Media Search:



The project Combating violence against children in Ukraine announces a competitive selection of representatives of non-governmental organisations to…

The involvement of civil society in preventing and combating child sexual exploitation and abuse is crucial. The Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of Children against Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse (Lanzarote Convention) explicitly recognises the role of civil society subjects in this regard, as well as the contribution of civil society to its effective implementation.

Cooperation with non-governmental organisations is essential to support, implement and monitor the Lanzarote Convention at the local, national and international levels. In addition, given the expertise and practical experience of civil society subjects, their participation in the Lanzarote Committee is a key advantage of the Lanzarote Convention monitoring mechanism and requires further development.

The workshop will be held on 28 October 2021 in an online format, and will benefit from the participation of Dr. George Nikolaidis, International Expert of the Council of Europe, and former Lanzarote Committee Chairperson,

The workshop will aim to:

To participate in the selection process, you must fill out before 24 October 2021the following questionnaire https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfF3yT6ppYvJg4rhzzkaACbME7yVYTtiz2eKApbZoZP0SRy1Q/viewform

The selection results will be announced by sending emails to the email addresses specified in the questionnaire.

Follow this link:
The project Combating violence against children in Ukraine announces a competitive selection of representatives of non-governmental organisations to...

Pat Robertson Turned Christian TV into Political Power & Blew it up with Wacky Prophecy – Word and Way

(RNS) For many Americans, Pat Robertson, the Christian television pioneer and onetime presidential candidate, will always be remembered for his wacky pronouncements made at inflection points of American history.

I dont think Id be waving those flags in Gods face if I were you, he warned Orlando, Florida, city leaders in 1998 when they flew rainbow flags downtown in honor of Gay Days at Disney World. This is not a message of hate this is a message of redemption. But a condition like this will bring about the destruction of your nation. Itll bring about terrorist bombs; itll bring earthquakes, tornadoes, and possibly a meteor.

After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the twin towers, Robertson said he agreed with Jerry Falwell, his guest on his signature talkshow, The 700 Club, that responsibility for the attacks on the United States fell to pagans, abortionists, feminists, gays, and lesbians.

In this Feb. 24, 2016, file photo, Rev. Pat Robertson listens as Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks at Regent University in Virginia Beach, Virginia. (Steve Helber/Associated Press)

Moments like these embarrassed his fellow Christians and marginalized the once-estimable political power Robertson wielded, consigning Robertson to the role of what one megachurch pastor called the crazy uncle in the evangelical attic.

But the right-wing conservative could also surprise his viewers. Once, he invited the Rev. Al Sharpton to the couch on The 700 Club to discuss climate change, agreeing that the issue is one that might bring the right and left together. In 2012, Robertson said that marijuana should be legalized.

Yet, any recollection of Robertson, who announced Friday his intention to retire as daily host of The 700 Club, must include his transformation of televangelism from hot, pulpit-pounding sermons to a cool format. With his avuncular, upbeat personality, Robertson, 91, changed the picture of what televangelism could be. His Tonight show-like The 700 Club featured conversational talk and couch interviews, interspersed with entertainment.The model was later adopted by Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker on their PTL (Praise the Lord) network and Paul and Jan Crouch on their Trinity Broadcasting Network.

Over the years, five presidents, both Democrats and Republicans, appeared on the show, along with numerous world leaders and musical artists.

After, I think, 54 years of hosting the program, I thank God for everyone thats been involved and I want to thank all of you, he told viewers on Friday, adding, Its been a great run.

His son, Gordon Robertson, who will replace him on the flagship program, released a statement saying, Good and faithful doesnt even begin to describe my fathers service to CBN for 60 years. His legacy and the example of his prayer life will continue to lead The 700 Club in the years to come.

But his CBN platform was much more than good television. Founding the Christian Broadcasting Network in 1961, the first Christian network in the United States, he shepherded his flock of white evangelicals to a position of unprecedented political influence within the Republican Party.

In 1987, Robertson, a Yale-educated lawyer, a Marine officer veteran and the son of a U.S. senator from Virginia, leveraged his fame into direct political action, something earlier Christian fundamentalists had shunned. That year heformed the Christian Coalition, later joined by Ralph Reed, the telegenic political strategist. Soon, other evangelical leaders, like the Rev. Jerry Falwell, jumped on their own electoral bandwagons.

Robertsons personal political high point came in 1988, when he ran for the Republican nomination for president, finishing third in the Iowa primary, behind Bob Dole and George H.W. Bush. In the campaign he claimed, without proof, that the Soviets were hiding missiles in Cuba.

Two years later, in 1990, the Christian coalition introduced ostensibly nonpartisan Christian voter guides, also called Christian score cards, handed out at conservative churches or placed on windshields in church parking lots.

He was very smart, said Frances Fitzgerald, author of The Evangelicals: The Struggle to Shape America. He turned his presidential campaign into this notion of organizing from the community base up. Its what people have been doing ever since. You cant always do it from a religion platform.

He also wrote 20 books and founded Regent University, located across the street from CBN studios and headquarters in Virginia Beach, and the American Center for Law and Justice, a Christian activist organization led by sometime Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow.

Robertsons firm support of former President Trump may well be the last memorable moment of his on-air career. After insisting for weeks that Trump had won, only to be cheated out of office by fraud, Robertson endorsed the Jan. 6 pro-Trump gathering at the Capitol in the run-up to the rally. After it proved to be a riotous attempted insurrection, Robertson stayed off The 700 Club for a week. When he returned, he acknowledged Bidens victory.

But Robertsons staying power which necessarily included overcoming embarrassing moments is an essential part of his legacy.

When other well-known ministries fizzled for a variety of reasons, he maintained a ministry that was respected because of his moral and spiritual consistency, said the Rev. Jim Henry of Orlando, a former president of the Southern Baptist Convention, in an interview with RNS. He finished well. He finished strong, and I join with a host of others in saluting this man of faith.

But other prominent evangelical voices said his legacy was tainted by his more outlandish comments.

Pat Robersons ministry should not be judged by a single quote that offends, said Richard Cizik, president of the New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good. The problem is the sum of the parts. After putting televangelism on the map, Robertson devolved to an enfant terrible on progressive social movements, from the environment to womens rights and race relations. In doing so he became more of a target for humor than any preacher would want.

Some of his critics go beyond his ability to gaffe his way into the headlines. One group dubbed him the Apostle of Hate for his longtime opposition to LGBTQ rights.

Pat Robertson contributed greatly to some of the worst trends in American Christianity over the last forty years, said the Rev. David P. Gushee, distinguished university professor of Christian ethics at Mercer University. These included the fusion of conservative white Protestantism with the Republican Party, the use and abuse of supernaturalist Christianity to offer spurious and unhelpful interpretations of historical events and the development of a conservative Christian media empire that made money and gained power in the process of making everyday Christians less thoughtful contributors to American life.

Lisa Sharon Harper, president and founder of Freedom Road and author of the forthcoming Fortune: How Race Broke My Family and the World And How to Repair It All, said Robertson had to answer for his racial message. He has been a dreamer and a builder, said Harper. Unfortunately, for people of color and for the post-colonizing majority church in the world, Robertsons dreams were awash with the protection and retention of white male domination; in church life, in public space and in pink-knuckled politics.

In the end history will likely tip its hat to Robertsons skill at drawing the attention of the country to the views of White evangelicals. What he did with that attention will be judged more harshly.

Pat Robertson had enough religious savvy to get on a national stage and enough outrageous proclamations to keep blowing up his chances for success outside his religious realm, said the Rev. Joel C. Hunter, a former megachurch pastor who now heads the Parable Foundation.From his failed attempt to become president, to claiming to divert Hurricane Gloria with prayer from his TV studio couch protecting his headquarters but causing millions of damages and eight deaths up the coast Robertson had a talent for gaining power, resulting in social good through his ministry, but also in political divisiveness and cynicism outside his spiritual audience.

Said Fitzgerald: He was pretty much always a crazy uncle, except when he was running for president.

Read the original:
Pat Robertson Turned Christian TV into Political Power & Blew it up with Wacky Prophecy - Word and Way

Opinion | David Shor Is Telling Democrats What They Dont Want to Hear – The New York Times

I want to stop here and say I believe, as does Shor, that educational polarization is serving here as a crude measure of class polarization. We tend to think of class as driven by income, but in terms of how its formed and practiced in America right now, education tracks facets that paychecks miss. A high school dropout who owns a successful pest extermination company in the Houston exurbs might have an income that looks a lot like a software engineers at Google, while an adjunct professors will look more like an apprentice plumbers. But in terms of class experience who they know, what they believe, where theyve lived, what they watch, who they marry and how they vote, act and protest the software engineer is more like the adjunct professor.

Either way, the sorting that educational polarization is picking up, inexact as the term may be, puts Democrats at a particular disadvantage in the Senate, as college-educated voters cluster in and around cities while non-college voters are heavily rural. This is why Shor believes Trump was good for the Republican Party, despite its losing the popular vote in 2016, the House in 2018 and the Senate and the presidency in 2020. Sure, maybe he underperforms the generic Republican by whatever, Shor said. But hes engineered a real and perhaps persistent bias in the Electoral College, and then when you get to the Senate, its so much worse. As he put it, Donald Trump enabled Republicans to win with a minority of the vote.

The second problem Democrats face is the sharp decline in ticket splitting a byproduct of the nationalization of politics. As recently as 2008, the correlation between how a state voted for president and how it voted in Senate elections was about 71 percent. Close, but plenty of room for candidates to outperform their party. In 2020, it was 95.6 percent.

The days when, say, North Dakotas Republicans would cheerfully vote for a Democrat for the Senate are long past. Just ask Heidi Heitkamp, the defeated North Dakota Democrat whos now lobbying her former colleagues to protect the rich from paying higher taxes on inheritances. There remain exceptions to this rule Joe Manchin being the most prominent but they loom so large in politics because they are now so rare. From 1960 to 1990, about half of senators represented a state that voted for the other partys nominee for president, the political scientist Lee Drutman noted. Today, there are six.

Put it all together, and the problem Democrats face is this: Educational polarization has made the Senate even more biased against Democrats than it was, and the decline in ticket splitting has made it harder for individual Democratic candidates to run ahead of their party.

Atop this analysis, Shor has built an increasingly influential theory of what the Democrats must do to avoid congressional calamity. The chain of logic is this: Democrats are on the edge of an electoral abyss. To avoid it, they need to win states that lean Republican. To do that, they need to internalize that they are not like and do not understand the voters they need to win over. Swing voters in these states are not liberals, are not woke and do not see the world in the way that the people who staff and donate to Democratic campaigns do.

All this comes down to a simple prescription: Democrats should do a lot of polling to figure out which of their views are popular and which are not popular, and then they should talk about the popular stuff and shut up about the unpopular stuff. Traditional diversity and inclusion is super important, but polling is one of the only tools we have to step outside of ourselves and see what the median voter actually thinks, Shor said. This theory is often short-handed as popularism. It doesnt sound as if it would be particularly controversial.

Go here to read the rest:
Opinion | David Shor Is Telling Democrats What They Dont Want to Hear - The New York Times

Yang officially breaks with Democratic Party – POLITICO

Breaking up with the Democratic Party feels like the right thing to do because I believe I can have a greater impact this way, he wrote. Am I right? Lets find out. Together.

POLITICO reported early last month that Yang plans to form a third party following his experiences running as a Democrat and what he sees as the failures of both major political parties to address the needs of Americans.

Yang is set to release a book titled, Forward: Notes on the Future of Our Democracy later this week. His nascent third party will carry a similar name, the Forward Party, according to several reports based on his book.

Yang said that his new focus is on promoting adoption of open primaries and ranked-choice voting, which New York City and several other cities have instituted in recent years. He said he believes those reforms would give voters more genuine choice and our system more dynamism.

Still, he said that he is not urging others to follow his lead in switching their party registration given that it could lock people out from participating in partisan primaries in many areas.

Yang first gained attention early in the 2020 Democratic primary campaign for making universal basic income his signature issue, as well as a smattering of other heterogeneous positions. He then sought to use the national media attention he garnered during that race to springboard into contention in the New York City mayoral race, and even became a frontrunner for a time before fizzling out and finishing fourth in the Democratic primary.

Follow this link:
Yang officially breaks with Democratic Party - POLITICO

The Democrats Future Is in the West – The Atlantic

Follow the sun. Thats the advice to Democrats from a leading party fundraising organization in an exhaustive analysis of the electoral landscape released today.

The study, from the group Way to Win, provided exclusively to The Atlantic, argues that to solidify their position in Congress and the Electoral College, Democrats must increase their investment and focus on Sun Belt states that have become more politically competitive over recent years as they have grown more urbanized and racially diverse. The majority of new, likely Democratic voters live in the South and Southwest, places the Democratic establishment have long ignored or are just waking up to now, the group argues in the report.

Read: What does the Democratic Party stand for?

The study, focusing on 11 battleground states, is as much a warning as an exhortation. It contends that although the key to contesting Sun Belt states such as North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, and Arizona is to sustain engagement among the largely nonwhite infrequent voters who turned out in huge numbers in 2018 and 2020, it also warns that Republicans could consolidate Donald Trumps gains last year among some minority voters, particularly Latino men. These trends across our multiracial coalition demonstrate the urgent need for campaigns and independent groups to stop assuming voters of color will vote Democrat, the report asserts.

The study echoes the findings of other Democratic strategists such as Mike Podhorzer, the longtime political director of the AFL-CIO, in arguing that the Democrats best chance to avoid the usual midterm losses is to turn out large numbers of those surge voters next year.

If all the consultants in the Democratic Party do is follow their same playbook, which is talking only to the most likely voters, or really focusing on white voters or white non-college voters, Democrats will likely lose, says Jenifer Fernandez Ancona, Way to Wins vice president and chief strategy officer. The big message for us is that the core strategy of the 2022 midterm [should be] about engineering and expanding enthusiasm among this high-potential multiracial, multigenerational base that is really a critical part of the electorate across the Sun Belt states.

Way to Win was founded by Fernandez Acona and the Democratic operatives Tory Gavito and Leah Hunt-Hendrix after the 2016 election to channel more funding from Democratic donors into organizations and campaigns that focus on voters of color. Their work, which they say has raised $165 million so far, has centered on Sun Belt states, but has also included investments in diversifying urban and suburban areas in other regions, says Gavito, who now serves as Way to Wins president and CEO. Among the groups Way to Win has funded are grassroots organizations in Georgia and Arizona that are widely credited for the robust minority turnout that helped President Joe Biden flip both of those states last November.

The key analytical insight in the new report is its attempt to quantify the stakes for Democrats in continuing to engage the infrequent voters who flocked to the polls in 2020.

Using an analysis of voter files by the firm TargetSmart, the report studied the 64.8 million voters who cast ballots last year in the 11 states where Way to Win focused its efforts: a Sun Beltheavy list that includes Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina, and Florida in the Southeast; Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, and Texas in the Southwest; and Minnesota, Michigan, and Pennsylvania in the Rust Belt.

TargetSmart projects that nearly 41 million of the voters in those states turned out in all three of the most recent elections2016, 2018, and 2020and that those dependable voters split almost exactly in half between Biden and Trump. Way to Win sees little opportunity for moving those voters through persuasion efforts, writing that they are polarized, deeply entrenched, partisan base voters. Only about one in seven of these habitual voters, the group concludes, might be genuinely persuadable from election to election.

Instead, the report argues that the Democratic Party has greater opportunity among less reliable voters. Despite Trumps own success at energizing infrequent voters, the study found that in these crucial states, Biden actually generated more support from voters who turn out only occasionally.

Across the 11 states, TargetSmart calculated, nearly 13 million 2020 voters participated in just two of the past three elections, and they preferred Biden 52 percent to 48 percent. Another 11.1 million 2020 voters did not vote in either 2018 or 2016, and they gave Biden an estimated advantage of 54 percent to 46 percent. Looking beyond these infrequent voters, the study found that another nearly 25 million registered adults did not vote in any of the three most recent elections, and they model as more Democratic- than Republican-leaning in all 11 states.

These concentric circles of irregular votersespecially those who have now turned out to oppose Trump or his party in either 2018 or 2020, or bothrepresent the Democrats best chance of expanding their support, and contesting new states, in the years ahead, the report argues. To expand the Democratic base with a durable coalition, the report maintains, all of these infrequent voters must be invited to become more habitual voters who consistently break for Democrats. Democrats cannot afford a scarcity mindset where we only talk to high-frequency persuadable voters in 2022.

David A. Graham: The Democrats greatest delusion

Even as it flags that opportunity, the Way to Win study echoes other Democratic analysts who have seen signs through Bidens first months that Republicans may be preserving the unexpected gains Trump recorded among Latino voters, particularly men, and even (though fewer) Black voters. In some ways this is a clarion call and a warning sign because it means that we need more investment and more work to figure out what is happening in these communities, Gavito says. One lesson thats clear already regarding Latinos, she says, is that emphasizing a traditional Democratic message thats centered on racial justice without delivering improvement in material day-to-day conditions is falling on deaf ears.

The Way to Win report arrives amid another spasm in the perennial Democratic argument over whether the partys future revolves more around the emerging electoral opportunities in the Sun Belt or restoring its strength in Rust Belt states such as Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, and Iowa that have moved toward the GOP in the Trump era. That geographic argument also functions as a proxy for the partys central demographic debate: whether Democrats should place more priority on recapturing non-college-educated white voters drawn to Trump or on maximizing support and turnout among their more recent coalition of young people, racial minorities, and college-educated white voters, particularly women.

On a national basis, white voters without a college degree for years have been supplying a shrinking share of Democrats total votes, both because those voters are declining as a percentage of the overall electorate (down about two percentage points every four years to roughly 40 percent now) and also because Democrats are winning fewer of them, especially in the Trump years.

But that national trend still leaves room for plenty of regional divergence that, in practice, commits Democrats to relying on both strategies, rather than choosing between them.

In the Rust Belt, party candidates have understandably devoted enormous effort to maintaining support among white voters without a college degree. Thats partly because in these states, minority populations are not growing nearly as quickly as in the Sun Belt, and those blue-collar white voters remain about half the electorate or more. But its also because a history of class consciousness and union activism has allowed Democrats to historically perform slightly better with working-class white voters in these states than elsewhere, even if that ceiling has lowered amid Trumps overt appeals to racial resentment.

In the Sun Belt, non-college-educated white voters are both a smaller share of the electorate and more resistant to Democrats, in part because more of them than in the Rust Belt are evangelical Christians. (Although exit polls showed Biden winning about two in five non-college-educated white voters in Michigan, Wisconsin, and even Iowa, he carried only about one in five of them in North Carolina and Georgia and only about one in four in Texas.) Conversely, the opportunity for mobilization is greater in the Sun Beltwhere people of color constitute a majority of the population turning 18 each year in many of the statesthan in the Rust Belt. Given those political and demographic realities, most Democratic campaigns and candidates across the Sun Belt believe their future depends primarily on engaging younger and nonwhite votersand the registration and turnout efforts led by Stacey Abrams in Georgia is the model they hope to emulate.

Fernandez Ancona says Way to Win isnt calling for Democrats to abandon the Rust Belt, or to concede more working-class white voters to the GOP. Rather, she says, the group believes that party donors and campaigns must increase the resources devoted to expansion of the minority electorate so that it more closely matches the greater sums already devoted to the persuasion of mostly white swing voters.

I dont think its expansion versus persuasion: Its that we have to prioritize expansion just as we have historically prioritized persuasion, she says. We saw that in 2020. Its very clear: We needed it all.

Read: Democrats 2024 problem is already clear

In fact, both Fernandez Ancona and Gavito argue, the entire debate over whether to stress recapturing more white voters or mobilizing more nonwhite voters obscures the partys actual challenge: finding ways to unify a coalition that is inherently more multiracial and multigenerational than the Republicans. Even with Trumps gains among some minority voters, white voters still supplied almost 92 percent of his votes across these 11 states, the analysis found. Bidens contrasting coalition was much more diverse: just under 60 percent white and more than 40 percent nonwhite.

Sometimes we are missing the whole and we are not grasping that the multiracial coalition includes white people and people of color, and we have to hold that coalition together, Fernandez Ancona says. Thinking about the whole coalition [means] we have to find messages that unite around a shared vision that includes cross-racial solidarity.

One of those messages, Gavito says, is boosting economically strained families of all races with the kind of kitchen-table programs embedded in the Democrats big budget-reconciliation bill, such as tax credits for children, lower prescription-drug prices, and increased subsidies for health- and child-care expenses. Those programs are very important at this stage, she says, to give Democrats any chance of avoiding the usual midterm losses for the presidents party, thats for damn sure.

On that point, Biden and almost every Democrat in both the House and the Senate agree. But unless they can also persuade Senators Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona to pass the bill, debates about the Sun Belt versus the Rust Belt, or white versus nonwhite voters, may be washed away by a tide of disapproval from all of those directions.

Read more from the original source:
The Democrats Future Is in the West - The Atlantic