I wish I could say that “change” is in the air, but it seems more like “inevitably polarizing and divisive rhetoric” is looming thanks in part to Obama’s historic endorsement of same-sex marriage today. I have to give him credit for at least taking a clear stand on the issue, something politicians usually steer clear of in an election year.
Regardless of the temptation to fall into the usual camps and talking points on this “issue,” I sincerely hope that some higher profile discussion of the very human implications of this kind of legislation will be able to move people toward a more sophisticated understanding of marriage, sexuality, and public policy. At a very basic level, this debate is not (to me at least) primarily about “defending a traditional definition of marriage.” Rather, the central issue in my mind is about equality and justice. Will society be able to grant same-sex partners– many of whom are already living in legally recognized civil unions– the same protection under the law that is afforded to heterosexual partners? Or will we continue to perpetuate a tiered system where same-sex partners are– whether in word or deed– basically second-class citizens? I am convinced that this is one of the most important civil rights questions of our day.
And especially for people of faith, there is a lot of hard, thoughtful, prayerful, considerate, compassionate work that needs to be done– relationally, theologically, and practically. You may not be ready to flip a switch and jump over to “the other side,” whatever that “side” may be. That’s fine. At the very least, you need to educate yourself and enter into conversation with others in humility and genuine openness.
I’ve spent the last few years wrestling with these conversations in various settings, and I’m not done. But one thing I’m absolutely convinced of is that Christians do not need to fight, accuse, belittle, divide, and label one another as they politicize their “position.” Why does the church feel the need to “take a position” on everything? There are plenty of things the church does not have an “official stance” on, and yet strong opinions can still be held and debated respectfully.
Ultimately, the public policy issues and the church issues are separate but overlapping conversations. And as society moves inevitably toward greater acceptance of LGBTQ persons and communities, the church must learn to bear a more faithful witness to the radical hospitality and reconciling love of Christ.
In my limited judgment, David, you do not, after all, escape “fall[ing] into the usual camps and talking points on this ‘issue,’” not least the implication that those who disagree are just not yet “ready” (“to flip a switch and jump over to ‘the other side’”), primarily because they haven’t yet “educate[d] themselves and enter[ed] into conversation with others” (“whatever that ‘side’ may be” being a bit of a throwaway in context). Not everyone who objects to the strikingly “usual” claim that “this is one of the most important civil rights questions of our day” does so because they haven’t yet “educate[d] themselves and enter[ed] into conversation with others”. Indeed, the opposite is not infrequently the case.
Posted by Steve Perisho | May 10, 2012, 4:14 amHey Steve,
What I meant was that there are indeed many gradients to this conversation and that an openness to “the other” does not require an immediate acceptance of arguments that are often bundled together. For example, my experience has often been that Christians (on various sides of the arguments) have difficulty thinking outside of the ways that denominations have staked out their positions- “welcoming but not affirming” or “open and affirming,” etc. If I speak critically about something like “welcoming but not affirming,” it is sometimes assumed (mistakenly) that I must be fully “open and affirming” (as if those are the only options to choose). Likewise, in some “open and affirming churches,” there is sometimes a “silencing of dissent” that may question the validity of a blanket policy around human sexuality.
I did not intend to imply that those who do not see this as a civil rights issue are simply “uneducated.” Of course there are thoughtful, educated people who disagree on this. But outside of the academy, my experience in the church, particularly among evangelicals, is that there hasn’t been a lot of thoughtful engagement with the LGBTQ community on their terms. And even within evangelical academia, the track record hasn’t been much better. It may be that genuine, mutually-informing friendships with the LGBTQ community do not necessarily transform the academic arguments at the root. But I do think such relationships can change the character of our public discourse, and open the possibility for more humility about what we do and don’t know about human sexuality.
Anyhow, I recognize that much of my blog readership is outside of the academy, but maybe it is unfair to assume that evangelicals (broadly speaking) haven’t been very thoughtful in their engagement with LGBTQ persons. I would love to be pleasantly surprised, but my limited experience thus far confirms this all too common stereotype of a general hostility to the possibility that faithful Christians can be in favor of same-sex marriage– in society, in the church, or both.
Posted by david | May 10, 2012, 11:12 am