I read your Op Ed piece in the Sunday Mercury News Perspective section with great interest. I am one who views with disbelief and, yes, horror the elevation of right wing fundamentalism to a dominant political force now in our country. This is not a knee-jerk secular-humanist liberal revulsion for all them “Bible thumpers.” It is a concern born of the history of religious and political interaction. The results have never to my knowledge been pretty.
Our Founding Fathers included the separation clause in the Bill of Rights, because they were much closer historically to the horrors of the church/state combination. From the persecution of the Albigensians and Gnostics in the early Church to the blood baths of the Inquisition and later the witch trials across Europe and colonial America, the record of the religious state has been one of singular and horrific human suffering.
That is why the concept of the separation of Church and State is central to the United States of America. You write that:
The main point on which conservative evangelicals ram up against the rest of American society is the separation of church and state.
Many conservative evangelicals simply don't believe in such a divide when it comes to ``traditional values.''
I can only recoil in horror at that thought. “Traditional values” for one is often very different for another. That is why the government of the United States must be secular, must be operated outside the confines of any specific religion. This is a diverse country and it must accommodate the needs, beliefs and aspirations of Christians, Jews, Moslems and anyone of any faith or no faith who comes to live on these shores. By demanding primacy for their views and their beliefs, the Christian Right is in my view engaging in exceptionalism and some degree of arrogance.
The tone of your article I took to be suggesting that we on the left don’t “get it.” You write:
Many overlooked the political power of conservative evangelical churches largely because they could not imagine so many people could have such a different worldview. That kept them from understanding how the culture of evangelical churches -- set up, after all, to convert people -- can be an ideal political mobilizing machine. There's a regular time and place to meet, a sense of mission, small communities accustomed to teamwork, and leaders who are often strong communicators.Okay, they are a lean, mean, fighting machine, that does not in itself bestow legitimacy or validate their mission. I view that fact with an additional note of alarm. I see the Christian Right positioning itself to impose its belief system and its agenda on the rest of us whether we like it or not.
Unfortunately, many of us see very little to like in the Christian right. We see strident preachers condemning our lifestyles without sparing the pejoratives. We see open and aggressive intolerance for gays who are often upstanding citizens and even role models in their communities, for scientists whose theories and whose discoveries don’t pass biblical muster, and for artists whose works may provoke thoughts and feelings that may fall outside the permissible bounds.
So, far from welcoming “salvation” from the Religious Right, many of us see them as a retrograde force trying to undo the gains that have been made in social justice and the extension of equality to women, gays and minorities over the last century. Since the Religious Right has gone to no pains to make its message palatable or user friendly to those not of the flock, their message remains couched in a highly repellent envelope.
There are many issues that opponents of the Religious Right could find common ground with them on. The most contentious issue is of course abortion. In my view, the Religious Right has one answer to this question and that is to shut it off. As one raised in the Catholic Church, I too feel very uncomfortable with abortion, however, I feel that there are many ways to reduce if not eliminate abortion including sex education and contraceptives. However, for the Religious Right, none of that is on the table. It’s either “my way or the highway.” And while the argument will no doubt be that these are moral principles that can’t be compromised, I can only respond that this is planet earth…not the kingdom of heaven. One will seldom be granted perfect alternatives. In many cases, it is necessary to pick the lesser of two or more evils. And that is one of the areas where I feel that the Religious Right has displayed no imagination but has instead retreated into moral cowardice. Abortion is an extremely complex issue and just closing it down will result in a reversion to the world prior to Roe v Wade…where the pillars of religion can congratulate themselves on defeating evil, but the dirty deed is still being performed in filthy back-alley abortion mills anyway…resulting in a high risk of infection and death to the women involved. Not to my mind a very Christian outcome.
I regret that opponents have ridiculed evangelical Christians. That is never appropriate and I don’t believe that it represents the views of the majority of those outside the fold. As I’ve tried to point out above, however, many do view your co-religionists with alarm. I will admit that as the Religious Right is now constituted, I see no chance of rapprochement or dialogue. For apparent moderates like yourself who seem to maintain an open mind, that is a different story. However, with the likes of James Dobson, Lou Sheldon, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and others, I expect to be in permanent opposition.
Thanks for a thought-provoking article.
Best Regards
Gene Eldridge
No comments:
Post a Comment