In Praise of Doubt

I just finished a book called "In Praise of Doubt: How to Have Convictions Without Becoming a Fanatic" by Peter Berger and Anton Zijderveld. I had first heard of this book when I heard Berger on the Public Radio program "Speaking of Faith" in the fall, and then I hear him speak at the National Cathedral's Sunday forum a few weeks ago.

I knew from the very first minute that this book might very much "speak my mind" and know that I've finished it, I know this is so. I can also say that I suspect there is much in these pages that could benefit the Religious Society of Friends.

Increasingly, I am seeing myself as a 'bridge-builder'. Going back to my "coming out" days, when the conservative/military side of my family stunned me by being the only part of the family to unconditionally accept me, and continuing through my days of working with evangelical Christians on HIV and subsequently gay issues, and now in DC building bridges across the economic and geographic parts of this city, I see that this is something that, while not always easy or successful, comes natural. What I am clear about, however, is that I am not wishy-washy on issues. I am convinced that we need to have a cleaner environment, a less-consumer/greed driven society, and more equal footing from which all people start this journey of life. I also know that most people have the same basic values I have, but they may have different ideas of how to get there, where authority lies, who should call the shots, etc.

I am also convinced of this: no matter what a person believes, his/her intentions are good, he/she is intelligent, and love is some part of the equation. To be sure, there are fanatics, as Berger and Zijderveld write. "Fanatics" are those extremists who exist at the ends of any spectrum, and are convinced that their world view and their way is the only right way and, often, those who don't see it their way are clueless, amoral, unChristian, unAmerican, or some other demonized being. I try to not let that be me. I have run into my fair share of fanatics - both left and right - and what I find is that there is little room for dialogue, so really there is not much to be said, even though they, too, are often motivated by love (usually with a mix of fear and power). It is between the margins that I am convinced that the real possibility for transformation exists, for creating a more peaceful and just world.

In our modern society, it seems that we could use more civility as we deal with the problems that face us. No matter what the issue, leaders of the causes of these issues tend to push a "with us/against us" paradigm. For Quakers, this creates a dilemma: are we going to choose sides on issues, or are we going to try and bring greater civility (peace) to the discussion by committing to see the "others" perspective? To what extent do we achieve our aims by making the other "wrong", vs. being open to possibly being wrong ourselves? In a pluralist society, these are inherent challenges, and I truly believe that it is the Peace congregations and pacifists who could really take up this mantel of finding common ground. It is going to take a disciplined life, but it is something we can do. "In Praise of Doubt", similar to another book called "Blind Spots: Why Smart People Do Dumb Things", are great resources for grounding us in this without sacrificing what we believe.

As a tangent: "In Praise of Doubt" also raised a question of how we reactively respond to and adopt understanding of things without thinking more deeply. An example of this was in the discussion of liberalism, conservatism and socialism as the 3 points of the "democratic" triangle. Taken to extremes, liberalism goes to absolutist understanding of the market (libertarian), socialism goes toward a totalitarian control of institutions, and conservatism is a reactionary project of going back to some traditional sense of society. As moderating forces (basically bringing the best of each together), conservatism glorifies civil society (in modern day this means a democratic state and market economy), whereas liberalism and socialism understand the limits of both state (socialism) and market (liberalism). This understanding of liberalism is not one I had heard, but does raise the question: what do we really mean when we use the terms "liberal" and "conservative" to either define ourselves or the other?

The De-Institutionalization of HIV/AIDS

Part 1

1996 was a critical year. I had dealt with my own personal crisis of finding out in 1992 I had fairly advanced HIV (my t-cells were around 200 at initial diagnosis). I had come to grips that the "fact" that I would most likely not see my 40th birthday in 2001. I had finally gotten a full-time job working in HIV/AIDS services after spending a few years volunteering in various capacities while biding my time in more arduous social service jobs. I was going to be doing counseling at a holistic health clinic for people with HIV/AIDS. I had also been a client at this clinic. The pay was not great, but I didn’t care. I was doing something fulfilling – providing support for people who were on a fast-track to death, as I was. As a group (as people living with HIV, and as organizations committed to supporting people with HIV), we were resigned to a fate where HIV=death. Just two years before, the news about HIV-treatment was not good. Treatments were minimally effective and highly toxic. Weekly gay newspapers were full of obituaries of young men. Increasingly at this clinic, the demographic of clients also included people of color, especially black women. It was a real community of love for those of us who had only that to hold onto.

Then, the world changed. Protease Inhibitors were introduced, and I remember one of my first thoughts was “Uh, Oh”. If these new medications were as good as promised, the landscape had just dramatically shifted. I remember running support groups, and seeing people almost magically becoming healthy – in one case literally rising from his wheelchair. Andrew Sullivan, senior editor for The New Republic at that time, wrote a cover story for the New York Times Magazine called “When Plagues End”. He observed how skeptics were challenged to hold on to their skepticism in the face of such news, and how the big shift was that AIDS was no longer a death sentence, but a chronic condition (the entire article can be seen on-line at http://www.nytimes.com/1996/11/10/magazine/when-plagues-end.html?pagewanted=1). Sullivan took a beating over time from the skeptics. He was proved wrong, as AIDS remained a permanent fixture in the world. But was he really wrong? I think he was right, but he underestimated the power of the skeptics – many of whom had a career investment in him being wrong.

"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket” - Pat Buchanan, May 2008

So here we are, 2010. HIV is still vibrantly with us. We stand on the verge of another turning point. This time, the turning point is funds are drying up for treatment, and waiting lists are starting to emerge and grow. Despite advancements in treatment and testing technology, and significant advancements in communications (cell-phones, internet, texting, social networking), we continue to lose. But, despite the pleas that are heard for more money, none of this is a crisis. It is the course we have been on and as a society – a global society – we have no one to blame for this but ourselves. To be sure, “AIDS, Inc” has done little to encourage us to truly be different, or to seriously think about what should be done. From the beginning of the pandemic to the present day, we have not been encouraged to be reflective, only reactive and to obey the orders of the Institutions of AIDS. These include:
• “Spend it or lose it” policies that have resulted in keeping case loads full (this is not simply a problem is AIDS services, but of our whole sick-care approach). Since 2000, the real message should have been “Spend it and lose it, so spend wisely”.
• AIDS = poverty, women and children in Africa. This is a favorite among the evangelical world, as many can deny that HIV is primarily a sexually-transmitted disease. Thanks, Bono, for that one.
• Advocacy groups hold workshops (often made up of a mix of energized college students, people living with HIV), and immerse them in information about what to say and what to do. I even heard at one such training that people receiving HIV-services were actually told not to mention any complaints he/she might have about services. The message is never about systemic change, just money.
• Countless people talk about HIV/AIDS in countless arenas without covering and in many cases even knowing the basic (such as the four body fluids that can spread HIV).
• The Gay/HIV organizations do not speak at all to the fact that anal sex is the easiest means of sexually transmitting HIV. This is not a judgment, just a fact.
• More money, but maintain the cultural status quo.
• When it comes to HIV-testing, you have nothing to fear but you really NEED Counseling. The kicker is that the training to be a counselor is only three days, certainly not enough time if giving one an HIV+ diagnosis is so devastating.

On the surface, these all may make sense. But upon reflection, they are not going to get the job done or, more accurately, based on where we are now, they certainly haven’t gotten the job done. Given that state and national governments throughout the world are simply running out of funds (in Illinois, for example, the entire annual state budget is going to be spent by the end of the 6th month), we are once again at a turning point.

Crisis – a crucial or decisive point or situation; a turning point; a stage in a sequence of events at which the trend of all future events, esp. for better or for worse, is determined.

This time, the turning point is not the result of a new condition such as when HIV first emerged. The word “crisis” will be thrown about as if this was unforeseen, but this turning point has been long-coming, ever since “AIDS, Inc.” (this encompasses not just organizations, but the collective groupthink that pervades much of our global community) did not make the adjustments necessary after the second HIV/AIDS crisis – the introduction of protease inhibitors as effective treatment. That was a major turning point that, partnered with technology that allows for all people to self-administer an HIV-test (but remains unavailable to the general public) should have greatly altered our course. Unfortunately, despite so many accolades to people like Bush, Bono, Gates, Clinton, and the countless local, regional and global people and organizations who have played along, we have remained on the same course of chasing the virus – always remaining a few years behind.

What we need to do now is to take time to reflect while also taking action. In a very uncomfortable way, the current financial crisis may make this work easier. In his most recent book In Praise of Doubt, sociologist Peter Berger and philosopher Anton Zijderveld write that “a society’s taken-for-granted programs of action are called ‘institutions’…Individuals follow the institutional programs automatically, without having to stop and reflect” (pg. 15). Many of these institutions – public and private – are drastically reducing and eliminating programs, with more to come. But rather than fall into chaos, I would like to propose that through reflection – not lengthy reflection, but a few minutes of reflection – we can see that we have many choices at our finger tips and that, through these choices, we may actually be able to do some things more effectively. Our collective pluralist voices, rather than the singular voice of institutions, might be our saving grace.

Over the next few weeks, I will be writing some reflective pieces on what the institutional approaches have done and trained us to believe, and how we can help de-institutionalize some of the tasks and explore and create new ways of moving forward. There are no quick fixes, or easy answers. But we can do much to avoid the chaos as we come together.

Enough with Urgent Calls for the Status Quo

Over the past week, AIDS organizations and workers around the world have been experiencing wake-up calls. Out of Uganda was the article in The Wall Street Journal that the rate of people getting tested is slowing down because treatment programs are less available and, without that incentive, what’s the point of getting tested? In Washington DC, GOP House members are calling for a more thorough vetting of federal dollars spent on AIDS programs in the District in light of the report in the Washington Post last fall about waste and corruption. No doubt, these House members are looking to score political points, and shame on Democrats for not also calling for greater program accountability thus allowing this to degrade into another partisan issue. The predictable reaction among AIDS advocates in DC has been silence or added layers of blame and denial, stating that the corruption occurred under the Bush Administration (forgetting the fact that the Bush Administration did not commit the corrupt acts, at least in this case). Then, this morning I received an e-mail from the AIDS Foundation of Chicago about the Illinois fiscal crisis. The writer of the e-mail stated that this is “the most serious state fiscal crisis (he has) seen in … 12 years”. You would think that all of these, clearly illustrating that the challenges are not restricted to any one area, would lead to urgent calls for community action. They are all indications that we are on a slippery slope to losing many of the gains that had been made in the fight against AIDS, and perhaps it is time to shake everything up so we can get back on a positive trajectory. But no. Instead, the calls to action are to sign petitions and lobby to get more dollars back into the same system.

Personally, I cannot get excited about any of this. Waste and corruption has been rampant in AIDS work for well-over a decade pretty much throughout the world as organizations have stubbornly refused to commit to getting ahead of the HIV-curve. For almost a decade now, I have been convinced that a vital piece to stopping the spread of HIV is that everyone – E-V-E-R-Y-O-N-E – knows his/her status through testing. The constant message I have said is that testing includes education and compassion, and that this is a community responsibility, not a government-funded program. Routinely, people have responded by twisting and contorting almost everything in order to keep HIV-testing and education the purview of “AIDS Inc.”, with comments like people can’t be trusted to do this right, or people will find out they are positive and then kill themselves. Data does not support this, but the very same people that demand factual, proven-effective education create myths about testing with no facts to back them up and no desire to test the theories.

I have seen the waste first-hand. I have not seen, perhaps, the blatant corruption of stealing and pilfering as has been reported in places such as Washington, DC, but I was not surprised by it, either. I have seen the corruption of greed and the waste of unnecessary expenditures, “needs assessments” and other kinds of delay-tactics that take time and money but by the time they lead to action, we are even further behind the curve. Some examples:
• Executive Directors blithely saying they only come to “partnership” meetings because they get money from the partnership and not being challenged to really collaborate.
• I have been recruited to be a participant in HIV-education presentations in order to meet a monthly funding quota, not because I needed the education.
• In the mid-1990’s, I was kept as an active caseload while not receiving any services, effectively being a statistic for funding.
• When I ran an AIDS Housing organization, the greatest pressure was to keep the apartments full regardless of whether the prospective resident was appropriate for that kind of housing. I resisted often. During this same time, many residents received travel vouchers to get cab rides for MD appointments at over $100 roundtrip. Public transportation could do it for under $15. Clients were given this independent of any physical-needs consideration; it was simply because the funds were available.
• One year in Kenya, I was told by a British worker that the US dollars are plentiful, but not very effective if spending must be done by the guidelines (Abstinence-only education), as they do not meet the community’s reality.
• I co-chaired a housing needs assessment in Chicago from 2000 to 2002. Despite my concerns about the waste of time and money put into the process (including bringing in out-of-state consultants), the project went on. The report provided no new information. The ultimate was this: the overwhelming majority of people with HIV/AIDS did not want AIDS-segregated housing. This was ignored because an AIDS housing organization had already made plans to build one. The ground had not been broken yet, but they proceeded anyway.
• As funding started to decrease, already-funded programs were forced to collaborate more. Prospective applications for grants are now often restricted to previously-funded programs, thereby decreasing the opportunities for truly innovative new ideas to emerge.
• Most recently, I have been participating on a committee to develop community-wide test and treat programs (under the purview of NIH and CDC). It is an expensive proposition that does not alter the current system at all, relying on even more funds in the future to be successful.

Throughout much of the 1990’s and into the new century, the mantra was “spend it or lose it”. I remember thinking to myself that the day will come when it will be “spend it AND lose it”. I always felt strongly that it is better to spend wisely and return funds if necessary rather than foster dependency on an impermanent system. It seems like that day has finally come. Sadly, what seems inevitable is that people all over the world – including in Illinois – with HIV are going to increasingly not be able to access funded treatment programs, HIV-prevention programs are going to be reaching less people, and HIV-testing will be increasingly limited to the highest-risk groups, always the most difficult to cherry-pick out of the fabric of society.

Instead of any innovative calls for community action, we are left with the same players putting out calls for people to advocate for the government to come up with more funds for these very same systems that, when the money was flowing, had no qualms about spending wildly and often unnecessarily. From city halls, to state capitals, to Washington, DC, people are converging (at no cheap cost) to learn how to lobby for dollars for the status-quo system both here in the US and in Africa, and they will be lobbying to systems that are flat broke and not going to be sympathetic.

If our AIDS leaders can come up with nothing better than “we need more dollars”, I say “enough”. It's been over two decades since AIDS, Inc. has come up with anything new or innovative, despite the fact that technological development now offers effective treatments, and we have the capacity to self-administer HIV-screening with results in 5 minutes. It’s been 8 years since I met with Senator Durbin and asked him to help us lead a campaign to have every resident in Illinois know his/her status. His response: “We can’t afford to do that”. I said at the time, "we can't afford not to do it", and every day, the cost goes up. Since then, I’ve kept to the same message – a message that the CDC now says is vital to stopping the spread of HIV. I know people get tired of hearing it but, just as over the past week many of us got tired of shoveling snow, the task remains, and won’t go away simply because we are tired of it or hearing about it. It will only go away when we take action. It is a simple fact – when we all know our status, our collective education as a society will rise dramatically, and as individuals armed with this education, we can be effective agents for taking this forward. The technology exists that we could do this on the cheap. We just need to change the policies around disbursement of self-administered HIV-screening and stop scaring people with the belief that they need "AIDS, Inc." to survive, and we can start moving.

So, until these urgent calls for action and demands for more funds start to include a strong message for community action to get everyone to know his or her status, and include as a part of their gatherings opportunities for people to learn how to administer and talk to people about these tests, I’m out. Enough chasing the virus. Too much money has been wasted, and too much time has passed. It’s time for the current system to collapse, and let something else emerge.

Recent Lessons in Humility

“The life that intends to be wholly obedient, wholly submissive, wholly listening, is astonishing in its completeness. Its joys are ravishing, its peace profound, its humility the deepest, its power world-shaking, its love enveloping, its simplicity that of a trusting child.” - Thomas Kelley

“What does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” - Micah 6:8

During the past week, I have thought a lot about humility and what it means, because in the last week, several friends have canceled prearranged plans due to either snow or personal emergencies. None of this has bothered me. Life happens, yeah some of the plan changes threw off my schedule a little, but all of the cancellations actually gave me more time to breathe, so they were gifts in disguise.

One friend has repeatedly apologized for her not showing up at an event that we planned together. She had let me know before the event, so I knew about it as soon as she knew she couldn't make it. I have been in her shoes several times feeling like I have let people down when stuff happen to me. But life happens no matter if my calendar had something else planned.

Then this past weekend, a major snowstorm hit DC hard. It snowed straight for more than 24 hours and dumped more than two feet of snow. I was supposed to attend a retreat this weekend, but it was canceled the day before due to the weather forecast. One of the organizers was upset at this; a feeling which I totally understand. Similar things have happen to me and I have felt that same feeling of being upset that I just spent so much time planning something that will never happen and I have felt defeated like I had spent all that time for nothing.

Now I see all of these times during the past week and beyond as ways to keep myself humble, because it just reminds me that no matter how much I plan or try to control my life, something bigger than me is always in control. I believe that God has plans for me and God will reveal them to me little by little. Living on God's time is not easy and being humble is not always simple. It requires putting aside my ego and fully submitting to a greater power. When I have, amazing things have happen, like finding my dream job. Thomas Kelly's quote resonates with my few experiences when I obeyed and submitted. I have felt more alive during these times, because I had been fully present during these times.

Part of the weekend, I was unexpectedly snowed in at a friend's house a couple miles away. I had wanted to weather the storm in my house where I had stocked up on food, but the snow came down faster than I had thought and I was stuck. That night, as I was snowed in, I watched the Bill Maher's documentary, Religulous that my friends had from Netflix. For much of the film, he mocks organized religion. Several times he asks hard questions and the interviewee cannot answer, such as Couldn't the writers of The Bible made everything up? He uses this as proof that organized religion is a clutch for the week-minded.

As I watched the film, I felt like I had no answers to many of the questions he asked. I started to think, maybe I am weak in my faith and Bill has a good point. But I realized faith isn't about answering questions, but about believing in something far greater than myself. I have known God experientially, not through answering questions.

Part of humility for me is knowing that I do not always have quick and ready answers to questions about my faith and I should not pretend that I do. I continue to ask myself many hard questions daily: Was it in God's plans to have a snow storm this weekend or does God control the weather really? Or why did the earthquake hit Haiti and kill 100,000 people while I am living safely in a warm house in the richest country with a nice job? Are these events really part of God's plans? Like I said before, I do not know any answers to these hard questions and I won't attempt to answer these questions, but what I do know is that I have felt God working in my life before and I know that God is still working in my life, so I will continue everyday trying, as Micah suggested thousands years ago, 'to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God'.

When was the last time we tackled a major problem?

This past Sunday in The New York Times, Frank Rich wrote a column called “The State of the Union is Comatose”. He cited historian Alan Brinkley’s observation “that we will soon enter the fourth decade in which Congress — and therefore government as a whole — has failed to deal with any major national problem, from infrastructure to education.” This statement really jarred me, and has me thinking that it’s not just government that has failed to deal with any major national problem in a proactive manner, its our whole society.

I have been spending the past few months working with colleagues at William Penn House and Washington Quaker Workcamps on ways to move Workcamps into the 21st century. In doing this, I have been doing some reading about the history of Quaker Workcamps and Service Learning. The origins of both of these can be traced back to the early 1900’s, and both grew out of the pacifist movement. At the time, given the new technologies of transportation and communication (as well as of warfare), they were very innovative. But now, a century later we continue to experience wars, environmental and economic violence and injustice that include poverty, hunger, homelessness, and preventable disease.

At the same time, I have been continuing my efforts to being a part of stopping the spread of HIV. This week has been interesting on this front as well. There was an article in the Wall Street Journal last week about the pace of funding for HIV-treatment in Africa is falling far behind the needs. In Illinois, the word has come down that prevention programs are being eliminated so that current dollars can be allocated to treatment programs. I have continued to be a part of a consulting group for the CDC and NIH to develop protocols for community-wide test-and-treat of HIV, and continue to be amazed at the slow pace of implementation as HIV enters, ironically, its 4th decade as well. Meanwhile, waiting lists are starting to emerge for treatment.

Meanwhile, the earthquake in Haiti has awakened the general public to the fact that there is this poor nation with a history of corruption and neglect in our hemisphere of the world. As we have seen with tsunamis, AIDS, and hurricanes, these events are not what seem to shock us, but the devastation these things have on the poor that really wake us up. In general, this is where Workcamps and many Service Learning programs, as well as faith –based mission trips, tend to go – places where the devastation is clear, and there are some quick fixes that require short-term sacrifices, but not transformative changes in how one lives his/her life. They have the potential to ingrain in people that we should always be chasing the devastation, not doing the hard work to minimize the harm of the next one – whether it is disease prevention, or addressing the despair and injustices that are the fertile ground for natural and man-made disasters to do their worst.

The big question I have with all of this rattling around the brain is: when was the last time social services/social justice movements have tackled anything new or tackled things in new, innovative ways. We for the most part have become a society that works at the margins – we will rise somewhat to the occasion when people have been devastated by a disaster, and we will advocate/blame the government for doing the rest (such as not giving enough money). These are just tweaking the societal system that needs a major overhaul. If ever there were a wake-up call for community action that is responsibility-driven, it is now. But I think the harsh reality is that social services has become an industrial complex as much as the military has, and we have become too complacent and dependent on these institutions to do our work. How else to explain that people cannot fathom spending $10 for an HIV-test as part of a “greater good” effort.

No doubt that technological advances have carried their weight. We have cars that are lighter, get more miles per gallon than ever. We have communication systems that make connecting easier than ever. We have had advances in medical testing and treatment. Unfortunately we often use these technologies to make our life easier and more of the same. When was the last time you heard someone talk about how their hybrid car has made them more conscious about driving, and they are actually driving less and walking more?

Another reality is that I am not sure Workcamps/Service Learning has had a new, innovative idea to breaking the cycles of violence and injustice. But with a century of being under our belts, perhaps it’s time; in fact, there is no better time than now. We have the means to connect with others, to share ideas, and to have voices heard far more than ever before. I know that here at William Penn House, and in conversations with folks in the community, we have started to really consider what this might look like, including that service is much more than physical labor; it’s community-building in a way that the health of the community comes before the needs of the individual, and is accomplished with community members as equal partners, not volunteers/recipients.

I can say the same for HIV/AIDS services: outside of technological advances, when was the last innovative thing created? The same funding boxes for the most part are there, and there is an institutional rigidity to maintain turf. But with the cuts in prevention, all of a sudden we in the community are going to need to step up. AIDS organizations will inevitably say we need to advocate for more dollars: I’m not so sure. I think we need to stop advocating so much, and start doing more. I also think that some of the basic testimonies of Quakerism can help lead the way, if we can only get the institutions out of our way.

Are we going to lose the fight against HIV?

It was with sadness and disappointment, but not surprise, to read the Wall Street Journal article published January 30 titled “War on AIDS Hangs in Balance as U.S. Curbs Help for Africa”. The gist of the article is this: “Seven years after the U.S. launched its widely hailed program to fight AIDS in the developing world, the battle is reaching a critical turning point. The growth in U.S. funding, which underwrites nearly half the world's AIDS relief, has slowed dramatically. At the same time, the number of people requiring treatment has skyrocketed.” The article goes on to point out that the global effort to prevent new infections has suffered some reversals due to a combination of factors such as complacency because of effective treatments, abstinence-only education, and testing that continues to suffer from the oppressive burdens of prejudice and homophobia.

As I sit and write this, it is a quiet Sunday afternoon and I am reflecting on, among other things:
• The radio program presently airing about being gay in Africa (in Namibia in particular), and how policies that outlaw homosexuality devastate HIV-prevention efforts. American Family Association radio host here in the US also thinks gays should be put in prison.
• The sermon at the National Cathedral this morning that talked about how Love, not our love, but God’s Love, is everywhere
• The Sunday forum at the Cathedral, with Congressman Tom Perriello (D-VA) talking about faith and politics. He mentioned how the financial bailout rewarded failure, and it had me thinking that when huge dollars are given to the big players in HIV/AIDS work (“AIDS, Inc”), are we not doing the same thing?
• In 2003, I pitched the idea to Senator Durbin that Illinois be the first state in the country to commit to getting all residents tested as part of the effort to get ahead of the HIV-transmission curve. He said “we can’t afford to do that”.
• This Wall Street Journal article, while certainly ringing an alarm that we all need to pay attention to, also perpetuates the misconception that “global HIV” is “Africa-only”. We are starting to see waiting lists for HIV-treatment in this country. If we cannot offer people who test positive some treatment options, we have lost a major selling point for testing. This is not an African truth, it’s a global truth that exists here as well.
• The two written comments to the WSj article include these comments: “This is a classic case of trying to fix problems in a retarded society using modern technology…AIDS isn’t the problem, it’s only one of the many symptoms…Until a people decide they want to join civilization, no amount of money will save them…” and “maybe what we are seeing is nature (gods) way of population control?”. Gotta love the compassion of ethno-centric Americans.

The nice thing about blogs vs. publications is that there is wiggle-room for venting, and that’s what the combination of the above drives me to. Are there no adults anywhere that can sit people down and say, ok, let’s be serious here: this is a deadly disease that is very treatable, preventable not curable, costly to treat, and the sooner we contain it, the cheaper the collective treatment costs will be. I’m not a public health expert, theologist, politician, financial whiz, prophet etc, but it just seems increasingly clear to me that we are a society that is trying to tinker with a system that needs a major overhaul. HIV/AIDS is both an example of this in action and an opportunity to learn what it takes to make a major overhaul. Funny thing is that this overhaul is not one of bricks and mortar, but of mindset. The image that comes to mind of our current state is this: the best mechanics in the world have been asked to work on the engine of an old car. They are all looking at the parts of the engine, talking about a new air filter, an oil change, perhaps some spark plugs. Then a kid walks by and points out to them that the car has rust, torn seats, no tires, smashed trunk, broken windows, and is basically beyond repair. By focusing on the engine, they did not see the big picture. That’s what we seem to have with HIV/AIDS work; no one in a position of authority seems to be willing to connect the dots. For example:
• The need for treatment will go up no matter what we do. Ideally, if we can quickly implement community-wide, compassionate, non-judgmental HIV-testing, the need will spike dramatically as we quickly decrease the collective “undiagnosed”, and then the needs for testing and will decrease over time. Under the current testing system, however, that tries to “cherry-pick” the most at-risk from society (basically the approach of the last 30 years), we will stay on the same course of ever-increasing needs for treatment.
• We cannot effectively stop the spread by saying everyone should be tested, and then focus on “them”.
• It is not possible to encourage the openness needed to have everyone know their status while condemning and judging the people most at-risk.

I could go on, and have for years. The point is, this WSJ article should be our wake-up call. I remember saying to a friend in Wheaton, IL, perhaps 4 years ago that the reason we were so insistent on community-wide testing in Wheaton is that’s where we were, we have to start where we are, and if we can’t do it here, is it realistic to expect places like Africa to take the lead? Most importantly, I felt then that if we do not implement a program like this locally, regionally, nationally, and internationally, we will see HIV become worse. I fear that that day has now come. We humans think we are so smart, but this simple virus has exposed a dark side of us that we need to overcome: greedy, arrogant, judgmental, afraid, and very short-sighted.

What I Did During the State of the Union Address

While President Obama started his first State of Union address last night, about 100 volunteers and I were gathering at the United Planning Office (UPO) to go out in teams for the Point in Time census to count the number of people sleeping on the DC streets. Even though we were only two miles away from where the President was speaking, I felt like I was a lot farther away and in many respects, I was.

As I started out on the census with another volunteer, I saw President Obama speaking on many TVs as I walked around a nearby neighborhood. As I saw him speaking on TV, I wondered if he would mention homelessness once in his speech, but I found out later that he didn't and I wasn't surprised. This year alone, according to National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, three million people will experience some kind of homelessness, whether it is sleeping on a friend's couch after an eviction for a couple days or a prolonged period of homelessness.

The topic of homelessness has been on my mind constantly for a couple weeks, after I decided to volunteer for this census. In between signing up and last night, a fellow Quaker brought to my attention an article in Street Sense, a publication by homeless advocates, about violence on homeless people by other homeless people and made the point that the homeless are not always innocent victims.

I already knew this from my own personal experience. Once several years ago, in Chicago, two homeless men accosted me as I was walking around downtown and I had escaped by walking frantically into a nearby store. Also during the past two years in my job as a coordinator of a service learning program, I have heard about numerous people speak about their experiences being homeless. I have heard stories of drug/alcohol abuse, depression, and health issues as causes of chronic homelessness.

Just because someone isn't entirely innocent of the situation they are in, does that mean we shouldn't help? But is that really an issue: Their innocence? They need help. No one is really benefiting from people sleeping on the streets. When a natural disaster or a fire hit, does the Red Cross not help people who didn't have any insurance?

I have done several risky things in my life that could have easily led me to be homeless, like moving to an unfamiliar city with no job prospects, passing up good paying jobs in the hope of a better job opportunity, and spending money that I don't have by using my credit card. But I have always been lucky to have a bed to sleep on and food to eat, because I have a strong support net and a family and many friends who loves me unconditionally. Every time I messed up, I knew I had a fallback plan. For many people who experience homelessness, they don't usually have that kind of support net, like Joe, who I met last night.

My volunteer partner and I encountered Joe outside a pharmacy panhandling. He was reluctant to admit that he was homeless. As he was telling his story, he told about his mother, who told him constantly that he wouldn't amount to anything. In contrast to my life, where each time I messed up, my parents were there to encourage me to try again and not give up. I know that there are stories of people who grow up fine with messed up parents, but there are still a lot of stories, like Joe. When the budget gets cut, social services to help people get off the streets are usually the first ones to go, not salaries of elected officials or the military budget. For example, here in Washington DC, people rallied together to save potential budget cuts to social services in order to save vital programs that help the homeless and low income people from becoming homeless.

Obama's theme last night was about how America needs to move forward together to build a better economy. As we work towards that goal, we need to see how as a community we can better meet the needs of the most vulnerable in our midst, instead of just continuing to turn a blind eye to them.


PS: Point in Time Surveys happen all over the United States during late January. Check with your local social services if you are interested in volunteering in your community.