Michael Not Mike reports that organizers of "The Call's Repentance Walk" from Centennial Park to LP Field via Church St. this morning did not provide thousands of walkers water stations or portable toilets.
Boy howdy. That's giving "a fast" a whole new uptight dimension.
So, what did the owners and supporter of the GLBT OutLoud Bookstore on Church do? They handed out 1,200 bottles of water (and after those ran out, cups of water). They also offered the use of the bookstore's restroom to the evangelical walkers, "countless numbers" of which used it to relieve themselves.
Hospitality is the great leveller, even when offered to those who revile you and say all manner of evil against you falsely.
The GLBT community went the extra mile for their enemies who were walking in the words of "The Call" to "reverse the curse sexual perversions" that undermine heterosexual marriage. The GLBT community showed proper Christian love this morning to the marching evangelicals, who even now are probably praying against the Good Samaritans on Church who gave them something to drink when they were thirsty, who invited them in when they were strangers.
Not participating in this event myself I can say for certain (as several of my clients and even friends are major players in The Call) this event, for many of the people there, has nothing to do with heterosexual vs homosexual marriages.
ReplyDeleteWhile there certainly are "evangelical conservative" folk taking part in The Call, lumping the entire crowd into this category discounts the thousands of participants who would gladly "love their [gay] neighbor" as they love themselves.
That said, the gesture from OutLoud is pricelessly awesome.
So, how could the major players fail to provide facilities for the marchers? That is a long walk from West Nashville to East Nashville.
ReplyDeleteThe sexual purity lingo on "The Call" website is indicative of conservative evangelical ideology. If people are organizing this on behalf of some larger, more inclusive goal, that is not clear from "The Call's" copyrighted promotional material.
It would neither be a stretch nor be discounting to conclude that the overwhelming majority of participants subscribe to the organizers' purpose of "calling the Church to Church Street, to repent on behalf of ourselves, the Church, and this nation for tolerating Jezebel and her insidious pornographic plague." Those who participate for any other reason are out of step with "The Call." Those mavericks in the minority also need to be honest to themselves about who represents their event to the community.
Wow, that seems a little harsh. I don't think its possible nor wise to lump a hundred thousand people into one frame of thinking. I have to agree with Sageish, I know a lot of people who were apart of the call and they are not the villians you are painting them out to be. Its really easy to judge a situation when your standing on the outside looking in. From personally experience with these people and these functions, there is more to the story. And the whole thing with the water and toilets, totally cool that the GLBT did what they did (seriously, that was a really awesome thing they did). But just so you know, there was free water all day at the stadium, lots of toilets and I'm pretty sure everyone survived the walk just fine.
ReplyDeleteSVanHoesen
You call them as you see them, but walk organizers are pretty clear about intentions that seem a lot harsher than I've been (again, from their website, which is available for all to see and decide whether they want to support):
ReplyDelete[Purpose of the Repentance Walk]: For 40 years our nation has been reeling under the influence of the sexual revolution. The fruit has been the disintegrating family unit, divorce skyrocketing, sexual abuse is everywhere, pornography is the norm, and gross perversion, rape and violence ravage our land.
Now is time to reverse the curse and denounce the bondage of the sexual revolution.
Those are their words. They go on to compare the liberation on many fronts that occurred during the 1960s to Jezebel, the Biblical character who was a wicked betrayer. My point: the GLBT community was more Jesus than Jezebel to a movement that clearly does not accept that community for who they are.
Defense of your personal friends is admirable, but other than that I don't understand your argument with me; are you saying that it is completely impossible that 100,000 could march to support the stated purpose of "The Call"? Why is it so hard to believe that the vast majority (with few exceptions) participated because they agreed with the belief that sexual perversion (like homosexuality) is destroying this country? The easiest possible explanation for participation is that people agree with the stated purpose. Why would someone participate in something with which they so vehemently disagreed?
My point about those whom you know: even if they participated for different reasons, they shouldn't deny that they are participating in an event that holds a pharisaic and judgmental attitude towards people like those who handed them water when they had none and a place of relief on a long, humid July morning walk when organizers failed to provide one or two.
This entire post is just "soap boxing" for sport at its best... Are you really seriously bitching about people not getting to use the bathroom for a 2.7 mile walk and then making it a Religious Vs Gay's debate?!
ReplyDeleteThis is all very simple.. The planners of the event overlooked the bathroom and water issue... Mistake on there part.
The bookstore owners were kind enough to help out and that's worth blogging about. The fact that they happen to be Gay is a completely pointless fact to bring up and is at best "Fox News" worthy of even mentioning.
If you have a problem with The Call or the reasoning for the walk it self then post about it in another post.. Mixing these two is just pointless inflammatory.
No hard feels, just my 2 cents.
I am "seriously" using this religious movement's words and its commitment to the Bible against it. If you want to call that "soap-boxing," then so be it.
ReplyDeleteI am not inventing the "sexual perversion" angle. And I'm not mixing anything. It is right there in the movement's online literature, and thus, it makes the observation relevant, newsworthy, and remarkable.
What I want to know is: why do those of you who have friends involved and leading this event keep ignoring the very purpose that the walk embraced, which is clearly opposing "sexual purity" to "sexual perversion"? Let's just be honest with each other what these people mean by sexual perversion. The Call's founder referred to Ted Haggard (see this morning's Tennessean) when he talked about sexual perversion. Hence, I am not inventing connections where they have not already been made.
On the subject of mixing things, I don't think that you should mix a loyalty to your friends who organized or participated in "The Call" with a denial of the event's stated focus on sexual perversion. The fact that these conservative Christians were served by people that they pray against and otherwise consider deviants matters even if the organizers are your friends. Even if there were walkers who do not consider the GLBT community deviant, they still signed up for a walk against "sexual perversion" so construed. That is a plain and simple fact, even if ignored.
Well said and I see where you are coming from. Not sure if I fully agree on it all, but you do make some very valid points. And I think I like (and understand) your replies more than the original post:) I always apprecitate a good discussion, thanks.
ReplyDeleteBack to your first reply Mike... I agree, their literature is NOT clearly communicating the primary focus of the event nor the motivations of the majority of The Call participants (from what I’ve seen and heard from those actually involved).
ReplyDeleteTheir primary opposition to "sexual perversion" is the internal perversion. While I'm sure there was a *minority* within the crowd who would love to policy the morality of others, the majority of participants were focused on "personal repentance" and the repentance of the church (hence, I assume, the Haggard comment).
On the note of OutLoud serving "conservative Christians" who pray against them. What makes you think that all (or even a majority) of the people who participated are "conservative christians". I’m sure there were plenty there who were not even christians at all. And I'm curious as to why you think they are praying against the GLBT community... from my observation these are people who pray for them, not against them. While I know some may see no difference I think the subjects and specifics of their prayers contrast greatly with the connotation that comes from the idea of their prayers being "against" anyone.
And on the issue of not providing restrooms or water for the walkers… why exactly should they have done that? If I were going to take place in a voluntary event like that I would have used enough common sense to relieve myself before going on a two mile walk… and carried bottle water as well. I defiantly see how that providing such things would be a good idea… but failing to do so doesn’t deserve the severe criticism you seem to be giving it. No one forced anyone to walk.
So, again I put the question: if the primary promotional literature communicates conservative sexual values, how can you be sure that the majority of people who attended were not of like mind? The simplest explanation for why people attended--outside of the anecdotes about your friends--is that they agreed with the publicized agenda.
ReplyDeleteLikewise, if someone marched to find a cure for breast cancer, chances are high that they promote the mission of the march. Or should we assume that most of those marchers would not be marching for a cure?
There has been a lot of research done on American religious movements, and a good bit of that research dealing with values points to ideological clusters that can distinguish conservatives from, for example, mainliners.
Generally, conservatives tend to emphasize moral purity while mainline-to-liberal and African American Protestants emphasize social justice. Each of the categories break down into clusters. Conservatives place a high priority on many of the themes that were promoted in this event: anti-abortion, anti-sexual revolution, reliance on authoritative scripture as truth-source and inspiration, etc. (I'm not telling tales out of school at this point. I have some "insider" experience with this research material).
It may be true that issues like fasting and prayer could cut across ideological lines, but there is less evidence from "The Call's" literature that mainline-to-liberal Christians would be attracted to this event. The primary values emphasized are conservative evangelical. So, why should any of the rest of us believe that most of the 40,000 were there for any other reason, but that they agreed with the stated purpose and the theology of the event?
If you've got evidence to show that there were larger crowds of non-Christians and progressives there, I'd like to see it. Otherwise, it is entirely fair to look at the expressed values and to conclude that it was mostly attended by conservative Christians, because it is unreasonable to conclude that people attend events that do not dovetail with their values. Your evidence is much more anecdotal than mine.
Praying for someone to overcome their sexual orientation is praying against them. It's a distinction without a difference.
As for water and restrooms, I cannot add any more to what I've said about the callousness of failing to provide either during this walk. That failure is indefensible.
Marching to support a cause while not agreeing with the cause? Doesn't make much sense to me. S-TownMike, you're totally right on this. I can't add anything else to your excellent argument.
ReplyDeleteThere are many non-conservatives who have similar sex values as those who call themselves conservatives.
ReplyDeleteFor example... I hardly doubt you'd be able to declare participants of The Call, like these guys conservatives. (http://www.jesuslovesyouministries.com)
The main issue I have is that you just lumped 40,000 people you've never met into a stereotype based of some information from a website. This seems an awful lot like the blanket judgments notoriously passed by the fundies. Perhaps I've misread you.
I agree your comments make your point much more clear than your original post did.
ReplyDeleteIf you were trying to promote the good deed the Outloud owners did then could I suggest next time you write a positive post about the good deed and let the ironic state of things speak for themselves.
I think the point that a few of us here are trying to make is that just because a Christian organization puts on an event to restore sexual purity and even stand against sexual perversion doesn't mean that it's a negative event and that the baby shouldn't be thrown out with the bath water...
100,000 people coming together to make a difference in:
"disintegrating family unit, divorce skyrocketing, sexual abuse is everywhere, pornography is the norm, and gross perversion, rape and violence"
is a good thing... Because some of the church considers homosexuality part of the "sexual perversion" is a debate that will likely never be resolved in our life time.
You seem to be dead focused on the terms "Sexual Perversion" and “Sexual Revolution” directly relating to homosexuality? Both of these terms are much larger then homosexuality and in a lot of people’s minds doesn't even include homosexuality. The walk and event were both focused on a bunch of different things and it’s pretty audacious to assume that everyone that attends believes in every aspect of the what is being said. Do you agree with everything the last politician you voted for said or indorsed? I think not. You agreed with the majority of what he/she stood and knew that there would be things that you wouldn’t agree with but the overall you’d hoped they would do a good job. Is it so hard to believe that a bunch of people are doing this walk with a similar mind set?
I find it interesting and hard to believe knowing you a little personally that you would have such a problem with people praying and fasting for everything listed above even if a couple aspects of it doesn’t stand in line with your beliefs’? I don’t agree with a bunch of stuff they do, but would you like your daughter exposed to any of the things listed above?
I might be wrong here but it seems the real issue you have is that the (un)organized church considers a number of the worldly acceptable things a sin and that they are stupidly naïve about how to address their moral convictions with the real world… If that’s the case then you’re not alone! Anyway, good thread here.