The Huffington Post has a brief article about gay rights and civil rights. Commenting on the Martin Luther King’s support for interracial marriage, the author says that King was “too prejudiced” to endorse gay marriage. Did you get that? Martin Luther King was “too prejudiced” to embrace same-sex marriage according to this article.
Mark it down, folks. It’s not too often that you’ll hear Dr. King spoken of as a bigot at the Huffington Post, but there it is. It just goes to show that the advocates of same-sex marriage are adopting civil rights rhetoric for a reason. They mean not merely to redefine marriage. They mean to marginalize and stigmatize anyone who stands for traditional marriage. They want to annihilate the character of anyone who believes that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Not even Martin Luther King is safe on this one.
I’m sure this makes you a racist, somehow.
I’m working out the “how.”
It has often been African-Americans themselves who have adopted civil rights rhetoric in the context of gay rights debates and discussions.
John Lewis has been doing this for years. He has as much credibility and experience with regard to “civil rights” than anyone living. And he’s certainly not gone down the path of Michael Long.
In fact, it has been Black Baptists who have most frequently invoked civil rights rhetoric and analogies including the mention of Dr. King and a reliance on his vision of a Beloved Community in these debates, PRO & CON.
A very abridged version of a paper of mine that was read at the recent meeting of the Baptist History & Heritage Society appears in this month’s Baptist Studies Bulletin:
Your own rhetoric here is that of an activist or advocate. I get that. But, as a scholar, I hope you will agree that such broad-sweeping statements are not entirely accurate. Your use of “They” portrays gay rights proponents as a monolithic group. Clearly, there are many such as John Lewis that don’t fit your characterization here.
It’s helpful when we don’t lump everyone on one side of an issue together or on another side of issue together as if they all think, speak and act alike.
Yes, but those leaders don’t seem to represent the vast majority of African Americans on this issue. It’s not monolithic, but neither is it a split decision.
Like with other groups, the polling shows that African-Americans are becoming more accepting of the legal right to same-sex marriage.
Take Lewis for example. He and other respected Atlanta black leaders like Julian Bond and the late Mrs. King have supported gay rights for a decade or longer. Perhaps in light of the polling, Lewis and others have influenced African-Americans. I’m sure they have to some degree (the extent is up for debate).
Did you see the recent national poll that showed a record-high 59% of African-Americans support giving same-sex couples the right to marry?
Even if that number is soft and goes down some, the stats indicate that your “vast majority” characterization is a bit overblown. We’re moving to a true even divide if that’s not already happened…
Support for same-sex marriage has been hovering in the low-40s for 3-4 years now. Those weren’t insignificant numbers then.
Keep in mind, that there hasn’t been a major Black Church denomination publicly oppose gay rights in the way that the Southern Baptist Convention has. As far as Black Baptist denominations go, no group has passed an anti-gay rights resolution or statement. Two Black Baptist chief executives are on the NAACP board and were not among the two dissenting votes.
I don’t think I saw that poll. Which one was it?
Believe me, I know the trends are going in favor of gay marriage, whatever the hard numbers may actually be.
I think it’s outrageous that some “Christians” won’t align themselves with Christ’s definition of marriage. It calls into question some pretty fundamental things.
It was a ABC/WaPo poll:
I think that most Black Christians who support the right of same-sex couples to marry ALSO affirm with you that Christ’s definition of marriage is one man, woman. The polling still finds that a much lower percentage of Americans do not morally approve of homosexuality.
The idea behind the Beloved Community is that rights – guided by principles of equality, justice, fairness – are to be expanded not restricted. Given the Black Church tradition w/ its emphasis on those concepts (defined liberally) and the role of that vision in the Black Church, I don’t think its surprising that African-American leaders have affirmed a political ethic that affirms gay rights in terms of legal rights.
I find it interesting that we don’t appeal to MLK jr more often. When I read his speeches he clearly believed that religious beliefs should construct public policy. Even if we have major disagreements in other areas this is an area that we hold in common.
It becomes very problematic for secularists when a major hero of a past became a hero by employing a political ideology (religion constructing public laws) that they presently reject. Their best reply is to say that while they disagree with how he did it they agree with the ends.
In reply. First that way of thinking is pure utilitarianism which is problematic. Second, it is questionable epistemological certainty to say so strongly that a present action is so dangerous (making laws based upon religious beliefs) which brought about such a great end just a few decades ago. Things are easy to see when you look back upon them from the present. But how do we not know that a present movement from such dangerous action (religious basis for law) will not also produce such a great end?
Aligning with God’s definition has nothing to do with disallowing another person to live according to their own conscience. You let people observe the Sabbath however they want to.You let people drink alcohol to whatever excess that they want to.You let people speak lies and profanities.You let people worship manmade idols and created things.You let people deify beasts and imaginary beings.You let children dishonor their parentsYou let people be prideful.You let people be bullies.You let people get divorced.You let divorced people get remarried.You let people have open marriages.You let people to engage in homosex.You let people make a mint by disgracing people in films.You let people gamble.You let men act like women.You let women act like men.You let women preach in churches.You let people hoard mountains of resources while letting people to starve.You let people get obnoxiously fat.You let people be takers and wasters.You let people sell their nakedness.You let people tell hurtful things about other people. I’m sure the list goes on and on and on, Denny. Why do I have to ascribe to force the nation to live according to your definition of this one thing or I’m not necessarily a Christian according to you? WHY?! All these things are legal in the US, yet somehow this one thing is a make it or break it issue for you. I find that odd.
dr. james willingham
It is sad to read and see how many Black leaders have fallen prey to the aim of a ruling class that has no concern for the religious rights and teachings of the Christian Faith. In fact, it will soon become evident that the powers of the state will be thrown behind the forces for sexual demoralization of our whole society. The info. on Weaver’s views at the Baptist History site was most discouraging to read. Clearly, we are coming to some of the most difficult and trying times, the church and individual Christians have ever faced. Behind the facade of respectability and acceptance lies an ill-concealed violence and devestation to children who are often the sufferers in the thriving of such practices. All of the claims of scientific justification for same sex marriage will not stand in the light of God’s will. What is being done will be such a blow to the Christian Faith and to our society, that one dreads to contemplate the traumas our children, grand children, and great grands will face…and even now are facing. Like the family being told by a judge in Texas that they could not say anything to their children about the evils of homosexuality, could not point out that it was wrong and contrary to the their Christian Faith. In short, their rights did not mean anything. That is not what my ancestors fought for in the American Revolution; it is not what I want taught to my family members out there in the future. There is a great despair and a disaster fast approaching our whole civilization unless God visits us with another Great Awakening for which I have been praying for 39 years. Then, those who indulge in evil practices give up their wicked ways out of grief for their offenses to God and His holy law.