LETTER TO BISHOP CURRY

June 30, 2017

Dear Bishop Curry,

I am an Episcopalian—member of St. David’s Austin and board member of the Episcopal Church Foundation and The Front Porch. I’ve been active in the Consortium of Endowed Episcopal Parishes.  My husband Ed and I have both served St. David’s vestry (Ed recently having been Senior Warden for two terms, helping the parish transition into David Boyd’s retirement).  We both got to hear you when you visited the Episcopal Church Foundation Board meeting last fall, and I had heard you previously at CEEP.  We are deeply grateful for your presence and leadership.  I have become politically engaged and have shared your letter to Speaker Joe Straus with the group of 250 people who sometimes write messages with me to elected officials; like you, we adamantly oppose “the bathroom bill.” The radical right is doing such damage to our nation, and in Texas, if possible, things are even worse.  Andy Doyle has received emails from me and heard me speak when he was at St. David’s early this month, and he eloquently addressed our congregation about matters at hand.  Nonetheless, I keep hoping for more from my church. Here’s a message I posted yesterday on my Facebook Feed and Friends for Civil Action blog at http://mollysharpe.blog.  In the context of the church, I think there’s a need to minister to those of us who are pro-choice.     Best, Molly

Action Step for voters: Let your U.S. Senators know that you, as a voter, believe health will be improved and costs significantly reduced by putting Planned Parenthood front and center in our nation’s health plan. Read below if you wonder why I say this. We cannot hope to reduce our nation’s deficit, if our country is sick.  It’s irresponsible to leave people in need without preventive and emergency care. Medicaid pays for half of all births in the U.S.  We need Medicaid. More than that, we need a health care plan that solves problems, rather than abdicating responsibility to provide a tax break for the already rich—a tiny minority of people. Planned Parenthood is foundational to a health care plan that solves problems and reduces health care expense.

June 29, 2017

Re:  Out of the Womb!

Dear Congress and Religious Leaders,

When a woman ends up pregnant, for whatever reason, what if that woman could make a heartfelt assessment of whether she was emotionally ready to carry a child?  What if she could decide whether she had the emotional and financial resources to raise a child?

For those who think there is a God who with each child sends a unique soul never to be sent again, please, please, please, it is time to wake up and acknowledge this is the 21^st century.  We were wrong about slavery, racial prejudice, forbidding divorce, treating women as subservient, the nature of family, the nature of gender, and I believe we are wrong about this.  For those of us—and I am one—who are open to the idea that there is a force of creation that cares for us and loves us even in times of huge duress, such a force surely has the capacity to send a soul via a new baby, if the originally designated baby didn’t arrive at the train station.  The Roman Catholic Church asks that there be no contraception—no meddling whatsoever with the possible plan of soul delivery, outside of trying to map your monthly cycle. CAN WE PLEASE STOP THIS ABSURDITY?

I believe that neither Congresspeople nor Religiouspersons have the right to weigh in on a woman’s womb and what happens there, beyond acknowledging that the choice is the woman’s.  The church I was born into and then married into again—the Episcopal Church—has a history of looking at multiple sides of serious matters.  I appreciate this questioning stance. Spending considerable time at church and with Episcopal—affiliated organizations reinforced my moderate viewpoint—my looking-both-ways attitude—until this week’s latest installment in the debate about health care broke my attitude wide open.

There was a day back in the 1980’s when The Junior League of Austin appointed me to the board of Planned Parenthood Austin.  No abortions were performed in their clinics here. I was relieved to be asked to serve an organization valuable to women’s health without having to deal head on with abortion. While I consistently have believed in the right for a woman to choose, if asked, I would have said that I was grateful not to have been faced with the dilemma of abortion.   I now believe that attitude of mine was WRONG.  Deciding for abortion should NOT be a dilemma.

It should be a simple choice for a woman to make, not one weighed down by all the judgments some politicians and some church people have placed on the decision of whether or not to carry a child to term or even whether or not to use birth control.

Providing proper access to abortion and contraception services should be about embracing an amazing solution to one of the huge health care problems facing our country and world—our ability to stop bringing new life into a world when we aren’t prepared to care for the health of that new life.  Let’s be free to exercise that right.

We do this much for our cats and dogs.

My middle-of-the road stance is gone with the wind now.  I fervently believe—where the mothers-to-be believe this also—that mothers-to-be who are emotionally unprepared to carry or care for a child should have the choice to abort. For a mother-to-be who feels differently from me, she needs to make her own choice.  It is not her congressperson’s or her religious leader’s choice, though.  However, I wouldn’t be at all opposed to mandating some education for mothers-to-be about what it means to be a parent, for there are a whole lot of very bad parents out there in our world—the result of being unprepared emotionally and financially for children.

Sincerely,

Mary (Molly) H. Sharpe

1805 Exposition Boulevard| Austin, Texas 78703-2833

It’s a Two Letter Week

Action Step for voters: Let your U.S. Senators know that you, as a voter, believe health will be improved and costs significantly reduced by putting Planned Parenthood front and center in our nation’s health plan. Read below if you wonder why I say this. We cannot hope to reduce our nation’s deficit, if our country is sick.  It’s irresponsible to leave people in need without preventive and emergency care. Medicaid pays for half of all births in the U.S.  We need Medicaid. More than that, we need a health care plan that solves problems, rather than abdicating responsibility to provide a tax break for the already rich—a tiny minority of people. Planned Parenthood is fundamental to a health care plan that solves problems and reduces health care expense.

June 29, 2017

Re:  Out of the Womb!

Dear Congress and Religious Leaders,

When a woman ends up pregnant, for whatever reason, what if that woman could make a heartfelt assessment of whether she was emotionally ready to carry a child?  What if she could decide whether she had the emotional and financial resources to raise a child?

For those who think there is a God who with each child sends a unique soul never to be sent again, please, please, please, it is time to wake up and acknowledge this is the 21^st century.  We were wrong about slavery, racial prejudice, forbidding divorce, treating women as subservient, the nature of family, the nature of gender, and I believe we are wrong about this.  For those of us—and I am one—who are open to the idea that there is a force of creation that cares for us and loves us even in times of huge duress, such a force surely has the capacity to send a soul via a new baby, if the originally designated baby didn’t arrive at the train station.  The Catholic Church asks that there be no contraception—no meddling whatsoever with the possible plan of soul delivery, outside of trying to map your monthly cycle. CAN WE PLEASE STOP THIS ABSURDITY?

I believe that neither Congresspeople nor Religiouspersons have the right to weigh in on a woman’s womb and what happens there, beyond acknowledging that the choice is the woman’s.  The church I was born into and then married into again—the Episcopal Church—has a history of looking at multiple sides of serious matters.  I appreciate this questioning stance. Spending considerable time at church and with Episcopal—affiliated organizations reinforced my moderate viewpoint—my looking-both-ways attitude—until this week’s latest installment in the debate about health care broke my attitude wide open.

There was a day back in the 1980’s when The Junior League of Austin appointed me to the board of Planned Parenthood Austin.  No abortions were performed in their clinics here. I was relieved to be asked to serve an organization valuable to women’s health without having to deal head on with abortion.

While I consistently have believed in the right for a woman to choose, if asked, I would have said that I was grateful not to have been faced with the dilemma of abortion.

I now believe that attitude of mine was WRONG.  Deciding for abortion should NOT be a dilemma.

It should be a simple choice for a woman to make, not one weighed down by all the judgments some politicians and some church people have placed on the decision of whether or not to carry a child to term or even whether or not to use birth control.

Providing proper access to abortion and contraception services should be about embracing an amazing solution to one of the huge health care problems facing our country and world—our ability to stop bringing new life into a world when we aren’t prepared to care for the health of that new life.  Let’s be free to exercise that right.

We do this much for our cats and dogs.

My middle-of-the road stance is gone with the wind now.  I fervently believe—where the mothers-to-be believe this also—that mothers-to-be who are emotionally unprepared to carry or care for a child should have the choice to abort. For a mother-to-be who feels differently from me, she needs to make her own choice.  It is not her congressperson’s or her religious leader’s choice, though.  However, I wouldn’t be at all opposed to mandating some education for mothers-to-be about what it means to be a parent, for there are a whole lot of very bad parents out there in our world—the result of being unprepared emotionally and financially for children.

Sincerely,

Molly H. Sharpe

Austin, Texas 78703-2833

A REQUEST FOR ACTION

I have just sent the following to a circle of family and friends and will be sending others I know and respect this message throughout the day.  I hope you who might read this will act and spread the word, by copying what you see here and adapting it to you.

I am turning to my dear family and friends with this fifteen minute request for today. If Medicaid gets cut, so many people we personally know in our relatively privileged world, and many more vulnerable people who live on the edge, will be devastated (a dramatic, but accurate, I believe, word). I am politically moderate. I want a strong Republican party, because I think it’s better for our country.  BUT, I absolutely oppose the Republican health care proposal, beginning with its cuts to Medicaid.

I ask you to do what I’ve done: send one handwritten postcard and one letter (preprinted, just signing, it in pen”) to your senators and the President. The postcard will be read and counted quickly. The letter reinforces if it gets opened. Together the two double the volume of mail.

Senator John Cornyn| 517 Hart Senate Office Building| Washington D.C. 20510| 202-224-2934

Dear Senator Cornyn,

I am a registered voter, a political moderate who sometimes votes Republican. I oppose any decrease in Medicaid spending now or going forward into the foreseeable future.

Mary (Molly) H. Sharpe

1805 Exposition Boulevard

Austin, TX  78703-2833

P.S. Note that I live in your old neighborhood, I believe, and, yes, there are neighbors here whose families and friends require Medicaid for various reasons, although most don’t talk about it. So far my immediate family hasn’t, but that’s by some good luck.  My mother when she died was in a nursing home that my husband and I were able to fund, but we were running low on money for that. Had Mother lived longer, she would have required Medicaid.

I sent similar postcards to:

Senator Ted Cruz| Russell Senate Office Building #404| Washington D.C. 20510| 202-224-5922| and President Donald Trump| 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW| Washington, D.C. 20500.

Here’s the letter I sent to the same three, writing in their names and signing my name and address: you can print out this same letter stating this position or tailor it to you:

I have sent you a post card to register my opposition to reducing Medicaid.  Here’s why I believe reduction of Medicaid is a mistake:  Medicaid covers more than a third of the nation’s children and pays for half of all births.

More than any other statistics, these speak to where we are headed as a nation if the federal government doesn’t act to create a health plan that helps people in need.

Pushing down the responsibility to the state level doesn’t help Texas; we are not a state known for its generosity to the poor. Pushing down the responsibility to the local government isn’t an answer either. That leads to a patchwork solution of highly expensive emergency room visits and health crises that could have been prevented with proper intervention. These pregnancies and children and pregnancies are not going away.  And, those of us who are older have our own needs, and we are the ones who vote at the greatest rate.  Ask AARP.

 

Mary (Molly) H. Sharpe

1805 Exposition Boulevard

Austin, TX  78703-2833

SO, DEAR FAMILY AND FRIENDS, I HOPE YOU WILL JOIN ME AND THE OTHER PEOPLE HARD AT WORK ENGAGED IN THIS EFFORT.  IF YOU DO, WOULD YOU EMAIL ME? I’M MAKING AN ATTEMPT TO TRACK HOW MUCH MAIL WE CAN GENERATE.  IF YOU DISAGREE, YOU CAN LET ME KNOW THAT, TOO, BUT PLEASE REPLY JUST TO ME—EITHER WAY.

AND, ONE MORE REQUEST:  If you would do as I have done and send this request to your ten best prospects (or 100 or 5—whatever works for you), that’s where our work will really get done.  I’d love to have people you contact email me, too, or go to the Friends for Civil Action blog to comment:  http://mollysharpe.blog.

WE: not us and them

Do you believe the government has a role in helping the poor and the middle class?  If you don’t, there’s no need to read further.  If you do, please consider putting “Dark Money” at the top of your summer reading list.  In it, author Jane Mayer who among many prizes has won the I.F. Stone Medal for Journalistic Independence presented by the Nieman Foundation at Harvard, writes as the book cover states “The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right.”  The story is gripping, epic, heart-wrenching, and, alas, real. It tells the tale of how the Koch Brothers and others of their ilk have planted ideas that are self-serving to the Kochs and destructive for the rest of us—and really, for them, too.

I believe for the sake of us all, we all need as a country to provide sufficient Medicaid.  If we are lucky enough not to need it for ourselves (Medicaid, according to a PBS News Hour report June 22, pays for one-HALF of all baby deliveries), we are still touched by those who need it.  They are our sisters, our sons, our fathers, mothers, and neighbors who suffer from chronic disabilities, addiction, bruising employment options, lack of meaningful education, and illness. They are the people we walk by on our downtown streets, sometimes being almost called to step over them. They wear rags. Some may have been to the emergency room not once, but twice, in a day, as the drug K2 ravages downtown Austin homeless neighbors.

Government abdication isn’t the answer.   Having a sign that says, “Paul Ryan suggests you get a job,” isn’t an answer. The answer is complicated, calls for new solutions we don’t yet know, and for meaningful dialogue among people who are willing to work for a greater good, rather than their self-interests alone.  Good Republicans and Democrats are needed. We are spiraling into chaos in our country, and the health care statistics paint the picture of where we are headed unless we look to government to be part of the solution.

Today’s Action

Texans, call Senator Cornyn at 202-224-2934 and Senator Cruz at 202-224-5922 and leave word that you oppose any reductions in Medicaid.  If you are some who believes as I do that we should help the poor  with health assistance, let’s do this efficiently.  That means  we need a federal plan that doesn’t shove assistance costs down to the local level where expensive emergency room visits become the unwanted answer.

Speaker Joe Straus

Thursday’s Austin American Statesman reported remarks that Texas House Speaker Joe Straus made to school board members from across the state.  I believe him and applaud him when he says that “the way to improve public education and reduce property taxes is to increase state support for education and that legislation to regulate bathrooms and offer state money for private school tuition is wrongheaded and counterproductive.”

The Influence of Tim Dunn

From The Lone Star Project: Abbott Abdicates Greg Abbott has surrendered leadership to Dan Patrick and sits as the weakest modern-day Texas Governor   It may not be official, but for all practical purposes Greg Abbott turned the keys to Texas government over to Dan Patrick and Tim Dunn yesterday.  At a stiff and awkward press conference, Abbott robotically called a Special Session of the Texas Legislature for July 18th and then laid out a laundry list of issues that could have been pulled from a Dan Patrick or Empower Texans website. Abbott dropped any pretense that he sits as a conservative counter-weight to the anti-business, anti-jobs, big government Republican agenda enforced by Empower Texans billionaire donor Tim Dunn and his political mouthpiece, Dan Patrick.  Abbott took credit for non-substantive issues like a constitutional convention of the states, passing over truly urgent matters like school finance reform and meaningful property tax reform.  Abbott then quickly read through a Tea Party legislative wish list and shrank away, avoiding any questions and leaving leadership and all the next moves to Dan Patrick and his alt-right deputies in the Senate and House. Abbott may be the weakest modern-day Texas Governor? It was a disorienting scene for Texans used to assertive sometimes larger than life Governors.  Ann Richards, George W. Bush and Rick Perry easily commanded center stage.  No one doubted that Governors like Bill Clements and Mark White could make a fist and land a punch.  With Abbott, it’s more make sandwich and take a nap.  Since Texas changed terms for Governors from 2 years to 4 years in 1972, Texans haven’t seen a less active, more reactive, or more passive aggressive Governor than Greg Abbott. During most of his term, the media has given Abbott the benefit of the doubt.  However, Abbott’s inability to direct or control the agenda during the 2017 Legislative Session – or to even serve as a mediator between the stronger personalities of Dan Patrick and Joe Straus – has apparently convinced reporters to stop waiting for signs of leadership and write about what they see.  Both the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal and the New York Times recently detailed some of the fallout from Abbott’s passive approach. Abbott’s weak leadership hurts Texans Since Abbott was sworn in as Governor, important measures of a strong state economy have trended downward.  Take a look: Under Abbott, the Texas economy has fallen from 3rd nationally to 21st. In April, the Dallas Morning News reported that the Texas unemployment rate surpassed the unemployment rate in state of California. In 2017, Texas lawmakers were forced to work under one of the tightest budget squeezes in recent memory due to Texas’ slower economic growth. Last year, Kiplinger did not forecast Texas to be among the top 10 states with the fastest job growth. According to Governing Magazine, 13 states, plus the District of Columbia, outpaced Texas in 2016. What does Abbott’s abdication mean for Texans? Now Dan Patrick is in the driver’s seat with Empower Texans billionaire Tim Dunn as his navigator.  Patrick’s goal is to lock down his position as the unquestioned leader of the Tea Party alt-right ideologues who control Republican primaries in Texas.  Dunn sees Patrick and his alt-right acolytes in the Legislature as the political force he needs to dismantle the Texas public school system and divert education funds to unregulated private schools, which will have devastating effects on Texas kids and on the long-term future of the state.   June 7, 2017 Contact: Matt Angle 972-885-9440

A Watch of Lamentation

During the special session of the Texas Legislature, we will hold a Watch of Lamentation. We are lamenting the divisive agenda set by the Governor.  We invite others into our grief, working together towards a day when more people will feel encouraged to vote–both those who are under-represented at the polls and also those who have fallen away from voting because of apathy.  We want to serve as inspiration for those qualified candidates in the wings who are capable of holding office with a desire to serve the best interests of the public.  Such service requires dialogue rather than combative behavior and talk.  Such service requires learning from dialogue and conflict what are the right questions to ask, rather than leaping over and over to the tired answers that don’t work.  Our best hope for state government would be to see two able candidates from the Republican party rise up to challenge the Governor and Lt. Governor.  Nationally, we want to see many good Democrats and Republicans step forward, people who won’t be cornered into being puppets for deep pockets.  Meanwhile, we lament. We also speak, that we may be heard.

A Lament

Hello postcard stormers with Friends for Civil Action,

Here’s a proposed message to send via postcard and phone to our elected officials serving the state of Texas:  I lament the divisive agenda the Governor has set for the Special Session. I support the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, the Bishop of the Diocese of Texas, and other leaders in their opposition to the “bathroom bill.” The bill discriminates needlessly.  I support the Texas Business Association in its opposition to the bill.  Hurting the economy hurts the people of Texas. Aside from the sunset bill requirement, I oppose the entire special session agenda.  Sign with your name as it appears on your voter’s registration card and include your return address.

Appreciate you all!

Molly Sharpe

Friends for Civil Action

Friends for Civil Action believe inclusive policies are the right policies for community life, public safety, the economy, and the human spirit.  We are an informal network—without dues or infra-structure—of friends and neighbors branching to many neighborhoods.  As we present our goals to elected officials, we do so with civility, avoiding name calling.  We focus on issues that are vital to community well-being.  We are residents of our neighborhoods and of the world.

 

 

 

A Letter Worth Reading

Forwarded from a friend with MIT ties:

To the members of the MIT community,   Yesterday, the White House took the position that the Paris climate agreement – a landmark effort to combat global warming by reducing greenhouse gas emissions – was a bad deal for America. Other nations have made clear that the deal is not open to renegotiation. And unfortunately, there is no negotiating with the scientific facts.   I believe all of us have a responsibility to stand up for concerted global action to combat and adapt to climate change.   At MIT, we take great care to get the science right. The scientific consensus is overwhelming: As human activity emits more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the global average surface temperature will continue to rise, driving rising sea levels and extreme weather.   Global warming is not a distant problem – not distant in time or space. Communities across the United States and around the world are already experiencing the impacts. Without immediate and concerted action, the damaging consequences will grow worse. As the Pentagon describes it, climate change is a “threat multiplier,” because its direct effects intensify other challenges, including mass migrations and zero-sum conflicts over existential resources like water and food. In short, global warming and its consequences present risks too grave to gamble with.   A global problem demands a global solution. With the Paris agreement, for the first time in history, 190+ nations agreed to work together to do something about it. In signing it, the U.S. was acting in concert with other nations, with the U.S. setting its own level of carbon reductions. The truth is that unless every nation joins in the solution, every nation will join in the suffering.   To solve this global problem, we must transform the global energy status quo. The Paris agreement is an important beginning: a mechanism that drives progress on emissions right away and speeds up progress over time. (Incidentally, MIT announced its own greenhouse gas reduction goal in October 2015, a month before the Paris conference, with our Plan for Action on Climate Change, which commits us to reducing our campus emissions at least 32% by 2030.) With this running start, humanity has time to prevent the worst impacts of climate change. But the longer we hesitate, the lower the odds of success; the carbon dioxide our cars and power plants emit today will linger in the atmosphere for a thousand years.   Climate change arguably represents the greatest threat of this generation. Fortunately, it also represents a tremendous opportunity. Already, hundreds of thousands of Americans work in the clean energy sector, and growth in clean energy jobs is rising fast: In 2016 alone, solar industry employment grew by 25 percent, while wind jobs grew 32 percent. As a nation, if we choose to invest in the relevant research, we have the opportunity to continue to lead, developing new energy technologies that will generate high-value exports and high-quality American jobs – the jobs of the future. That is in no way to minimize the disruption that the changing energy economy will cause to some workers and regions. But the solution to that problem is not to deny scientific facts and give away economic opportunity. If we don’t seize this chance, other nations certainly will. By withdrawing from the Paris accord, the US is surrendering leadership in a priceless global market.   I am encouraged, however, to see so much leadership at the state and city level, in industry and at universities – here in Massachusetts and nationwide.   Time and again, this country has risen to civilizational challenges with a sense of optimism, creativity and drive. I hope that the people of the United States will – as a matter of service to the nation and the world – continue to take the lead in pursuing a carbon-free future.   In this work, the people of MIT have a special role to play. I look forward to working with you as we step up to the challenge.   Sincerely,   L. Rafael Reif       MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 77 MASSACHUSETTS AVE, W98-300 | CAMBRIDGE, MA 02139