COLUMN: A Bible story Donald Trump ‘mite’ not understand

Tulsa World News, March 30, 2017
- By Isaac Wright

What can the Biblical lesson of the widow’s mite teach us about President Trump’s new tax proposal?

A “mite” is a tiny copper coin from Biblical antiquity. In the Gospel of Mark, Jesus watched as rich people gave large sums as offering in the temple. A woman in poverty came to offer only a few mites.

In Chapter 12, “Jesus said, ‘Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything — all she had to live on.’”

Jesus is praising this woman’s abundant support for benevolent works – likely without even adequate nourishment for her or her children. But the full story is more than that. Jesus is also rebuking leaders of society who pervert the concept of stewardship and move the financial burden onto those with the fewer resources.

Directly preceding the widow’s gift, Jesus was teaching about inequities and the social, religious, and political imbalances of the day. Mark 12:38-40 reads, “As he taught, Jesus said, ‘Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets.

“‘They devour widows’ houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. These men will be punished most severely.’”

Jesus is not simply praising this widow in poverty who was sacrificing personally to give generously. Jesus was condemning leaders who had wealth, and who glorified their own position, but who failed the test of stewardship of the society’s resources.

There is a lesson here for President Donald Trump and members of Congress as they debate tax reform. Independent reviews of the Trump tax plan reveal that it would shift a greater burden of our national tax structure away from those with the greatest resources to pay it and instead put the burden on the shoulders of the middle class and those making less.

The wealthiest Americans would receive the biggest tax cuts both in raw dollars and in percentage. Those making over $1 million annually would see over $300,000 in tax cuts. Those earning over $1 million annually would receive 42 percent of the tax cut, but those Americans earning $40 to $50,000 annually would only receive 1.5 percent of the tax cut.

Our government allocates much of its tax expenditures on things like health care (Medicaid, Medicare and subsidies for those who can’t afford private health insurance), Social Security, and the social safety net programs for the poor.

Jesus directly addressed the importance of these categories.

“Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise.” (Luke 3:11) “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor” (Matthew 19:21)

These are consistent themes throughout the Christian scriptures. “Thus says the Lord of hosts … do not oppress the widow, the fatherless, the sojourner, or the poor…” (Zechariah 7:9-10)

“I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land.” (Deuteronomy 15:11) “Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.” (Hebrews 13:16)

I remember a pastor in my childhood referring to the government’s social safety net as “the Church’s unpaid bills.”

Before President Trump and Congress move to tilt the nation’s tax code to help the wealthy, they should pay heed to Jesus’s lesson of the widow’s mite in its full context.

In our first year of marriage, for my birthday my wife bought me a widow’s mite – one of the actual 2,000-year-old coins from Roman times.

I keep the coin in the top drawer of my dresser, so I see it every Sunday morning as we get ready for church.

I think I will start carrying the mite with me to the ballot box.

COLUMN: Trump Admin Ill-Equipped for New Threat Level Posed By North Korea

Huffington Post, 3.24.17
By Isaac Wright

The situation on the Korean Peninsula is a dangerous and complicated one. It is a problem regarding which the current administration seems dangerously lacking in direction.

Amidst all the news coverage of President Donald Trump’s team and its questionable connections to Russia and all the talk of the debacle which is TrumpCare, we as a nation cannot lose focus on the evolving crisis on the Korean peninsula or the potential nuclear threat to our nation’s safety.

Every year when the U.S. engages in military and naval exercises with South Korea, Pyongyang reacts defensively. This year has proven no different. The U.S. never backed down on the joint exercises in the face of Pyongyang antics and should not do so now.

However, American leaders must view the most recent defiance by North Korea in its broader context of an escalating threat. The North Korean weapons program has advanced exponentially. Last year North Korea conducted 24 ballistic missile tests and two nuclear test explosions. Make no mistake, the North Korean intentions are aggressive. In dictator Kim Jong Un’s New Year’s address, he declared that North Korea “entered the final stage of preparation for the test launch of intercontinental ballistic missile.” He wants the capability to strike American cities at will, most likely with nuclear capable weapons.

Recently, a defiant North Korea simultaneously launched four missiles, three of which landed dangerously close to Japan’s coast where the U.S. maintains significant military bases. The subtext of this simultaneous launch is clear: North Korea can conduct multiple, simultaneous launches to thwart the new THAAD missile defense system (Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense) our military is deploying in South Korea, a system intended to obliterate descending ballistic missiles while they are still in the air negating their damage. The THAAD system would likely struggle to knock out multiple targets at once.

The North Korean dictator is sending a message that he will soon be able to strike and he will aggressively work to thwart our defenses should he choose to strike.

Inaction is not an option. According to U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, an Exxon Oil mogul with no foreign policy experience other than being buddies with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, “all options are on the table.”

Yet Tillerson and the Trump administration have failed to articulate what those options are.

Expanding THAAD to Japan might offer some level of defense for our allied nation and our soldiers stationed there, but Pyongyang is already in the process of undermining that technology.

A preemptive strike against North Korea would destroy some, but likely not all, of North Korea’s missile facilities and nuclear technology which appear to be spread far and wide geographically, fortified, and in some instances hidden. Between waves of being bombed, North Korea would put all its efforts into missile attacks on the U.S. or our allies in Japan and South Korea – or all three. Seoul is only 30 miles from the North Korean border. Millions of casualties and massive unchecked radioactivity would result.

Moving American first-strike-capable assets to Japan or South Korea would likely result in similar disastrous outcomes, as could attempted regime change since Kim Jong Un’s primary concern seems to be continuing the survival of his regime.

We could continue or further U.S. economic sanctions on North Korea. Already, four-in-ten citizens are undernourished, and 70 percent rely on some sort of government food aid just to survive. According to the same United Nations reports, most North Koreans lack basic health care and sanitation. Despite sanctions and these base national circumstances, North Korea remains on an aggressive and dangerously militarily-equipped footing.

China, North Korea’s only treaty-aligned nation and primary economic partner, could be utilized as a vehicle to inflict more decisive sanctions on North Korea. Previous Chinese sanctions on North Korean coal exports were important, but China has little strategic interest in going further. China is upset at the deployment of THAAD by the U.S. and has never been the closest of U.S. allies. Outsourcing our national security and diplomatic authority to China seems risky.

U.S. sanctions against Chinese banks and industries that do business with North Korea could be enacted, but the reaction by China to such moves would be unpredictable to say the least.

The Trump administration has yet to offer any of these options as possible actions. In fact, Trump and Tillerson have yet to offer much of any leadership on this dire issue.

We have a national responsibility to stand with our allies, engage the regional players in a constructive manner, maintain diplomatic efforts keeping channels open, and continue in a position of strength as we resolve to find a solution to this crisis of global security emanating from the Korean peninsula.

Where is the leadership from the people at the helm of the free world – Trump and his cabinet — to accomplish these responsibilities?

The Trump administration must articulate some sort of strategy with respect to the North Korean situation. Simply beating our proverbial national chest will not resolve anything. We have a reality TV star and a corporate oil-man muddling their way through multi-state, delicate international relations with a rogue state and nuclear weapons at play. We have entered a new threat level.