Recently, the United States celebrated the birth and legacy of one of the most notable leaders in the history of human rights, Martin Luther King Jr. ...
When thousands of men and women work full time but need food stamps to put food on their tables, when they can't get health benefits, when they can't get paid sick days, then we must do whatever we can to stand up for them.
Years from now, when people look back at this generation as one that created change on a scale not seen since the civil rights movement itself, they will know there was a soundtrack.
We've become liberal about our liberalism, to our own detriment and that of the world. What if we could restore the radical edge and dynamic energy of religious liberalism? What would the world look like if, instead of advertising religion lite, religious liberals became the most observant people around?
Fifty years after President Lyndon Johnson declared a War on Poverty, the United States is still not a fair playing field for millions of children afflicted by preventable poverty, hunger, homelessness, sickness, poor education and violence in the world's richest economy with a gross domestic product (GDP) of $15.7 trillion. Every fifth child (16.1 million) is poor, and every tenth child (7.1 million) is extremely poor. Children are the poorest age group and the younger they are the poorer they are. Every fourth infant, toddler and preschool child (5 million) is poor; 1 in 8 is extremely poor. A majority of our one- and two-year-olds are already children of color. In five years children of color who are disproportionately poor, nearly 1 in 3, will be a majority of all children in America and of our future workforce, military and consumers. But millions of them are unready for school, poorly educated and unprepared to face the future.
Unfortunately, we're a punitive culture, repeatedly enacting legislation based on emotion rather than reason, and turning a blind eye toward the reality that punishment alone rarely works to alter another's behavior (GTMO, anyone?). We love heroes and we love villains -- and we are rarely right about either.
It's the day after Martin Luther King, Jr. Day at this writing. That means that it's the day in which we can return to forgetting about Dr. King's values or we can take a new stride in making Kingian principles tangible.
I feel ridiculous writing another story about cooking chicken but this one is so astonishing, so easy and delicious, that with the snow day coming after an already long weekend, I have to share.
How do these embarrassing posts continue to happen? In part these posts are driven by the need, bordering on mania, for a constant stream of content to power the social media presence of countless brands.
Both Martin Luther King and Gandhi were people who gained tremendous inspiration from their faith traditions and were able to perform tremendous feats of courage through the implementation of non-violence.
e simply cannot celebrate Dr. King, then turn around and watch efforts to dismantle the very things he fought and died for. Here we are recognizing such an esteemed figure and a national holiday, yet the Supreme Court recently gutted part of the Voting Rights Act itself.
"I'm so sorry." Let me start with these three words. We've all been in this situation. Someone suffers a tragic loss, hardship, difficulty. In this m...
It's easy to give our kids lessons from a book, but if we really want to honor Dr. King's dream, then diversity should be reflected in our lives.
Mainly, we remember Dr. King as a prophet of non-discrimination. If the government treats black folks and white folks alike (which it does not always, even today), we tell ourselves that we have lived up to Dr. King's mighty vision. But Dr. King, and the civil rights movement as a whole, wanted much, much more for America.
King began his activism as a crusader against racial segregation, but he soon recognized that his battle was part of a much broader fight for a more humane society.
I bet if you made these sorts of statements to the average American-on-the-street in 1964, they would have wholeheartedly agreed. Because the public simply had no idea of what was going on, back then. Those of us who know our history, however, just don't have that excuse today.