advertisement
RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

An Altar Call from Bill and Melinda Gates

by Jim Wallis 11-02-2009

Last week, my wife Joy and I were front and center when Bill and Melinda Gates launched their new Living Proof campaign in Washington, D.C.  I have to imagine that this campaign launch sounded a lot like one of Microsoft’s shareholder meetings.  It was replete with charts, graphs, well-defined metrics for success, best practices, and market projections.  But present throughout Bill and Melinda Gates’ talk on the state of global health and poverty were not just numbers but the real people whose lives are being saved every day by their U.S. investments in global health.  As the Living Proof Web site states,

Much of what people read and hear is bad news — terrible statistics and sad stories. The purpose of the Living Proof Project is to share good news: Together, we can help the world’s poorest people improve their lives. We know, because we’ve seen living proof. People’s lives are improving in measurable ways … They are testimony to the fact that when you improve health, life improves by every other measure.

I believe the Gates Foundation has been so effective in their work for two primary reasons.  First, they aren’t afraid to make the “smart case” through clear and definable metrics and at the same time make clear the “moral imperative” for improving global health and ending extreme poverty.  Second, they recognize that solutions to problems this big come when everybody is at the table.  That means private philanthropy, government policy, NGOs, local leadership, and the faith community all have roles to play.

Too often the well meaning case for the moral urgency of global health and poverty is divorced from a hard nosed look at both what is most effective and what makes the best use of limited resources.  The Gates Foundation is changing that.  In the “I’m Living Proof” video, they show child after child proudly proclaiming, “I’m Living Proof” that these programs work. They talk about the “Lazarus effect” of how HIV/AIDS drugs are bringing people back to life who were nearly dead. They profiled a small child who nearly died after her mother’s death from HIV/AIDS. Just one year after starting HIV/AIDS drugs, the video shows this same child now thriving. The change is almost unbelievable.

These compelling stories are combined with big goals and measurable outcomes.  Bill and Melinda Gates called on each of us to join them in advocating for U.S. investments in reducing the number of child deaths worldwide by nearly half by 2025. That may sound like an ambitious goal, but we’ve already made real progress. The number of children who die before age 5 has been halved since 1960 — from 20 million to fewer than 9 million per year — even as the number of births increased by more than 20 percent. The child death rate declined by more than a quarter (27 percent) from 1990 to 2007 alone. Now we need to further reduce child deaths by half once again.

The kind of gains we have seen in the past and the ambitious goal of repeating them in the future are not the result of any one sector of society, approach, or organization.  It is not a choice between private charity, government aid, debt cancellation, trade policy change, or NGO cooperation; rather, it’s a question of getting them all to work together.  Change happens most effectively when there is coordination and cooperation between different sectors and forces, not a choice between them.  Bill and Melinda make it very clear that even as the Gates Foundation is the single largest philanthropic organization in the world, they can’t accomplish their goals without the cooperation and coordination with government and the nonprofit world — including the faith community.

Bill Gates is known for the smart approach; that came through as he made the compelling case for the results we can have with more investment. Melinda struck me as a real evangelist as she spoke naturally and passionately for all of our involvement. She spoke in moral terms about the “preciousness of every human life.”  But the most successful CEO in the world also spoke in moral terms about the deeply held American value of equality and how we now need to be consistent in applying that value around the world. In other words, the poorest kids in the world shouldn’t die from diseases that none of our kids do anymore.

As I spoke with a person at the foundation at the small reception afterward, he explained to me that the Gates had been on Capitol Hill for two days and in almost every meeting they had, Members of Congress told them that the faith community will have to be centrally involved if the U.S. is to make an even deeper investment in global health. At the reception, I thanked both Melinda and Bill Gates for their work and promised that we would be involved.

I almost expected an altar call at the end of Bill and Melinda’s presentation, and I would have gone down the aisle. Because when it comes to the health and well-being of the world’s poorest people, Jesus is already there, and its time the rest of us Christians joined him. And as I suggested to Bill, the combination of the smart case and the moral case is the winning strategy.

Categories: Global Issues, Poverty
Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • This is one application of welfare I support - primarily because it's not permanent. We're funding them just long enough to get them on their feet, then we're out. Once the number of sick falls low enough that the country can handle the problem, we let it do so (I hope).

    If the healthcare bill supplied measurable outcomes to watch for which would deactivate it and restore freedom to the market, I might support it. Even better if it were restricted to only a few special cases (e.g. chronic/inborn problems and the health of the very poor).
  • letjusticerolldown
    Dr Ralph Winter, founder of US Center for World Missions, died this past year. In the years before his passing he wrote increasingly about fighting the origins and fundamental causes of disease. He discussed how our theological frameworks don't even conceive of the workings of good and evil on the levels of micro-biology. For instance, he discusses the intersection of colonial powers, missionaries, armies, and native persons in the SE portion of the United States over a 250 year period. 150 missions were built. Armies fought each other. Missionaries sought to express the Gospel. And the native poputlations were virtually wiped out. By disease.

    And there was no real comprehension that the Enemy's strategy was not war; colonialism; competing powers; etc. It was the waging of disease.

    Bill Gates and Dr Winter, in some ways, started down very similar paths about the same time. I don't know if they ever crossed paths.

    I think this summary of changes in global health and wealth over last 50 years is remarkable. I think it very important to simply conceive of the change that has been underfoot. www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_at_state.html (20 mins)

    (It is also an interesting graphic representation of complex data--that can be accessed on Google)
  • kevinmadsen
    Thought this might fit in with the poverty discussion - Here's a video about churches fighting poverty and its consequences.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JfGki00T0c
  • BrotherMarcus
    Sorry to be a killjoy, but Bill and Melinda Gates are a major funder of International Planned Parenthood, the largest global supplier of abortion "services." They've showered the group with over $35 Million in the past ten years. How exactly does this square with reducing the "child death rate" or being an "evangelist" for the "preciousness of human life?"

    "It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish" -Mother Teresa
  • letjusticerolldown
    Are you opposed to parents planning their family?? Do you think that might have any impact on infant mortality? It is possible to oppose the present practice of abortion without turning any party who supports legal abortion into a demon incapable of any good action.
  • BrotherMarcus
    It isn't a question of supporting legal abortion. In this case, it is a question of owning and operating fixed and mobile abortion clinics around the globe. Clinics in which hundreds of thousands of unborn children's lives are snuffed out every year. That is the activity funded and enabled by the Bill 7 Melinda Gates Foundation. You don't care about those lives. Fine. That is your poverty. Justice indeed.
  • letjusticerolldown
    Are you opposed to parents planning their family?? Do you think that might have any impact on infant mortality?

    Plannned Parenthood will continue to drive a great big extra-wide mobile clinic through the gaping holes left by a level of discourse that fails to see any legitimate agenda but one. Where did I indicate any expression about not caring about those aborted? I believe those committed to justice must listen with two ears and speak with one mouth.
  • BrotherMarcus
    I believe those committed to justice must listen with two ears and speak with one mouth.

    Do you "listen with two ears" to the racist? The warmonger? The slavemaster? The corporate exploiter of the poor? No, you condemn racism, war, slavery and exploitation, as you should.

    Why, then, do you choose to listen to the abortionist? To the multinational corporation that pulls in millions a year in fee-for-killing services? Why do you celebrate the billionaires who underwrite the killing? Why on this issue alone is some "level of discourse" invoked as an excuse for passivity and acquiesence?
  • letjusticerolldown
    I'm all ears listening for how anyone is using discourse as an excuse for passivity; and for your answers: "Are you opposed to parents planning their family?? Do you think that might have any impact on infant mortality?"
  • BrotherMarcus
    No, I am not opposed to parents planning their families. My wife and I planned ours. And yes, I think that may have some bearing on infant mortality. All of which is beside the point because the mortality to which I'm referring - and which you are assiduously avoiding - is the violent mortality of abortion.

    If you are planning to inform me that Planned Parenthood does some good things in addition to killing unborn children, I'll ask you in return how a Christian can be so callous as to pit the life of one innocent child against another.
  • letjusticerolldown
    "All of which is beside the point "

    My point is only this: There is more than one point.

    One does not become more committed to reducing abortions by measuring all things against that standard. It requires us becoming a people with a love, ethic, and way of life that transcends issues and answers the questions better than Planned Parenthood and others whom we believe to be the opposition.

    They exist and thrive because they are answering some questions better than we are. We can listen, learn, change, grow and become transformative. Or we can shout louder.

    How do you feel the "shout louder" strategy has worked?
  • BrotherMarcus
    Imagine saying "one does not become more committed to reducing child abuse (or poverty, or war) by measuring all things against that standard." You never would, nor should you. It is only on the issue of abortion that you counsel listening, learning, changing, growing.

    Wilberforce shouted down the injustice of the slave trade. Ghandi shouted down the injustice of the Raj, and King shouted down - quite literally - the injustice of Jim Crow. What is lacking on the issue of abortion is a unified Christian voice shouting "STOP". Instead, we have Christians who if they don't actively support abortion are embarrassed by those with the bad taste to bring it up.

    Why? Here's what I think. I think that many of those on the religious Left know that they would lose their friends in the Democratic Party if they began speaking "prophetically" about abortion. They would quickly find themselves labelled "extremists" and "intolerant" if they stood up for the unborn, and so they don't. They have made a tacit pact with the secular Left: accept us at the table on the issues of poverty and war and we won't be a bother on abortion. It is a mirror image of the pact the religious Right has made with the Republican Party: accept us at the table on the issue of abortion and we won't be a bother on war and torture. And it is as cyncial and disheartening to see Christians on the Left abandon the unborn as it is to see Christians on the Right abandon the poor.
  • kansasmennonite
    It's easier to see that the poor are human than a fertilized egg. When does life begin? I personally wouldn't abort but know that when Human life begins is a difficult question from a scientific and theologic perspective. It always has been in history.
  • conservativeeconomist
    "Are you opposed to parents planning their family?? Do you think that might have any impact on infant mortality?"

    -- This is a contrary belief, you believe if you abort a baby... you have a reduction in infant mortality?

    Aborting a baby increases infant mortality! By killing the baby before it is birthed.

    You have the right to your belief, you do not have a right to the facts. An abortion stops a beating heart, look it up.

    We all know what the code word for 'family planning' is. On the other hand, if you are talking about contraception; that is an ethical way to reduce infant mortality.
  • I've often wondered why we don't praise Bill Gates for his work in poverty reduction prior to his "retired work" of funding lots of different initiatives. Not to minimize them, of course, but his method of getting rich was to provide something for society that we either needed or found our lives better because of it. One result is many people from India have jobs because of technical support necessary for others with computers. Other things might include the software, hardware, and other industries that we created because there was now an avenue for more wealth creation to make our lives collectively better. Imagine the number of jobs we wouldn't have without a Bill Gates.
  • nuclearferret
    "As I spoke with a person at the foundation at the small reception afterward, he explained to me that the Gates had been on Capitol Hill for two days and in almost every meeting they had, Members of Congress told them that the faith community will have to be centrally involved if the U.S. is to make an even deeper investment in global health."

    Good for Congress on one part: It IS the faith community, and any other interested individuals' responsibility, NOT the US government to make the investment and work on the issue of global health. And good for Gates in putting his money where his mouth is and using his voluntarily offered resources. As for more tax money going out...whether it is war in Iraq or nation-building in Afghanistan, it shouldn't be done.
  • letjusticerolldown
    If US policy (e.g. on the regulation and application of pesticides) impacts the economic livilihood, health and life of hundreds of millions--should we ask what the health implications are of those policies--or just say, "Hey, nuclearferret says that ain't our job?"

    We have no moral right to assert global leadership on anything---if we can't take into account the life, safety and health of humanity in all we do.
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertisement
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008