Jewish Teenager’s Prayer Diverts a Plane

From The Philadelphia Jewish Voice
From The Philadelphia Jewish Voice

No one was surprised it happened, everybody remained calm and polite — including, apparently, the two teenagers when they were briefly handcuffed — all aboard were safe. Still it’s a little sad when a young airline passenger in prayer sets off alarm bells in our spacious American skies.

The 17-year-old observant Jewish passenger, seated next to his younger sister, was strapping a tefillin onto his wrist and his head, figuring to take advantage of the quiet time for ritual prayer. It was a small plane outbound from La Guardia Airport and about 25 minutes into a flight to Kentucky. The flight attendant on US Airways Express Flight 3079 last Thursday thought the tefillin looked ominously like wires or cables.

And in a time when in-flight thinking is colored by the brutal knowledge that passengers have hidden bombs in underwear or shoes, she told the officers in the cockpit. The pilot decided to divert the Kentucky-bound plane to Philadelphia. In less than 30 minutes it was on the ground, police officers were swarming through the passenger cabin, and the Transportation Security Administration was using terms like “disruptive passenger” and “suspicious passenger” to describe the boy. An hour or so after that, Lt. Frank Vanore, a spokesman for the Philadelphia police, had another explanation.

“It was unfamiliarity that caused this,” he said.

He said the flight crew had never seen tefillin, small leather boxes attached to leather straps that observant Jews wear during morning prayers. The flight crew “didn’t understand what it was,” he said, and the pilot “erred on the side of caution and decided to radio that in and to divert the flight.”

We can’t all recognize a tefillin, or appreciate head scarves, or somehow get comfortable with the accoutrements of unfamiliar religions. But this incident suggests we might need to try harder.

The young man and his sister, whose names were not released, are from White Plains, the authorities said. Rabbi Shmuel Greenberg of Young Israel of White Plains said that they were members of his congregation and that the young man was “a good boy, bright, intelligent, as docile as you can imagine.” Some observant Jews said they were not surprised that the ritual had attracted attention — or that people on the plane would have been unfamiliar with it. “When they see a passenger strapping yourself,” said Isaac Abraham, a Satmar who lives in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, and campaigned for the Democratic nomination for a City Council seat last year, “you might as well strap yourself with hand grenades. They have no idea. He probably just figured, ‘I have nothing else to do on the plane, I might as well use this time to pray.’ Other people read. They watch a movie. He figured, ‘Let me grab the time.’ But the obvious reality of it is that when we see people carrying explosive material in their shoes and their pants and I am the passenger next to him and see someone strapping, I would panic too.”

And most of the rest of us would say the same. Maybe most of the rest of us, though, could take some time to check out interfaith groups such the International Association for Religious Freedom or United Religions Initiative, or local organizations such as the San Francisco Interfaith Council (local interfaith groups exist throughout the country), which offer a chance to learn about other faiths and get to know the mostly peace-loving people who follow other traditions. In all probability, there will be times ahead when some badly-misled person will shout “Allahu Akbar” before blowing himself or herself to smithereens, or some deranged person will commit violence (witness the killer of abortion Dr. George Tiller claiming his religious convictions justified the act) in the name of some abused diety. But a little interfaith understanding could go a long way in today’s super-suspicious world.

Rabbi Greenberg, the boy’s rabbi, had some advice for future flights.

“I would suggest, pray on the plane and put the tefillin on later on,” he said.

Jewish Teenager’s Tefillin Diverts a US Airways Flight – NYTimes.com.

World peace could happen

We could have world peace. If everyone would simply agree to begin the day — tomorrow would be a good time to start — with a group Ommmm, peace would follow.

Optimally, your group would be led by Sr. Chandru — although the Dalai Lama would do, and since he’s right here on YouTube he is accessible to an in-home group. Sr. Chandru is affiliated with the Brahma Kumaris, a lady who travels through life in white robes and a cloud of peace and serenity.  It tends to rub off, even if your personal aura is less than serene that day. This morning Sr. Chandru led a group of people of vastly differing faith traditions in a meditative Ommmm to begin a meeting of the San Francisco Interfaith Council. Peace reigned.

I know, I know, not everyone is in synch with the Brahma Kumaris. But then, not everyone is in synch with fundamentalist Christianity or mainstream Judaism or radical Islam, which is why we need to sit down to a group Ommmm. I do know the Brahma Kumaris are the only Hindu sect (I hope I’m getting this right, but they are also very forgiving) that has women priests, and they are an incredibly peaceful sort. BK Sr. Elizabeth has her own little peace cloud, and before she adopted it she was a lead singer in Beach Blanket Babylon, which is known for a lot of good things to almost anyone who’s ever heard of San Francisco — but calm and serenity are not among them.

Some of us are better candidates for serenity than others, but nobody could get up from an Ommmm and charge off to battle. Therefore, with all the charging off to battle that is currently destroying the planet, perhaps an Ommm-first policy is worth considering.

I can put you in touch with Sr. Chandru.

Gay rights, hate crimes & social justice

Can hate crimes be erased from the U.S.? Probably not. Will same-sex marriage some day become the law of the land? Probably, eventually, so.

A few blocks around the corner from the federal courthouse in San Francisco where the latest battle for marriage equality is beginning an ambitious effort to combat hate crimes through community action was also getting underway on Monday morning.

Not In Our Town (NIOT) is a national movement planning a full-scale web organizing campaign  launch on April 6. Its focus is on mobilizing citizens in response to hate crimes, but its ultimate goal is to help build communities where such crimes won’t happen. Strategies were unveiled for a group of civic and religious leaders in San Francisco as part of the pre-launch efforts.

Not In Our Town began with a PBS documentary about Billings, Montana citizens joining together to respond to a series of hate crimes in their town. The story struck a chord with audiences, and created a model that inspired viewers around the country to hold their own campaigns against intolerance. Now in its second decade, the Not In Our Town movement continues to grow. Media company nonprofit The Working Group, which produced the PBS documentary, is the force behind NIOT’s emerging web-based organizational campaign

In the audience at Monday’s meeting, which was held at the San Francisco Public Library, were San Francisco Interfaith Council Executive Director Michael Pappas, Assistant District Attorney Victor Hwang (whose specific concentration is on prosecution of hate crimes), Director of the Mayor’s Office of Neighborhood Services Mike Farrah and representatives of a host of community action programs such as AfroSolo — a visual and performing arts nonprofit working, among other things, to combat black-on-black crime. Plus a wide assortment of individuals from religious and community groups. The audience mix was, NIOT representatives said, typical of groups around the country from which community efforts have grown.

NIOT grassroots efforts have taken place in communities from Patchogue, NY to Ft. Collins, CO to Richmond, CA and dozens in between. If the interest shown in the San Francisco Library — while most eyes were on the courthouse around the corner — was any indication, an enthusiastic San Francisco NIOT group will join others for the April 6 launce.

Catholic bishops mandate treatment to keep comatose patients alive

Catholic hospitals across the country face a new mandate this year to provide life-sustaining treatment to comatose patients regardless of the wishes of those patients and/or their families, and even when there is no hope of recovery.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops issued the directive Nov. 17 to the more than 1,000 church-affiliated hospitals and nursing homes in the United States and to all Catholic doctors and nurses. Invoking a 2004 speech by Pope John Paul II, the bishops said Catholics must provide nutritional assistance to patients with “presumably irreversible conditions … who can reasonably be expected to live indefinitely if given such care.”

A previous directive let Catholic hospitals and doctors decide whether the burdens on the patient outweighed the benefits of prolonging life. The bishops said the new policy was guided by “Catholic teaching against euthanasia” and by John Paul’s observation that providing food and water “always represents a natural means of preserving life, not a medical act.”

The issue of whose wishes will be observed — the patient’s or the bishops’ — is certain to be raised. And in the case of a comatose patient, having someone else to advocate in one’s behalf will be critical.

Catholic hospital officials say the November decree isn’t rigid and leaves room for accommodating patients’ wishes. But the bishops’ language appears to conflict with a hospital’s legal duty to follow a patient’s instructions to withdraw life support, as expressed in an advance written directive or by a close relative or friend who knows the patient’s intentions.

Courts have ordered hospitals to disconnect feeding tubes when an unconscious patient’s wishes were clearly established. The best-known case involved Terri Schiavo, the Florida woman who died in 2005 after 15 years in a coma and unsuccessful attempts by her parents and Republicans in Congress to keep her alive.

The decree itself does not require life-sustaining care that would be “excessively burdensome for the patient” or would cause “significant physical discomfort.” If those exemptions don’t apply, a hospital will send a patient elsewhere rather than violate his or her expressed wishes, the (Catholic hospitals) organizations said.

The Catholic Health Association of the United States, which represents both hospitals and nursing homes, said a facility’s ethics committee would probably meet with the doctor and the patient’s representative to “explore the alternatives” whenever a patient’s decision to withdraw life support clashed with Catholic doctrine.”In some instances, this might include the transfer of the patient to another facility,” the association said.

Considering the number of Catholic hospitals, nursing homes, doctors and nurses under the bishops’ directive and the number of people who would not choose to spend their final weeks and months hooked up to tubes and wires, ethics committees are going to be very busy. It is hard to make sense of this across-the-board imposition of one religion’s views on countless patients whose own wishes may differ.

New Catholic mandate on comatose patients.

1 5 6 7