I've always had a soft spot in my cold black heart for The Washington Times' refusal to run the term gay "marriage" without the scare quotes. That's not the editorial call I would make were I in charge (and God help us all if that happens), but there's something about the stubbornness to concede a point by accepting the usual terms of debate that I admire. So, when I clicked on this Jerusalem Post story, the first sentence leaped out at me:
The Protestant campaign of divestment, meant to punish Israel for its "occupation," is weakening.
The substance of the piece is solid enough. After the moral grandstanding of the last few years -- during which many pro-Palestinian voices bent the ears of a number of mostly mainline Protestant churches with pleas to divest church holdings from businesses that do business with Israel -- many churches are backing down from divestment. To wit:
The announcement by Massachusetts Episcopal Bishop M. Thomas Shaw -- a staunch pro-Palestinian advocate -- that he would oppose divestment efforts from within his church was the latest in a string of similar declarations by small member communities of America's large liberal-leaning churches.
In fact, some of the advocates of divestment may come to regret the strategy. Reportedly, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has decided to call a pox down on both houses and encourage divestment in companies that deal with Palestinians as well as those that do business with Israel.