Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Changing pastimes

Changing pastimes

Savenor serves as the Executive Director of Civic Spirit that provides training in civic education to faith based day schools.

Framing America’s longstanding love affair with baseball, Rabbi Solomon Schechter once asserted: “In order to be a success in the American rabbinate, you must be able to talk baseball.” While these words from the head of the Jewish Theological Seminar a century ago may be apocryphal, their impact is unequivocal. By the twentieth century baseball had become an integral part of Americana. Baseball metaphors pervade our speech today and a simple game of catch between father and son still represents the quintessential moment of familial bonding.


A century later, however, baseball is no longer America’s pastime, as reflected by a significant drop in ratings. And despite several attempts at rule changes – including larger bases introduced during Spring Training - to lure fans back, it is clear that baseball has lost its luster.

Football is our new pastime. In addition to incredible ratings and the popularity of Madden video games, perhaps the greatest indicator of the NFL’s dominance in American culture is the Super Bowl. At a time when content has become “tribal,” Super Bowl Sunday has almost reached civic holiday status. The game itself is the most watched TV program during the year.

To evaluate whether this change of pastimes sends any deeper messages about our times, a look at both sports is warranted. During a baseball game teams try to score the most runs, but opposing sides occupy the same space, run the same basepath, and even agree on what constitutes the final destination, home plate. The fact that runs are scored at “home” speaks to the deeply personal connection fans feel towards their team. This may explain why some fans felt betrayed when the sport instead acts blatantly as a business, and when MLB franchises move, like when the Brooklyn Dodgers relocated in a heartbeat to Los Angeles.

In football, players compete on the same field, but to win they need to reach the other side. Endzones are different for each team and as literally far away as possible. Moreover, NFL players do everything in their power to prevent the competition from getting to the other side. While baseball is played without a clock, our new pastime is intensified by its fixed timeframe, thereby making clock management a valued skill by coaches and players alike.

One can argue that the shift from baseball to football sheds light on something more important than our pastime preferences, namely how contemporary society approaches competition itself. Neither competition nor football is inherently negative. Regarding the former, Robert Kennedy once said that "the lessons of competition are lessons for life." Competition pushes us to learn to reach our potential and provides us with the opportunity to discover how to win with grace and lose with dignity. And team experiences provide players, especially students, with the chance to achieve excellence in a particular area.

But what happens when our only interaction with “the other” is through competition? Do we have a shared sense of home, or do we solely focus on tackling and sacking the opposition?

A recent incident in Miami illustrates the challenges associated with this no-holds-barred approach to competition. Instead of shaking hands at the end of their championship game, the students from Scheck Hillel Community School and Archbishop Carroll Coleman High School began to brawl. According to news reports, this incident began with Antisemitic and hated-filled curses.

This melee in Miami generated news headlines because this behavior goes against our shared aspirations of sportsmanship, and even worse, signifies a symptom of a growing national problem. In our nation of immigrants, distrust of the other frequently frames our interactions in our country. While team sports are supposed to build character and community, there are similar stories of verbal taunts and some punches thrown at schools from Los Angeles, California, to Franklin, Massachusetts.

With so much of our attention focused on what is being taught in the classroom, it behooves us to notice what is going on outside. How often do children get together with those who are different from themselves? Where do students engage with new peers?

Students are most likely to meet peers different from themselves on a sports field, in a debate tournament, at Model UN and a Science Fair. All of these activities contribute greatly to our children’s development, and yet, the one common thread is competition.

When one doesn’t know the people on the other side of the field whether it be in Miami or Anytown USA, it is unfortunately too easy to classify an opponent myopically as merely a member of another religion, race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic background, etc. The problem is that when we only meet others to compete, our pastimes can become clash times.

I recently started working for Civic Spirit, an organization that provides training in civic education to faith based schools. In addition to professional development and leadership training, we create opportunities for Jewish, Catholic, Christian, and Muslim teachers and students to meet and work together. While dialogue across differences is an important first step, real change takes place when we collaborate in an ongoing manner.

What amazes me most about the field of civic education is the amount of collaboration taking place. This year’s Civic Learning Week consisted of offerings from an array of organizations with diverse missions and overlapping goals. The spirit of the week is that all of us are needed to enhance civic education, despite differences in approach and overlapping needs.

Thinking about the clash between the students in Miami, I am reminded of the words of Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks: “We encounter God in the face of a stranger. That, I believe, is the Hebrew Bible’s single greatest and most counterintuitive contribution to ethics. God creates difference; therefore it is in one-who-is-different that we meet God.” This sensibility is not intended to reduce our competitive spirit; rather foster generosity of spirit towards those on the other side of the field.

While our pastimes change over time, our commitment to community and country must be given every chance to stand the test of time. When we give the next generation the opportunity to work together rather than against one another, we all win the day.

Read More

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., January 29, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Chen Mengtong/China News Service/VCG via Getty Images)

Understanding the Debate on Health Secretary Kennedy’s Vaccine Panelists

Summary

On June 9, 2025, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), dismissed all 17 members of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Secretary Kennedy claimed the move was necessary to eliminate “conflicts of interest” and restore public trust in vaccines, which he argued had been compromised by the influence of pharmaceutical companies. However, this decision strays from precedent and has drawn significant criticism from medical experts and public health officials across the country. Some argue that this shake-up undermines scientific independence and opens the door to politicized decision-making in vaccine policy.

Background: What Is ACIP?

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is a federal advisory group that helps guide national vaccine policy. Established in 1964, it has over 60 years of credibility as an evidence-based body of medical and scientific experts. ACIP makes official recommendations on vaccine schedules for both children and adults, determining which immunizations are required for school entry, covered by health insurance, and prioritized in public health programs. The committee is composed of specialists in immunology, epidemiology, pediatrics, infectious disease, and public health, all of whom are vetted for scientific rigor and ethical standards. ACIP’s guidance holds national weight, shaping both public perception of vaccines and the policies of institutions like schools, hospitals, and insurers.

Keep ReadingShow less
MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border
Way into future, RPA Airmen participate in Red Flag 16-2 > Creech ...

MQ-9 Predator Drones Hunt Migrants at the Border

FT HUACHUCA, Ariz. - Inside a windowless and dark shipping container turned into a high-tech surveillance command center, two analysts peered at their own set of six screens that showed data coming in from an MQ-9 Predator B drone. Both were looking for two adults and a child who had crossed the U.S.-Mexico border and had fled when a Border Patrol agent approached in a truck.

Inside the drone hangar on the other side of the Fort Huachuca base sat another former shipping container, this one occupied by a drone pilot and a camera operator who pivoted the drone's camera to scan nine square miles of shrubs and saguaros for the migrants. Like the command center, the onetime shipping container was dark, lit only by the glow of the computer screens.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Trump 2020 flag outside of a home.

As Trump’s second presidency unfolds, rural America—the foundation of his 2024 election win—is feeling the sting. From collapsing export markets to cuts in healthcare and infrastructure, those very voters are losing faith.

Getty Images, ablokhin

Trump’s 2.0 Actions Have Harmed Rural America Who Voted for Him

Daryl Royal, the 20-year University of Texas football coach, once said, “You've gotta dance with them that brung ya.” The modern adaptation of that quote is “you gotta dance with the one who brought you to the party.” The expression means you should remain loyal to the people or things that helped you succeed.

Sixty-three percent of America’s 3,144 counties are predominantly rural, and Donald Trump won 93 percent of those counties in 2024. Analyses show that rural counties have become increasingly solid Republican, and Trump’s margin of victory within rural America reached a new high in the 2024 election.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules
white concrete dome museum

Hands Off Our Elections: States and Congress, Not Presidents, Set the Rules

Trust in elections is fragile – and once lost, it is extraordinarily difficult to rebuild. While Democrats and Republicans disagree on many election policies, there is broad bipartisan agreement on one point: executive branch interference in elections undermines the constitutional authority of states and Congress to determine how elections are run.

Recent executive branch actions threaten to upend this constitutional balance, and Congress must act before it’s too late. To be clear – this is not just about the current president. Keeping the executive branch out of elections is a crucial safeguard against power grabs by any future president, Democrat or Republican.

Keep ReadingShow less