1. Maven is right. As far as I have found, at least not from his own mouth, Rick Warren has not directly tied homosexuality or gay marriage to incest, pedophilia, polygamy, etc. Concession granted.
2. However, Maven is wrong that Warren doesn't do so implicitly! He pretty much ties all of those together into one big, fat knot of similar sin that real Christians (read: good, moral, etc. people) ought to best avoid. I do think the video does a much better job of providing context for what he says...and it also does a much better job of demonstrating his homophobia and a dangerous obfuscation of what is dangerous and violent with who/what a person is. And where this really becomes sticky is where gay marriage and Rick Warren becomes gay marriage and a general homophobia of a certain kind, in certain Christian communities. I beef with this big time, although I do it as someone who is outside of this community both as a Catholic (we got to hell for breathing the wrong way on the wrong day) and as a Catholic (damn molesting a$$ priests) and as a Latina Catholic (rampant, violent homophobia and machismo is in our water) and as a Puerto Rican Catholic (totally out the box all the time--who cares what you do in your bedroom? I'm having premarital sex anyway).
3. Not I did not use gay-bashing above. I will release Warren from my charge of gay-bashing because I don't think it is relevant here in this case. HOWEVER, I think the problem I have with Rick Warren as a leader is above and beyond homophobic Christian rhetoric precisely because the two lead into the other. And this is where I completely disagree with Maven's comment on the Rick Warren post:
@T so very true. it is interesting that as Warren points out in the video that everyone is so quick to point out the shortcomings of others instead of their own. gluttony, materialism, lying, gossip, unkindness--all of these get constantly overlooked in order to "address" beliefs on sex. Gotta love the puritan traditions in this country! ::eyes rolling:: so frustrating sometimes.Gluttony, materialism, lying, gossip, unkindness all stem from an intolerance, closed-mindedness, and violence that occurs from racist, sexist, and homophobic stances such as these. I've had many a Christian friend, who I love and who I know means well, in the context of discussing gay marriage, or same sex behavior, or either of those and the Bible, segue very smoothly into general gay-bashing: Those people molest children, those people are running the black family, those men aren't real men, those men are endangering us black women because they spread AIDS, those women aren't real women, that's gay (as a term, it seems like "gay" is to black folks what "ghetto" is to white girls), how gross, ew, yuck, etc. These are not bad people. These are people I truly care about. They are not evil. No more than the queer folks they are referring to. But the reality is when this language, sentiment, and un-Christian rhetoric is in the water, it doesn't stop just at, "Oh, you can't join my church but I'll give you funding for your AIDS projects." It doesn't stop at, "Well, do what you want but you're going to hell. But we can agree to disagree because that is tolerance." It stops at insults and sometimes, all too often, it stops at real violence.
Also interesting that Puritan got thrown in there too because a hyper-heterosexual stance is pretty, damn Puritan. Contesting that is actually part of our other tradition. You know, the radical, anti-hierarchical tradition of dissent, resistance and revolt for human rights. The same one that sent slaves scampering across the Ohio River and even as far as Canada. And that is just one example. Those human rights weren't always clear for everyone--most of the founders who signed the Dec were also slaveowners--but part of our tradition of dissent comes from the (very Christian, at least in the U.S.) understanding that human kindness and morality do not stand outside of larger issues because the two (larger issues, inherent morality) are intricately connected. Social movements throughout U.S. history have used the perceived connection between the two to mobilize since our slaveowners started grumbling in 1776 about their damn tea. Suffrage, Great Awakenings, Civil War, Progressivism, Civil Rights Movement and all attending movements....the list goes on and on.
4. Rick Warren did support Prop 8. Even if he was one of the least inflammatory about it. But this was interesting:
"His social consciousness is somewhat left of center, but his theological, ethical stance is right of center," said the Rev. William Leonard, a critic of the Southern Baptist Convention and dean of Wake Forest Divinity School in North Carolina. "That's the thing that makes him potentially a bridge person."
5. The inauguration does not belong to Obama the POTUS. Not Obama the man (he belongs to Michelle, dammit) but Obama the President of the United States. Obama the POTUS does not belong to Obama. Obama the POTUS is my duly elected President. I helped put his ass there with my vote and my money, as small as it was. And this entire election he's been aware of that, always claiming that this wasn't about him, his personality, charisma, or speeches. It was about us being active, being vocal and visible. The inauguration--and there will be other times in the next four years--is the moment when the vision of his presidency will become true. I am not comfortable with that vision including such conservative rhetoric, and again, I say that while being decently comfortable with that vision including HRC, Summers, and other sundry throwbacks of past administrations.
6. Witch hunts suck. But I don't think the media blitz has been a witch hunt (I don't mean blogs...bloggers live to witch hunt). Rachel Maddow has done great, balanced pieces on the situation, Warren sat down with Ann Curry in another interview. I just think the facts speak for themselves and this is an issue that is hotter than maybe the Obama team expected it to be. And I hope it stays that way! We keep sleeping on it! From what little I was asked to research, courtesy of Maven!, I am willing to consider this in the context of Obama reaching across the aisle. But that doesn't make me like it. Again, for some people it is HRC as Secretary of State. For me it is this ever more ambiguous hand that gets extended to the U.S. gay community (white, mainstream in particular). I'd feel better if he was reaching and already had a solid and well publicized stance on civil unions and how to secure them as a civil right (he's always kind of slid around that one). And I think that he is going to get pressed on this by people more qualified than me to do so (as an ally I can only say so much).
7. I've stayed away from the "Bible says gay is bad" stance. I don't know the Bible well enough to fight back. Even if I did, my worldview on the Bible is so un-Christian, that I probably wouldn't help anyone. For people like me, who live within and internalize all the contradictions of being human and following a faith (see the end of #2), this argument is not impressive and patently unconvincing. I therefore can't be an ally in that kind of conversation, but I hope that there are people who are those kinds of allies and can have those conversations.
That's all I've got for now. And I'm pretty darn happy. We don't talk about this enough, although I wish I had more of #7 in me. So if there is anything good the Rick Warren pick does for the country, it is this--conversation.
1 comment:
And see Kis, THIS is why you are the resident ABD!!!! We just give you a topic and you go at it! =)
okay lets see if I can address the things that popped into my mind while reading your post.
@2. You still think it's an implicit tie? See, the way I hear it is not "this is what I believe these people are" it sounds to me like "This is what i feel marriage is not" That doesn't seem like obfuscating... it seems like a legitimate attempt at defining a particular union.
@3. I frequently refer to the puritans these days because I live in MA and the region is still very steeped in their traditions. I think we agree on this part , but i just wanted to rephrase. I think its very interesting that SEX draws that biggest discussions about sin and right and wrong over SO MANY other things. Maybe because the puritans new how much fun it was and all that sensual enjoyment was seen as a direct threat to "true piety"...clearly they never read song of solomon! =) (AMEN!) I think we don't discuss our other shortcoming because its makes people sleep easier to put themselves on a pedestal. But i don't think that gluttony, lying, gossip, or material ism stem from close-mindedness or intolerance... i think thats a jump. but i feel you for the most part on 3.
@5. I told you, I'm an only child...I'm loving but I'm territorial! lol so yeah.. it would be MY inauguration. Obama is a better man than I. Perhaps it's more fitting to say. I'd like him to have the autonomy/wiggle room for him to see his vision for the inauguration come to fruition without alot of stress. I mean, heck... we give him the reins to the country. We see his vision for leading us but we micro-manage his first big party!! That seems counter intuitive! =)
@6. you're right Kis, I meant more bloggers than the main media.. but i feel like the print journalist are taking liberties or at time just being lazy with what it is he said. Then the misquotes get passed around, and people get rightfully upset based on what they've heard, but no one stops and says.. wait, watch the curry interview. I don't think everyone is going to agree with warren, but he's not a basher. I don't like hyperbole on EITHER side of this issue.. any issue really. but the media (old and new) thrive on it these days it seems.
@7. I've grown up in a chuch every sunday, prayer meeting on wednesday, christian school attending kinda of existence. And after all these years there is one thing that hold true... no one agrees on everything... hence sects and denominations galore. Yes, the old testament and the new testament speak against homosexuality... they also speak out againts shrimp, lying, hair braiding, piercings, swearing, greed, polyester, and slaves fleeing masters... all of which bring about valid conversations!(Especialy the polyester one! =P)
But the important thing that T mentioned is that regardless of what the bible says about same-sex relationships, it also makes very clear that slander and hateful speech are wrong. So any so-called Christian who active partakes in that is wrong, and is sinning. Hypocrisy is THE PITS!
But yes the conversation is good. not just for idea sharing, but to some self-inventory as well. Yay for a diverse and thoughtful group of Black women...I love yal.
Post a Comment