Doug:
> Chuck has long made it clear that he's seriously annoyed by
the role of Jesus in American political life.
And I am seriously annoyed at Chuck's serious annoyance.
> Would it have been ok to make that remark about a white centrist
politician, just not a black one?
It would have been just as bad. Now if Chuck has evidence that Ford's or anyone else's faith is simply a prop/device, then I say have at them. But friends who know the man say that faith is not a prop for him.
Carl:
> Publicly grandstanding Jesus Freaks are fair game for criticism
irrespective of race, sex or any other qualification.
How do you know Ford is a Jesus Freak (or are all Christians Jesus Freaks?). For that matter, what makes one a Jesus Freak? Is mentioning your faith in public the equivalent of public grandstanding? That sounds a lot like the "rubbing-in-it-my-face" accusations straights love to hurl against queers when they hold hands or kiss in public.
Dwayne:
> As a Black man who, from time to time, speaks of his non-faith,
I share some of Chuck's annoyance at the relentless insertion of
Jesus into every nook and cranny.
But what is so annoying about sincere expressions of faith? (Unless, of course, all expressions of faith are suspect). Aren't you just as determined to insert your dogma (whatever it is) in as many nooks and crannies as possible?
> (as happened Brian when you implied that a "Black man expressing
his faith" is somehow more special and deserving of protection than
a White guy doing the same thing or perhaps even the opposite universe
version, a Black man expressing his un-faith).
I do not think it is more deserving or less deserving. I guess I was just suprised at Chuck's singling out the Black man who talked about religion among the countless white guys who did the same thing all night long.
[This part comes after thinking about how I felt] Maybe some of what I felt came from the fact that I feel Chuck thinks all Christians are cut from the same megachurch cloth that he was exposed to growing up. Chuck is always going off on megachurch Christians as if they are the template for all people of faith. In my experience this is not the case. In fact, I have witnessed some significant differences between megachurch Christians and Christians who who come from the tradition of the Black church. There were also commonalities, but in my experience the differences outnumbered the similarities. What I find suspect about Chuck's position is the assumption that the megachurch model (which is also a product of white, middle class privilege) can be assumed to be the template for the religious expression of all Christians, especially those who come from different backgrounds.
> Chuck is not a racist and doesn't deserve to be spoken to or about as
if he's some jackass trying to keep me out of his neighborhood.
I do not think he is a racist. But viewing all Christians through a white megachurch lens seems myopic to me. It eradicates all nuance and difference.
Ravi:
> I should add that I was surprised by Brian Dauth's post -- not a style
of argument I would have attributed to him at all.
Well, maybe I am having a bad day. I work with these horrid Jesus freaks every day. But my perceptions of them are a little different. The majority are regular people who are trying to do the best they can under the weight of an incredibly racist system. I have found that their faith is something that gives them the strength to continue to fight. They are not the "I-do-not-care-about-poverty" Christians that Chuck is fulminating against. I just do not recognize the deluded beings Chuck and Carl allege lurk in every nook and cranny in the people I interact with on a daily basis.
I also work with these evil people to change their attitudes toward same-sex marriage and guess what -- part of their moving to my position involves their following their religious beliefs. Maybe Christians are different in Kansas.
Chuck:
> I'm going to criticize any career politician who gets up on stage and starts
thanking his imaginary friend for his fortune or misfortune.
Why? Because it makes you feel better? What does alienating potential allies accomplish besides self-aggrandizement?
> Religion is fucking stupid. I'm a militant atheist who fucking hates religion.
So you are a fundamentalist atheist -- a variation on a fundamentalist Christian. Same intolerant attitude, different dogma.
> I'm not going to shove my feelings about religion into the closet in order to
mollify some NPR liberal progressives who want to make nice with religious
people.
I just want to succeed in making the lives of the children and families I work with better. If making nice with church congregations in Harlem helps to provide safe outcomes for youth, where is the problem? Should I turn away their help and alienate them because they are religious?
> If anything, leftists should be more vocal and critical of religion, even the
crap spewed by religious people of color.
Is everything that religious people of color say with regard to their religious feelings/beliefs crap?
> I live and grew up in a city of megachurches and religion. I'm tired of
religion.
Chuck grew up around one particular type of religious expression and became tired of this religion, therefore, all religious belief and speech is crap.
> I want to enjoy getting into the faces of religious people. I want to offend
the holy crap out of them. I want to step on their pious hypocritical toes. I
want to smack the motherfuckers who go to church on Sundays, display
anti-choice bumper stickers on their cars and pretend that they have no
obligation to eliminate poverty.
Terrance and I invite you to go with us one Sunday to our church. One note: you will not see many (if any) anti-abortion bumper stickers, but you will find a lot of people who believe that they and the rest of the nation have an obligation to eliminate poverty.
> I'm fucking tired of the megachurches with their office complexes, Sunday
school facilities that are better than inner city schools, and their multimedia
outreach to the "unchurched." I'm tired of religion idiots who indoctinate
children in their "schools" of ignorance. I'm tired of their rejection
of evolution and the rest of reality.
But "Megachurch Christians" do not equal "All Christians." The megachurch phenomenon is a product of white, middle class privilege.
Carl:
> Wow, that's pretty authoritative-sounding! Can I see your
Spokesperson-For-Blacks badge?
20 years of working in the Black community and seeing what helps and what hinders. In my work I have often been told that a big turn-off are people who degrade Blacks and their religious beliefs. In fact, I cannot think of one instance in my career where hostility to a person's or the community's religious beliefs helped in a situation or resulted in a positive outcome.
> IMO, the left should make all its appeals on the basis of tangible reality.
But what is tangible reality to you may not be to someone else. I find the female form undesirable, but for others the female form inspires a tangible desire. Since I do not feel this desire is it, therefore, not a tangible reality?
> It should make promoting material security and equity throughout society
its sole objective.
Now who is sounding authoritative? LOL.
> The left as a political force should not aknowledge or seek to ingratiate
itself with any religion whatsoever.
Why?
> The left should make no special effort to build alliances with individuals
of any background who believe that infantile, knee-jerk recourse to religion
merits them public honor.
But you could argue that turning to atheism is also an infantile recourse. People will always defend their dogma whatever it is. And I am not saying that someone should get public honor for being religious, but what is wrong with respect?
John:
> A politician was being "dissed" for the infusing of his religious beliefs into
politics by someone with a well known animosity for such behavior. His
race was irrelevant to the comment.
But race was not irrelevant since Chuck was extending his white megachurch Christian hatred to include someone who comes from a Black church background. Chuck may be right -- megachurch Christians may be as toxic as he maintains (the ones I know would confirm the general outline of his assertions, but my contact is not nearly as extensive as his). But I am far less convinced that his ideas about Christians are equally applicable to those raised in other traditions.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister