Abortion debate needs voices of reason

The leaders of Canada’s national political parties all agree on one thing; they do not want to talk about abortion.  Yet, with Justin Trudeau’s announcement that going forward all Liberal candidates must be pro-choice, abortion is back on their radar screens. 

Under Trudeau’s leadership, the Liberal Party joins the New Democratic Party in discouraging those who believe in the sanctity of life within the womb from the party folds and from running for Parliament. This leaves only the Conservative Party truly open to those with pro-life sensibilities.

While Justin Trudeau and Tom Mulcair may want to avoid candidates who are solely interested in codifying an uncompromising ban on abortion, party policy that precludes individuals who are not pro-choice from running for office violates a fundamental principle of Canadian democracy.

Representation is a pillar of democracy

As any well-taught sixth grader in the country knows, representation is one of the pillars of Canadian democracy. Canadian citizens have a right to select their representatives to Parliament. Collectively, these representatives should represent the diversity of Canada in race, creed and opinion.

Representatives have a responsibility to listen to the conflicting voices of Canadians on all matters, including those of conscience, even though they may disagree with those voices. The electorate is not well served when political parties pay lip service to Canadians of all views, but then stipulate, as Mr. Trudeau has in an email to Liberal party members, “incoming Liberal MPs will always vote in favour of a woman’s fundamental rights.”  

While it is true that the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the country’s last abortion law in 1988 on the basis that the law was unconstitutional, and contravened Section 7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms which guarantees a woman’s legal right to life, liberty and the security of the person, there are other ways to support pregnant women besides silencing the voices of those who believe that life is sacred from the moment of conception.

Canada needs voices of reason to move beyond polarized arguments

The practice of discouraging, if not down right excluding, those who are pro-life from vying for office implies that anyone who is not pro-choice is incapable of being an effective parliamentarian. There seems to be an assumption that all pro-lifers are radical zealots. This is simply untrue; many people who hold pro-life views and who have reservations about Canada’s lack of abortion laws are quite capable of approaching the issue rationally, realistically, and with regard for a woman’s right to choose.

Canadians need voices of reason on both sides of the abortion debate at the national level. Perhaps if national leaders were more open to dissenting voices on the topic, and to the concerns of the sixty percent of Canadians who favor some legislative restriction on abortion (such as on sex selective abortion), the debate could move beyond inflammatory rhetoric and polarized arguments. Instead of focusing on universal and unrestricted access to abortion or a complete ban on abortion, Canada could move towards the development of educational and social programs that would held reduce the number of abortions in the country, while at the same time respecting a woman’s freedom and right to choose.  Too often pro-choice means no choice for a pregnant woman because of a lack of practical support for other options during a difficult time.

National parties that prevent Canadians from running for office based on a single issue shut out many talented, principled, altruistic and reasonable people from participation in the development of the broad range of economic, environmental, legislative and social policies that affect Canadian life. 

As Archbishop Cardinal Collins of Toronto noted in his letter to Trudeau, Pope Francis "would have been ineligible to be a candidate" for the Liberals. And, as someone noted on a media discussion board, Mother Theresa would not have made the cut either.

With Trudeau’s “resolutely pro-choice” version of Liberal values, the Liberal Party follows the New Democratic Party in an exclusionary practice that has implications for representation in a parliamentary democracy, and at the end of the day, may do little to support women facing the difficult decision of carrying a pregnancy to term.

Women are making the desert bloom

In recognition of this year’s International Women’s Day, I attended two events. Though the character of the two events differed, they shared a common element: women around the globe are a force for change in their communities and in the world. From the macro to the micro level, women are creating streams in the desert places of human society.

World Day of Prayer 

The first event that I attended was the 2014 World Day of Prayer. The World Day of Prayer has its origins in the 19^th century in the missionary activity of women. Held annually since 1927, women from 170 countries participate.

This year, the women of Egypt prepared the ecumenical service, and not surprisingly, given the importance of the Nile River for life in the Sahara Desert, water featured prominently in the readings and prayers. The spiritually evocative theme, “Streams in the Desert”, pointed to God’s love and mercy in the parched places of human life.

As the women reflected on Egypt’s history and anticipated the future, the life-giving character of water was a metaphor for individual and community transformation.  Through faith in action, the women of Egypt aspire to “become channels of living water to the world” (Women's Inter-Church Council of Canada Ecumenical Service World Day of Prayer 2014). 

Egyptian women are continually discovering ways to make their world bloom with possibilities. From the daughter of Pharaoh, who in the biblical story of salvation defied her father to rescue the Hebrew baby who would lead an enslaved people to freedom, to the women who stood with men in Tahrir Square protesting a repressive regime, Egyptian women are agents of change, claiming their “right to freedom, justice and equality” (Ecumenical Service World Day of Prayer 2014).  Their vision extends into the future as they look for ways to preserve the waters of the Nile for future generations, and to enhance opportunities for women and girls. 

Unbreakable: One Girl Changing the World

The World Day of Prayer service prompted me to look inward for the parched places of my life that could use a little sprinkling of life giving water, and it prepared me for the second event, the screening of the film Unbreakable: One Girl Changing the World. This event took me out of my self, leading me to reevaluate my commitment to social justice at home and in places oceans away.

“Women Creating Change”, a project in the Lower Columbia region where I live, screened the film.   Before the film, we watched a video presentation that depicts some of the barriers – isolation, unaffordable housing and childcare, food insecurity, transportation costs, and claw backs to social assistance – women with low incomes struggle to overcome.  

Unbreakable: One Girl Changing the World tells the story of Malala Yousafzai who is internationally renowned for her courageous efforts to promote education for girls. Malala survived and recovered from a Taliban attempt to assassinate her, and remains committed to her mission. Not unlike Pharaoh’s daughter, the baby she plucked from the waters or the women who protested in Tahrir Square, Malala refuses to be silent against injustice; her inspiring example to empower girls through education is a stream in the desert of ignorance.

The Malala film was a natural fit with the goals of “Women Creating Change”. Tara Howse, project co-coordinator, explains, “Our project is based around identifying what prevents women in our local region from having a secure and stable future. We know that education is directly linked to the empowerment of women, which has been demonstrated to a better quality of life for their families and the rest of society.” To this end, the project hopes to establish a bursary for women. Projects like this one are made in Canada examples of women working towards the transformation of society.

The women of Egypt, Malala and “Women Creating Change” share a common goal; all want to see an increase in the opportunities for individuals to live with dignity, to realize their potential, and to live in harmony with others.

Collaborating with others, we become streams in the desert

These are matters of social justice in which we can participate, although I admit that there are times when I feel quite useless in the face of injustice. Despite these sometimes feelings of uselessness, I believe that often even a small action makes a significant difference, and that when we collaborate with others, we become like streams in the desert, helping individuals and communities to bloom.

Barbie doesn't belong in a men's magazine

"The partnership of Barbie and SI Swimsuit has nothing to do with empowering choices for girls no matter how the executives spin it."

A controversial marketing campaign

Advertisers have long used women’s bodies to make a buck, and every so often a controversial advertising campaign, like the marketing of the Barbie doll as a Sports Illustrated Swimsuit supermodel, creates a stir in the marketplace.

Coinciding with the 50^th anniversary issue of the magazine’s swimsuit edition, Mattel released a limited edition SI Swimsuit Barbie. Barbie sports a contemporary version of the doll’s original 1959 black and white swimsuit, fashionably accessorized with strappy black high-heeled sandals, jewelry and sunglasses.  

The magazine includes a four page-advertising feature of the doll, and features Barbie as an SI Swimsuit supermodel on 1,000 cover wraps with the headline “the doll that started it all”.

The Barbie debate

This latest rebranding of Barbie has reignited the debate about the appropriateness of the doll.  Some say the doll’s proportions give girls an unrealistic idea of beauty that is harmful to their self-esteem, and as evidence, they point to the number of mutilated Barbie dolls on tables at garage sales. Others argue that Barbie represents choices for women.  Mattel describes Barbie, who apparently has had about 150 careers including a run at the presidency of the United States, as “unapologetic” about her career as a SI Swimsuit supermodel.

A blast from the past - my "swimsuit Barbie"

I am neither a Barbie doll detractor nor apologist.  Like most girls growing up in the 1960’s, I had a Barbie.  The only thing I ever learned from Barbie was how to mix and match outfits and accessorize them.  I never confused Barbie with reality. I was quite sure she came from an impossibly rich family while everyone I knew worked hard for a living. No one I knew even remotely resembled her physically, let alone possessed her extensive and glamorous wardrobe.  Nor did Barbie have a negative affect on my self-image. I never felt inadequate because I had no hope of looking like her, and once I outgrew her, I never gave Barbie a second thought. She was not a major factor in my emotional development.

But then, the technology to bombard my impressionable young psyche with sexual images and messages did not exist. I grew up in the age of black and white television, watching wholesome shows like Leave it to Beaver and The Brady Bunch. We had party line telephones, not smart phones. There was no such thing as social media where today’s marketing gurus have Barbie blogging and tweeting her “#unapolgetic” message that it is okay to be a model and wear a bikini. 

Of course it is okay; girls can and do model swimsuits - for catalogues like Sears, and other department stores that sell kids clothes.  They should not be posing in swimsuits for a sexy issue of a magazine for men, and those women who are old enough to do so are not playing with Barbie dolls, following her blog, or tuning into her tweets.  

The messaging says something quite different

The marketing of this Barbie, and not the look of the doll itself, bothers me. The marketing conveys and reinforces the idea that women are sex symbols. Playing to both the imagination of children and adults, the marketing campaign links a little girl’s doll to a magazine for middle-aged men devoted to provocative photos of scantily clad women.  

Company executives want us to think that Barbie’s association with successful SI swimsuit alumni celebrates women’s accomplishments as entrepreneurs, but in proclaiming Barbie as “the doll that started it all”, the messaging says something quite different; women are dolls, and in this case, dolls are playthings for men. It is a poor, if not disturbing, message for everyone.

The partnership of Barbie and SI Swimsuit has nothing to do with empowering choices for girls no matter how the executives spin it. It is, unapologetically, about making a profit for companies. And while there are those who think the campaign is clever and witty, in my view, it is unprincipled and sad.

Has York University turned back the clock on gender equality?

There has been a furor over York University's decision to grant a male student an exemption from an assignment that would have required him to work with female students. When the news broke, public reaction was swift and negative.  The incident points out the intense emotion that we bring to discussions when fundamental rights (in this case, the religious rights and the rights of women) come into conflict. Below is my recent newspaper column, also published online at Troy Media, on the topic.

Has York University turned back the clock on gender equality?

Has York University turned back the clock on gender equality?  Is the university’s decision to grant a male student an exemption from a group assignment that required him to work with female students a threat to the rights of women?   While I personally consider the student’s request offensive, I am not convinced that the level of criticism aimed at York University is entirely fair.

The background

Sometime in September, a male student who was enrolled in an on-line class requested an exemption from an on-campus group assignment on the basis that his religious beliefs prevented him from intermingling with women. The course professor, Paul Grayson, denied the request and forwarded it to the Dean and the university’s Center for Human Rights, expecting to receive a “principled statement” in support of his decision. Instead, the university instructed him to accommodate the student.  Grayson stuck to his guns, refused the exemption, and the student completed the assignment without any further fuss or bother. When the student’s request to the public’s attention in January, public opinion quickly came down against the university; there is a consensus that with this exemption the university is condoning sexism.

York's explanation

The university argues that it approved the request for an exemption not for religious reasons, but rather on the nature of an on-line course. In an interview with CBC radio’s Metro Morning, Rhonda Lenton, Provost at York University, explained the determining factor in making the decision: the course was advertised as an on-line course, and there was not an expectation that students would attend on-campus sessions. Had the course been an on-campus course, Lenton believes the university would have denied the student’s request.

A customer service problem

It seems to me that the university was trying to correct a customer service problem: the course was not delivered in the manner in which it was marketed, and the university wanted to remedy the problem.  One wonders, though, why the university did not make a straightforward refusal of the request for religious accommodation, and then deal with the requirements for an on-line course as a separate matter. Combining the two things has only confounded the issue.

The university’s explanation of its decision has had little effect, if any, on the debate which has pitted religious accommodation against women’s rights. How far should a public institution go to accommodate an individual’s religious beliefs when those beliefs conflict with a societal value?  There is no easy answer, although it seems reasonable to me that a public institution would opt to resolve this type of conflict between rights on the side of inclusivity. 

Emotions influence our reaction and opinion

The public reaction to the university’s handling of the student’s request for religious accommodation illustrates the tension that arises when fundamental rights are in competition.  It is not surprising that the university finds itself at the center of an emotionally charged controversy given the high degree of importance that Canadian society places on gender equality and that individuals place on religion. Surely, the university foresaw the public reaction, and could have handled the request differently.

While I think that the university made a misstep and ‘got it wrong’, I also think that some of the criticism leveled at York has been overblown.  Emotional rhetoric, such as evidenced in Federal Justice Minister Peter Mackay’s comment, “…we did not send soldiers to Afghanistan to protect the rights of women to only see those same rights eroded here at home”, serves no useful purpose in helping Canadian society sort out the thorny issue of religious accommodation; an issue that we can expect to encounter more frequently as Canadian society becomes more diverse.

I was initially appalled that a public university would countenance this student’s request to be excused from working with women.  And while I have modified my reaction somewhat based on the university’s explanation, I still find the request unpalatable. I shudder when anyone uses religion to marginalize women, or any group of people, for that matter, and I feel very strongly about gender equality. But, I disagree that given the reasons for this exemption, York University is eroding women’s rights in Canada and promoting sexism.

Hallmark is partially right about mothers

...I thought of my mother as springing into the world, fully formed, like Athena from the head of Zeus, ready for the action of being my mother.

This Mother's Day, I am enjoying a vacation in Sooke, BC on the west coast of Vancouver Island.  We are in a modern cottage on an expansive property overlooking the Strait of Juan de Fuca surrounded with beauty and quiet. The place is conducive to reflecting on blessings. My own mother  has been a blessing in my life, and I hope that I am a blessing to my children. I was also blessed in my relationship with my mother-in-law, my grandmother, and several aunts.  

Around Mother's Day, we tend to focus on the traits that we commonly associate with mothers; flowery cards abound extolling mothers for their gentleness, kindness, compassion, and lifetime support. One of the dangers of this Hallmark style of effusiveness is that we may reduce women to the biological role of child bearing and the sociological role of child rearing. While I am privileged to be a mother and am extraordinarily blessed in my children, motherhood is not the sum total of who I am, or of my contribution to the world.  

Springing fully formed, ready for action

I suspect that from an early age we quite naturally think that the primary role of a woman is to be a mother.  We literally begin life attached to our mother’s body, and in our immaturity, we think that our mother is an extension of our own self.

My mother and father 

I’m not sure when I first came to the realization that my mother had her own identity. For a good portion of my life, I thought of my mother as springing into the world, fully formed, like Athena from the head of Zeus, ready for the action of being my mother.  It just did not enter my head that my mother was once a little girl, skipping on the street; or a teenager, breaking loose from her own parents; or a young woman with dreams and aspirations for her future.

My mother's brown coat

If I were to design a Mother’s Day card, it would have two pictures: a mother in a brown, wool coat with the caption, “a generous mother”, and a mother in a navy coat with the caption, “and a talented woman”.

My mother had two such coats.  I remember the brown coat clearly. It had a beautiful fur collar and big round black buttons.  At the same time the brown coat made its way into her closet, a white faux fur coat appeared in mine.  I loved that coat; it was haute couture for a little girl, and I felt special and glamorous when I wore it.  It was a sad day when I outgrew it. I wonder if my mother felt a similar sense of sadness when she said good-bye to the brown coat.  You see, while I wore my coat for one season, my mother wore her coat for years.

The brown coat is fixed in my memory as a symbol of generosity. It never occurred to me that Mom went without so that her daughters could be well turned out.  But, it was even more than that. We enjoyed Mom’s lavish generosity on a daily basis, even if we failed to notice it. Material sacrifices, like wearing the brown coat winter after winter, meant nutritious food on the table, a roof over our heads, swimming and piano lessons, properly fitting clothes, and a university education.  With the gift of her time, she nurtured us and our dreams, while her own took a back seat. 

And her navy coat

Perhaps my mother did feel a touch of nostalgia when she got rid of her brown coat because that coat had seen us grow from children into young women. It had been with Mom through the busy years of raising four daughters and the lean years of building a business.  But more than likely, Mom was ready to put on her new navy coat as a symbolic welcome to the next phase of her life, a phase that gave her the freedom to explore new avenues of service to the community, to discover new talents, and to have some fun of her own along the way.

I have never asked Mom if she minded wearing that brown coat for so many years, but I am confident that she would look at me incredulously and reply, “No, why would I mind?”  And in that reply, lies the lavishness of a mother’s love and the generosity of a woman who graces the world with her particular talents apart from motherhood.

Much Ado About Nothing?

Chicago Blackhawks defenseman, Duncan Keith, made some snide comments to female reporter Karen Thomson following a 3-1 loss to the Vancouver Canucks. Don Cherry went on a rant about women in men's dressing rooms, and his colleague Ron McLean countered with an opinion on the CBC website.  

I have never personally understood why any reporter, male or female, needs to be in the locker room getting an "exclusive" interview with a player. Really, what earth shattering revelation hinges on how a team played or didn't play its game?  It's much ado about nothing. But, this latest sports controversy prompts the question, "What price do we put on respect? How highly do we value the dignity of each person?"

For my thoughts on this, please see "Locker room banter isn't always funny" from Troy Media.

Malala Yousafzai: Sharing in the prophetic task

Because she is a girl, she was shot in the head. 

Malala Yousafzai has become a household name since the Taliban attempted to assassinate her on October 9.  That day, as Malala and other girls rode home from school, Taliban gunmen boarded the canopied Toyota pick up truck that served as their bus.

Malala’s crime: her conviction that girls have a right to education. Her advocacy for the education of girls began in 2009, when the Taliban captured her town of Mingora in the Swat valley of Pakistan, and began a reign of terror. Eleven years old at the time, Malala wrote a blog for the BBC describing life under the Taliban. While Malala wrote anonymously under the pen name Gul Malek, which means “grief stricken”, it was only a matter of time before the Taliban discovered her identity. 

Since 2011, when she was awarded Pakistan’s National Peace Prize, and nominated for the International Children’s Peace Prize, the Taliban have been out to get Malala, who believes that education for girls is a human right, a means of reducing poverty, and a tool for peace. Not surprisingly, these accolades fail to impress the Taliban, and perhaps make them even more determined to harm Malala, whom they consider to be a “symbol of obscenity”, and “an advocate for the west”. They have said they will attack her again.

Malala has power over the Taliban

Even while she is wounded and recovering in a hospital bed far from home, Malala has power over these men. While she is at her weakest and most vulnerable, the strength of her convictions, her spiritual courage, and her ability to inspire others scare these men. Because of her courageous spirit that arises from her deep convictions, Malala has successfully inspired her community and  captured international attention. She epitomizes Ambrose Redmoon’s definition of courage; “courage is not the absence fear, but rather the judgment that something else is more important than fear.”

Malala’s courage is contagious. It empowers others. Despite her fears, Malala publicly expressed the grief of her community and persisted in her criticism of their oppressors.  In the words of Malala’s friend Kainat Riaz, who was also wounded in the attack, Malala gave them courage; “she made us powerful.”

As if to prove her point, Riaz has put herself at risk by telling the story of that fateful day. Armed guards are posted outside her home to protect her and her family. Everyday, she and other girls put themselves in harm’s way when they go to school. Since the assassination attempt the Pakistani Taliban has adopted the horrific practice of throwing acid in the faces of girls who continue to attend school.

A voice in the wilderness cries out for justice

The Taliban has presently silenced Malala, but her voice echoes in the courageous but less attention grabbing actions of others who daily challenge their oppressors. Her voice echoes in the determined footsteps of girls who continue to attend school, refusing to let the Taliban dictate their future. Her voice echoes in the fathers who respect their daughters’ desire to learn, and who still allow their daughters to attend school despite the risks. These fathers and daughters are everyday prophets who know that to do nothing in the face of oppression presents a greater risk. They are laying the foundations for change.

While the Taliban call Malala a symbol of obscenity, others call her a “symbol of resistance”, a “symbol of peace,” and a “voice in the wilderness”.  This last epithet strikes me as particularly apt.  It brings to mind Biblical prophets, like Moses, Isaiah, and John the Baptist.  These were not doom and gloom harbingers of an apocalypse. These were prophets who brought hope to communities that were oppressed with injustice.  They challenged the dominant culture, offered a different vision of the future and energized the people.

Malala is like these prophets. She discerns a reality that transcends her current personal and communal experience of suffering. She envisions a new future full of possibility.  She inspires others to work for change.

Every so often, someone exceptional like Malala appears as a leader in a community. While her prophetic imagination is linked with the culture and history of a specific situation, the call to be a prophet is universal. Each one of us shares the prophetic task of envisioning and building a more just world, where the dignity and rights of all people are honored. Each one of us has a responsibility to do our part so that justice flows like a mighty river, enriching the lives of all people, regardless of sex, race, or creed.

Read more on the courage of girls like Malala in this story from Kathy Gannon of the Associated Press.

See the petition to nominate Malala for the Nobel Peace Prize 

Some Biblical references for the requirement of justice:

Micah 6:8

You have been told, oh mortal, what is good
and what the Lord requires of you:
Only to do justice and to love goodness,
and to walk humbly with your God.

Amos 5: 22-24

 Even though you offer me your burnt offerings and grain offerings,

I will not accept them;

and the offerings of well-being of your fatted animals

I will not look upon.

 Take away from me the noise of your songs;

I will not listen to the melody of your harps.

 But let justice roll down like waters,

and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream.

Speaking about God

The almost exclusively female congregation had just finished singing, “Let there be peace”, when a friend turned to me and remarked that the Catholics had gone for gender-neutral language. The original words of the song, “with God as our Father, brothers are all are we/Let me walk with my brother” had been rewritten, “with God our creator, children all are we/Let me walk with my neighbour”.  “In my dreams,” was my first thought, but I responded with, “We prefer the term inclusive language.”

This exchange took place at the conclusion of this year’s World Day of Prayer, an ecumenical event that celebrates the determination and achievements of women around the world in overcoming poverty, oppression, and human rights abuses.  It was the turn of the Catholic women in my hometown to host the event, and they had opted for an inclusive language version of the closing song.
http://www.worlddayofprayer.net/

Their choice seemed appropriate to me for what has traditionally been a women’s event that gives voice to the many women worldwide who live with the unjust systems of patriarchy.  Male dominance and violence consistently figure in the lives of women everywhere.  The image of God as a benevolent male is contrary to the lived experience of many people, female and male alike.

Language shapes and reflects values

I was recently reminded of this encounter at the World Day of Prayer service while listening to a discussion on gender neutrality in Sweden. The discussion centered on language, and the use of one little word, “hen”.  The most recent edition of the Swedish online “National Encyclopedia” proposes replacing “han” (he) and “hon” (she) with the gender neutral pronoun “hen”.  Sweden, the most gender equal country in the world, would like to eliminate traditional gender stereotyping and roles, and views language as an effective tool to accomplish that goal.

The Swedish example and the example from the World Day of Prayer illustrate the ability of language to both shape and reflect the values of a society or a community. The power of language to express a specific worldview underlies the feminist push for gender-neutral or inclusive language when referring to God.

Androcentric language for God remains the norm

Since the 1980’s, the application of gender-neutral language to God has been a common practice in many seminaries, Bible colleges, and theological schools.  This practice is clearly not catching on very quickly; three decades later, most churches persist in referencing God as male in their worship and official documents.

Christianity has inherited centuries of androcentric language, language that is centered on and around men to the exclusion of women, to describe the ineffable God. While theologically God is spirit, possessing neither a male nor female form, linguistically God is typically described, and visually depicted, as male.

"Creation of Adam" Michaelangelo

The almost exclusive use of androcentric language to describe God, particularly in public worship, perpetuates the stereotype of male superiority, implies that women are subordinate, and that male dominance is divinely ordained. The persistent metaphor of God as a ruling (usually white) male legitimizes social systems that glorify men, exclude women, exploit the marginalized, contribute to racism, and justify environmental degradation.  These are the very same social systems that many churches recognize as sinful, and seek to transform through acts of social justice.

Balance androcentric language with feminine images of God

The language of public worship, if it cannot be gender-neutral, should at least aim to be more inclusive.  Specifically masculine language can be balanced with Biblical images of God as mother, wisdom, and spirit.

"Sophia, Godess of Wisdom" by Pamela Matthews

A priest visiting my parish on Mother’s Day provided a good example of this.  He opened his homily with a description of God as a mother’s love.  He used an image from the Hebrew bible to speak of the unconditional, everlasting love that God, like a mother, has for each one of us.  For me, his homily functioned as a counterpoint to all the prayers that followed which referenced God as “he”.

There are many images of God as female, and as part of the natural world, that can be incorporated into worship. Incorporating some of these images more systematically into our speaking about God might just change the way we think. And therein lies the rub. Long held beliefs about the very structures of society, both religious and secular, will come under scrutiny and may be found wanting. 

Two sides of the same coin

As the Swedish drive for gender-neutral language indicates, linguistic change and structural change are two sides of the same coin.  Religions that speak about transforming unjust systems need to take a hard look at their language for God. In my view, it is time to stop making God into the image of men. 

Recommended post on "Biblical Maternal Images for God"

http://3dchristianity.wordpress.com/2011/05/06/biblical-maternal-images-for-god/

For more on inclusive language see  Isabella Moyers blog, Catholic Dialogue, http://catholicdialogue.com/2012/05/28/pondering-inclusive-language/