In the meantime, the credibility of the Supreme Court has been further eroded as Justice Alito has refused to recuse himself following reporting that an inverted American flag associated with the insurrection was flown outside the Alito home days after the insurrection and later reporting that a second Appeal to Heavan flag associated with insurrectionists flew above the Alito vacation home as recently as 2023. And yesterday, it was reported that Justice Thomas had belatedly disclosed further travel paid for by a Republican donor. 

As Brennan Center President Michael Waldman has noted (“What Comes Next in the Trump Legal System”), the fact that the conviction is a matter of state law raises a number of federalism and Supreme Clause questions, highlights how damaging it is that the Supreme Court has delayed the Jack Smith case. He also notes that the “speed and calm dispatch” with which the New York state court was able to hold and complete the case highlights the disfunction in the federal system.

And Trump’s enablers, among others, had this to say:Senator Roger Marshall, a Kansas Republican, called the verdict “the most egregious miscarriage of justice in our nation’s history.” Obviously, he is not much of a student of American history.

Senator Marco Rubio: “The public spectacle of political show trials has come to America.” Rubio should know better as Cuba has had first-hand experience with authoritarianism, military tribunals and political show trials, and the total absence of due process.
House Speaker Mike Johnson referred to the “weaponization of our justice system” and the “absurd verdict.” On Fox & Friends he called for the Supreme Court to “step in” to overturn the jury verdict, notwithstanding that the appeal would have to go through two levels of appellate courts (the Appellate Court and the Court of Appeals) in New York first. Trump has limited remedies in federal courts.

As Susan Glasser reported (“The Revisionist History of the Trump Trial Has Already Begun”), when House Democrat Jim McGovern had the temerity, while lamenting the failure of the 118th Congress to accomplish anything (which as she notes is on track to be the least productive congress in recent memory), he speculated that House Republicans were trying “to distract from the fact that their candidate for President has been indicted more times than he’s been elected,” and that “the leader of their party is on trial for covering up hush-money payments to a porn star for political gain,” he was admonished by the presiding Republican and, after enumerating the various cases against Trump, his comments were struck from the official record.
Concluding Thoughts

Trump has a history of weaponizing his victimhood. We continue to face the devastating consequences of election denial, attacks on electoral systems and election workers, which continue to this day in the form of continued pressure on election administrators and election officials. The Big Lie also will underpin deepfake and other forms of disinformation intended to sow distrust in electoral systems, keep voters at home and serve as the predicate for massive legal challenges of election results. So too do we face potentially devastating consequences of sustained efforts to delegitimize judges, juries and the judicial system.

Expect this theme to dominate the Trumpworld narrative. Democratic pollster Anna Greenberg, quoted by Kessler, notes that “Trump is going to run on rigged courts and rigged elections. I don’t think he can help himself even though it would be better for him to talk about inflation. Biden is going to run on democratic norms, women’s rights – especially abortion – and the rule of law and be able to ask voters if they want a convicted felon as their president.”

There is though one more dystopian angle to this, which former Governor Chris Christie recently spelled out. Trump, who has long threatened an administration driven by revenge and retribution, will get angrier and more paranoid as we get closer to the election. Longtime Trump observer and political correspondent Maggie Haberman has made the same point – he is serious about revenge; “it’s very much a focal point for him right now.” This obviously poses an existential danger to the Republic should Trump win, but in the meantime there has been a spike in online threats that have migrated from election administration only to a broader range of targets that now include anyone associated with the prosecution of Trump, including jurors, judges and prosecutors. We are coming dangerously close to the tipping point where doxxing and threats of sexual violence and death on social media and web forums beget offline violence.

What is needed is an all-of-society response to counter the firehose of disinformation about the trial, about the impartiality of the judge, about the process, about the prosecutors, about the jury. By the way, compare and contrast the reaction across the political spectrum, starting with President Biden, to the Hunter Biden case and the verdict reached a week ago. This is the time for trusted voices in the business community, trusted voices in the legal community, trusted voices in popular culture and trusted voices in sports to set aside partisan identity to urge respect for the judicial system, for law enforcement, for elections and for democratic institutions.

While it may be easy for many to dismiss a future blighted by political sectarian divisions and violence, let alone civil war, history provides ample warnings. Yes, the 2024 ballot will present us all with a choice, but, no, we do not have a real choice as to what that future of America should look like. As between democracy and authoritarianism, the answer should be clear. We all need to convey that message and we must not shy away from characterizing this election from what it is – perhaps the last opportunity to preserve the Republic.


Mark Bergman seeks to capitalize on a series of networks he has developed while based in London for two decades and more recently in Washington, D.C. He convenes and connects constituencies and has established himself as a thought leader on political, geopolitical and regulatory developments and trends, with a particular emphasis on the resilience of democracy; extremism/disinformation/weaponization of hate; transnational repression and kleptocracy; and climate change. His written analyses – as part of his briefing notes series — are available on his website: 7Pillars Global Insights.

Saturday, June 22, 2024

 Opinion

‘No false choices’: Why we don’t decide between faith and LGBTQ+ rights

Vice President Harris named a truth I know through both my work and my living.

Marchers carry a large rainbow flag during the annual Pride parade in Portland, Maine. (Photo by Mercedes Mehling/Unsplash/Creative Commons)

(RNS) — In my brief conversation with Vice President Kamala Harris at a Pride event she and second gentleman Douglas Emhoff hosted at their Washington residence last week, I told her that a significant percentage of students I serve at Union Theological Seminary, if not a majority, are LGBTQ+. The vice president seemed genuinely surprised and pleased. After a moment’s pensive consideration, she responded, “It just proves there are no false choices.” 

Her words have continued to reverberate in the days since the event. They name a truth I know through both my work and my living: We don’t have to choose between faith, spirituality or religion and a fully embodied sexuality.

For too long, cultural consensus has held LGBTQ+ identity and religious belonging to be mutually exclusive. It’s not infrequent to see newspaper headlines proclaiming “conflict between LGBTQ+ rights and faith voters” — as if many LGBTQ+ people do not love God and millions of cis-heterosexual religious people don’t believe their spiritual tradition calls them to embrace their LGBTQ+ neighbors. 

Ad Choices Icon

Indeed, when policymakers, faith leaders and activists attempt to force a choice between “religion” and “LGBTQ+ rights,” it is actually a choice between abusive religion and healthy sexuality. For far too long, hateful voices have contorted and twisted religious texts to demonize LGBTQ+ people. They’ve weaponized religion to pursue their own far-right agenda.



In sum, the widely held dichotomy between faith and sexuality is not the product of innate and irresolvable tension; it’s the consequence of hatred masquerading as faith. 

What I also deeply appreciate about the vice president’s remark is how, in just a few words, she creates space for the breadth and depth of religious and spiritual expression and practice in the United States. Religious pluralism is one of our greatest defenses against the ascendant Christian nationalism that presently drives far-right forces. Interreligious coalitions can uproot the myth that the U.S. was founded as a Christian nation. 

In my own city of New York, I watch Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu communities — and so many others — work beside atheist and agnostic neighbors to advocate for policies that promote universal thriving. 

Sadly, that kind of collaboration rarely makes headlines, while Christian nationalists are often given airtime and column inches to speak as though they alone define “religious concerns.” 

The millions of faithful Americans who believe God calls us to mutual respect must get louder about the religious values that motivate our interdependence. We cannot let the most bigoted and negative perspectives define faith in the public square.

Ultimately, what I also hear in Harris’ simple sentence is the grace that has defined my own life; my own marriage to my husband, Michael; and the beautiful lives of so many LGBTQ+ people I know. Healthy sexuality and sexual expression and identity coupled with healthy spirituality is a well of love and compassion that flows in abundance from our living. 

I watch LGBTQ+ students at Union Seminary, LGBTQ+ clergy who faithfully serve their communities and LGBTQ+ people filling pews in congregations throughout the country and I see God’s radiance reflected back at me. It’s the embodiment of the truth I read in the Bible, “We are fearfully and wonderfully made.”



What’s doubly beautiful is that all of these people are living and transforming religious communities despite the long history of theologies telling us we have no place. We heard voices telling us, “You are not welcome,” and proclaimed our own belonging and belovedness because we heard God’s voice tell us clearly that we are. That kind of radical love transforms communities. It’s the reason more and more faiths are changing their policies to bless same-sex marriages and ordain LGTBQ+ people.

The Rev. Frederick Davie. (Courtesy photo)

The Rev. Frederick Davie. (Courtesy photo)

When you see this beauty firsthand, it exposes homo- and transphobic lies. “There are no false choices” — just a love that can heal what bigotry has broken. It’s love that can heal a fractured nation, too.

(The Rev. Frederick Davie, formerly the executive vice president of Union Theological Seminary, is senior strategic adviser to the president at the school. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)

Donate to Support Independent Journalism!