The Parable of the Three Sons (as told by my mother)

Growing up, my mother told me a parable in order to illustrate the importance of not hoarding

money. She taught me that hoarding your money is the greatest sin.*

A father gave each of his three sons equal portions of money and sent them off into the world. The first son invested his money; the second son spent his money; and the third son buried his money in ground. Some time later the father called his sons together and asked about the status of the gift he had given them. The first son proudly reported that through wise investing, he had increased his initial amount. The father was incredibly proud of his son and told him so. The second son hung his head and told his father that he had spent the entirety of the gift. The father explained that he was also proud of him because he had spent the money and therefore helped the economy. The infusion of capital into the market helped the overall well being of their country and countrymen. The third son was pleased to report that he had the same amount that he was originally given. The father asked how this was possible and the son explained he had buried it. The father was gravely disappointed in his son and the son did not understand. The father explained that the first son had invested the money, which helps the economy of their country, and the second son spent the money, which also helps the economy, but he had buried his money which helps no one. The father explained that hoarding money and not aiding in the growth of the overall economy of his community is the greatest sin of all.

*It turns out that her parable is loosely based on the Parable of Three Servants found in both Matthew and Luke but hers has a different twist.

His Holiness the Dalai Lama to visit Emory this October

Why I support The Visit 2013 and why you should too.

For those of you who are Facebook friends with me, you may or may not have seen my posts on the Dalai Lama visiting Emory this October. I am on the Development Committee for this visit, which benefits The Emory Tibet Science Initiative. My mother's foundation supports this cause because of its focus on uniting science and religion. Among their goals is creating open dialogue between science and religion in the hopes of "bridging two worlds for one common humanity". They accomplish this by an exchange program between Emory students (who study in Dharmasala, India) and Tibetan Buddhist monks (who come to Emory to study), translating science texts into Tibetan, and developing cognitively based compassion training. The later is ground breaking and will allow for the scientific study (replicable) of meditation in many contexts. It also puts it into a format that can be taught in many contexts such as in schools or to battered and abused women/children. To learn more about it: http://www.tibet.emory.edu/cbct/index.html.

When the Dalai Lama visited three years ago, I arranged for an Endowment Level gift and was given unbelievable access to His Holiness (including a private lunch with HHDL, Richard Gere, and 20 other people). This year's visit will focus on secular ethics in the context of our citizenship in the 21st century Global Village.

Please consider visiting Atlanta and sharing in this life changing experience with me this October! If you are unable to make it, please consider making a donation to this remarkable project and spreading the word about this opportunity.
http://www.dalailama.emory.edu/
http://www.dalailama.emory.edu/support/index.html

With love and light,
Allegra

An Ethic of Responsibility: The Estate Tax Debate

There are some that believe that we should sell our possessions and become homeless ourselves; Jesus himself calls for us to sell our possessions and follow him (Mk 10:21; Lk 12:33; 18:22; Mt 19:21) but I know that money equates to power and the ability to be heard within society. Chuck Collins is an example of one that takes the ethic of responsibility further than I feel comfortable with, yet he was able to maintain his power, voice, and influence.

Chuck Collins, the great-grandson of Oscar Mayer and a Unitarian Universalist, at the ripe age of 26 gave the entirety of his birthright “to foundations and groups that he knew needed funding”[1] believing it to be an important step on his journey towards creating a more just society. An article from 2003 covers his defense of the Estate Tax by starting with his early life experience, the source of his authority. Discussing his early life experience working in disadvantaged communities, such as Appalachia, we see how Collins arrived at the decision to give away his inheritance. Collins is a “radical meritocratist”[2], operating out of a responsibility ethic, who believes that each generation should start out fresh instead of inheritance allowing those of less quality to end up in positions of power based solely on the merits of their forefathers.

Torn over boycotting Chick-fil-A

I love the country we live in. I love the fact that my right to decent from the popular opinion is supported in our Constitution. I love that fact that I am able to vote with the power of my dollar by supporting organizations that I agree with philosophically. I also appreciate the fact that even those I disagree with are also able to vote with their dollar and support organizations they believe in. For example: I appreciate Home Depot. There are a lot of things that I don't agree with in regards to Home Depot: they support the Republican National Convention, they are blamed for driving the independent hardware store out of business. However, due to their size, they are able to help those in need when natural disaster strikes. They are also huge sponsors of the Georgia Aquarium. But returning to their support of the RNC- if I am able to support the political party of my choice, is it not fair that others are able to support the party of their choice? Home Depot is enacting an important right that we have in this country, one that we should not take for granted nor let atrophy.

So this leaves me torn. Which do I believe in more: our inherent right to support causes of our choice or the causes themselves? I do not like the idea of my money going, indirectly, to causes I am passionately against (such as homophobia). Yet, if I am to expect my right to support my causes, doesn't that mean that we should respect others' right to support their causes?

Chick-fil-A is getting a lot of attention recently. My liberal friends are calling for us all to boycott them. Once their views on marriage equality came to light, about a year ago, I significantly cut down on the business I gave them. I could give you a long, sob story as to why I did not cut them out cold turkey but it comes down to this: at least the revenue they received from me was markedly less.

Truth be told, this could be me justifying my continued patronizing of Chick-fil-A. Yet I am left with the question: if I want the freedom to support my causes, doesn't the reverse seem important? Chick-fil-A is engaging society, supporting causes they are passionate about, and inadvertently creating important dialogue. Does this call for an all-out boycott?

Addressing Poverty, Privilege, and Faith from a Unitarian Universalist Perspective

My final paper for Christian Ethics.

            I am troubled over the issue of privilege and poverty. As someone who has come from a privileged background, I suffer from the common liberal guilt. I was raised to not get stuck in these situations but to take action and fix it. So I have gone on an academic quest to try to reconcile this situation. I came to seminary to find ways to create the Kingdom of God here on earth, not dissimilar to when Rauschenbusch says, “When our moral actions are consciously related to the Kingdom of God they gain religious quality.”[1]

            I have experienced both ends of the economic spectrum, which gives me unique perspective and credibility with both groups. However this is also problematic in that sometimes I forget that I chose my lifestyle(s) and sometimes I make assumptions that do not necessarily apply to those who were not able to choose their circumstances. Additionally, born into a life of privilege, I had access to an education and connections that helped me survive in a way that others do not have.

There are some that believe that we should sell our possessions and become homeless ourselves; Jesus himself calls for us to sell our possessions and follow him (Mk 10:21; Lk 12:33; 18:22; Mt 19:21) but I know that money equates to power and the ability to be heard within society. Unlike Chuck Collins, the great-grandson of Oscar Mayer and a Unitarian Universalist who gave away the entirety of his birthright when he was 26 years old, I don’t believe that we have to give up everything in order to help the situation.[2] Mainly, I believe in playing fair and want to help others realize that it is possible to share without loss, that generosity builds abundance. I, like most Unitarian Universalists, know “that, regardless of our circumstances at birth, with help and effort most of us are capable of making a positive difference in our own lives and the life of our times.”[3]

As a Unitarian Universalist, I belong to a denomination that holds social justice as one of our highest principles. How far do I go to combat poverty? How do I know I have done all that I can do? How does my faith call me to act in this situation?