By Julia Conley, Common Dreams, Used with Permission
Chris Avell, a pastor in Bryan, Ohio who opened his church to the city’s “vulnerable” residents to give them a place to stay amid freezing winter weather, is suing city officials over what he says is “discrimination” and “harassment” stemming from criminal charges he faced for providing housing for homeless people.
Avell filed a federal lawsuit on Monday against the city of Bryan, Mayor Carrie Schlade, Police Department Capt. Jamie Mendez, zoning official Andrew Waterson, and Fire Chief Doug Pool.
In court filings, Avell said he hosted an average of eight unhoused people per night at his church, Dad’s Place, “without incident” for several months before the city tried to stop him from keeping the facility open 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
As Common Dreams reported last week, city officials told Avell he could no longer house people in the church because it lacked bedrooms and was zoned as a central business, in which Ohio prohibits residential use.
Authorities arrived at the church during a New Year’s Eve service and issued 18 zoning and fire code violations.
Despite Avell’s assertion that welcoming unhoused people into the church, which is located next to a homeless shelter that has experienced overcrowding, has not caused any disruptions in the community, Bryan city officials said in a new release that police saw an increase in reports of “inappropriate activity” at Dad’s Place in May 2023, two months after Avell first opened the church at all hours.
“It was city police officers who would bring people by,” Avell told The Associated Press on Tuesday. “The local hospital would call and bring people by. Other homeless shelters would call and bring people by.”
He told the outlet that two volunteers have acted as security guards since he began the overnight “Rest and Refresh in the Lord ministry,” and that the church has allowed anyone who needs shelter to stay overnight, only asking them to leave if “there is a biblically valid reason for doing so or if someone at the property poses a danger to himself or others.”
Avell’s lawsuit alleges that the city has moved the “goalposts” in its directives to him regarding safety and zoning codes. Officials ordered him to install a hood over the stove in the church’s kitchen, but after he complied, the city said the hood was not sufficient and required him to have the state inspect it.
“Nothing satisfies the city,” Jeremy Dys, Avell’s attorney, told the AP. “And worse—they go on a smear campaign of innuendo and half-truths.”
Avell accused the city of engaging in a “campaign to harass, intimidate, and shut down Dad’s Place” and said the order to stop housing homeless people was “directly contrary to its religious obligation.”
Represented by a conservative legal group called the First Liberty Institute, Avell alleged that the city has violated his rights under the First Amendment, the equal protection clause under the 14th Amendment, and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.
The court filings included a request for a restraining order against the city as well as damages and attorneys’ fees.
Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
By C.J. Polychroniou, Common Dreams, Used with Permission
If we are to expect the frustrated and badly battered working-class people to turn their backs on the false promises of the far right and join instead the struggle for a more humane order based on socialist ideals and values, we need to take winning hearts and minds much more seriously.
For radical socialists, one of the most frustrating political experiences in the post-Cold War era is witnessing the dramatic deterioration of socio-economic conditions throughout the developed world and, at the same time, the failure of the Left narrative to convince the citizenry about the root causes of the problems at hand and that alternative socio-economic arrangements are in turn urgently needed. This is a paradox that open-minded radical socialists should not be hesitant to confront. A critical examination of the failure of the Left narrative to make inroads with the laboring classes in contemporary capitalist society is a must if the political pendulum is to swing back from conservative control.
The Left has always offered solid critiques about the state of capitalism. Armed with a class-driven perspective (“the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”) which has become increasingly complemented by a multi-level analysis that also brings into play the role of race, gender, culture and ethnicity, the Left narrative about the nature of the problems facing contemporary capitalist societies has no equal among politico-economic discourses. It explains economic inequality on the basis of the dynamics of a profit-driven system geared toward serving almost exclusively the interests of the dominant classes instead of treating it as an outcome of individual failures (the right-wing version of economic inequality); understands racism as a force of its own, instead of trying to sweep it under the carpet as the Right does, but also recognizes that it’s continuation in present-day society is a consequence of specific institutional arrangements and both implicit and explicit biases; and advocates a succession of policies that aim toward the attainment of the common good instead of catering to the needs and interests of a tiny coterie of corporate and financial elites as conservative policies tend to do.
The Left narrative is intellectually rigorous but also couched in deeply humanistic terms. Since the French Revolution, the Left worldview has always been one that values the common good over narrowly defined private interests, progress over tradition, democracy over authoritarian rule. As such, it favors cooperation over competition, solidarity over rugged individualism, and science over religion and superstition. It is of little surprise, therefore, that the world’s greatest intellectuals, artists and writers in the modern age — from Victor Hugo to Arturo Toscanini and from Pablo Picasso to Jean Paul Sartre — have been to the left of the political spectrum. Indeed, in a continent where ideas have always been taken very seriously, one of the great grievances among 20th century European conservatives was over the fact that so few artists and intellectuals were to be found to the right of the ideological spectrum.
Nonetheless, no matter how intellectually and morally powerful it may have been, the Left narrative about the brutal realities of the capitalist system and the alternative values that should be guiding societal development was never the dominant political paradigm. The forces of reaction have always been a formidable opponent, relying both on the ideological and repressive apparatuses of the state to block radical change initiatives. From the brutal suppression of the Paris Commune by French and Prussian troops during the “Bloody Week” (21-28 May 1871), where some 30,000 Communards were killed, to the role of the CIA in promoting anticommunism in Europe in the period immediately following the Second World War to today’s strategic co-optation of once radical groups into mainstream political forces (the German Green Party, Syriza in Greece, Podemos in Spain, to name just a few), the powers that be have almost always found ways to create barriers to radical social transformation.
The Left narrative has also been undermined by the experience of “actually existing socialism.” Socialism, as practiced in the former Soviet Union and its satellite states, was undemocratic and had little tolerance for individual liberties and freedoms. The political system in place actually sabotaged the social, cultural, and economic achievements of “actually existing socialism,” which were in fact quite extensive, and it was a key factor in people turning away from embracing socialism as an alternative socio-economic order.
Formed in the periphery of the global capitalist system, where neither economic nor political development had yet to reach capitalist maturity (Russia was largely an agrarian society that had never before experienced democracy when the Bolsheviks took power in 1917), the type of socialism introduced functioned on the basis of the centralization of economic resources and institutions in the hands of the state and on single party governance. Workers had no say in economic decisions even though they were touted as co-owners of the means of production. This form of system became entrenched in the “motherland” of socialism after Stalin became an autocrat (1929-1953) and remained pretty much intact even during the so-called liberalization period that was ushered in by Nikita Khruschev (1956-1964), while even less changed under the leadership of Leonid Brezhnev (1964-1982). In the land of “actually existing socialism,” the rulers possessed no wealth and had no private property of their own but made all the decisions for the rest of society. The USSR was at best a “deformed workers’ state.”
Still, socialist and communist parties in the western world were quite popular with the masses both during the interwar years and for much of the postwar period. Communist parties carried a great deal of influence in trade unions and student movements and socialist parties were in power in numerous European countries after World War II. Indeed, the future did seem to belong to the Left.
All this changed for the worse with the collapse of “actually existing socialism” and the end of the Cold War. Instead of feeling liberated by the collapse of authoritarian state-socialism, the western Left felt a loss of identity and entered a long period of intellectual confusion and political paralysis. Many of its intellectuals abandoned their long-held ideas about socialism and communism and turned instead to mainstream political discourses, while others fell into depression and retreated altogether from political and ideological struggles. Subsequently, postmodern philosophers emerged on the scene who not only challenged the ideals of socialism but, in one of the vilest interventions in the history of intellectual discourse, identified socialism and communism with the crimes of Stalinism. The works of Marx were either ignored or completely distorted. By the mid-1990s, the intellectual paradigm shifted from Marxism and socialism to postmodernism. Media outlets to the very left of the political spectrum saw their readership decline in substantial numbers, and communist parties fell out of favor with intellectuals, workers, and students alike. By the early 2000s, most western communist parties ended up in the dustbin of history while trade unions lost entirely their political character and turned ever more toward economism. The end result was that the vision of socialism suffered a tremendous blow and the Left narrative about capitalism became quite marginalized, having little impact on the laboring populations that were experiencing declining standards of living, growing economic insecurity, and a shrinking social state under the auspices of neoliberalism.
And this is where things still stand today. Socialism remains in deep crisis in the developed world, with the only exception being the United States, the only country in the developed world that doesn’t even have a left-wing political party.
Indeed, in the metropolis of the neoliberal capitalist universe, socialism is enjoying considerable popular support, especially among the youth. For the first time, socialism in the U.S. has ceased being a taboo. Yet, one could argue that some of the political figures most responsible for the rebirth of socialism in the United States (such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders) are not socialists per se and that their fight is on behalf of a light version of European social democracy.
To stress this point further, the progressive struggle in the U.S. is over a series of selected economic and social issues (universal healthcare, student debt elimination, unionization, and defending social security and Medicare) when Europe’s postwar left-wing movements and parties, especially from the 1950s through the mid-1980s, were aiming for nothing less than the radical transformation of the entire capitalist system. Social rights such as free higher education and free healthcare had already been realized in western European countries, thus making the struggle for socialism not issue-oriented but a holistic project. For example, demands for the socialization of the means of production were on top of the political agenda of all radical left parties and organizations in western Europe. The French communist party did not shy away from labelling the socialist revolution and the “dictatorship of the proletariat” as its key strategic objectives. Yet, indicative of how sour things have gone for the socialist project since the end of the Cold War, popular forces in many European countries find themselves today fighting for the mere protection of basic social rights as the wrecking ball of neoliberalism is in full swing, seeking to destroy the last vestiges of the social state.
The Left narrative is failing to convince the bulk of the citizenry in today’s western world not because the analyses advanced about the consequences of neoliberal capitalism are incorrect but because the vision of socialism itself rarely enters the equation. Leftist intellectuals shy away from making a case for socialism. Critiques of neoliberal capitalism are not in themselves a case for the radical transformation of capitalism and its eventual replacement with a socialist socio-economic order. Critiques of neoliberal capitalism without the ideological underpinnings of a socialist vision ingrained into the analysis suggest that there is no alternative to capitalism, only a better version of capitalism. And today’s Left narrative is overwhelmed with critiques of neoliberal capitalism, which are of course very much needed, but remain largely silent about the question of a future beyond capitalism.
If we are to expect the frustrated and badly battered working-class people to turn their backs on the false promises of the far right and join instead the struggle for a more humane order based on socialist ideals and values, then the ideological battle for the minds and hearts of the laboring populations must be resumed. The vision of socialism must return in full force to the public arena. Ideological belief systems matter in politics. They are what motivates people into political action.
There are, however, also systemic factors responsible for the failure of the Left narrative to convince the laboring population in the developed countries. On the one hand, the ideological apparatuses of late capitalism have elevated the art of political apathy to such great heights that they have succeeded in making an increasingly large segment of the citizenry feel totally helpless about the possibility of making a meaningful change through participation in political struggles. At the same time, they are creating the illusion that success and failure are a matter of character, and that self-realization can be attained based on the pursuit of purely self-centered activities rather than through engagement with other human beings in common struggles for a better future for all. Whether it is the entertainment industry or marketing strategies for consumers, the prevailing mode of reference is the “self,” the individual as an isolated unit with “unique” experiences. Social injustices are virtually never brought into light by the system’s ideological apparatuses, including public education which acts under capitalism as a mechanism for creating social consensus around mainstream values and beliefs. The corporatization of higher education, with its overwhelming emphasis on market skills instead of critical pedagogy for the betterment of society and the enhancement of the democratic ethos, has also contributed immensely to the politics of apolitical culture.
On the other hand, the political agencies and the cultural institutions that are needed for the enhancement of working-class consciousness and for activating the Left narrative into action have been extensively weakened and, in some cases, even become extinct. As stated earlier, communist parties in western Europe are mostly gone while their socialist counterparts have moved so far to the right that they are now virtually indistinguishable from Christian Democratic and conservative parties in general. As for today’s radical left parties, they are anything but radical and reflect the ideological confusion that is the hallmark of multiculturalism and the politics of identity. In sum, the working classes in the developed world find themselves today without mass-based political parties that represent the interests of labor. Little wonder then why working-class people are drawn to the far-right as the leaders of those parties claim to be fighting for the primacy of workers’ interests.
Until a few decades ago, the working-class people throughout the developed world could not only rely on mass parties representing specifically their own interests but also had their own cultural institutions whose mission was to foster ideological awareness and forge proletarian culture. Socialist and communist newspapers made an immense contribution to working-class consciousness and raised the level of radicalism. Trade unions performed an equally important role by organizing various educational and social activities that enhanced solidarity. With the collapse of “actually existing socialism” and the onset of a socialist crisis, all working-class institutions experienced a dramatic fallout. In Italy, l’Unità, which had been founded by Antonio Gramsci and was the official newspaper of the Italian Communist Party, went under. In France, the venerable L’Humanité has been struggling for years with financial woes and low circulation. As for workers’ clubs, they are a thing of the past.
In conclusion, the Left narrative, no matter how accurate and intellectually powerful it may be, cannot expect to catch the imagination of the citizenry without including a vision for a real alternative future. Moreover, working-class cultural institutions need to be reinstituted for the enhancement of class consciousness and authentic socialist parties need to be rediscovered for the Left narrative to become politically effective. Social movements are important, but their actions rarely have lasting effects. Only political parties can succeed in forging the Left narrative into the policy agenda and turn it into a programmatic plan for radical social change. Understandably enough, this is quite a tall order, but the Left needs to win once again the hearts and minds of the laboring classes. But it needs the necessary political agencies and cultural instruments to do so. It cannot accomplish it on intellectual grounds alone, especially with the politics of identity acting as a spearhead for social transformation. The Communist Manifesto would have remained just a mere political document if it wasn’t for the existence of radical political parties across the globe to embrace it as their guide and vision for the emancipation of the working class from the yoke of capital.
In conclusion, the Left narrative, no matter how accurate and intellectually powerful it may be, cannot expect to catch the imagination of the citizenry without including a vision for a real alternative future. Moreover, working-class cultural institutions need to be reinstituted for the enhancement of class consciousness and authentic socialist parties need to be rediscovered for the Left narrative to become politically effective. Social movements are important, but their actions rarely have lasting effects. Only political parties can succeed in forging the Left narrative into the policy agenda and turn it into a programmatic plan for radical social change. Understandably enough, this is quite a tall order, but the Left needs to win once again the hearts and minds of the laboring classes. But it needs the necessary political agencies and cultural instruments to do so. It cannot accomplish it on intellectual grounds alone, especially with the politics of identity acting as a spearhead for social transformation. The Communist Manifesto would have remained just a mere political document if it wasn’t for the existence of radical political parties across the globe to embrace it as their guide and vision for the emancipation of the working class from the yoke of capital
The Left has always offered solid critiques about the state of capitalism. Armed with a class-driven perspective (“the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles”) which has become increasingly complemented by a multi-level analysis that also brings into play the role of race, gender, culture and ethnicity, the Left narrative about the nature of the problems facing contemporary capitalist societies has no equal among politico-economic discourses. It explains economic inequality on the basis of the dynamics of a profit-driven system geared toward serving almost exclusively the interests of the dominant classes instead of treating it as an outcome of individual failures (the right-wing version of economic inequality); understands racism as a force of its own, instead of trying to sweep it under the carpet as the Right does, but also recognizes that it’s continuation in present-day society is a consequence of specific institutional arrangements and both implicit and explicit biases; and advocates a succession of policies that aim toward the attainment of the common good instead of catering to the needs and interests of a tiny coterie of corporate and financial elites as conservative policies tend to do.
Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
The Biden Administration says the United States is not at war with the Houthis. We are bombing the hell out of them, but that’s not “war.” Sure . . .
G-Poem is not a surgical procedure, even though it is invasive, done under general anesthesia, and takes 2 hours to perform. G-Poem, which I hope to have done soon if my insurance pays for it, is considered by doctors to be a “procedure” or “intervention.” I learn something new every day.
Electric vehicles are not ready for prime time — especially in rural areas. Terrible actual battery life (especially in cold weather), high repair costs, lack of parts, and sparsity of charging stations that work make owning an EV a no-go for most rural people.
PayPal donations in 2023 dropped significantly, while Patreon supporters stayed steady. I know I don’t push asking for donations, but I wonder if I should be more aggressive in this regard.
Creon, a pancreatic enzyme replacement made from pig pancreases, is used for the treatment of exocrine pancreatic insufficiency — a rare disease. I take nine capsules a day — three with full meals, two with smaller meals. Cost? Almost $3,000 a month. Fortunately, the drug company is paying most of the cost. How long this will last remains to be seen.
Gastroparesis, another rare disease, affects stomach/bowel motility. Food doesn’t transverse the bowel as it should. I’ve had food take 4 days to make it through my digestive system. Food will stay in my stomach for hours before emptying, leading to nausea, vomiting, pain, and a plethora of bowel problems. Gastroparesis is incurable, with few treatments available. Drugs, Botox injections, G-Poem, feeding tubes, and nerve stimulators are the only treatments available for gastroparesis.
I received some free light bulbs, night lights, and a power strip from First Energy (Toledo Edison). I wonder how much “free” is going to cost me on my electric bill.
Income tax time. Kill me now.
Winter is taking its toll on wildlife. Last night, we had three deer in our yard scrounging for food. This afternoon we had thirteen cardinals at our feeders — beautiful red birds against a white snowy landscape.
New year, new insurance company: Aetna Blue Cross, Blue Shield. My therapist is not in network. 🤬 We need universal, single-payer health insurance for all. This will not happen in my lifetime.
Bonus: New network programming is back. I’m already bored. We are rewatching Treme onMax. Now there’s an awesome show.
Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Recently, Democratic President Joe Biden gave a political speech before a historically black congregation at Mother Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina. You may remember, that in 2015 White supremacist and neo-Nazi Dylann Roof murdered nine Mother Emanuel members while they were gathered for prayer. Democrats have often used Black churches to give political speeches — contravening the separation of church and state and the Johnson Amendment.
Democrats have long objected to Republican political candidates giving speeches at Evangelical churches. Republicans show no regard for the rule of law. How dare the government tell them who can or can’t give speeches in churches? However, religious sects, parachurch organizations (who increasingly claim they are churches), and churches are tax-supported institutions — exempt from most taxes. U.S. law requires tax-exempt religious institutions to refrain from endorsing political candidates (though they can endorse/support issues). Choosing to do so anyway can lead to religious institutions losing their tax-exempt status. Though to be honest with you, I can’t remember a time when the IRS revoked a church’s tax exemption. A cursory Google search showed that IRS tax revocations since the inception of the Johnson Amendment can be counted on one hand. The IRS has stopped enforcing the law, allowing Democrats and Republicans alike to use churches for political campaigning. Pastors freely endorse candidates, knowing that nothing will happen if they do. (Personally, I support revoking tax exemption for all religious institutions; that churches who claim to be tax-exempt charitable institutions must prove it.)
Liberals love to scream about Republicans giving political speeches at Evangelical churches, yet are silent when Democrats do the same at liberal, mainline Black churches. Democrats are hypocrites if they refuse to call out liberal Black churches for doing the very same things as Evangelical churches do. One liberal writer said “Yes, Biden shouldn’t have given a political speech at Mother Emanuel, but, hey, the Republicans are doing it, so, so should we.”
As long as churches are tax-supported to the tune of billions of dollars a year, the IRS MUST enforce the Johnson Amendment and laws governing the separation of church and state. If the government is no longer willing to enforce the law, then it is time for Congress to put an end to the tax-exemption scam, taxing churches as the businesses they most certainly are. If congregations want to be tax-exempt, they must justify and prove their exempt charitable status. If churches cannot show that the majority of their income is spent on genuine charitable activities — and not just on programs and ministries that primarily exist to make fat sheep fatter — then they must pay taxes just like other businesses do. This means they must file annual income tax returns. (Churches are not required to file tax returns, including informational forms.)
If President Biden wants to speak to the members of Mother Emanuel, he should stand on the public sidewalk in front of the church and do so. On the sidewalk, Biden is free to say whatever he wants. However, once the President walks in the church’s doors, he and the church must abide by the law. That they don’t is disheartening and discredits attempts to hold Republicans accountable for their own violations of the separation of church and state and the Johnson Amendment.
Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Dear Republicans, learn the difference between free speech and free market. Twitter owner Elon Musk told some advertisers to go fuck themselves. That’s free speech. After hearing Musk loud and clear, scores of companies stopped advertising on Twitter. That’s the free market.
The late Henry Kissinger was a war criminal.
We the American people are culpable for the war crimes being perpetrated in Palestine. Our weapons, our money, our blind and deaf politicians. We can excuse and justify our behavior, but the world at large sees the United States as the money and power behind the Netanyahu government’s murderous war against the Palestinian people.
Dad’s Place, a small Evangelical church in Bryan, Ohio, pastored by Chris Avell, is in the midst of a legal fight with the City over feeding and caring for homeless people. The City filed CRIMINAL charges against Avell for violating zoning laws. The church is right next to the homeless shelter, caring for the overflow crowds the shelter cannot care for. Yes, the church is technically breaking the law, as is EVERY business and church in town. Why was Dad’s Place singled out by Bryan law enforcement? Avell is a friend of mine. I recently told him I have no use for his theology, but I appreciate his concern and care for the “least of these.” Avell has a top-flight church and state law firm representing him. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
I will be on the primary ballot this spring. I’m running unopposed for Ney’s Democratic central committee seat. This will allow me to play an active part in the reorganization of the local party. The local Democratic Party is on life support. I hope new life can be breathed into the group.
In 1998, Evangelical preachers railed against President Bill Clinton over his inappropriate sexual behavior with an intern. I remember preaching a whole sermon about Clinton’s debauched behavior. Today, most Evangelical preachers have lost all sense of morals and ethics, resolutely supporting Donald Trump, even calling him a Christian. As long as you support Trump, Evangelicals, spare me your moralizing. You are hypocrites, the lot of you.
It was shameful for the New York Times to run an article questioning Taylor Swift’s sexuality. Who she loves or fucks is NOT news.
According to many Evangelicals, God created Donald Trump for such a time as this. Gag me with a spoon.
I saw a specialist at the University of Michigan Hospital in Ann Arbor yesterday. I am hoping to have a G-Poem (gastric peroral endoscopic myotomy) procedure done soon. This procedure is relatively new and only one regional surgeon is qualified to perform it. G-Poem cuts the sphincter muscle in the stomach, relaxing it. Hopefully, this will improve my stomach/bowel motility, and reduce my nausea and vomiting. Unfortunately, many insurance companies consider this an experimental procedure and refuse to pay. My surgeon will seek pre-approval, hoping Aetna Blue Cross Blue Shield approves the procedure. We shall see . . .
Granddaughters #2 and #3 graduate from high school this spring. Victoria was accepted for enrollment at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio and Karah was accepted at Richmond University in Richmond, Virginia. Forty-eight years ago, I was the first person in our family to go to college. Since then, Polly, and three of my sons, and my youngest daughter have graduated from accredited colleges. Our granddaughters are straight-A students. It does an old man’s heart good to see them do well in life.
Bonus: The Cincinnati Reds have signed a number of new players — especially pitchers. Hope springs eternal. Catchers and pitchers report to training camp in a month. Will this be the year the Reds make some noise in the playoffs? Fingers crossed, prayers uttered to Loki. May a dying old man’s wish be granted.
Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
President Joe Biden is on the campaign trail today. He wants prospective voters to know that EVERYONE is doing better economically thanks to Bidenomics. As I write this post, I am watching MSNBC. Both Chris Hayes and Alex Wagner want voters to understand that they are doing well economically, even if it doesn’t “feel” like it. According to Hayes, Wagner, and a host of Biden apologists, the numbers don’t lie: unemployment is down, wages areup, and inflation declining. In their minds, these macro numbers prove that Biden’s economic policies work. Americans are better off, even if they don’t feel they are.
Here’s the problem with this kind of thinking: Americans live in a micro world, not a macro one. The macro numbers parroted by Biden and his defenders do not represent what is actually taking place on the ground in what MSNBC often derisively calls “flyover land” — the Midwest — you know where all those MAGA people live. Biden touts new jobs, yet fails to explain how total employment is static. No one bothers to question how accurate unemployment numbers are. Only people who are drawing unemployment are counted as unemployed. People no longer or unable to seek employment are not counted. Nary a word is said about what percentage of American jobs pay a living wage. Nothing is said about those who are working part-time jobs because they can’t find well-paying full-time jobs. The same can be said for the inflation rate. This rate is always quoted in insolation of what has taken place in the past. Rarely, do Americans recover purchasing power lost. Wage increases never seem to outstrip inflation.
Here’s what I know. In the past two years, our utility bills, insurance, and groceries have all done up — often dramatically. Our medical costs are a runaway freight train. Housing costs are up. Interest rates are up. Real estate taxes are up. Entertainment costs are up. (But, Bruce, gas prices are down! Yea, Team Biden, right?) These expenses have, for the most part, outstripped inflation. Wages are flat, unable to keep up with rising prices. If an employer raises wages 3% every year, it will take workers more than five years to regain the purchasing power lost in 2021-2022 alone. All is NOT well for Midwestern working-class people. Biden and defenders telling us that it is “all in our heads” does not reflect how life really is for us. And until Biden understands this and changes his tune, he can expect to continue to alienate voters. Biden, along with his cheerleaders at MSNBC need to personally come to the Midwest and actually talk to working-class people. To quote Fox Mulder, “the truth is out there.”
Of course, Biden will ignore people like me, as will Chris Hayes, Joy Reid, and Alex Wagner. I just don’t understand “economics.” I am just an uneducated country bumpkin. Maybe, but here’s what I know: my wife and I have less discretionary income than we had two years ago, our expenses are outstripping inflation, our wages are in decline (when adjusted for inflation), our debt is increasing, and medical costs are out of control. Worse, my wife’s employer laid off workers and she has been on a reduced schedule since October. The promised raise never materialized, and when one does eventually materialize it will likely be 25-40 cents. In the meantime, the company raised insurance premiums, stopped 401K contributions, and is hanging on for dear life. So much for the awesomeness of Biden’s economy.
But, Bruce, the macro numbers say _________________. Sorry, but we live in a micro world — a world where bank balances matter, not labor statistics. And if Biden can’t or won’t understand this, he shouldn’t be surprised when he loses the 2024 presidential election. Unlike the talking heads at MSNBC, I actually have my finger on the pulse of Midwestern workers. They are my spouse, children, grandchildren, friends, and neighbors. I understand their questions and fears. I listen to them talk while in line at the grocery, sitting in stands for a basketball game, or having dinner at a local restaurant. I hear their worries and concerns. One thing is clear, Biden and the Democrats are clueless about what Midwestern people think, and what it is that drives their fears. (And Republicans are no better.)
Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
When the United States adopted an income tax in 1913, a major purpose was to make the system progressive and ease growing inequality. More than a century on, Ohio’s system of taxation is having the opposite effect — it’s taxing poor residents much more heavily than the rich and driving further inequality, according to a report released this month.
In fact, Ohio has the 15th-most unequal system of taxation, according to the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy’s 7th annual analysis, “Who Pays?”
The Buckeye State also has the dubious distinction of having the 12th-highest state and local tax rate — 12.7% — for the poorest 20% of households, the report said. That was more than double the rate — 6.3% — paid by the 1% of households with the highest incomes in Ohio. Additionally, the poorest 80% of households paid at least 10% in state and local taxes, which means the bulk of Ohioans face significantly heavier burdens than their richest neighbors.
Ohioans are hardly alone. The Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy report said that in 41 states, the highest 1% are taxed at lower rates than everyone else and that 34 — including Ohio — tax the bottom 20% at a higher rate than any other income group.
Not only do low and middle-income households pay more of state and local taxes as a share of their own income, nationally they also pay more in terms of their share of their states’ overall incomes, the report said.
“In other words, not only do the rich, on average, pay a lower effective state and local tax rate than lower-income people, they also collectively contribute a smaller share of state and local taxes than their share of all income,” it said. “This limits states’ ability to raise revenue, particularly as inequality increases. Research shows that when income growth concentrates among the wealthy, state revenues grow more slowly, especially in states that rely more heavily on taxes that disproportionately fall on low and middle-income households.”
Poverty and inequality are serious problems in Ohio. For example, Medicaid, the state/federal health program for the poor, serves almost a third of Ohioans.
Many also lack the most basic necessities.
The U.S. Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey in October estimated that 357,000 Ohioans often or sometimes didn’t have all the food they need. It also estimated that members of 62,000 households who rent thought it was very or somewhat likely they would be evicted in the next two months.
Even so, they’re being asked to shoulder more of the burden for state and local government than the richest Ohioans.
The Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy report looked at all state and local taxes people pay, including those on income and property and user fees such as sales and gasoline taxes. Since user fees are the same regardless of income, the less you earn the more of a percentage they take up of your income.
The federal income tax was proposed as a way of raising revenue — and to address growing inequality. President William Howard Taft, an Ohio Republican, in 1909 proposed a constitutional amendment allowing for it. The amendment was ratified in 1913, and in the debate leading up to ratification many representing agrarian interests said making things more equal was the entire point.
“The purpose of this tax is nothing more than to levy a tribute upon that surplus wealth which requires extra expense, and in doing so, it is nothing more than meting out even-handed justice,” said Rep. William H. “Alfalfa Bill” Murray, D-Okla.
At the height of the push, Ohio voters in 1912 gave their OK for a state income tax by a 52-48 margin. But it wasn’t until 1971 that the General Assembly adopted it, and opponents have been chipping away and doing other things to reduce the burden on the wealthy ever since.
For example, a tax break benefitting people who can run their income through a limited liability company is costing the state $1 billion a year, despite doing little to fulfill promises to juice the Ohio economy.
The moves seem likely to make worse what the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy found in its analysis.
“Forty-four states’ tax systems exacerbate income inequality,” it said. “When the lowest-income households pay the greatest proportion of their income in state and local taxes, gaps between the most affluent and everyone else grow larger.”
Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
I’ve lived in Ohio for nearly four decades and for that entire time, LGBTQ+ lives have been treated by our politicians as little more than a convenient political punching bag. Every year I ask myself, why can’t they just leave us alone?
I turned 18 in late 2002, so my first non-local election as a voter was in 2004, when the George W. Bush campaign juiced his reelection prospects by putting same-sex marriage bans on the ballot and passing them in 11 states, including Ohio.
Welcome to politics, kid, you’re a second-class citizen. That’s the message Ohio welcomed me with as a voter.
It was easy in 2004 to scapegoat and victimize the entire LGBTQ+ community, not just segments of it as we largely see today. We were going to destroy traditional marriage. We were — by seeking the same legal benefits of marriage afforded to opposite-sex couples — going to destroy the entire country.Marriages to farm animals are coming next, they shrieked. “Fire and brimstone… Forty years of darkness… Dogs and cats living together — mass hysteria!”
It took 11 years for Ohio’s same-sex marriage ban to be overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court in its 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, a case originating out of Ohio.
The state of Ohio, under then-Attorney General Mike DeWine, cost taxpayers more than a million dollars working to keep myself and the rest of my LGBTQ+ family second-class citizens, undeserving of the same legal protections as everyone else.
But over those years, the tide had begun to turn. One of the most significant things I learned after 2004 was that many people changed their minds on the issue of LGBTQ+ rights when somebody close to them came out as LGBTQ+. Of course, plenty of others reject their LGBTQ+ family members: disowning us, kicking us out of our homes, or even doing violence to us. But as enough of us came out and showed that we are normal, everyday people with real humanity, the mood of the country slowly changed.
Ohio’s same-sex marriage ban of 2004 was passed by 61.7% of voters. A 2012 poll by the Washington Post showed 52% of Ohio residents saying that same-sex marriage should be legal. A 2016 Public Religion Research Institute poll showed a 56% majority in favor of same-sex marriage in Ohio. A 2022 survey by the same institute showed 70% of Ohio respondents supported same-sex marriage.
And yet, still, Ohio Revised Code Section 3101.01 states “Any marriage between persons of the same sex is against the strong public policy of this state. Any marriage between persons of the same sex shall have no legal force or effect in this state.”
So if the current right-wing U.S. Supreme Court decides to overturn the Obergefell decision and return it to the states, LGBTQ+ Ohioans would once again be relegated to second-class citizenship against the wishes of 70% of the public.
In the last several years, because of this shift in public opinion, right-wing operatives have decided it’s more politically convenient and publicly palatable to shine their spotlight of hatred, lies, and intolerance not on the LGBTQ+ community broadly, but on our transgender brothers and sisters specifically.
Ohio’s unconstitutionally gerrymandered state legislature has gone full-bore into the play: introducing anti-trans athlete bills, anti-transgender health care bills, and even anti-drag and bathroom ban laws. They passed the youth athlete and gender-affirming care ban just before the end of the year. DeWine vetoed it, but the lege now looks to make their first order of business in 2024 attacking trans people next week with a possible override of DeWine’s veto.
DeWine said during his press conference last week that, “Parents looked me in the eye and they said, ‘My child would be dead if they had not received this care.” DeWine did his research, he listened to families and doctors, and he showed more honesty and compassion in a 30-minute presser than I saw out of Statehouse Republican lawmakers in all of 2023.
The fact that this is a matter of life and death is obvious to those of us who know and love and care about trans and other LGBTQ+ people in our lives. I’ve heard too many awful stories. My heart has been broken over and over knowing what those in my LGBTQ+ family have had to endure: the fear, the lack of safety, the horror stories of pain, violence, and rejection from a society that has historically not given a damn about us or our lives.
But our LGBTQ+ family is strong. We’ve created communities for ourselves. We’ve worked with medical professionals to create health care spaces for ourselves, when much of the rest of the world was dismissing us and laughing at us, even amid the AIDS epidemic. We created spaces for ourselves where we could live in peace, not fearing for our safety and security, but lifting each other up in acceptance and love.
So no matter what happens next week, I want to send a very clear message to my LGBTQ+ family and especially our trans sisters and brothers: You are loved. You are accepted. You are appreciated. You are wanted, needed, and valued in our communities and in our families. Your individuality is a gift, and your lives are precious. I will never abandon you and I will never stop fighting for all of our rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
To our allies, thank you. Truly, thank you. Your strength and alliance carries far more weight than you might conceive.
And to the small-minded, closed-hearted bigots who seek to rob us of our inalienable rights, to scapegoat us, to ostracize us, to “other” us, to exclude us, to lie about us, to victimize us, to use our lives as a political cudgel whether out of cynicism or ignorance — perpetuating or being duped by propaganda: You’ve never cared about us, and we don’t need you, so honestly, why can’t you just leave us alone?
Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
When the homosexual comes out of the closet and he is bragging about his activities, demanding not only acceptance, but endorsement, that is a nation that God is taking his hand off of. And that’s exactly who we are.
Jesus, take the wheel Take it from my hands ‘Cause I can’t do this on my own I’m letting go So give me one more chance And save me from this road I’m on Jesus, take the wheel
— Chorus for Jesus, Take the Wheel
If you listen to the mainstream media, you might conclude that Christian Nationalism is new; and that Donald Trump and his MAGA faithful are to blame for the rise of Christian Nationalism in Evangelical sects and churches. Mainstream media says, “Look what we found!” However, as someone who spent the first fifty years of his life in Evangelicalism, I can authoritatively say that Evangelicals have always been, to some degree or the other, (white) Christian nationalists. I can’t remember a time when the American flag and the Christian flag didn’t fly together on Evangelical church platforms or flag poles in front of church buildings.
What is new is how Evangelicals now view the separation of church and state. When I began training for the ministry in 1976, most Evangelicals believed that there was a strict, inviolable separation of church and state. Each was a separate sphere of influence; separate, but equal. God ordains both government and church, each with their own duties and obligations. I believed then, and still do today, that government and church need to stay the hell out of each other’s business. The government can and must insist churches follow building and health codes and obey the law, but outside of that, the government should leave churches alone. That’s called freedom of religion.
Many Evangelical preachers now believe that the separation of church and state is a myth; that Christians are duty-bound to capture and control the government for the glory of God. In their minds, Jesus sits on the throne as ruler and king, and the Bible (as interpreted by them, of course) is the law of the land. Their goal is a hostile takeover of the secular state.
Regardless of how Evangelicals view the separation of church and state, most of them believe that the United States is a divinely chosen and called nation — an explicitly Christian nation. In their minds, the United States, much like the Jewish state, has a unique relationship with God; that God has blessed our nation because of our commitment to Christianity. As long as we maintain this commitment, God will bless us.
This “blessing” from God is often described as “God’s hand upon us.” Much like Adam Smith’s invisible hand, many Evangelicals believe that God has ahold of the steering wheel and is guiding us where he wants to go. Culture wars (which are primarily fueled by Evangelicals, conservative Catholics, and Mormons) are God taking the wheel and steering the United States in the direction he wants us to go.
The past fifty years have not been kind to Evangelicals. American culture has largely abandoned Evangelicalism. There are more non-Christians in the United States than there are Evangelical Christians. As a result, Evangelicals lose one culture battle after another. Not having numbers sufficient to win elections, Evangelicals (who are overwhelmingly Republican) have turned to using gerrymandered legislatures to advance their cause. This approach will eventually fail as voters fix the gerrymandering problem through voter initiatives or amendments to state constitutions.
If the United States is a Christian nation, why are we becoming increasingly non-Christian or indifferent towards religious beliefs? Some Evangelical preachers, such as Rick Scarborough quoted above, think the answer to the “why” question is that God has taken his hands off the wheel; that the United States is a driverless car careening down the highway.
How do Evangelicals know that God has taken his hands off the wheel? According to Scarborough, the h-o-m-o-s-e-x-u-a-l-s are to blame. Ah yes, blame the queers. During my high school years in the 70s, I can’t remember a sermon on the evils of homosexuality or abortion. Preachers blamed hippies, draft dodgers, rock music, and short-skirted slutty women for the decline of Western civilization. Today, LGBTQ people are to blame for, well, e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g Evangelicals deem an affront to their deity. In their minds, if LGBTQ people would return to the closet (by force, if necessary), never to be seen again, then, and only then, will God put his hands back on the proverbial wheel.
Of course, even if LGBTQ people disappeared in the Gay Rapture, Evangelicals would not be satisfied. There are always culture wars to fight. There will always be threats of driverless cars speeding down the cultural highway. Evangelical preachers know that congregants need to feel threatened or persecuted for them to be motivated to attend church, and most importantly, give their tithes and offerings. Fear is good for business and keeping God’s soldiers on the battle lines.
The only hands on the cultural steering wheel are ours. May justice, equality, inclusion, and fairness always guide us.
Bruce Gerencser, 66, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 45 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Every time I write a political post that is critical of disgraced ex-president Donald Trump or the present iteration of the Republican Party one or more commenters will object, saying “both sides do it,” or they will attempt to distract by trying to play “whataboutism.” The goal is to ignore/dismiss what I have said or paint me as some sort of hypocrite. Anything except interacting with what I actually wrote.
I make no apologies for the fact that I am a liberal, socialist, and pacifist. I don’t often write about my political beliefs, but that doesn’t mean I don’t have strong opinions and beliefs about all sorts of political, social, and religious beliefs. I am aware of the fact that when I write about politics, it often causes controversies. I have lost numerous readers over this or that political issue. Some people love my atheism, but hate my politics.
If rural Ohio Republicans were surveyed and asked if they believed in freedom and liberty for everyone, to the person they would say YES! However, words are cheap, and when we take a close look at Republican behavior and practices, we learn that they only believe in freedom and liberty for some people.
Most rural Ohioans voted for and currently support Donald Trump. They overwhelmingly voted for the disgraced ex-president in 2016 and 2020, and plan to do so again in 2024. Does Trump believe in freedom and liberty for everyone? Of course not. He routinely threatens people like me, calls for my arrest, and says that I should expelled from the country of my birth. Why? I have political and religious beliefs different from Trump and his MAGA followers. Evidently, freedom and liberty only apply to people who agree with Trump and the rhetoric of white Evangelical Christians. Everyone else is an enemy of God and state.
When local Republicans talk glowingly about their commitment to freedom and liberty, I don’t believe them. These same people are working diligently to undo the express will of the people as they try to neuter recently passed initiatives that legalize abortion and recreational cannabis. If Republicans truly believe in freedom and liberty, then they would accept the will of the people. Instead, both at state and local levels, Republicans are intent on forcing their moral beliefs on others.
Republicans want public school students to have freedom to attend release time programs such as Lifewise Academy — an Evangelical organization — yet when The Satanic Temple wants to sponsor a release time program, all of a sudden freedom only applies to Evangelical Christians. Everywhere we look, we see right-wing Republicans prosecuting the latest iteration of the culture war. For all their talk about freedom and liberty, Republicans deny that same right for everyone. Not for LGBTQ people, nor socialists, atheists, or humanists. Not for women seeking abortion care, nor people with moral beliefs different from the Christian majority.
I am in the minority when it comes to my political and religious beliefs. Even local Democrats distance themselves from me because I am a Democratic socialist, too liberal, or a godless heathen. That’s the price I pay for living in rural Ohio. That said, I demand and expect the same freedom and liberty as my Republican neighbors.
After reading my letter, several people commented and sent me messages that said there is “no difference between Republicans and Democrats.” Others played the “whataboutism” game, suggesting that Biden and the Democrats have done things just as bad as indicted Donald Trump and MAGA Republicans. Really? Do otherwise thoughtful, rational people really believe there is no difference between the Democrats and Republicans; that President Biden is just a bad Donald Trump?
Donald Trump is a fascist and authoritarian. In 2020, he tried to overthrow the government and remain in power. He is currently facing numerous criminal charges in three jurisdictions. If re-elected in 2024, Trump has made it clear that he intends to upend the federal government and the rule of law. Invoking the Insurrection Act, Trump intends to use the military to advance his domestic cause, which includes rounding up and incarcerating people such as myself. One need only look at Project 2025 to find out Trump’s intentions. Does anyone seriously believe there is no difference between Trump and Biden; that Trump is not a direct threat to the future and health of our Republic?
The Republican Party has, for the most part, been taken over by Donald Trump and MAGA zealots. Centrist Republicans have either given up or left the party altogether. Trump IS the Republican Party. Are you okay with that? Are you okay with a Party that is racist, misogynistic, and anti-LGBTQ? Are you okay with a Party that doesn’t give a shit about immigrants, pregnant women, children, or the poor? Shall I go on? Explain to me how one can be a Republican and a humanist. The Republican platform is antithetical to the humanist ideal.
That is not to say that the Democratic Party is without its own problems. That’s why I am no longer a Democrat, I may vote Democratic, but I am not a Democrat. I am not a supporter of Joe Biden, but when forced to choose between the most unfit man to ever be president and Joe Biden, I am going to choose Biden every time. I am a pragmatist, not an idealist, when it comes to politics. If other Democratic presidential candidates show themselves to be viable candidates, then it is likely I will vote for one of them. Biden wasn’t my first, second, or third choice in 2020 (and neither was Clinton in 2016), and he is most certainly not my choice today. However, we have a two-party system, so that means I will likely have to vote for Biden in 2024. The United States can survive another Biden presidency (provided he doesn’t drag us into a world war). It cannot survive another Trump presidency.
The same goes for Republicans at the state level. MAGA zealots have taken over virtually every state Republican party. Here in Ohio, a supermajority of Republicans rule the roost without any regard for the will of the people. Last month, Ohio voters overwhelmingly voted to legalize abortion and recreational marijuana use. Did Republicans respect the will of the people? Of course not. They are doing everything they can to neuter the abortion amendment and recreational marijuana initiative. These Republicans are Christian nationalists and fascists who are hell-bent on shaping Ohio according to the teachings of the Bible.
So, enough of this idea that there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans and between Biden and Trump. Instead of playing the “whataboutism” game, how about actually justifying the policies of Trump and the MAGA-controlled Republican Party? How about justifying why ANYONE would vote for Donald Trump (or Ron DeSantis)? I don’t see it. Hate Joe Biden? Fine, don’t vote for him. However, if you care about the future of our country, for the love of Loki, please don’t vote for Trump. He is not the lesser of two evils, he is evil, period.
