OK, here's the deal: I haven't written a blog in forever - like, eight months, literally. But like anybody else with a Facebook account, I was hit this morning with countless images of a haggard, bearded face that belongs to the man who was easily the most talked-about person in America today. Of course, it's not like his face wasn't already ubiquitous; Duck Dynasty pitches everything from coffee cups to sunglasses to feminine hygiene products (probably), in stores ranging from Walmart to Macy's (again, probably - I haven't actually been into a Macy's in many years).
Of course, the news broke today that Duck Dynasty family patriarch Phil Robertson was suspended indefinitely by A&E after GQ posted an article that included an array of, er, incendiary comments by Robertson about topics ranging from homosexuality to race relations. (I couldn't begin to link to all of the material out there about the controversy; typing "Phil Robertson suspended" into Google yielded 193 million hits.)
The responses have been predictable, with social and political conservatives lambasting A&E and rallying around Robertson and those of a more progressive bend (hi there) praising the network and decrying the remarks. The culture war, sadly, has intensified in the last 24 hours, and it's a safe bet that a number of friendships are among the latest casualties.
I simply cannot avoid writing about this. I want to avoid it; I want to hide from it and wait until it goes away. And maybe you're sitting there thinking, That's exactly what you should have done; you're only fanning the flames if you write about it now. But I feel compelled. I can't help it.
I have given the issue a fair amount of thought throughout the day, and I wouldn't say my thoughts are altogether organized. Fair warning: This post will seem random and non-linear; the thoughts expressed below are, for the most part, in no particular order. I might come back to some of them later in another writing if I feel so compelled.
But before I start, a disclosure: I have watched exactly five minutes of Duck Dynasty ... ever. I don't get the appeal. I don't believe these characters are in any way authentic; I believe they are media creations who are getting paid very handsomely to be caricatures. Aside from that, I have zero strong feelings about the show. I don't love it; I don't hate it; I have no interest in it. It's kind of like my feelings about spring in Norway (never been there), or whether you should buy dill pickles or bread and butter (I don't eat any kind of pickles). I'm not interested in defending the show, and I'm not interested in destroying it; I'm simply not interested in it.
I am, however, very interested in the conversation Robertson started - for reasons I can't really explain. I have a fair number of gay friends, but I wouldn't say I've ever really had an in-depth conversation with any of them about their sexuality, and don't really intend to. But over the last few years, this has been become an issue about which I am deeply passionate.
With that said ... let's roll up our sleeves and get to it.
* * *
1. Is this a freedom of speech issue? Absolutely not. I've seen that phrase thrown around a dozen times today, and almost no one seems to understand that a constitutional right to freedom of speech only means that the government can't punish us for something we say. Unless I missed part of the report, Phil isn't in jail; he was only held accountable by his employer after saying some ugly things that reflected badly on that employer. This is not a violation of his freedom of speech; it's simply a consequence of the choice he made to say the things he said.
2. This post on Red Letter Christians stole my thunder, but I had this thought earlier today, even before I read it there: Today was an interesting day for the LGBT community. In one 24-hour period, this whole Phil Robertson fiasco exploded, New Mexico became the 17th state to allow same-sex marriage, a Methodist minister was defrocked for officiating at his gay son's wedding ... and, perhaps least surprisingly, Brian Boitano came out as gay (I know, I know -- I thought this had already happened, too).
The point is this: Today underscores that how big this issue is in our world right now. It's not a marginal issue; it's fairly inaccurate at this point to say it's a growing issue. It is, indisputably, front-and-center. The pendulum has swung; as of July, it was reported that a majority of Americans (again, hi there) are in favor of same-sex marriage being legal. You can like it, you can hate it; but it is inevitable. It is going to happen. Eventually (and I think sooner rather than later), it's going to be a non-issue; just like my generation thinks nothing of white and black people sharing a water fountain, my daughter's generation will not blink at the thought of same-sex couples. To borrow from one of Bob Dylan's very best songs, "The times, they are a-changin'."
3. It will always baffle me why Christians have to be right about this one issue. We can agree to disagree about almost any other biblical topic -- women in ministry, the role of music in worship services, the King James Version vs. newer translations, adult vs. child baptism, et cetera, et cetera -- but there is no room for disagreement here. Anyone who won't say that homosexuality is a sin is labeled a heretic, a relativist, a liberal (hi again).
But Jarrod, you say, the Bible says ... . OK. Depending on who you ask, the Bible has things to say about all those other issues as well, but we don't draw lines in the sand on those? Why must we do that here?
4. And furthermore, if you're convinced it is a sin, why is it necessary for you to tell everyone that? Are you equally compelled to point out gluttony? Pride? I'm guessing no. Pardon me for being so blunt, but this is a classic Pharisee response -- picking an easily identifiable "sin" and using it to draw an easy distinction between who's right and who isn't.
5. Yesterday evening, while driving home from Lexington, I heard a DJ talking about same-sex marriage (I missed the first part of his rant, but I assume it stemmed from the news about Robertson). What I did hear was something like this (obviously, I'm paraphrasing a little): "I will always prefer that people be heterosexual. Now, if you're a homosexual, I'm not throwing rocks at you. I'm not saying that we can't be friends. I'm not saying I won't go to your house for a party, or that you can't come to my house for a party. You're asking me to accept you; why won't you accept me?"
You're not saying you can't be friends with a gay person? Um, yeah ... you kind of are. It's hard to be friends with someone you view as less human than you.
This is where the comparison breaks down. Conservatives are fond of accusing liberals of hypocrisy when it comes to issues of tolerance. The problem with this is that there is a fundamental difference between criticizing what somebody says and criticizing who somebody is. To take exception with this DJ's remarks, or Phil's, isn't damaging to them; it's simply disagreeing, which we're allowed to do in this country. A person's sexuality is an intrinsic part of who they are -- far more so than a belief they espouse -- so to indicate that a person's "lifestyle" is wrong is to say that there is something wrong with them, something less than human. (Phil Robertson, incidentally, took this to a disgusting level with his homosexuality-to-bestiality connection.)
I can hear the response already: But who I am is a Christian who believes what the Bible says about homosexuality. You cannot possibly think that a belief is intrinsically who you are. If Christianity is a set of beliefs -- you're doing it wrong. If the core issue of your faith is whether or not homosexuality is wrong, you have a problem. Really: Take a deep breath, sit back and think about that for a minute.
6. I look forward to a few days from now, when all of this has disappeared from our news cycle and we're on to the next media firestorm. But at the same time, I dread that moment because I fear that my confession of faith will cause me to be lumped into Team Phil. I love Phil Robertson as a person (while maintaining that I couldn't care less about his show), and I accept him as a brother in Christ who is just as flawed as I am, and whose theology has as many holes as mine does (and yours -- sorry to be the one to tell you). But I must reject his words, and I must apologize on behalf of Phil and the rest of the Christian community for the immense hurt that has been inflicted on the LGBT community. We don't all share the same opinion. We don't all share the same beliefs about this particular issue (or many others, for that matter). To my friends in the LGBT community: Please know that you are loved and affirmed and accepted -- by me, and by many others who strive to follow the way of Jesus.
* * *
Post script: I've read no less than eight or 10 blog posts on this controversy today. The best ones can be found here and here.
No comments:
Post a Comment